>>FUNDING FOR NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS IS PROVIDED BY VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

>>LOU: THIS WEEK ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS, TWO FORMER STATE SENATORS FROM DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE POLITICAL AISLE GET INTO WHAT'S WORKED AND WHAT HASN'T AS CURRENT LAWMAKERS TURN FOR HOME.

AND... >>ABIGAIL: WE THINK THAT PEOPLE SHOULD BE BASED ON THEIR ACTING PERFORMANCE RATHER THAN BEING SEPARATED INTO THESE GENDERED CATEGORIES WHICH CAN KIND OF PERPETUATE THIS NOTION OF ABILITY.

>>LOU: A GROUP OF UNM STUDENTS EXPLAIN THEIR FORMAL PROPOSAL TO CHANGE THE SYSTEM OF GENDERED ACTING CATEGORIES AT THE OSCARS.

NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS STARTS NOW.

THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS WEEK.

I'M SENIOR PRODUCER LOU DIVIZIO.

THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO IS MAKING HEADLINES ON MULTIPLE FRONTS.

WE'LL GET INTO THAT PROPOSAL FROM A GROUP OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW STUDENTS ON GENDER INTEGRATION AT THE ACADEMY AWARDS LATER IN THE SHOW.

WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HEAR FROM A RESEARCHER AT UNM HEALTH SCIENCES ABOUT A NEW STUDY SHOWING THE PREVALENCE OF MICROPLASTICS IN THE HUMAN BRAIN.

IN ABOUT 40 MINUTES I SIT DOWN WITH DR. MARCUS GARCIA TO ASK WHAT THEY'VE LEARNED.

BUT AS WE PASS THE HALFWAY POINT OF THIS YEAR'S LEGISLATIVE SESSION, WE'RE TAKING STOCK OF WHAT'S PASSED THROUGH THE ROUNDHOUSE AND WHAT'S STILL UP FOR DEBATE.

THIS WEEK, POLITICS CORRESPONDENT GWYNETH DOLAN CHATS WITH TWO FORMER STATE SENATORS, WELL-VERSED IN THE PROCESS.

ERIC GRIEGO SERVED AS A DEMOCRAT FROM 2009 TO 2013, AND MARK MOORES, A REPUBLICAN WHO SPENT 10 YEARS IN THE UPPER CHAMBER.

HERE'S GWYNETH.

>>GWYNETH: ERIC, MARK, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING ME TODAY.

>>MARK: MY PLEASURE.

>>ERIC: GOOD TO BE HERE.

>>GWYNETH: WE ARE PAST THE HALFWAY POINT IN THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

WE'RE ON THE DOWNHILL STRETCH OF THE 60 DAY AND THINGS ARE STARTING TO ROLL.

EARLIER THIS WEEK, THE HOUSE PASSED A $10.8 BILLION BUDGET OVER TO THE SENATE, AND THERE'S A LOT IN IT.

A BIG BUMP IN MONEY FOR EDUCATION, IN THE STATE'S NEW HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY, PUBLIC DEFENDERS, AND THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, STATE EMPLOYEES, TEACHERS GETTING A 4% PAY RAISE RIGHT NOW.

SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE CHAIR GEORGE MUNOZ CALLED IT A "HODGEPODGE," AND THAT PROBABLY DOESN'T BODE TOO WELL.

FORMER SENATORS WHO'VE KIND OF BEEN THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WHAT DO YOU THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE THE SENATE DO HERE?

ARE THEY GOING TO RIP OUT THE SEAMS OF THIS THING, OR ARE THEY GOING TO DO MAYBE A LIGHT TAILORING?

MARK, DO YOU HAVE A PREDICTION HERE?

>>MARK: I IMAGINE THAT MY PREDICTION AS A FORMER SENATOR IS THEY'LL DO SOME LIGHT WORK TO IT.

USUALLY THERE'S AN AGREEMENT GOING IN FROM THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE, HOW MUCH WORK IS GOING TO BE DONE ONCE IT GETS OVER TO THE SENATE, AND THEY WORK WITH THE GOVERNOR TO FINE TUNE SOME THINGS.

MY PREDICTION IS THAT IT'LL PROBABLY JUST BE WORKED AROUND THE EDGES.

I THINK IT CAME OVER WITH ABOUT A 4% INCREASE OVERALL AND ABOUT A BILLION DOLLARS OF NONRECURRING SPENDING IN THERE.

I THINK THE GOOSE WAS COOKED BEFORE THEY GOT TO SANTA FE, WHICH OFTEN IT IS.

OBVIOUSLY IT'S A HUGE BUDGET THAT HAS GROWN EXPONENTIALLY OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS AS OIL AND GAS HAS JUST SKYROCKETED AND BROUGHT IN SOME INCREDIBLE REVENUE NUMBERS.

BUT I THINK THERE'S CONCERNS.

I THINK THE GOVERNOR BROUGHT UP A VERY BIG CONCERN, WHICH I SUPPORT IN REDUCING FEDERAL SPENDING AND LIMITING THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT.

THAT WILL IMPACT NEW MEXICO, AND THE GOVERNOR BROUGHT IT UP DURING HER SPEECH YESTERDAY, THAT WE WILL HAVE BUDGET ISSUES IF SOME OF THESE BUDGET AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL BECAUSE WE ARE SO DEPENDENT ON FEDERAL SPENDING IN NEW MEXICO.

WHILE I SUPPORT THE EFFORTS FOR OUR GRAND REPUBLIC IN WASHINGTON TO REDUCE SPENDING, THAT WILL HAVE A HUGE IMPACT.

I'M GOING TO CAUTION THOSE APPROPRIATORS TO MAKE SURE THEY DON'T GET TOO CARRIED AWAY, THAT THEY DO CREATE SOME ROOM THAT WE CAN GO BACK OR THEY CAN GO BACK IN OCTOBER OR NOVEMBER, AS THE GOVERNOR SAID, AND MAKE SOME FINE TUNING.

I WOULD BE VERY, VERY CAUTIOUS THAT THEY INCREASE SPENDING AT ALL RIGHT NOW UNTIL YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE FEDS BECAUSE THEY COULD BE CAUGHT FLAT-FOOTED COME OCTOBER IF THINGS GO, WHICH I HOPE THEY GO IN THE D.C. AREA, BUT THAT WILL, HAVING SAID THAT, I'M NO LONGER AN ELECTED OFFICIAL IN NEW MEXICO, WILL HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS ON NEW MEXICO'S ECONOMY SINCE WE ARE SO DEPENDENT ON FEDERAL SPENDING HERE.

>>GWYNETH: AND AS YOU SAID, MARK, THIS WAS ANOTHER YEAR OF RECORD REVENUES, AND SO WE HAVE A MUCH BIGGER BUDGET, AND YOU BOTH KNOW HOW IT IS.

WHEN THERE'S MONEY, PEOPLE ARE LIKE, NOW IS THE YEAR TO GET MY PROJECT IN THE BUDGET, NOW IS THE YEAR TO FUND THIS THING, AND WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF THAT ENERGY.

REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE CATHERINE BROWN MADE SORT OF A SYMBOLIC GESTURE THE OTHER DAY WITH HER OWN BUDGET PROPOSAL, WOULD HAVE CUT $1.5 BILLION IN RECURRING SPENDING, IN ONE-TIME SPENDING, WHILE GIVING $600 CHECKS TO EVERY NEW MEXICAN.

DEMOCRATS DIDN'T BUY IT.

ERIC, WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE JOB THAT LAWMAKERS HAVE DONE SO FAR?

>>ERIC: I ACTUALLY THINK IT'S A PRETTY BREAD-AND-BUTTER DEMOCRATIC VALUES BUDGET, AND I THINK IN ADDITION TO INVESTING IN THE THINGS YOU MENTIONED, GOING INTO THE EARLY CHILDHOOD DEPARTMENT, GOT A HUGE $170 MILLION INCREASE, A TON MORE MONEY FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CARE, THAT HOUSING INVESTMENT, $110 MILLION WITH HOUSING AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FOR HOMELESS FOLKS, I THINK SOME REALLY BIG BREAD-AND-BUTTER SORT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE, IF YOU WANT TO CALL THEM THAT, INVESTMENTS THAT THE DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY, AS YOU KNOW, THE HOUSE LEANS A LITTLE MORE DEMOCRATIC PROGRESSIVE THAN THE SENATE, BUT THEY ALSO MADE SURE THEY LEFT $3 BILLION, A 30% SORT OF RESERVE, SO I TOO AM WORRIED ABOUT WHAT MARK SAID ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF, IN PARTICULAR, THE MEDICAID CUTS THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S PROPOSING TO GIVE THESE TAX BREAKS TO FOLKS WHO MOST OF US THINK THEY DON'T DESERVE THEM, AND CUTTING MEDICAID AS DEEPLY AS THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL IS GOING TO HAVE A HUGE IMPACT ON NEW MEXICO, BECAUSE ONE OF THE WINS WE GOT FROM THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT WAS A MAJOR FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN MEDICAID.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 840,000 PEOPLE IN NEW MEXICO WHO ARE ON MEDICAID, THAT'S ABOUT 40% OF THE STATE POPULATION, THAT'S GOING TO BE A BIG HIT IF IT COMES TO FRUITION, SO WHETHER THEY'LL USE THAT 30% RESERVE TO SORT OF BACKFILL THAT OR NOT, BUT ALL OF THE INVESTMENTS, I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK ANY OF THEM ARE FRIVOLOUS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HOUSING, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION, AGAIN, THIS IS, RATHER THAN GIVING $600 BACK TO INDIVIDUALS, I MEAN, I'D LOVE TO GET A CHECK AS MUCH AS THE NEXT GUY, BUT WE HAVE SOME FUNDAMENTAL SORT OF HUMAN CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS BUDGET REALLY EMPHASIZES, AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD BUDGET.

>>GWYNETH: MARK, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO ASK YOU, WE WERE TALKING BEFORE THIS, AND YOU BOTH SAID, WELL, YOU NEVER WERE REALLY VERY INVOLVED IN THE BUDGET, BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T ON THOSE BUDGET COMMITTEES, BUT HOW MUCH INFLUENCE DOES THE MINORITY PARTY HAVE OVER THE BUDGET?

THERE ARE REPUBLICANS ON THE INTERIM LEGISLATIVE FINANCE COMMITTEE, THERE'S REPUBLICANS ON SENATE FINANCE, ON HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS, HOW MUCH ABILITY DO REPUBLICANS HAVE TO MEANINGFULLY SHAPE THE BUDGET?

>>MARK: IT DEPENDS, IT DEPENDS ON THE ISSUE.

YOU CAN WORK ON YOUR PRIORITY ISSUES, I WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL GETTING MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES INTO THE BUDGET BY WORKING, OBVIOUSLY AS A FORMER ATHLETE, WORKED ON A NUMBER OF THOSE KIND OF THINGS AND GOT IT INTO THE BUDGET, BUT YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.

THE REPUBLICANS ARE ALMOST A SUPER MINORITY.

