States reliant on Colorado River fail to meet the latest deadline to find consensus - Associated Press
The seven Western states that depend on the Colorado River missed a deadline for the second time Saturday to agree on a plan addressing record drought and water shortages.
Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo released a joint statement calling on Upper Basin states to offer more concessions. Those states include Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming.
"The Colorado River is essential to our communities and economies, and our states have conserved large volumes of water in recent years to stabilize the basin's water supplies for years to come," the governors said. "Our stance remains firm and fair: all seven basin states must share in the responsibility of conservation."
Arizona, California and Nevada have offered to decrease Colorado River allocation by 27%, 10% and 17%, respectively, according to those states.
Colorado Sen. John Hickenlooper. who helped negotiate a river contingency plan in 2019 as governor, called the situation in the Colorado Basin "dire," pointing to the state's low snowpack.
"If we don't address this problem together –- head-on and fast –- our communities, farms, and economies will suffer. The best path forward is the one we take together. Litigation won't solve the problem of this long-term aridification," Hickenlooper said in a statement.
John Entsminger, the general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, also expressed frustration at the lack of progress.
"The actions we have taken over the past two-plus decades are less about raising Lake Mead's elevation than they are about protecting ourselves if things go from bad to worse," Entsminger said in a statement.
The states previously let pass a November deadline set by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to devise a strategy to face water shortages after this year, when current guidelines will expire.
Over 40 million people across these states along with Mexico and Native American tribes rely on Colorado River water. The river is crucial to farming as well as water and electricity for millions of homes and businesses. Much of the water starts out as winter mountain snowfall in the Upper Basin, which amasses far more that way than it consumes. Lower Basin states, including agriculture-heavy regions, are bigger consumers.
Major cities including Denver, Salt Lake City, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Phoenix and Los Angeles, are also big water consumers. Chronic overuse, drought and rising temperatures linked to climate change have lessened water flows.
How the water is allocated — especially in dry spells — and conserved has been the center of agreements among the states for decades. The original 1922 Colorado River Compact was calculated based on water amounts that doesn't exist today, especially with the long-term drought.
The current round of negotiations among states have been going on over two years.
If no consensus can be reached, the federal government could step in and devise a plan that leaves parties dissatisfied and could even result in litigation.
Scientists recently found snow cover and snow depth in the West are at their lowest in decades. Some areas have seen their warmest December through early February. Normally, snow cover this time of year spans 460,000 square miles — about the size of California, Utah, Idaho and Montana. But, this year it is only California-sized, about 155,000 square miles, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center.
Amid partisan strife, Senate passes election bills to bar troops, concealed firearms from polling places - Dan Boyd, Albuquerque Journal
The Senate voted to approve a politically-tinged election bill on Sunday, sending it on to the House with just a few days left in this year's 30-day legislative session.
The measure, Senate Bill 264, would make it a state-level crime for troops, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, to be deployed to polling places or to block registered voters from casting a ballot.
It passed the Senate on a straight party-line 26-16 vote, with all Democrats voting in favor and all Republicans in opposition.
Backers of the legislation said the bill was prompted by President Donald Trump's recent calls to "nationalize" elections.
"We have to be prepared," said Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, D-Albuquerque, at one point during Sunday's debate. "We've heard enough in the rhetoric of this president to show we're doing absolutely the right thing."
But Republicans blasted the measures as misguided, with Senate Minority Leader William Sharer, R-Farmington, calling the bill dealing with election interference a "tin foil hat" law.
"It is clearly another example of Trump Derangement Syndrome," Sharer said, using a term commonly used by Republicans to describe critics of the president. "It's not going to happen here or anywhere else."
Other Republicans also pointed out that nearly all New Mexico county clerks — with the exception of Doña Ana County Clerk Amanda López Askin — have come out in opposition to the bill.
But Sen. Katy Duhigg, D-Albuquerque, dismissed many of the county clerks' concerns as misguided.
She also expressed fear that an existing federal law that prohibits federal troops from being stationed at polling places, unless such force is necessary to "repel armed enemies" of the United States, might ultimately be ignored by the Trump administration.
"We're at the point we can no longer rely on the federal government to follow its own laws," Duhigg said.
Trump said this month that Republicans should nationalize elections and take over voting oversight in 15 states, though he did not specify to which states he was referring. The president later doubled down on his remarks, describing states as "federal agents" to count votes.
He also recently labeled New Mexico elections as "so corrupt it's incredible," suggesting he would have won the state's five electoral votes were it not for the state's election practices. Trump has lost in New Mexico all three times he has run for president, most recently by 6 percentage points in 2024.
New Mexico is approaching a key election cycle, with all statewide offices up for election in the November general election. All 70 state House seats will also be on the ballot, along with the state's three U.S. House seats and the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Democrat Ben Ray Luján.
Meanwhile, senators were also poised late Sunday to vote on a separate bill eliminating an existing exemption for licensed concealed-carry permit holders to bring their gun to vote.
That bill, Senate Bill 261, would largely do away with exemptions enshrined in a 2024 bill signed into law by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham that prohibited carrying firearms within 100 feet of polling places — and within 50 feet of ballot drop boxes — in an attempt to address possible voter intimidation.
However, it would leave in place an exemption for law enforcement officers to bring firearms to polling places in certain limited situations, including when summoned by a county clerk or election judge.
NM House passes medical malpractice reform - Patrick Lohmann, Source New Mexico
The New Mexico House of Representatives on Saturday quickly and overwhelmingly endorsed a bill making multiple changes to the state’s medical malpractice law, with members of both parties hailing the overhaul as a compromise resulting from months of negotiations.
