This story was originally published by New Mexico In Depth.
An effort to change the lengths of legislative sessions each year sailed through the House of Representatives on Thursday, passing without any debate and just four lawmakers voting against it.
Currently, there are alternating 30- and 60-day legislative sessions over two years, and during the 30-day sessions lawmakers are restricted to introducing “germane” bills — basically, dealing with budgetary issues or subjects that the governor greenlights.
House Joint Resolution 1, sponsored by Rep. Matthew McQueen, D-Galisteo, would change the legislative session cycle to 45-day sessions each year during which lawmakers could introduce bills tackling any issue.
Allowing bills on any subject to be introduced every session would help lawmakers maintain momentum on an issue, year-to-year, McQueen said in a mid-February interview.
Right now, lawmakers who can’t get legislation across the finish line during a 60-day session have to wait for two years to work on it again, he said. “You don’t have any momentum. You lose your coalition, you have turnover in your colleagues in the House. It’s a hard way to get legislation passed.”
If the Senate gets on board with the idea, the proposal would go before voters either in 2026 or at a special election and would change the New Mexico Constitution if approved.
On Thursday, McQueen shepherded through the House another measure that would ask voters to eliminate “pocket vetoes.” Not a single lawmaker voted against it.
Currently, the governor must sign bills that clear the legislature in the final three days of a session within a 20-day period after the legislature adjourns.
She can choose to veto a bill outright, in which case she is required to explain the veto. But she isn’t required to veto a bill —she can simply not sign it. In that case, it’s considered a “pocket veto” and no explanation is required.
House Joint Resolution 2 would ask voters to amend the Constitution to require the governor to either sign or veto all bills, and in the case of vetoes, to provide a substantive explanation for why she vetoed the bill. If the governor does neither, the change would require the bill to automatically become law.