THIS IS A PROGRESSIVE BUDGET, AS ERIC SAID, IT IS A SOCIALIST DREAM TO HAVE THIS KIND OF MONEY, TO BE ABLE TO JUST MOVE ON FORWARD WITH EVERY LATEST NATIONAL SOCIALIST PROGRAM, WE'RE GOING TO FUND IT ON THE OIL AND GAS MONEY THAT'S BEEN FLOWING IN.

SO OIL AND GAS IS PAYING FOR IT, WE HAVE ALL THESE SOCIALIST PROGRAMS THAT ARE JUST BEING ADDED ON, AND QUITE FRANKLY, YOU LOOK AT IT, HAVE THINGS CHANGED IN NEW MEXICO?

NO.

NEW MEXICO CONTINUES TO BE 50TH, 49TH ON EVERY BAD RATING, 50TH IN THE LAST RATING, CHILD WELFARE HAS CONTINUED TO SLIP BEHIND PLACES LIKE MISSISSIPPI AND WEST VIRGINIA, SO IT HASN'T GOTTEN BETTER.

SO I THINK THERE'S FUNDAMENTAL CONSERVATIVE VALUES IF WE HAD DONE THINGS DIFFERENTLY.

BUT ERIC SAID ABOUT THE $600, WE TILTED THAT WINDMILL DURING COVID, AND WE WERE REJECTED.

WE SAID WE SHOULD GIVE SOME OF THIS MONEY BACK TO THE PEOPLE.

SURE ENOUGH, THE NEXT SPECIAL SESSION, WE WERE GIVING BACK REFUNDS TO THE PEOPLE, BECAUSE I THINK THE DEMOCRAT MAJORITY SAW THAT THAT WAS A GOOD MESSAGE AND THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

SO THERE ARE THINGS YOU CAN DO WITH THE BULLY PULPIT, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, THIS IS A SOCIALIST, DEMOCRATIC BUDGET, AND IT WILL STEAMROLL THROUGH WITHOUT MUCH ACCOUNTABILITY, AND THERE'S A LOT OF PAYBACK TO THE FOUNDATION INDUSTRIAL MACHINE THAT RUNS SANTA FE, AND I THINK THAT WILL CONTINUE UNLESS THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE IN THE ELECTORATE IN NEW MEXICO.

AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, IT'S BECOME MORE AND MORE PROGRESSIVE.

SINCE ERIC SERVED IN THE SENATE, I BELIEVE NOW THE SENATE IS THE ONE THAT IS MORE PROGRESSIVE THAN THE HOUSE, WITH THINGS LIKE PAID WORKER LEAVE AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT HAVE SAILED THROUGH THE SENATE THE LAST NUMBER OF YEARS.

AND YOU'VE SEEN THAT EVERY PROGRAM THAT THEY WANTED HAS BEEN ABLE TO PASS AND WILL PROBABLY PASS THIS YEAR IF THEY DIDN'T GET IT BEFORE.

>>GWYNETH: AS MARK SAID, ERIC, THERE IS A MUCH STRONGER FLAVOR OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AMONG THIS MORE PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT CAUCUS.

ONE OF THE EXAMPLES WE LOOKED AT WAS THE ALCOHOL TAX, AND YOU HAD REPRESENTATIVE PARAJON SPEAKING QUITE PASSIONATELY AND OPENLY ABOUT USING THIS NEW TAX TO EFFECTIVELY RIGHT SOME HISTORICAL WRONGS, YOU KNOW, TO PUT MONEY IN THE AREAS WHERE THEY FEEL ALCOHOL HAS HARMED THE COMMUNITY.

HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THIS NEW, I MEAN, DO YOU THINK IT'S SOCIALIST?

DO YOU THINK IT'S GOOD?

>>ERIC: IF WE LIVED IN THIS SOCIALIST UTOPIA THAT SENATOR MOORES IS TALKING ABOUT, I THINK THAT THIS WOULD SAIL THROUGH.

I MEAN, THE FACT THAT, AS HE SAID, THIS IS ALL FUNDED BY FOSSIL FUELS IS SORT OF EVIDENCE OF THE FACT THAT WE'RE NOT AS PROGRESSIVE AS WE SAY.

IN FACT, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT, I'M SURE, BUT LIKE THERE ISN'T ANY REASONABLE REGULATION GOING ON FOR THAT INDUSTRY, RIGHT?

YOU COULD SAY THAT'S THE GOOSE THAT LAID THE GOLDEN EGG.

AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S HARD TO SAY YOU'RE A PROGRESSIVE STATE IF YOU'RE LEANING INTO SORT OF FUNDING ALL THE SOCIAL SPENDING WITH FOSSIL FUELS.

SO THAT'S A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION.

BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, LIQUOR TAXES, YOU WOULD THINK IF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE WERE AS PROGRESSIVE AS WE'RE SORT OF SUGGESTING, THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO PASS SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

BUT IT JUST GOES TO SHOW YOU HOW POWERFUL LOBBIES LIKE THE OIL AND GAS LOBBY, LIKE THE LIQUOR LOBBY ARE, LOBBYISTS IN GENERAL.

THIS IS A MARGINAL, SIX CENTS, I MEAN, MY GOSH.

YOU CAN DEBATE THE LITERATURE ON WHETHER OR NOT RESEARCH REALLY SHOWS THAT THIS IMPACTS CONSUMPTION.

BUT I THINK WHAT REPRESENTATIVE PARAJON IS SAYING IS, LOOK, WE NEED MORE INVESTMENT IN THE PROGRAMS TO DIVERT AND SORT OF HELP THE COMMUNITIES.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A DEEP ALCOHOLISM PROBLEM IN THIS STATE.

I THINK NOBODY'S IN DENIAL ABOUT IT.

WE HAVE HIGH DWI RATES, THEY'VE COME DOWN.

BUT WE HAVE AN ADDICTION PROBLEM IN THIS STATE.

IT'S NOT JUST FENTANYL, IT'S ALCOHOL.

>>GWYNETH: AND AS YOU SAID, LOBBYISTS HAVE KILLED THIS BILL THREE YEARS IN A ROW.

THIS YEAR, IT DOES SEEM TO BE MOVING.

WE'RE GOING TO KEEP AN EYE ON THAT, AND WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK TO LOBBYISTS AND DARK MONEY IN A MINUTE HERE.

MEANWHILE, POLLS HAVE SHOWN THAT NEW MEXICANS ARE FED UP WITH CRIME.

THEY'RE REALLY UNHAPPY SEEING SO MANY PEOPLE ON THE STREET.

RIGHT NOW THE BUDGET INCLUDES ABOUT $110 MILLION FOR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES AIMED AT GETTING PEOPLE THE HELP THEY NEED AND GETTING THEM HOUSING.

ERIC, IS THIS GOING TO PRODUCE MEANINGFUL CHANGE THAT WE CAN SEE AND FEEL ANY TIME SOON?

>> ERIC: WELL, I THINK IT'S A BOLD STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

$110 MILLION IS SIGNIFICANT.

WE NEED ABOUT TEN TIMES THAT AMOUNT.

IT'S VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE, ESPECIALLY THE KIND OF HOUSING THAT GETS PEOPLE INTO SUPPORT SERVICES AND GETS THEM OUT OF -- DEALS WITH MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES AND ADDICTION ISSUES AND SO ON.

SO IT'S NOT CHEAP, YOU KNOW.

BUT I THINK IT WILL AT LEAST TAKE CARE OF PART OF THE PROBLEM.

AS YOU KNOW, GWYNETH, IT TAKES A WHILE TO BUILD THESE THINGS.

WE FUNDED -- IN THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE, WE FUNDED CONVERTING A HOTEL INTO SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.

IT TOOK ALMOST THREE YEARS TO DO THAT.

AND $10 MILLION FOR 100 PEOPLE.

SO IF YOU JUST DO THE MATH, THIS IS GOING TO MAYBE HELP A FEW HUNDRED PEOPLE, A THOUSAND, BEST-CASE SCENARIO.

BUT YOU KNOW WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT, I THINK, IS THERE'S A FEW BILLS FLOATING AROUND.

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE IT THROUGH AROUND CHANGING THE RULES IN THE CITIES AND THE STATES THAT HAVE FIGURED OUT THAT WE'RE IN A CRISIS IN TERMS OF UNHOUSED FOLKS IN HOUSING IN THIS COUNTRY.

AND WE HAVE TO BE WILLING TO MAKE REASONABLE CHANGES TO PLANNING AND ZONING.

YOU KNOW, I'VE NEVER BEEN ACCUSED OF BEING A DARLING OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, BUT I WILL SAY WE'VE JUST GOTTEN SO JUST UNMOVABLE IN MOVING AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS IN MOST AREAS OF THE CITY ACROSS THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM.

AND I KNOW SENATOR MAESTAS AND OTHERS HAVE SPONSORED LEGISLATION TO TRY TO MAKE REASONABLE CHANGES TO ALLOW MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SORT OF REDUCE ALL THE VETO POINTS THAT HAPPEN IN PROJECTS THAT REALLY ARE MEANT TO TRY TO GET PEOPLE INTO HOUSING.

AND NOT JUST SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, BUT JUST WORKFORCE HOUSING, YOU KNOW.

AND NOT NECESSARILY OWNER-OCCUPIED HOUSING, JUST FOLKS TO GET THEM OFF THE STREETS.

AND I HOPE THAT LEGISLATION ALSO IS PART OF THE LARGER SOLUTION, IN ADDITION TO SPENDING, YOU KNOW, $110 MILLION, WHICH IS A SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT IN THIS ISSUE.

>>GWYNETH: MARK, ABOUT CRIME AND PUBLIC SAFETY, HOUSE BILL 8, A BUNDLE OF IDEAS FROM SIX DIFFERENT PUBLIC SAFETY BILLS IS ON THE GOVERNOR'S DESK.

IS THIS A WIN FOR THE GOVERNOR?

IS IT A WIN FOR THE KIND OF COALITION THAT SHE BUILT?

ARE REPUBLICANS GETTING WHAT THEY WANTED OUT OF THIS, ALMOST?

WELL, IT'S, I GUESS YOU COULD CONSIDER IT A WIN, BUT IT IS VERY SMALL A WIN.

TO REFRESH YOUR VIEWERS' MIND, MEMORY, I WAS THE ONE DURING THE SPECIAL SESSION THAT INTRODUCED ALL OF GOVERNOR'S PUBLIC SAFETY BILLS.

AND NOT ONE SINGLE MEMBER OF THE DEMOCRAT CAUCUS, THE SENATE OR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WAS WILLING TO INTRODUCE THE BILLS AND HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WHEN WE CAME BACK INTO A SPECIAL SESSION.

I WAS OUT OF STATE, ACTUALLY, AND I TEXTED ONE OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF UPSTAIRS, I WAS LIKE, DUDE, WHY ARE YOU HAVING US COME BACK?

YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE A SPONSOR.

AND HE GOES, WELL, YOU WORK WITH US.

AND I SAID, ABSOLUTELY, I'LL WORK WITH YOU ON THIS.

