OPINION: Talk of the Town

Securing retirement for all New Mexicans

As a former member of the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA), I’ve witnessed firsthand how retirement security changes lives.

PERA has successfully protected thousands of New Mexico’s public workers, helping them retire with dignity after years of service. However, far too many private-sector employees and small-business owners in our state lack access to the same opportunities for secure retirement planning. This is why I fully support the Council for Safe and Secure Retirement (CSSR) and its initiatives to ensure all New Mexicans can plan for a brighter future.

CSSR is leading the charge to make retirement plans — like 401(k)s — more accessible to workers and businesses across New Mexico. Their commitment to empowering employees and employers alike through innovative solutions, such as expanding access to private market investments, mirrors strategies that have proven successful with PERA. These efforts give individuals the tools they need to grow their savings in more diversified and stable ways over time.

Retirement is not just a personal milestone; it’s a shared responsibility. When workers save confidently, communities thrive, businesses attract and retain employees and future generations are lifted. CSSR’s initiatives provide a practical, equitable framework to bridge gaps in financial security, particularly for underserved populations in New Mexico.

I encourage every business leader, policymaker and resident to support CSSR’s efforts to cultivate retirement readiness and long-term sustainability. Together, we can ensure that all New Mexicans — regardless of their background or profession — have the freedom to retire safely and securely. Let’s invest in the future of our families and workforce by prioritizing initiatives that empower retirement savings for everyone. It’s an opportunity we cannot afford to ignore.

Jeff Varela

Former board member of the Public Employees Retirement Association

Why health care is so expensive

The recent 43 day shutdown of the federal government was triggered by a lack of bipartisan agreement on the funding of subsidies for the Affordable Care Act Marketplace plans. The subsidies would be a great deal lower if this country’s health care costs were not prohibitively expensive.

The high cost of health care has been a critical issue for decades. So why is our health care cost far above any other modern industrialized country? Several reasons:

Even after adjusting for the higher costs of living, the salaries for doctors, prices for prescription drugs, hospital charges and specialist visits are considerably higher than other comparable countries.

Here is a startling fact : 25 to 30 cents of every dollar of health care spending goes for paperwork. Different insurance company billing rules, coding and having to deal with multiple insurance companies results in enormous overhead. A single payer system would eliminate most of this overhead.

The U.S. fee for service system is far more expensive than a system that emphasizes primary care and prevention.

The drug companies have strong market power. Like many folks I am exhausted by the endless number of TV ads for prescription drugs. The U.S. is one of a handful of countries that allows direct to consumer drug advertising. Also, there is very limited government price negotiation. Unlike other countries the U.S. leaves pricing to the market which leads to wide variation and often rapid price increases.

The U.S. has higher rates of chronic disease such as obesity, diabetes and heart diseases

Medical malpractice and defensive medicine leads to doctors ordering extra tests or consultations “just in case.”

The U.S. doesn’t use more health care than other countries — it just pays far more for each unit of care because of a system built around complexity, market pricing and high administrative overhead.

Bill Tallman

State senator from 2017-2025

Affordability can be tough to reach

“Affordability” is cited as the reason Democrats won the elections earlier this month and the No. 1 concern for Americans, especially young Americans. It is especially a concern for those people who want to buy a house.

I see several factors that influence house affordability. First is the size of the house people want to buy. My first house was approximately 1,300 square feet. It was a starter home, nothing fancy, but it allowed me to quit wasting my money on rent and start building equity. A lot of the homes people want as their first homes are larger than 2,000 square feet, and the cost is much higher than what a smaller starter home would cost.

Most people of my generation waited until their kids were out of the house and were near retirement before buying a luxury car. These days many young people are driving a BMW, Lexus, Infinity or other luxury cars. With the costs of those cars and interest rates as they are these days, they are paying several hundred dollars per month for those cars.

When I was young and considering buying my first home I was not paying for the internet, a cell phone or cell service. These days those expenses are quite necessary, but many people are paying hundreds of dollars each month for each service. I pay less than $70/month for my cell phone service and internet combined.

It is very difficult for someone to afford a nice new home when they are paying more than $1,000/month for a car and these services. Look at what you are spending on these items and try to reduce them. If you can, that house you want may become affordable.

Jeffrey Peace

Kirtland

Albuquerque needs a change in direction

The upcoming Albuquerque mayoral election will be a good test of wisdom or wackiness by the electorate. Will they reelect Mayor Tim Keller for another four-year term (wackiness) or finally decide it’s time for him to leave (wisdom)?

Keller’s two terms in office have resulted in a precipitous decline in the state of the city and his saying he needs four more years to get things done is wishful thinking. In the debate prior to the primary election then-candidate Louie Sanchez reminded all of the definition of insanity as it applies to Keller “repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting different results.”

Crime, drugs and homelessness are running rampant in Keller’s city, none of which are aided by his sanctuary city-related policies. Albuquerque has been rated in several surveys as being among the top most dangerous cities in America. Folks are finally realizing that Keller has to go. That time has come.

I ask my fellow citizens, do you want four more years of the same or should we put an end to the self-destruction this administration has rendered? Please vote and make the right choice.

Davie Coulie

Albuquerque