Representatives passed House Bill 99 by a vote of 66-3, with every Republican and all but three Democrats advancing the measure after a little more than 15 minutes of debate.
The three Democrats who voted “no” were Reps. Janelle Anyanonu, Angelica Rubio and Patricia Roybal Caballero. They did not explain their opposition during the debate Saturday.
Rep. Christine Chandler (D-Los Alamos), who spearheaded the bill, said it will improve the climate for doctors seeking to move and work here amid a statewide shortage, while also ensuring adequate compensation for patients harmed due to medical malpractice.
“We are not changing anything in the act that will provide unlimited medical care for individuals who have been injured in a medical malpractice suit. I think that’s a very important point to emphasize,” she said on the House floor Saturday. “But rather, there are some guardrails around the other damages, which I think are very fair.”
Currently, no caps exist on the amount of punitive damages providers can be forced to pay if a jury determines they are liable. Those damages are aimed at punishing providers in cases of egregious wrongdoing.
Plaintiffs’ lawyers also face a lower burden of proof than in many other states.
The bill caps the amount juries can award, depending on the type of provider. Domestically owned hospitals and independent providers have the lowest cap; corporately owned hospitals have the highest.
HB99 also requires a judge to review evidence and sign off before plaintiffs’ lawyers will be allowed to seek punitive damages. Chandler on Saturday cited a report that estimated plaintiffs’ lawyers seek punitive damages in 92% of cases.
Now that the bill has cleared the House, HB 99 will head to the Senate. It’s been assigned to a single committee, Senate Judiciary, before it hits the Senate floor. The session ends Thursday at noon.
During a news conference Saturday before the House floor debate, House Democrats said they weren’t sure whether their Senate colleagues would endorse the measure before the session ends.
Chandler said at the news conference that she anticipates conversations with Senate leaders about various provisions in the bill, but she’s hopeful the public pressure to get reform done this session, along with the hard-won compromise the bill represents, will ultimately convince them.
“I think we owe that to our constituents,” she said.
In a statement Saturday, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, who also backs the legislation, urged the Senate to send her the bill quickly.
“New Mexicans, many of whom are waiting months to see a doctor, expect the Senate to put this bill on its calendar immediately and treat it with the urgency it requires with just a few days left in the session,” Lujan Grisham said in a statement.
Indian Health Service to phase out use of dental fillings containing mercury by 2027 - By Graham Lee Brewer and Savannah Peters, Associated Press
The federal agency that provides health care to Native Americans and Alaska Natives has announced it will phase out the use of dental fillings containing mercury.
The Indian Health Service has used fillings, known as dental amalgams, that contain elemental mercury to treat decayed and otherwise damaged teeth for decades. Native American rights and industry advocates have called for an end to the practice, arguing it exposes patients who may not have access to private dentistry to a harmful neurotoxin.
The use of mercury-containing amalgams, also known as "silver fillings" due to their appearance, has declined sharply since 2009 when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration reclassified the devices from low to moderate risk. The industry has largely abandoned them in favor of plastic resin alternatives, which are also preferred for aesthetic reasons.
The Indian Health Service says it will fully implement the move to mercury-free alternatives by 2027. Already, the percentage of the Indian Health Service's roughly 2.8 million patient user population receiving them has declined from 12% in 2005 to 2% in 2023, the latest year of available data, agency documents show.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees IHS, said growing environmental and health concerns about mercury exposure, and global efforts to reduce materials containing the hazardous heavy metal prompted the change announced this month.
"This is a commonsense step that protects patients and prevents harm before it starts," Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., said in a statement.
The agency's switch to mercury-free alternatives also upholds legal responsibilities the U.S. government has to the 575 federally recognized tribes, he said.
According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, dental amalgam fillings can release small amounts of mercury vapor during placement, removal, teeth grinding and gum chewing. It recommends that certain people at high risk for adverse effects of mercury exposure, including pregnant women, children under 6, and those with existing neurological conditions avoid the fillings. But the administration, along with the American Dental Association, says available evidence does not link mercury-containing fillings to long-term negative health outcomes.
The World Health Organization has created a plan to encourage countries around the world to phase out the use of dental amalgams, citing potential for mercury exposure. In 2013 several countries, including the U.S., signed onto the Minamata Convention, a global agreement targeting the adverse health and the environment effects of mercury. In November, signatories to the convention agreed to phase out the use of mercury-containing dental amalgams by the year 2034.
While Kennedy's decision to stop its use within the IHS by 2027 puts the U.S. ahead of the global schedule, the country is still behind many other developed nations that have already banned the practice.
"The rest of the world is light years ahead of us," said Rochelle Diver, the U.N. environmental treaties coordinator for the International Indian Treaty Council, adding that IHS patients should not receive treatment that is considered antiquated by many dentists.
In a statement, the American Dental Association acknowledged declining use of mercury-containing fillings, but said they remain a "safe, durable and affordable material."
The use of mercury in other medical devices, including thermometers and blood pressure devices, has also declined sharply in recent decades. While mercury-containing amalgams have fallen out of favor in the U.S. private dental sector, patients relying on government services may not have a say, according to Charles G. Brown, president of the World Alliance for Mercury-Free Dentistry.
Many state-administered Medicaid programs continue to cover mercury-containing fillings as a treatment for tooth decay, Brown said.
"If you're on Medicaid, if you are stuck in the Indian Health Service, if you were stuck in a prison or other institution, you just don't have any choice," Brown said.
___
Brewer reported from Oklahoma City.