AND I DIDN'T THINK THOSE BILLS WERE STRONG ENOUGH.

SO THIS PACKAGE, I BELIEVE, IS A POLITICAL COVER THAT THEY PASSED.

IT MOVES THE NEEDLE VERY, VERY SMALL.

IT GIVES THE GOVERNOR THE ABILITY TO CLAIM VICTORY, IT GIVES SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF THE DEMOCRAT CAUCUS THE ABILITY TO CLAIM VICTORY AND GO HOME.

BUT I DON'T SEE ANY MEANINGFUL CHANGES IN THIS.

AND THIS IS COMING FROM SOMEONE WHO IS WILLING TO WORK BIPARTISAN IN EFFORT WITH BOTH THE GOVERNOR AND MY DEMOCRAT COLLEAGUES FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.

I THINK I HAD A REPUTATION UP THERE TRYING TO WORK ACROSS THE AISLE ON ISSUES THAT I FELT PASSIONATE ABOUT THAT WERE NOT PARTISAN.

SO I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT, IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE CRIME THAT'S HAPPENING IN ALBUQUERQUE.

I NOW LIVE IN LAS CRUCES.

AND WHAT I SAW PEOPLE DOWN HERE IS THAT I SEE LAS CRUCES TURNING INTO ALBUQUERQUE IN THE NEXT, TO ME, IT REMINDS ME ABOUT ALBUQUERQUE ABOUT WHAT IT WAS 10 YEARS AGO.

AND IT'S JUST GETTING WORSE AND WORSE.

AND I THINK PEOPLE DOWN HERE NEED TO BE AWARE THAT THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED IN ALBUQUERQUE IS GOING TO HAPPEN DOWN HERE IN THE REST OF THE STATE IF THEY'RE NOT CAREFUL.

>>GWYNETH: WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW UP ON THESE BILLS AND ON SOME OTHER LITTLE PIECES OF LEGISLATION THAT ARE MOVING AS WELL.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A BREAK NOW.

WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK WITH ANOTHER SEGMENT LOOKING AT POTENTIAL CHANGES TO STATE IMMIGRATION POLICIES AND THE INFLUENCE OF THE LOBBYING ON KEY ISSUES LIKE HEALTH CARE AND THE ENVIRONMENT.

>>MARCUS: WE USE THESE PLASTIC MATERIALS AND AFTER WE'RE DONE WITH THOSE, THEY END UP IN THE LANDFILL.

WELL, THEN FROM THERE, THOSE END UP LEACHING INTO OUR GROUNDWATER.

AND THEN WE USE OUR GROUNDWATER TO IRRIGATE OUR CROPS.

AND EVEN WE'LL SEE THESE MICROPLASTICS GET INTO THE SOILS.

AND THAT'S ONE OF THE BIGGEST CAUSES FOR CONCERN.

>>LOU: MY CONVERSATION ON MICROPLASTICS IN THE BRAIN IS COMING UP IN ABOUT 30 MINUTES.

THANKS TO ERIC GRIEGO AND MARK MOORES AND GWYNETH, OF COURSE, WE'LL CATCH BACK UP WITH THEM IN A LITTLE LESS THAN 15 MINUTES.

A FINAL PROJECT FROM A CONSTITUTIONAL LAW CLASS HAS MADE IT OUT OF UNM LECTURE HALLS AND ALL THE WAY TO THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE ACADEMY OF MOTION PICTURE ARTS AND SCIENCES IN CALIFORNIA.

THE 99-PAGE PROPOSAL CALLS FOR THE ACADEMY TO CREATE A TASK FORCE TO CONSIDER GENDER INTEGRATION FOR ACTING CATEGORIES AT THE OSCARS.

I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN WITH TWO OF THOSE STUDENTS AND THEIR PROFESSOR TO ASK ABOUT THE LEGAL AND SOCIAL ARGUMENTS THEY'RE MAKING.

ABIGAIL MCCOY, DEVRAH FUNG, PROFESSOR LARRY JONES, THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.

THANK YOU.

NOW, DEVRAH AND ABIGAIL, I UNDERSTAND YOU ARE TWO OF THE TEN UNM STUDENTS WHO PUT TOGETHER A PROPOSAL TO CHANGE SOME OF THE CATEGORIES AT THE OSCARS WHILE IN PROFESSOR JONES' CLASS.

THAT REPORT MADE IT ALL THE WAY TO THE ACADEMY OF MOTION PICTURE ARTS AND SCIENCES IN CALIFORNIA FOR CONSIDERATION.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING, STARTING WITH YOU, ABIGAIL?

>>ABIGAIL: YEAH, SO WE ARE PROPOSING THAT THE ACADEMY CREATES A TASK FORCE TO ADDRESS THEIR NEARLY CENTURY-LONG TRADITION OF GENDER-SEGREGATED AWARD SHOW CATEGORIES AND WHAT THE SOCIAL AND IMPLICATIONS OF IT ARE AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD ELIMINATE THIS PRACTICE.

>>LOU: OKAY.

AND DEVRAH, WHEN YOU FIRST HEARD ABOUT THIS, WAS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU WERE PASSIONATE ABOUT?

>>DEVRAH: ORIGINALLY, I WAS NOT PASSIONATE ABOUT IT, BUT I NEVER KNEW.

I KNEW THAT OTHER AWARD SHOWS HAD INTEGRATED THE GENDERS, BUT I DID NOT KNOW THAT THE OSCARS WERE STILL KEEPING THAT TRADITION OF SEGREGATING.

>>LOU: NOW, LARRY, HOW DID THIS IDEA COME ABOUT AND DEVELOP ALL THE WAY TO A FORMAL PRESENTATION TO THE ACADEMY?

>>LARRY: WELL, THE COURSE WAS CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, AND EACH SEMESTER, I HAD BEEN TEACHING FOR A WHILE SINCE RETIRING FROM THE BENCH, AND I TRIED TO DO A NEW PROJECT EACH SEMESTER THAT WOULD BE OF INTEREST TO THE STUDENTS.

SO THIS WAS ONE WHICH I THOUGHT UP AT THE BEGINNING OF A SEMESTER, AND THE STUDENTS SEEMED TO ENJOY IT VERY MUCH.

>>LOU: GREAT.

AND NOW IT'S GOTTEN ALL THE WAY TO THE ACADEMY.

DID YOU GUYS EXPECT IT TO GET THIS FAR?

>>ABIGAIL: NOT REALLY.

I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT, BUT WE'RE HAPPY WITH THE OUTCOME SO FAR.

WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO TALK TO MULTIPLE DIFFERENT NEWS SOURCES ABOUT IT.

WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED A REPLY BACK FROM THEM YET, BUT WE STARTED A CONVERSATION, WHICH IS ALL THAT I COULD ASK FOR.

>>LOU: SO THE PROPOSAL MENTIONS SOME POTENTIAL LEGAL AND SOCIAL FLAWS IN THE CURRENT SYSTEM OF GENDERED CATEGORIES.

LET'S START WITH THE LAW.

ABIGAIL, WHAT HAVE YOU FOUND IN TERMS OF CASE LAW THAT SUPPORTS YOUR IDEA FOR INTEGRATING THESE CATEGORIES?

>>ABIGAIL: ONE OF THE CASES THAT WE DISCUSSED WAS UNITED STATES VERSUS VIRGINIA IN 1996, AND THIS IS A CASE THAT STRUCK DOWN THE MALE-ONLY ADMISSION PROCESS FOR THE VIRGINIA MILITARY INSTITUTE BECAUSE THEY BELIEVED THAT THE ADMISSION SHOULD BE BASED ON INDIVIDUAL ABILITY RATHER THAN YOUR GENDER.

SO THEN RELATING TO WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE PROPOSAL, WE THINK THAT PEOPLE SHOULD BE BASED ON THEIR ACTING PERFORMANCE RATHER THAN BEING SEPARATED INTO THESE GENDERED CATEGORIES, WHICH CAN KIND OF PERPETUATE THIS NOTION OF ABILITY.

>>LOU: OKAY.

WHAT ABOUT POTENTIAL SOCIAL FLAWS, DEVRAH?

WHAT DID YOU FIND WHEN YOU DUG INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT?

>>DEVRAH: ONE SOCIAL FLAW THAT I SAW WAS THAT IT EXCLUDED NON-BINARY PEOPLE, AND IT PERPETUATED BINARY FOR MEN AND WOMEN, AND IT ALSO DISCOURAGED WOMEN FROM COMPETING AGAINST MEN AND MEN COMPETING AGAINST WOMEN.

>>LOU: OKAY.

SO HOW WOULD THE ACADEMY DEAL WITH A NON-BINARY ACTOR RIGHT NOW?

I KNOW THAT WOULD IT, THEY MAYBE DRAG THEIR FEET A LITTLE BIT, AND WOULD IT BE HARDER, DO YOU THINK, FOR A PERSON LIKE THAT TO BE NOMINATED BECAUSE THEY COULD SEE SOME BACKLASH?

>>DEVRAH: I THINK IT WOULD DEFINITELY BE A CHALLENGE FOR THE OSCARS, BUT I KNOW THE GRAMMYS, RIGHT?

THE GRAMMYS ALLOW THEM TO WRITE IN, SO MAYBE THEY COULD DO – THE OSCARS COULD DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

>>LOU: OKAY.

NOW, YOU BRING UP THE GRAMMYS.

YOUR PRESENTATION CITED SOMETHING CALLED THE TAYLOR-SWIFT PRINCIPLE.

THAT'S BASED AROUND THE SUCCESS OF GENDER DESEGREGATION AT THE GRAMMYS IN 2012.

THEY'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR 12 YEARS NOW.

IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE'VE SEEN FROM THAT AWARDS SHOW THAT WOULD GIVE THE ACADEMY CAUSE FOR CONCERN OR THE OPPOSITE?

>>ABIGAIL: I THINK THAT IT COULD LEAD TO SOME CONCERN BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN BEYONCÉ, ADELE, AND TAYLOR SWIFT, AS WE MENTIONED.

THEY'VE DOMINATED THE GRAMMYS FOR THE PAST OVER A DECADE, AND IT COULD LEAD TO THE OPPOSITE WITHIN THE ACADEMY AWARDS.

WE COULD SEE LEONARDO DICAPRIO OR CILLIAN MURPHY OR ALL THESE MALE ACTORS START TO DOMINATE, AND THEN IT'S GOING TO GET RID OF THE FEMALE REPRESENTATION THAT PEOPLE HAVE WORKED SO HARD TO PUT IN PLACE.

>>LOU: OKAY.

HOLLYWOOD, IT'S OFTEN PERCEIVED BY THE REST OF THE COUNTRY AS ABOUT AS FAR LEFT AND PROGRESSIVE AS IT GETS.

WHY DO YOU THINK THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN MORE SUPPORT FOR THIS CHANGE IN THE INDUSTRY, DEVRAH?

>>DEVRAH: I WOULD SAY BECAUSE THEY'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON TRADITION, ESPECIALLY WITH THE OSCARS BEING A CENTURY OLD.

