KUNM News Reports

Health and Environment Secretary George Goldstein says state officials may be up late tonight trying to work out a final agreement on the proposed nuclear waste site near Carl's bed. Midnight is the deadline for Governor Bruce King to sign an agreement with the Department of Energy concerning the much-debate-it-wice isolation pilot plant or WIP. Besides being a major focus of unsuccessful opposition by anti-nuclear groups, the WIP project has drawn criticism on another level as well. State officials are still concerned about how much say New Mexico will have in the future project. After many go-rounds in Congress, New Mexico was given the right of consultation and cooperation in the location of the WIP. But differences between how the state interprets these rights and how the Department of Energy interprets them continues to exist. Goldstein says this conflict between the DOE and the state has now boiled down to one issue. As New Mexico officials believe the state has a constitutional right to ask for a judicial review of final decisions made by the Secretary of Energy on the project.

And they want to include language in the agreement to that effect. But Goldstein says the Department of Energy sees the situation differently. Department of Energy, I believe, in fairness to them, reads the enabling law such that the state does not have judicial review. Since the law is silent on it, the attorney general and the task force have recommended to the governor that we put language in, which would define final agency action by the Department of Energy. And so that we, in the state of New Mexico, if we felt that the decision was not based on the record, not based on information gathered, could go to court. Goldstein says state officials feel strongly that the state would gain by having judicial review in the agreement. Some feel it may be the state's last chance in having a voice in the development of whip. It was hoped that differences between the state and the DOE on the whip would have been ironed out long before now.

Negotiations have dragged on for five months. And even at this late hour, DOE negotiator Leonard Jacobits couldn't tell us if the state and the Department of Energy will come to any agreement. Jacobits had this to say when we asked him about the negotiations progress. Well, first of all, I don't believe in negotiating agreements through the press. And I'm really in opposition to comment on where we stand other than we're still negotiating and we're trying to reach some accommodation with the state. It was certainly not in favor of denying the state the right of judicial review. On the other hand, there's a question of what right the state in fact does have. And that's what's being negotiated right now. Meanwhile, Goldstein says King has already written to the Secretary of Energy in Washington, explaining the state's viewpoint. He also sent the Secretary a draft agreement that contains a dutical review provision. The final decision on the whip and New Mexico's voice in the project will be made by the Secretary of Energy in Washington. And Goldstein says that if the DOE officials in Albuquerque don't see things the state's way,

maybe the officials in Washington will. Yet Jacobits seems to think negotiations between the state and the DOE here even now take two. Meanwhile, Goldstein says King has already written to the Secretary of Energy in Washington, explaining the state's viewpoint. He also sent the Secretary a draft agreement that contains a dutical review provision. The final decision on the whip and New Mexico's voice in the project will be made by the Secretary of Energy in Washington. And Goldstein says if the DOE officials in Albuquerque don't see things the state's way, maybe the officials in Washington will. Yet Jacobits seems to think negotiations between the state and the DOE here even now are not totally in vain. In fact, he says that midnight deadline might not be so ironclad. I want to think that we've been negotiating for at least five months. And as I read the underlying statute that provides for the negotiation, it says that the Secretary of Energy will seek to enter into an agreement with the state by September 30th.

And at least I don't read that as ironclad deadline. What the DOE in the state come up with, if they come up with anything in the way of an agreement about the judicial review issue remains to be seen. Once again, issues surrounding the whip seem to be fraught with the usual debate and delays. For KUNM News, I'm Diana Spirata. Take two. What the DOE in the state come up with, if they come up with anything in the way of an agreement about the dutical review issue remains to be seen. But once again, issues surrounding the development of whip seem to be fraught with the usual debate and delays. For KUNM News, I'm Diana Spirata. Health and Environment Secretary George Goldstein says state officials may be up late tonight trying to work out a final agreement on the proposed nuclear waste site near Carl's bed. Midnight is the deadline for Governor Bruce King to sign the agreement with the Department of Energy concerning the much debated waste-dacillation pilot plan or whip.

Besides being a major focus of unsuccessful opposition by anti-nuclear groups, the whip project has drawn criticism on another level as well. State officials are still concerned about how much say New Mexico will have in the future project. After many go rounds in Congress, New Mexico was given the right of consultation and cooperation in the location of the whip. But differences between how the state interprets these rights and how the Department of Energy interprets them continue to exist. This is the third and last paragraph. Why the DOE in the state, KUNM, second paragraph. Some claim the Anderson for President campaign is losing steam. They cite some recent polls that seem to show Anderson trailing further behind Reagan and Carter as election day approaches. But Chairperson Mary Crisp didn't buy any of that gloom today about the candidate she says is the only real choice left to the American people.

Large percentage of Carter supporters are large percentage of Reagan supporters. We're only supporting them because they were anti the other candidate. I think there's a great deal of softness in the electorate today. I think the American people are reasonable and they've got good sense and they're deeply concerned and they do want the best president. And so I think they're still making up their minds. So when you say polls polls or it won't only poll that really matters isn't one on November 4th. Crisp admits it's going to be an uphill battle to get Anderson elected. But the ex-Republican says she's up for the fight. Crisp says she's appalled by stands made by both Reagan and President Carter on some issues very close to her own heart. The ERA and federal money for abortions. Crisp says Anderson is the only candidate that will really push for ratification of the now precarious ERA amendment. And she says Anderson is the only candidate who will also stand by equally precarious federal money for abortions.

