New Mexico officials react to 'One Big Beautiful Bill'

While the Republican Party of New Mexico celebrated tax cuts included in the House budget bill passed early Thursday, New Mexico Democrats railed against the proposed cuts to Medicaid and food assistance.

The House passed a legislative package that would enact policies President Donald Trump promised on the campaign trail, such as no tax on tips or overtime through 2028 and funding for mass deportations. The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” would also extend the 2017 tax cuts and cut social safety net spending. With the third-highest poverty rate in the country as of 2023, New Mexico is one of the states most reliant on Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

House Democrats filed more than 500 amendments to the bill, which were rejected by the GOP majority. The legislative package still has to get through the Senate, which could make substantial changes.

“This so-called budget is not just morally bankrupt — it’s downright cruel,” Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández, D-N.M., said in a statement.

All three of New Mexico’s Democratic House representatives voted against it.

“This is what leadership looks like. This bill puts Americans first — not special interests, not foreign nationals, and certainly not radical ideology,” Amy Barela, New Mexico Republican Party chair, said in a statement.

Democratic New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham condemned the bill because of its cuts to social safety net programs and said in a statement it “undermined our progress on clean energy.” U.S. Senate budget committee member Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M., also condemned the House bill.

The bill would cut Medicaid spending by almost $700 billion and spending on SNAP by $267 billion over 10 years. It would also create new work requirements for Medicaid and expand food aid work requirements. Just the proposed SNAP changes could be a $300 million hit to New Mexico’s budget, according to New Mexico Legislative Finance Committee Director Charles Sallee.

Environmental advocates are celebrating a measure that didn’t make the final package: a plan to sell 500,000 acres of federally owned public land in Nevada and Utah.

“The victory in the House is significant because it sends a clear message that public land sell-off isn’t popular, and there’s bipartisan support for making sure that sell-off provisions don’t advance,” said Michael Carroll, Bureau of Land Management campaign director for The Wilderness Society.

Carroll is still concerned Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, could put a public lands sale provision in the Senate budget package. Lee, another Senate budget committee member, has been a vocal proponent of transferring federal public lands in Utah to state ownership.

Reps. Gabe Vasquez, D-N.M., and Ryan Zinke, R-Mont., claimed killing the House land sell-off plan as a win for their newly formed Public Lands Caucus.

“We’ve worked together across the aisle to prevent this unprecedented public lands sell-off,” Vasquez said in a statement. “We will continue to work together to ensure our lands are public, accessible, and well managed.”