THEY WANT TO KEEP THEIR TRADITION.

>>LOU: OKAY.

I WANT TO ASK YOU THE INVERSE, LARRY.

OUR COUNTRY JUST ELECTED DONALD TRUMP.

COULD THERE BE BACKLASH FROM THE WIDER MOVIE-VIEWING PUBLIC IF THE ACADEMY DECIDES TO GO THIS WAY?

>>LARRY: WELL, THERE COULD BE THEORETICALLY BACKLASH ON ANYTHING.

ANYTIME THERE'S ANY TYPE OF CHANGE, ANYTIME YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LOOKING AT DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENTLY THAN HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR 100 YEARS RIGHTFULLY OR WRONGFULLY OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON, THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE SOME PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT CHANGE AND SOME PEOPLE WHO OPPOSE CHANGE.

BUT THIS IS A PROGRESSIVE COUNTRY, A COUNTRY WHICH HAS BEEN BUILT ON CHANGE.

SO SOMETHING AS HIGH-PROFILE AS THE ACADEMY AWARDS, THAT THE RULES WERE FIRST PUT IN PLACE IN 1927, WHERE SOCIALLY AND LEGALLY THINGS WERE MUCH DIFFERENT, THAT IT'S TIME TO LOOK AT THINGS IN 2024 TO SEE WHERE THERE CAN BE PROGRESSIVE AND POSITIVE CHANGE.

SO THAT'S WHAT THE STUDENTS ARE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF SETTING UP A TASK FORCE BY THE ACADEMY TO LOOK REALLY CAREFULLY AT THESE ISSUES AND IN A VERY PUBLIC WAY, TOO, BECAUSE THE ACADEMY AWARDS IS A PUBLIC EVENT.

IT IS A PUBLIC SOCIAL EVENT.

SO LIKE WITH ANYTHING ELSE, THERE ARE BOUND TO BE SOME PEOPLE WHO OPPOSE CHANGE AND SOME PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT CHANGE FOR ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT REASONS.

>>LOU: OKAY.

NOW, INTEGRATING OF AWARDS, THAT WOULD, OF COURSE, MEAN FEWER AWARDS TO WIN.

WHAT ARE YOUR SUGGESTIONS FOR NAVIGATING THAT POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCE OF GENDER INTEGRATION?

>>ABIGAIL: IN 2017, THE MTV AWARDS, THEY GARNERED A LOT OF ATTENTION BECAUSE EMMA WATSON WON THEIR FIRST GENDER-NEUTRAL ACTING AWARD.

AND I THINK THAT WE COULD ADOPT A SIMILAR STRATEGY TO THAT.

AND THEN, OBVIOUSLY, IT DOES LEAD TO LESS AWARDS FOR OTHER PEOPLE.

BUT THAT'S JUST IF WE'RE NOT DOING THE GENDERED CATEGORIES ANYMORE.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CAN'T FOCUS ON MORE SPECIFIC TO THE PERFORMANCE.

SO I BELIEVE THAT ONE OF THE SUGGESTIONS WAS TO DO BEST PERFORMANCE IN A THRILLER, BEST PERFORMANCE IN A DRAMA.

YOU KNOW, WE COULD DO MORE SPECIFIC TO THE FILM ITSELF RATHER THAN FOCUSING ON GENDER.

>>LOU: OKAY.

NOW, ALL 10 OF YOU WHO WORKED ON THIS PRESENTATION ARE WOMEN.

WOULD A MALE OR NON-BINARY STUDENT PERSPECTIVE HAVE CHANGED YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS AT ALL OR WERE YOU HAPPY WITH HOW THIS WORKED OUT?

>>DEVRAH: I DON'T THINK IT WOULD JUST BECAUSE ALL OF US HAVE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES NO MATTER WHAT GENDER WE IDENTIFY AS.

AND SO I'M REALLY HAPPY WITH HOW OUR PERSPECTIVE TURNED OUT.

BUT I DON'T THINK A MALE WOULD CHANGE IT OR A NON-BINARY PERSON.

>>LOU: OKAY.

NOW, YOUR ANALYSIS DIDN'T EXPLICITLY CALL ON THE ACADEMY TO MAKE THESE CHANGES.

WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU HOPING TO ACCOMPLISH WITH THE REPORT?

WE ARE HOPING THAT THEY CREATE A TASK FORCE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE.

WE WANTED TO STAY VERY NEUTRAL WITHIN OUR PRESENTATION.

WE DIDN'T WANT TO ROOT FOR ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER, BUT WE WANTED TO LAY OUT A FRAMEWORK AND THE CASE LAW, THE LEGAL IMPLICATIONS, THE SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR AND AGAINST DESEGREGATING THE AWARD SHOW CATEGORIES.

SO IF THEY CREATE A TASK FORCE SO THAT THEY CAN APPROPRIATELY ADDRESS THE ISSUE, THEN WE WOULD BE VERY HAPPY WITH THAT OUTCOME.

>>LOU: NOW, LARRY, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE LIMITED SPACE HERE, BUT ALL TEN OF YOUR STUDENTS WERE INVOLVED IN THIS-- OR ALL TEN OF THE STUDENTS INVOLVED WITH THIS NOW HAVE A BIT OF A NATIONAL PROFILE.

I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A SECOND TO TALK ABOUT THEIR WORK AND IT RISING TO THIS LEVEL.

>>LARRY: WELL, THEIR WORK IS GREAT.

ABIGAIL, DEVRAH, AND THE OTHER EIGHT STUDENTS WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THIS PRESENTATION AND PROPOSAL, THEY REALLY REFLECT VERY POSITIVELY ON UNM.

THEY REFLECT POSITIVELY ON THE NEW AND UPCOMING GENERATION OF FUTURE LEADERS.

AND HOPEFULLY THE ACADEMY WILL BE RECEPTIVE AND RESPONSIVE TO THE TYPE OF HARD WORK WHICH THEY PUT INTO THIS IN TERMS OF TRYING TO EFFECTUATE SOCIAL CHANGE OR A SOCIAL DIALOGUE ON POTENTIAL CHANGE, NOT ONLY FOR LEGAL ISSUES AND SOCIAL ISSUES AND CULTURAL ISSUES, BUT JUST BECAUSE THE ACADEMY AWARDS HAS BEEN SUCH A LARGE PART OF THE CULTURAL DYNAMIC IN THE UNITED STATES FOR THE LAST HUNDRED YEARS THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THESE TYPES OF DISCUSSIONS FROM TIME TO TIME.

>>LOU: NOW, I KNOW YOU SAID THAT THE ACADEMY HASN'T GOTTEN BACK TO YOU YET.

EVEN IF THEY DON'T MAKE THE CHANGE NOW OR IF THEY DON'T GET BACK TO YOU BY THE OSCARS THIS YEAR, DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THIS IS INEVITABLE, WHETHER IT'S IN A YEAR, TWO YEARS, OR TEN YEARS FROM NOW?

>>ABIGAIL: I DO THINK IT'S INEVITABLE.

WE'VE ALREADY SEEN CHANGES WITH DIFFERENT AWARD SHOWS, AND WE LIVE IN A RAPIDLY EVOLVING SOCIETY, AND I THINK THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO START NOTICING, AND THEY'RE GOING TO ASK FOR CHANGE.

AND, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN'T AVOID IT FOREVER, SO THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS IT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

>>DEVRAH: THERE WAS ALREADY A CHANGE WITH THE OSCAR SO WHITE MOVEMENT.

PEOPLE STARTED NOTICING THAT A LOT OF THE OSCAR WINNERS WERE WHITE, AND SO I THINK IT IS INEVITABLE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO CHANGE.

>>LOU: UNDERSTOOD.

ABIGAIL MCCOY, DEBORAH FUNG, PROFESSOR LARRY JONES, THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

>>THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.

>>LOU: RETURNING TO THE ROUNDHOUSE, POLITICS CORRESPONDENT GWYNETH DOLAN RECENTLY SPOKE WITH REPRESENTATIVE MATTHEW MCQUEEN ABOUT HIS PROPOSAL TO REMOVE A GOVERNOR'S POWER TO POCKET VETO BILLS.

THAT'S WHEN THE EXECUTIVE DOES AWAY WITH LEGISLATION BY TAKING NO ACTION AND GIVING NO EXPLANATION.

>>GWYNETH: REPRESENTATIVE MCQUEEN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TALKING TO US ABOUT SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT UNUSUAL, THE POCKET VETO.

THERE'S A POCKET VETO IDEA THAT'S IN THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, AND THE FOUNDERS PUT IT IN THERE 238 YEARS AGO IN CASE A PRESIDENT WANTED TO RETURN A BILL, A PHYSICAL PIECE OF PAPER, YOU CAN IMAGINE IT TIED UP WITH A RED RIBBON, BACK TO CONGRESS, AND THERE WAS NO ONE THERE TO PHYSICALLY ACCEPT THE PIECE OF PAPER, RIGHT?

AND MANY STATES KIND OF COPIED THAT IDEA.

WE DID.

WE'VE HAD IT FOR 100 YEARS.

BUT NOW YOU WANT TO CHANGE IT.

WHY?

>>MCQUEEN: WELL, TODAY A POCKET VETO ISN'T SO MUCH ABOUT RETURNING A DOCUMENT WITH A RIBBON, IT'S ABOUT SIMPLY NOT ENACTING A LAW WITHOUT A SIGNATURE AND WITHOUT AN EXPLANATION.

SO TO ELIMINATE THE POCKET VETO, WHAT WE'RE REALLY SAYING IS YOU CAN STILL VETO A BILL, WE JUST WANT AN EXPLANATION WHY.

>>GWYNETH: WHY DON'T YOU JUST ASK THE GOVERNOR WHY?

>>MCQUEEN: THAT DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK.

SOMETIMES GOVERNORS DON'T WANT TO EXPLAIN WHY THEY'RE VETOING A BILL, AND ASKING THEM WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE ANY MORE SUCCESSFUL THAN REQUIRING THEM TO GIVE US A MESSAGE.

>>GWYNETH: HAVE YOU HAD A PERSONAL SITUATION WHERE SOMETHING YOU WORKED ON WAS POCKET VETOED?

>>MCQUEEN: I HAVE HAD MULTIPLE BILLS POCKET VETOED BY DIFFERENT GOVERNORS.

>>GWYNETH: AND GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE.

TELL ME A STORY.

>>MCQUEEN: I HAD A BILL TO EXEMPT MEMORY CARE MEDICAL SERVICES FROM GROCERY SEATS TAXES, AND THAT GOT POCKET VETOED.

AND I WAS REALLY DISAPPOINTED BECAUSE WE WERE TRYING TO HELP FAMILIES THAT ARE BURDENED BY EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE MEMORY CARE.

NEVER GOT A GOOD EXPLANATION FOR WHY THAT WAS VETOED.

I BELIEVE THE REASONING CAME FROM THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, BUT THEY NEVER TALKED TO US.

>>GWYNETH: SO THEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO TO CHANGE IT, TO PASS IT THE NEXT TIME.

