OPINION: An unpaid Legislature comes at a high cost 

New Mexico lawmakers began the 2026 legislative session with a clear and widely shared policy goal: stabilize the medical malpractice system that many physicians say is driving them out of the state, limiting our access to care and driving up wait times. Rep. Christine Chandler, D-Los Alamos, carefully negotiated a bipartisan bill that struck the right balance — protecting patient's rights while ensuring New Mexicans can still find a doctor when they need one. 

The effort is now at risk. And the reason it was put at risk is alarming and a striking example of why the lawmaking process in New Mexico needs to be reformed.

The malpractice bill earned resounding bipartisan support in the House with a 66-3 vote. But in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sens. Joseph Cervantes, D-Las Cruces, and Katy Duhigg, D-Albuquerque, introduced a flurry of amendments — 10 in total — that changed the structure and intent of the legislation. Though most were rejected by the rest of the committee, some of the Cervantes amendments made their way through and are included in the bill the Senate was expected to vote on late Tuesday.

The malpractice debate is hyper-technical, and it's hard to take a side when positions are so nuanced. Essentially, some of the amendments that Cervantes proposed would prevent the state from making changes to the way that damages are calculated in medical malpractice lawsuits, and the other amendment would allow plaintiff attorneys to continue stacking lawsuits against as many parties as possible for the same incident, driving up a potential settlement or jury award. 

While the future of the poisoned bill is uncertain, how we got to this point is crystal clear and the reforms that our state needs are even more apparent: We need to professionalize our Legislature. 

Cervantes and Duhigg are influential members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. They are also attorneys who specialize in bringing malpractice lawsuits. That means Cervantes and Duhigg, and their respective firms and employees, get a cut of whatever settlement or jury award is handed down in their cases. Why on Earth would they want to improve a broken health care system if everyone who suffers from it becomes a potential client? It's a commonsense conflict of interest and they certainly should have recused themselves from voting on the bill, let alone amending it to their checkbook's favor. 

We're not writing to cast aspersions on Cervantes and Duhigg. We believe in capitalism. Why would they vote against their own self-interests? But we need legislators who are working for us, not for themselves. So we need to make some changes.

New Mexico is the only state in the U.S. that doesn't pay its legislators a salary. And while on paper it sounds like we are electing true public servants who volunteer their time for the betterment of their community, we're seeing time and time again that that is not the case, e.g., the Cervantes and Duhigg amendments. 

One of the bills still pending in the Legislature is a joint resolution that proposes a constitutional amendment to pay state lawmakers an annual salary of around $64,000 a year and link it to the median income going forward. The proposal cleared the House and is expected to be taken up by the Senate. If it clears that chamber, it will head directly to voters. 

The status quo means that lawmakers have to take one to two months off a year to move to Santa Fe and negotiate things like malpractice reform, education and criminal justice bills and the plethora of other things our state needs to improve. But as structured, we certainly can't send doctors, teachers, cops or, hell, just about any of us, to make the case for change. We're busy. So we send plaintiff attorneys, retirees and rich people to decide what's best for us. 

Hopefully, the joint resolution and voter approval would also come with additional ethics reforms, including enacting policies similar to what the federal government has for when lawmakers have to recuse themselves from voting on a bill. 

Yes, some might argue that even now, Senate rules state that, "Members shall not use their offices for private gain and shall at all times maintain the integrity and discharge ethically the high responsibilities of their legislative positions.” But clearly, as we're seeing with the malpractice bill, that is not being enforced. 

We as voters need to do all we can to ensure we are sending our best to the Roundhouse to advocate to improve the lives of all New Mexicans. 

And we're better than this.