>>MCQUEEN: CORRECT.

>>GWYNETH: NOW YOU'RE A DEMOCRAT.

THIS GOVERNOR IS A DEMOCRAT.

ARE YOU MAD AT THIS GOVERNOR?

>>MCQUEEN: I'M NOT MAD AT THIS GOVERNOR.

>>GWYNETH: WOULD THIS AFFECT THIS GOVERNOR?

>>MCQUEEN: THIS BILL, IT WOULD GO TO THE VOTERS IN 2026.

IT WOULD TAKE EFFECT IN 2027.

THIS GOVERNOR WOULD NO LONGER BE IN OFFICE.

>>GWYNETH: THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TALKING TO US.

>>MCQUEEN: SURE.

>>LOU: THANKS TO REPRESENTATIVE MCQUEEN.

NOW LET'S GET BACK TO GWYNETH AND HER TWO GUESTS, FORMER STATE SENATORS ERIC GRIEGO AND MARK MOORES.

HERE'S GWYNETH FOR THEIR FINAL CONVERSATION.

>>GWYNETH: ERIC AND MARK, WELCOME BACK.

I WANT TO TURN TO IMMIGRATION.

WE ARE SEEING HEADLINES FROM AROUND THE COUNTRY ABOUT DEPORTATIONS AND SEARCHES.

THE BORDER PATROL BOARDED A BUS FULL OF LAS CRUCES HIGH SCHOOL KIDS ON THEIR WAY TO A SWIM MEET IN ALBUQUERQUE THIS WEEK.

BEFORE WE GET TO STATE POLICY AND HOW IT CAN OR CANNOT WORK WITH THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, MARK, WHAT ARE YOU HEARING FROM FOLKS IN LAS CRUCES IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE STATE?

WHAT IS THE GENERAL FEELING DOWN THERE WHEN IT COMES TO IMMIGRATION, FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT, WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD BE COOPERATING, THAT KIND OF STUFF?

>>MARK: I THINK PEOPLE ARE SEEING A NOTICEABLE CHANGE ON THE STREETS.

IT HAPPENS A LOT, ESPECIALLY DURING THE SURGE THAT HAPPENED DURING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

IF YOU GO DOWN TO EL PASO, FREQUENTLY YOU HAVE TO GO DOWN THERE FOR THE MUSEUMS AND SHOPS AND STORES.

YOU WOULD SEE EL PASO FLOODED, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE WEREN'T STAYING IN EL PASO.

THEY WOULD COME ACROSS THE BORDER, GET ONTO BUSES OR PLANES AND THEN LEAVE.

WHENEVER YOU FLEW IN AND OUT OF EL PASO, THE PLANES WERE ALWAYS FULL.

OR DOWNTOWN EL PASO WHERE THE CHURCHES ARE GIVING OUT CARE, IT WAS ALWAYS FULL.

AND THEN THEY WOULD GET ON BUSES AND GO TO OTHER POINTS IN THE COUNTRY.

THAT HAS STOPPED, AND SO YOU'RE SEEING JUST A CLEANING UP OF THAT IMPACT THAT THEY'VE HAD.

BUT I THINK PEOPLE ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF IT BECAUSE THE IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY DOWN HERE WAS VERY, VERY STRONG.

A LOT OF PEOPLE COMING THROUGH, TAKING A LOT OF RESOURCES.

THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN MOVING ON, BUT THEY WERE TAKING A LOT OF RESOURCES WHILE THEY'RE HERE.

SO I THINK YOU HAVE SEEN THAT CALM DOWN.

YOU'RE NOT SEEING THAT WAVE AFTER WAVE THAT WAS HAPPENING DURING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

AND IT'S POSITIVE.

IT'S ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE.

>>GWYNETH: ERIC, OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF DEMOCRATS HAVE DIFFERENT FEELINGS ON THIS.

ONE PROPOSAL THAT MADE ITS WAY THROUGH A HOUSE COMMITTEE THIS WEEK WOULD BAN LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FROM COOPERATING WITH FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TO LOCK UP MIGRANTS.

DEMOCRATS HAVE TRIED THIS BEFORE AND FAILED.

ERIC, DO YOU THINK THIS IS THE YEAR THAT THEY ARE GOING TO SUCCEED IN KIND OF BREAKING THAT LINK?

>>ERIC: I HOPE SO.

I MEAN, I THINK THE MYTHS THAT UNFORTUNATELY ARE PERPETUATED FROM THE PRESIDENT AND, UNFORTUNATELY, DOWN TO LOCAL LEVELS IS THAT SORT OF ALL OF THESE IMMIGRANT FOLKS WHO WORK AND PROVIDE A LOT OF THE SERVICES THAT WE ALL NEED, AND 99 PERCENT OF WHOM ARE JUST LIKE US, LAW-ABIDING FOLKS.

BUT THIS CARICATURE OF IMMIGRANTS COMING AND COMMITTING ALL THE CRIMES AND ALL THAT IS JUST PATENTLY FALSE BASED ON RESEARCH AND WHAT WE KNOW.

SO I THINK WHAT LEGISLATORS, MANY OF WHOM ARE FROM IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES, ARE SAYING IS THAT, LOOK, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE COMPLICIT IN THIS ANTI-IMMIGRANT FEDERAL SORT OF POSTURING AROUND ASSUMING THAT EVERYBODY, BECAUSE OF THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN OR BECAUSE OF WHERE THEY COME FROM, IS A CRIMINAL.

IMMIGRATION IS NOT A CRIMINAL ACT.

IT'S AN ACT OF TRYING TO DO WHAT MARK OR I OR YOU, GWYNETH, WOULD DO FOR OUR FAMILY IF WE WERE IN A BAD SITUATION, WHICH IS I WOULD LIKE TO THINK AS HUMAN BEINGS, WE WOULD TRY TO MAKE THE SITUATION BETTER.

AND IF THAT MEANT CROSSING A BORDER TO WORK, TO GET OUR KIDS EDUCATED, TO GET DECENT HEALTH CARE, THAT'S A HUMAN DESIRE THAT WE ALL HAVE.

AND I THINK JUST TO REALLY SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE ANY PUBLIC MONEY TO SORT OF DENY PEOPLE DUE PROCESS, TO DETAIN PEOPLE ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THEY'RE BAD PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY HAPPEN TO BE FROM SOUTH OF THE BORDER AND HAPPEN TO BE IMMIGRANTS, IT'S UN-AMERICAN.

WE DIDN'T DO THAT TO IRISH FOLKS.

WE DIDN'T DO THAT TO GERMAN FOLKS.

WE DIDN'T DO THAT TO ITALIAN FOLKS.

SADLY, WE DID IT TO SOME OTHER GROUPS, LIKE THE JAPANESE DURING WORLD WAR II.

WE'VE NEVER SAID TO FOLKS, "WE'RE GOING TO DETAIN YOU AND WE'RE GOING TO SPEND MONEY TO PUT YOU IN CAMPS."

IT'S DEHUMANIZING.

I THINK IT'S NOT WHO WE ARE AS NEW MEXICANS.

AND I'M GLAD THAT A LOT OF LEGISLATORS ARE STEPPING UP AND REALLY SORT OF DRAWING THE LINE, AND I HOPE IT DOES PASS.

>>GWYNETH: THANK YOU FOR THAT GREAT PERSPECTIVE ON BOTH SIDES, REALLY GOOD VIEW OF THE OPPOSING ARGUMENTS THERE.

LET'S MOVE TO THE ENVIRONMENT REALLY QUICKLY.

GOVERNOR MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM SET AN AMBITIOUS GOAL FOR THIS STATE TO REACH ZERO GAS EMISSIONS BY 2050.

THE CLEAR HORIZONS BILL, WHICH WOULD HAVE MADE THAT LAW, DIED IN THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE THIS WEEK.

THIS IS THE FOURTH TIME A VERSION OF THIS BILL HAS FAILED.

ERIC, I'M GOING TO COME BACK TO YOU.

WHY ARE DEMOCRATS IN THE LEGISLATURE ON A DIFFERENT PAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR HERE WHEN IT COMES TO ELIMINATING GAS EMISSIONS?

>>ERIC: I'M BAFFLED.

SOME OF THE FOLKS OPPOSING THIS ARE FOLKS WHO'VE BEEN ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERS, AND I THINK IT JUST SPEAKS TO THE GROWING POWER OF THE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY AND THE LOBBY.

AS MARK SAID, UNFORTUNATELY, IF WE CUT FEDERAL SPENDING TO A STATE LIKE US THAT'S CONTRIBUTED TO THE FEDERAL HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE COUNTRY FROM THE LABS AND SO ON, THEN WE'RE GOING TO EVEN BE MORE DEPENDENT ON FOSSIL FUELS AND THE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY, WHICH MEANS THEY HAVE MORE POWER, AND THEY GIVE LOTS OF MONEY TO DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS.

I THINK THAT YOU HAD A LEGISLATURE THAT, INCLUDING SOME OF THE LEADERS, UNFORTUNATELY, WHO ARE NOT TAKING PART IN REALLY TRYING TO STOP SOME OF THESE REALLY SORT OF PRO-OIL AND GAS LEGISLATION, SORT OF DEREGULATE, DON'T HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR EMISSIONS, DON'T ASK THEM FOR ANY MORE MONEY.

JUST SORT OF LIKE, AGAIN, THEY'RE THE GOLDEN EGG AND SAY, "WHATEVER YOU WANT, JUST KEEP THE WELLS GOING, KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING, SO WE CAN KEEP INVESTING IN PEOPLE."

I UNDERSTAND THE NEED WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THESE SOCIAL PROBLEMS, BUT I AM DEEPLY CONCERNED THAT REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS AREN'T DRAWING THE HARDER LINE TO PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT, TO PROTECT OUR STATE FROM CLIMATE CHANGE.

IT'S HAVING DEEP IMPACTS ON THE STATE, ON OUR WATER SUPPLY, ON OUR OPEN SPACES, ON WILDFIRES.

THERE'S JUST A LOT OF REAL CONSEQUENCES.

AND WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE, EVEN IF YOU SUPPORT THE INDUSTRY AND THE REVENUE IT PROVIDES, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE REASONABLE, SORT OF RESPONSIBLE REGULATIONS IN TERMS OF THEIR BEHAVIOR.

AND I AM A LITTLE TROUBLED THAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO GET, NOT JUST WHAT THE GOVERNOR IS TRYING TO DO WITH THE TARGETING, AND TARGETING SORT OF STANDARDS AND TIMELINES TO REALLY GET TO SOME OF THESE GOALS, BUT JUST BASICS AROUND WHAT WE THINK THE INDUSTRY SHOULD BE PAYING, WHAT SORT OF REASONABLE, RESPONSIBLE CLEANUP IS, WHO SHOULD PAY FOR IT.

SO, AGAIN, THIS SOCIALIST LEGISLATURE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE STEPPING UP ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, IF YOU ASK ME.

>>GWYNETH: AND THAT'S INTERESTING, MARK.

WE NOTICED THAT TWO DEMOCRATS, INCLUDING THE FINANCE COMMITTEE CHAIR, GEORGE MUNOZ, VOTED WITH REPUBLICANS TO TABLE THAT CLEAR HORIZONS BILL.

MARK, IS THE GOVERNOR'S PUSH ON THIS OUT OF STEP WITH THE REALITY OF THE STATE'S FINANCIAL FUTURE?

>>MARK: THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT THIS GOVERNOR'S PUSH WOULD REALLY HARM THE FUTURE OF NEW MEXICO.

AND IT'S REALLY CURIOUS THAT THE TWO DEMOCRATS WHO VOTED AGAINST THIS WERE FROM RURAL COMMUNITIES, PREDOMINANTLY NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITIES.

ONE OF THEM WAS A NATIVE AMERICAN WHO VOTED AGAINST THE BILL.

THE OTHER ONE REPRESENTS A DISTRICT THAT'S IN THE HEART OF THE NAVAJO NATION, THAT IS PREDOMINANTLY NAVAJO.

AND THEY BOTH VOTED AGAINST IT BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, DESPITE THE ALLEGED POWER OF OIL AND GAS.

THIS WOULD HAVE HAD A HUGE IMPACT ON THEIR LOCAL NATIVE AMERICAN POPULATIONS.

YOU ALREADY HAD UP IN NAVAJO THE CLOSING OF THE COAL PLANT, WHICH REALLY HURT NATIVE AMERICAN WORKERS.

THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN ANOTHER HUGE IMPACT ON THOSE LOCAL COMMUNITIES.

SO ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL, AND THOSE TWO REPRESENTATIVES, TWO SENATORS, WERE VOTING FOR THEIR DISTRICTS, WHICH ARE PREDOMINANTLY NATIVE AMERICANS, AND THEY WERE EMPOWERING NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITIES TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR FOLKS WERE NOT HURT BY THIS GOVERNOR'S RADICAL AGENDA.

IT MIGHT BE GREAT FOR ALBUQUERQUE, AND I REPRESENTED ALBUQUERQUE, AND THIS IS A GUY WHO VOTED FOR THE ENERGY TRANSITION ACT BECAUSE IT WAS GOOD FOR ALBUQUERQUE, BUT IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GOOD FOR LEE COUNTY, WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GOOD FOR SAN JUAN COUNTY.

IT CERTAINLY WAS NOT GOOD FOR THE NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITIES IN THE NAVAJO NATION.

SO TALKING ABOUT SOCIAL JUSTICE, THAT WOULD HAVE A HUGE IMPACT ON SOCIAL JUSTICE FOR THOSE NATIVE POPULATIONS.

>>GWYNETH: LET'S GET BACK TO LOBBYING, WHICH WE MENTIONED EARLIER.

CAPITAL AND MAINE RECENTLY REPORTED THAT THE NEW MEXICO OIL AND GAS ASSOCIATION HAS ALREADY SPENT ABOUT $125,000 ON ADVERTISING AGAINST BILLS LIKE CLEAR HORIZONS.

THIS WEEK SEARCHLIGHT NEW MEXICO SHINED SOME LIGHT ON A DARK MONEY GROUP DUMPING MONEY INTO FIGHTING MEDICAL MALPRACTICE REFORM.

MARK, LET ME STAY WITH YOU.

WE'VE HEARD FROM MEDICAL PROVIDERS THAT THE STATE'S HIGH MALPRACTICE INSURANCE COSTS ARE HURTING THE HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY.

HOW WORRIED ARE YOU THAT UNDISCLOSED LOBBYING GROUPS LIKE NEW MEXICO'S SAFETY OVER PROFIT WILL KILL BIPARTISAN LEGISLATION THAT WOULD LOWER THE MEDICAL MALPRACTICE RATE?

>>MARK: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ISSUE HAS DESTROYED MEDICINE IN NEW MEXICO.

AS YOU MIGHT RECALL, WE'RE IN THE MEDICAL BUSINESS WITH THE PATHOLOGY LABORATORY.

IT SERVES A LOT OF RURAL HOSPITALS AND RURAL DOCTORS AROUND THE STATE.

AND THE WORD IS OUT NEW MEXICO IS CLOSED TO MEDICINE, AND NEW DOCTORS DO NOT WANT TO COME HERE.

IT'S QUITE OBVIOUS WHEN YOU READ THAT ARTICLE ABOUT WHO IS BEHIND THIS DARK MONEY GROUP, AND IT'S THE TRIAL ATTORNEYS.

TO THEM, MEDICAL MALPRACTICE LAWS IS ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR TRIAL ATTORNEYS.

THAT'S WHO'S FUNDING IT.

THAT IS WHO'S BEHIND IT.

IT WASN'T EVEN HIDDEN SINCE THEIR PAST PRESIDENT WAS THE SECRETARY AND OFFICER, AND THEY GOT ONE BIG CHECK FOR WHAT, $400,000?

AND I GUARANTEE YOU I'LL GO ON THE RECORD IN FRONT OF ALL YOUR LISTENERS OR WATCHERS AND SAY IT CAME DIRECTLY FROM THE TRIAL ATTORNEYS.

THAT IS WHO'S PUSHING IT, THAT WHO CONTROLS THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS THROUGH THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEES.

THERE'S A WHOLE HECK OF A LOT MORE TRIAL ATTORNEYS IN THE LEGISLATURE THAN THERE ARE DOCTORS, AND IT SHOWS, AND I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF FAITH IN THAT WE'LL GET MEDICAL MALPRACTICE REFORM THIS YEAR UNTIL THERE'S A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE WITHIN THE STRUCTURE OF THE LEGISLATURE.

>>GWYNETH: SO WE TALKED ABOUT THAT.

SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT WE TALKED ABOUT HOW MUCH THE MAKEUP OF THE LEGISLATURE HAS CHANGED, AND YET SOME THINGS ABOUT IT HAVE NOT CHANGED IN FOREVER, RIGHT?

SO THERE WAS A BID TO TURN OUR CURRENT CYCLE OF A 30-DAY BUDGET SESSION, WHICH IS REALLY JUST ABOUT THE BUDGET, AND THEN A 60-DAY SESSION WHEN ANYTHING IS FAIR GAME INTO TWO SESSIONS OF 45 DAYS EACH.

THERE'S AN ACCOMPANYING BID TO PAY LAWMAKERS.

THOSE DON'T SEEM TO BE GOING ANYWHERE.

THE QUESTION IS--AND LET ME PUT THIS TO YOU, ERIC--WOULD LOBBYISTS HAVE LESS POWER-- AND DARK MONEY GROUPS--WOULD THEY HAVE LESS POWER AT THE ROUNDHOUSE IF WE MODERNIZED THE WAY GOOD GOVERNMENT GROUPS SAY WE SHOULD AND PAID LAWMAKERS AND MADE THESE LONGER SESSIONS?

>>ERIC: ABSOLUTELY.

I MEAN, I THINK--LOOK, CITIZENS UNITED HAS COMPLETELY DESTROYED OUR DEMOCRACY.

THE FACT THAT YOU CAN JUST SPEND LOTS OF MONEY ON--THE OIL AND GAS MONEY, THE TRIAL HOUR MONEY.

IF YOU WANT TO GET ELECTED, AND THE NUMBER ONE OBJECTIVE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS IS TO GET REELECTED, RIGHT?

I MEAN, THAT'S JUST WHAT WE KNOW.

SO YOU CAN'T GET REELECTED.

WE'RE SEEING THIS WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.

EVERYBODY'S AFRAID OF GETTING PRIMARIED, AND SO THAT'S WHY THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL HAS SORT OF COMPLETELY REALLY JUST RELEGATED ALL OF THEIR POWER TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, WHICH IS UNFORTUNATE.

AT THE STATE LEVEL, THERE ARE GROUPS LIKE OIL AND GAS, LIKE THE TRIAL HOURS, ARE REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT.

THEY TEND TO BE ALIGNED WITH CERTAIN INTERESTS, ALTHOUGH OIL AND GAS HAS INCREASINGLY EXPANDED THEIR POWER WITH DEMOCRATS.

BUT IF YOU HAD LEGISLATORS WHO DIDN'T HAVE TO RELY SO MUCH ON LOBBYISTS BECAUSE THEY COULD SPEND MORE TIME LEARNING THE ISSUES, IF YOU HAD A LONGER SESSION WHERE THERE'S THIS CHAOS OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S EXACTLY IN A BILL AND WHO CARES ABOUT THE BILL AND YOU COULD ACTUALLY STUDY IT, I THINK HAVING STAFFERS HAS GONE A LONG WAY TO REALLY HELPING LEGISLATORS BE MORE PREPARED FOR THE SESSION.

BUT I DO THINK WE NEED MORE THOUGHTFUL TIME TO LEARN ABOUT LEGISLATION.

WE NEED LEGISLATORS WHO AREN'T DEPENDENT ON LOBBYISTS ACROSS THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM TO INFORM THEM.

CERTAINLY, ADVOCATES ARE IMPORTANT, BUT THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF EXPERTISE THAT YOU HAVE TO DEVELOP AS A LEGISLATOR JUST TO DO YOUR JOB.

AND IF YOU'RE EXPECTED TO SHOW UP FOR 30 DAYS AND WHATEVER THE 2,000 BILLS THAT COME OUT, EVEN IN ADDITION TO THE BUDGET, IT'S JUST NOT REASONABLE.

I DON'T CARE HOW SMART YOU ARE.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK MORE TIME, GIVING THEM MORE RESOURCES, GIVING THEM MORE STAFF, FRANKLY.

BUT THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS REGULATING LOBBYISTS AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT THEY'RE SPENDING TO SORT OF CURRY FAVOR WITH.

AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A REPUBLICAN DEMOCRAT.

THIS IS ACROSS THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM.

IN FACT, THE SMART MONEY GIVES TO EVERYBODY.

THAT'S WHAT OIL AND GAS DOES.

TRIAL LAWYERS TEND TO FAVOR DEMOCRATS BECAUSE THEY'RE MORE ALIGNED, BUT OIL AND GAS IS SORT OF DIVERSIFYING THEIR INVESTMENT.

>>GWYNETH: LET ME LET ME BREAK IN HERE.

WE HAVE ONE MINUTE LEFT AND I WANT TO GO TO YOU, MARK.

YOU KNOW, THE TROUBLE WITH GETTING THINGS DONE IN A 60 DAY SESSION IS IF SOMETHING DOESN'T MAKE IT AND OR THE GOVERNOR POCKET VETOES IT.

WE JUST SAW AN INTERVIEW WITH REPRESENTATIVE MCQUEEN ABOUT ELIMINATING THE POCKET VETO.

>>MARK: WE GOT TO GET RID OF THAT THING.

THE GOVERNOR OWES A MESSAGE.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO VETO SOMETHING, LEGISLATORS WORK THEIR TAIL OFF.

IF BILLS PASS, ADVOCATES WORK THEIR TAIL OFF.

AND THE LEAST SHE CAN DO IS SAY, HEY, THIS IS WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT.

COME BACK NEXT TIME.

I'M GOING TO ADD TO WHAT ERIC SAID.

IT'S ALSO ABOUT CLOSED PRIMARIES AND REDISTRICTING AND GERRYMANDERING.

WE CANNOT GET PEOPLE TO RUN FOR THESE OFFICES BECAUSE THEY'RE THERE.

THEY'RE THERE.

THE DISTRICT AND RESULTS ARE COOKED WAY BEFORE WE GET TO THE GENERAL ELECTION.

SO WE'VE GOT TO HAVE OPEN PRIMARIES AND REDISTRICTING REFORM ALSO.

>>GWYNETH: THANK YOU FOR THAT, ERIC.

MARK, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING WITH US TODAY AND HELPING US MAKE SENSE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN SANTA FE.

>>WELCOME.

WHAT'S FUN.

>>LOU: THANKS AGAIN TO GWYNETH AND FORMER STATE SENATORS MARK MORRIS AND ERIC GRIEGO.

RECENT SCIENTIFIC STUDIES SHOW THAT MICROPLASTICS ARE EVERYWHERE.

THEY'RE IN OUR ENVIRONMENT.

THEY'RE IN THE FOOD WE EAT.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, THEY'RE BEING FOUND EVERYWHERE IN THE HUMAN BODY.

JUST LAST YEAR, THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO'S DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES MADE HEADLINES WITH A REPORT THAT FOUND MICROPLASTICS IN HUMAN PLACENTAS.

NOW, A NEW REPORT FROM THAT SAME COLLEGE LOOKED INTO THE HIGH LEVELS OF MICROPLASTICS FOUND IN THE HUMAN BRAIN.

I HAD A CHANCE TO SIT DOWN WITH DR. MARCUS GARCIA TO DISCUSS THAT STUDY AND WHY OUR BRAINS APPEAR TO ACCUMULATE MORE MICROPLASTICS THAN ANY OTHER ORGAN IN OUR BODY.

>>LOU: DR. MARCUS GARCIA, THANK YOU FOR JOINING ME IN NEW MEXICO AND FOCUS.

>>MARCUS: THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

I APPRECIATE IT.

>>LOU: NOW, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT UNM HEALTH SCIENCES, TWO RECENT STUDIES ON MICROPLASTICS IN THE HUMAN BODY.

THE PLACENTA LAST YEAR AND MOST RECENTLY PUBLISHED THE BRAIN.

BUT I WANT TO START GENERALLY.

WHAT ARE MICROPLASTICS?

HOW DO THEY ENTER OUR BODIES?

AND WHY ARE YOU AND YOUR TEAM SO FOCUSED ON STUDYING THEM?

>>MARCUS: YEAH.

AND THESE ARE VERY GREAT QUESTIONS TO HAVE.

SO JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND AROUND WHAT MICROPLASTICS ARE.

WHEN WE THINK OF PLASTICS IN GENERAL, I MEAN, A BOTTLE OR EVEN JUST TUPPERWARE, THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES.

WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING WITH THOSE IS AS THEY START TO DEGRADE OR GET OLDER, THEY START TO BREAK DOWN INTO WHAT WE CALL THESE MICROPLASTICS.

NOW, IN TERMS FOR THE ACTUAL DEFINITION, A MICROPLASTIC IS ANYTHING OR A PIECE OF PLASTIC THAT'S LESS THAN FIVE MILLIMETERS IN SIZE.

SO STILL CAN SEE VISUALLY AND CONTINUES TO BREAK DOWN INTO MORE THINGS.

AND ONE THING I DO I DO WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS MORE SPECIFICALLY AND IN REGARDS TO THE BRAIN STUDY IS NANOPLASTICS.

SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE KEY FINDINGS THAT WE WERE ABLE TO SEE IN THIS AND WHAT NANOPLASTICS ARE EVEN SMALLER.

SO LESS THAN ONE MICROMETER IN SIZE.

SO NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SIZE OF A CELL.

AND THAT ISN'T SOMETHING THAT WE CAN VISIBLY SEE, BUT WE KNOW THAT THESE ARE IN THE ENVIRONMENT.

AND I THINK THAT THAT WHENEVER WE COME DOWN TO WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO RESEARCH THESE IS BECAUSE THEY'RE SO UBIQUITOUS IN THE ENVIRONMENT.

SO AS THESE PLASTICS BREAK DOWN.

SO WE'LL BACKTRACK IT A LITTLE BIT.

WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS, IS, YOU KNOW, WE USE THESE PLASTIC MATERIALS AND AFTER WE'RE DONE WITH THOSE, THEY END UP IN A LANDFILL.

THEN OVER THE NEXT 20, 30 YEARS, THEY SIT IN THAT LANDFILL AND THE SUNLIGHT IS OR THE SUN IS HITTING THEM.

THEY'RE ALSO BEING DEGRADED JUST BECAUSE OF COMPACTING THOSE LANDFILLS DOWN, WHICH STARTS TO BREAK THOSE INTO THESE MICROPLASTICS THAT WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT.

WELL, THEN FROM THERE, THOSE END UP LEACHING INTO OUR GROUNDWATER.

AND THEN WE USE OUR GROUNDWATER TO IRRIGATE OUR CROPS AND EVEN WE'LL SEE THESE MICROPLASTICS GET INTO THE SOILS.

AND THAT'S ONE OF THE BIGGEST CAUSES FOR CONCERN.

>>LOU: SO JUST TO NAIL THAT DOWN, IT'S MOSTLY FROM THESE INDIRECT SOURCES, NOT SO MUCH THE FIVE YEAR OLD PIECE OF TUPPERWARE I HAVE IN MY CABINET OR THE WATER BOTTLES THAT I'M DRINKING OUT OF.

>>MARCUS: YES, EXACTLY.

AND JUST TO KIND OF BRING IT A LITTLE BIT MORE IS, YOU KNOW, YOU MAY BREAK OFF A PIECE OF SO SO IN THE MEDIA, WE DO SEE A LOT AROUND LIKE THE CUTTING BOARDS.

AND WHEN YOU'RE TAKING PIECES OFF AS YOU'RE CUTTING, THOSE ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE VERY LARGE PIECES.

SO MACROPLASTICS, OUR BODY HAS A GOOD WAY OF JUST GETTING RID OF A LOT OF THOSE BIGGER PIECES.

IT'S MORE OF THE SMALLER STUFF THAT WE REALLY HAVE TO BE BE CONCERNED WITH.

SO SO YES, YOU ARE CORRECT ON THAT.

>>LOU: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT WHAT THESE MICROPLASTICS ARE DOING TO OUR BODIES?

ARE THEY INHERENTLY DANGEROUS OR HARMFUL?

>>MARCUS: SO THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION.

AND WE CAN'T GIVE ANY DEFINITIVE ANSWERS RIGHT NOW.

BUT IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT CERTAIN TRENDS AND ALL THE RESEARCH THAT'S COMING OUT, WE'RE STARTING TO SEE A LOT OF TRENDS TOWARDS TOWARDS THOSE DIRECTIONS.

NOW, THE MAIN THING WITH THIS STUDY WAS IS WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY, ARE THESE PLASTICS BEING ABSORBED INTO THE BODY AS WELL AS ENDING UP IN SPECIFIC AND VITAL VITAL ORGANS AS WELL?

SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE FOCUS ON THE LIVER, KIDNEY AS WELL AS THE BRAIN.

AND WE ARE SEEING THEM THERE.

WE NOW USE THIS INFORMATION BECAUSE USING THIS NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT WE'VE CREATED OR THIS NEW METHODOLOGY, WE CAN NOW TELL EXACTLY HOW MUCH OF THOSE MICROPLASTICS ARE PRESENT IN THESE THESE SPECIFIC ORGANS.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE SAY AS TOXICOLOGISTS IS THE DOSE MAKES THE POISON.

SO NOW THAT WE KNOW WHAT DOSE, WE CAN START LINKING THAT TO CLINICAL OUTCOMES.

SO WHETHER IT BE RELATED TO CERTAIN CARDIOVASCULAR HEALTH OUTCOMES, I MEAN, DIABETES, EVEN JUST NEURODEGENERATIVE DISORDERS.

THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE KEEPING KEEPING IN MIND, ESPECIALLY AS WE'RE MOVING INTO A LOT OF THE PHASE TWOS OF A LOT OF OUR STUDIES.

>>LOU: OK, KIND OF ALONG THE SAME LINES, BUT WHAT DON'T WE KNOW ABOUT MICROPLASTICS?

>>MARCUS: YEAH.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS IS, IS WE HAVE IDEAS AROUND HOW THEY GET INTO OUR BODIES, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT DEFINITIVE WHAT WE CALL MECHANISMS.

SO UNTIL THAT'S ANOTHER AREA THAT WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON IN BEING ABLE TO IDENTIFY.

SO ONE OF THE THOUGHTS THAT WE'RE WE'RE REALLY MOVING TOWARDS AND ANSWERING IS, IS WE BELIEVE THAT THESE PLASTICS ARE BEING UPTAKEN THROUGH OUR DIETARY FATS.

SO AS OUR BODY STARTS PROCESSING OUR FOOD AS AFTER WE EAT, WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS, IS THOSE NANOPLASTICS HITCHHIKE INTO OUR DIETARY FATS AND THEN OUR BODIES WORK TO PROCESS THOSE THROUGHOUT, THROUGHOUT OUR BODY FOR DIFFERENT ENERGY SOURCES OR JUST OVERALL NUTRIENTS.

AND AS THEY'RE ENTERING INTO THOSE TISSUES, THEN THEY GET EMBEDDED AND ULTIMATELY ACCUMULATE OVER A PERIOD OF TIME.

>>LOU: OK. NOW, THE STUDY THAT WAS PUBLISHED LAST YEAR ON THE PLACENTA THAT, OF COURSE, BREATHES LIFE, SO TO SPEAK, INTO A FETUS.

AND AS THEY GROW IN THE WOMB, DOES THE PRESENCE OF MICROPLASTICS IN A PLACENTA MEAN THAT BABIES ARE BEING BORN WITH MICROPLASTICS IN THEIR SYSTEMS?

>>MARCUS: YES.

SO.

SO THAT IS ONE THING THAT HAS BEEN A BIG CAUSE FOR CONCERN.

THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF STUDIES OUT THERE FROM OTHER OTHER GROUPS WHO ARE REALLY FOCUSED ON MICROPLASTICS AND SPECIFICALLY TRANSPORT FROM PLACENTA TO FETUS, AS WELL AS IN BREAST MILK.

AND FROM THOSE, OF COURSE, THIS IS IN A MOUSE MODEL.

THEY HAVE SEEN THAT THERE IS THAT TRANSLOCATION OR PASSING FROM THE PLACENTA ONTO THE FETUS, AS WELL AS EVEN AFTER BIRTH.

THEY'RE CONSUMING THESE MICROPLASTICS THROUGH THE BREAST MILK AS WELL, TOO.

>>LOU: NOW, LET'S MOVE ON TO THE RECENT STUDY ON THE BRAIN.

WHY WAS THAT THE NEXT PLACE THAT YOU CHOSE TO LOOK AND WHAT DID YOU FIND THERE?

>>MARCUS: YEAH.

SO THE BRAIN WAS A VERY KEY, KEY ORGAN.

I MEAN, AS WE WE THINK ABOUT IT, THAT'S WHAT PRETTY MUCH RUNS OUR ENTIRE BODY, HELPS WITH OVERALL PROCESSING THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES.

AND THE BRAIN ALSO HAS A VERY GOOD WAY OF KEEPING THINGS OUT.

SO WHENEVER WE TALK ABOUT THE BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER.

SO WHENEVER WE WANTED TO LOOK AT THAT TISSUE SPECIFICALLY, IT WAS JUST, OK, ARE THEY IF THEY'RE GETTING INTO ALL THESE OTHER TISSUES THAT WE'VE ALREADY LOOKED AT?

IS IT ALSO GETTING IN THERE?

AND TO OUR SURPRISE, INITIALLY, WHEN WE SAW THAT, WE'RE LIKE, OK, YES, YES, THEY ARE.

NOW, SEEING THAT IT'S ACCUMULATING AT THE HIGHEST AMOUNT AS COMPARED TO OTHER TISSUES WAS VERY CONCERNING TO US.

BUT AGAIN, TO THIS ALSO GOES DOWN THE LINES OF THINKING THAT THESE PLASTICS ACTUALLY HITCHHIKE THROUGH A LOT OF OUR DIETARY FATS.

SO THE BRAIN DOES HAVE A LOT OF FAT IN IT AS WELL, TOO.

AND THAT'S WHAT HELPS WITH OVERALL PROCESSING.

BUT ON THE SAME SIDE, TOO, IS THE BRAIN HAS A VERY HIGH METABOLISM, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE A GREAT MECHANISM TO GET THINGS OUT.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE THINK.

SO LIKE WITH THE LIVER AND KIDNEY, THOSE STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO FILTER OUT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF THESE PLASTICS, WHEREAS THE BRAIN MAY NOT HAVE THAT SAME KIND OF MECHANISM.

SO TO SEE THAT THERE WAS THAT ACCUMULATION IN THERE, THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIG FINDINGS.

AND AGAIN, MOVING TOWARDS LIKE NOW LOOKING AT SOME NEURODEGENERATIVE DISORDERS THAT MIGHT BE ASSOCIATED.

OF COURSE, WE HAVEN'T MADE THAT DEFINITIVE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION YET.

IT'S GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT.

>>LOU: WHAT WAS THE DATA THAT YOU FOUND ON A POSSIBLE LINK BETWEEN DEMENTIA AND THE PRESENCE OF MICROPLASTICS?

>>MARCUS: SO WITH THAT STUDY, TOO, IS WE LOOKED AT HEALTHY BRAINS AND WE NOTICED THAT THERE WAS A CERTAIN CONCENTRATION OF PLASTICS THAT WAS PRETTY HIGH IN GENERAL.

BUT THEN WE WERE ALSO ABLE TO COLLECT BRAIN SAMPLES FROM DEMENTIA PATIENTS.

AND WE ACTUALLY SAW THAT THERE WAS 10 TIMES THE AMOUNTS OF PLASTICS WITHIN THOSE TISSUES.

NOW, I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THIS IS MORE A CORRELATION STUDY, NOT A CAUSATION.

SO WHEN I SAY THAT IS, IS WE'RE SEEING THAT THEY'RE THERE IN THIS HIGHER CONCENTRATION.

WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT IT'S THE PLASTICS THAT ARE CAUSING THE DEMENTIA AT THIS POINT.

BUT WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS, IS THAT BASED OFF OF THE DEGENERATION OF THESE BARRIERS, AS AS THESE TYPES OF CONDITIONS PROGRESS, THAT IT MIGHT ALLOW FOR THESE PLASTICS TO GET IN THERE A LOT EASIER.

SO SO THAT'S ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS THAT WE'RE STILL CONTINUING TO INVESTIGATE TO BE ABLE TO GIVE THAT DEFINITIVE ANSWER.

>>LOU: NOW, GIVEN THESE MICROPLASTICS HAVE MADE THEIR WAY INTO OUR ECOSYSTEM, OUR GROUNDWATER, AS YOU SAID, SIMPLY AVOIDING THINGS LIKE LIKE I SAID, TUPPERWARE, BOTTLED WATER, THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO COMPLETELY PROTECT ANYBODY.

ARE THERE LIFESTYLE CHANGES, THOUGH, THAT PEOPLE CAN MAKE TO STEER CLEAR OF THESE THINGS?

OR AT THIS POINT, IS THAT JUST KIND OF LIKE PADDLING UPSTREAM?

>>MARCUS: I THINK THAT WE CAN ALWAYS DO SOMETHING TO IMPROVE IN OUR EVERYDAY LIFE.

OF COURSE, BEING MORE COGNIZANT OR UNDERSTANDING AND SEEING HOW MUCH PLASTIC WE'RE USING ON A DAY TO DAY USE, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?

SO WHETHER THAT BEING LOOKING AT SOME OF THE PACKAGING THAT SOME OF OUR PRODUCTS ARE COMING IN AND FIGURING OUT, IS THERE A WAY WHERE I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BUY A PRODUCT THAT HAS THAT MUCH PLASTIC WRAPPED?

OR EVEN IF YOU STILL DO, BECAUSE WE KNOW IT'S SO IT MAY BE DIFFICULT IS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT BETTER WAYS IN WHICH TO TO MANAGE THAT OR EVEN JUST REUSE SOME OF THESE THESE PRODUCTS UNTIL THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO BE REUSED ANYMORE.

OF COURSE, RECYCLING IS AN AREA THAT WE WANT TO SEE IMPROVED.

BUT ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS IS IS SEEING HOW UBIQUITOUS OR HOW MUCH WE'RE SEEING IN THE ENVIRONMENT.

AGAIN, A LOT OF THAT IS COMING FROM THAT BREAKDOWN IN THESE LANDFILLS.

AND WHAT WE'RE THINKING WE CAN DO IS WORK AROUND POLICIES TO REALLY MITIGATE SOME OF THAT.

SO BEING ABLE TO TAKE THOSE PLASTICS OUT OF THESE LANDFILLS AND BETTER PROCESS THEM OR BETTER RECYCLING OR EVEN ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS THAT WE THINK OF IS EVEN HAVING SOME FORM OF WASTE TO ENERGY TREATMENT PLANT.

OF COURSE, WE KNOW INFRASTRUCTURE IS ALWAYS A CHALLENGE AND ESPECIALLY BUILDING SOMETHING NEW.

BUT IN A LOT OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES, WE'RE SEEING THEM UTILIZING A LOT OF THESE AND REALLY WORKING WELL AT THIS TIME.

AND THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I FEEL WE CAN CONTINUE TO ADAPT OR ADVANCE AND CONTINUE TO BUILD UP AND ANSWER THIS QUESTION.

>>LOU: HAVE YOU HEARD A WILLINGNESS FROM INDUSTRY TO TRY TO MITIGATE AT LEAST THE PREVALENCE OF THESE?

>>MARCUS: YEAH, ACTUALLY, A LOT OF THE PLASTIC PRODUCING COMPANIES, THEY DO REALIZE THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE.

AND JUST BASED OFF OF THE STUDY THAT WE'VE PRODUCED AND EVEN THE OTHER STUDIES THAT WE'VE PRODUCED, THEY'VE REACHED OUT TO US ASKING FOR OUR EXPERTISE.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST GOING TO BE ONE COMPANY SPECIFICALLY.

IT HAS TO BE A AROUND ACROSS THE BOARD KIND OF THING IS HAVING ALL THESE COMPANIES COME TOGETHER, HAVE THESE POLICIES IN PLACE WHERE ALL OF THEM CAN FIGURE OUT WAYS TO BETTER RECYCLE OR ALSO PRODUCE LIKE PRODUCTS THAT CAN HAVE EVEN JUST A SMALLER AMOUNT OF OF THESE SPECIFIC PLASTICS OR GOING TO OTHER TYPES OF PACKAGING THAT THEY CAN BE USING AS WELL.

SO THAT WAS VERY EXCITING TO BE ABLE TO SEE THAT THESE COMPANIES ARE WEARY ABOUT IT, WANT TO DO SOMETHING.

AND WE'RE WORKING HEAVILY WITH THEM TO TO TRY AND CONTINUE TO WORK TOWARDS THOSE POLICIES AND ANSWERING A LOT OF THESE QUESTIONS AS WELL.

>>LOU: OK, NOW, AS HUMANS, MANY OF US AREN'T SCIENTISTS AND WE TEND TO START AND END OUR THINKING WITH OUR SPECIES.

BUT OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS MUCH BIGGER THAN THAT IF IT'S IN GROUNDWATER AND OTHER PLACES.

WHAT DOES YOUR RESEARCH INDICATE ABOUT THE IMPACTS ON OTHER SPECIES AND OUR LARGER ECOSYSTEM?

>>MARCUS: YEAH.

SO, AGAIN, IT'S IT'S SO UBIQUITOUS IN THE ENVIRONMENT.

A LOT OF THE MICROPLASTICS RESEARCH REALLY STARTED FROM OUR OCEANS.

I MEAN, SEEING HOW AFFECTED THAT MARINE LIFE HAS BEEN OVER THESE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE ALWAYS HEAR ABOUT THE GREAT PACIFIC GARBAGE PATCH THAT'S THE SIZE OF TEXAS AND, YOU KNOW, CONTINUALLY DEGRADING AND GETTING INTO THAT TYPE OF ECOSYSTEM.

THOSE ARE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO BE KEY, IMPORTANT FACTORS TO BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE THE RESEARCH FORWARD, NOT ONLY FROM A HUMAN PERSPECTIVE, BUT OVERALL EVERYDAY LIFE.

SO SO WE DO A STUDY TO WHERE OTHER STUDIES WHERE WE'RE LOOKING SPECIFICALLY AT OTHER ANIMAL CREATURES THAT ARE JUST AROUND, WHETHER THAT BE LOOKING AT SHEEP, LIVESTOCK.

WE DO A LOT OF STUFF WITH LIKE RODENT MODELS OR RODENTS THAT ARE JUST OUT IN THE WILD.

SO WE WORK WITH THE MUSEUM OF SOUTHWESTERN BIOLOGY TO BE ABLE TO TO LOOK AND SEE HOW THESE HAVE ACCUMULATED OVER OVER TIME AND SEE HOW THAT'S EVEN AFFECTING NOT ONLY THE CREATURES HERE IN NEW MEXICO, BUT ON A GRANDER SCALE MOVING THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY AS WELL.

>>LOU: THANKS TO DR. MARCUS GARCIA, TO GWYNETH DOLAN FOR ALL OF HER WORK.

AND THANKS TO EVERYONE ELSE WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THE SHOW.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING.

WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

[MUSIC] >>FUNDING FOR NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS IS PROVIDED BY VIEWERS LIKE YOU.