Today, Crisp didn't mince words in her criticism of Reagan and the Republican Party's platform on these issues. The Republican platform, Governor Reagan's platform, which is dominated by views of the right wing, is outrageous. It is offensive to the majority of the American people. It abandoned a 40-year commitment to the Equal Rights Amendment. It proposes a constitutional amendment banning abortion, making it a criminal act. And perhaps even more frightening is that a candidate for federal judgeship should take an anti-abortion position. The Republican platform is a major issue in this campaign because it denies personal rights and freedom of choice, which is the very basic spirit and principles of America. And Crisp didn't spare President Carter any criticism, either. She blasted his administration for breaking promises on women's issues. President Carter should be explaining and defending his record of the last four years and the grave state of the nation today.

Needless to say, his record is impossible to explain. Back in 1976, when Carter was campaigning for the presidency, he said about the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment, and I quote, I believe we are going to do it in the next four years without any problem, unquote. Well, since his election, not one single state has ratified the Equal Rights Amendment. In 1977, following the Supreme Court decision against federal Medicaid funding for non-therapeutic abortions, President Carter addressed the dilemma of poor women who cannot afford abortions by saying, quote, there are many things in life that are not fair that wealthy people can afford and poor people can't unquote. Can these be words of a president who says he is for women's rights, for human rights? As with Reagan, President Carter is consistently inconsistent. Crisp says she's still optimistic about Anderson's chances, but she's also realistic about what it will take to get John Anderson into the White House, and that's money.

Indeed, without the necessary funds, Anderson's chances may fade out, as Reagan and Carter step up their media blitzes of the national network. I think this is something the American people are going to have to look at too. We've got two candidates that have 29.4 million dollars plus the independent packs that are funneling more money into the campaign. And here is John Anderson a real choice. 58% of the American people are opposed to the candidates of both major parties. Funding is important to us, and we are still raising money through voluntary contributions, and we're still negotiating with the banks for the post-election funding that we are entitled to based on the FEC ruling of how many weeks ago. But we must have the funding to have John Anderson's presence on the national networks. So, in fact, the American people can more thoroughly understand his positions on the issues that are critical to them.

Another obstacle facing Anderson is what some call his role as a spoiler in this campaign. Many Democrats have condemned a vote for Anderson as a vote for Reagan. I hate to deal with that hypothetical problem, which I think has been a creation of the Georgia boys, including Bob Strauss of Texas, who have their strategy as to attack Governor Reagan's character. And then the second part of that is to undermine the Anderson campaign by saying your vote for Anderson is a vote for Ronald Reagan. I suggest we've got five weeks until the election day. If all of the people who claim they believe in John Anderson that he is the best candidate for the presidency, stand up now, work for us, give us the money. They will never have to make that decision November 4th. A vote for Anderson will be a vote for John Anderson. But whether the Anderson campaign can pull off what would be a startling upset remains to be seen.

It's true Anderson has captured many minority and women's votes because of his strong stand on the ERA and personal rights issues. But beating the odds is going to take grabbing a majority of American voters away from Reagan and Carter. Can it still be done? And I see a grassroots diverse group of people that are supporting John Anderson. All right, they said he couldn't do that. He accomplished that. He couldn't get a vice presidential running made a strong Democrat. He did that. He couldn't get a platform or program. He's got the most comprehensive one today. He wouldn't get into debates. He wouldn't raise the money. He wouldn't get an FEC ruling. Now they're saying he can't win. I am suggesting that the strength of the campaign is that he has accomplished the insurmountable. And we will continue to will get this money that we need to get on on the networks. And he will have that opportunity to appeal to the American people. For KUNM News, I'm Diana Spirata. Sanchez says that figure one. Sanchez says that figure 210,000 represents take three.

The second tax permanent fund is the favorite money well for legislators pet project. The fund is commonly used to pay for highway construction. And a number of bills were introduced today that will build more and better roads. One will pay for the purchase of right away and the widening of San Mateo Boulevard between Zuni and Gibson and Albuquerque. Robert Hawk is sponsoring the bill that would provide more than $7 million in seven tax money. And right now it looks like 1986, which is a what is that? Another four to five years out before the thing would even begin where they would start to acquire right away. And so my intention is try to get this up on a higher priority with the state highway department. Hearings and environmental impact statements have already been completed. The street would become four lanes with turn lines and bus stops. He says most property owners go along with the improvements. This portion of San Mateo Boulevard is the final major highway project in an urban area.

And it's supported by Southside employers like Curtlyn and Sandia Air Force bases. It will probably take two to three years to complete the work on the expansion. And if the bill passes, Hawk says San Mateo will probably look very different than it does today. I would suspect that after this was widened and the project was completed, I would suspect that some of that that's its own commercial along San Mateo might revert to apartments for instance rather than go commercial. Because it's more common now to have cluster commercial instead of strip zoning commercial. And I would suspect that some of that would revert to not residential but for apartments. Two other highway department construction bills were introduced in the house today. They too used seven tax money to generate construction funds. But they're much more controversial. They are the plans to build the Montaño and El Pueblo bridges across the Rio Grande and the North Valley of Albuquerque. House Dreddin, a Westside legislator, introduced the bills. But the seven tax permanent fund can't provide all the dollars New Mexico needs to erode. We've become heavily dependent on the federal government.

But this year, the feds are cutting New Mexico's share of federal highway funds by $34 million. Highway department head Reddy Jewett is aligned to report the cut means a halt for 36 projects in the state, including the completion of interstate U.S. 70 in the South. Jewett continues to charge the feds with politics. Federal money overall is only being trimmed by 2.5%, but New Mexico's critics see 30%. Governor King is speculating this because he's a Democratic governor under a Republican administration. Another major use of seven tax money is capital construction projects, particularly the state's universities in public schools. Two bills introduced today would pay for a new music building at New Mexico State University and for the renovation of a campus drama building. Representatives Randy Saban and Mary Thompson both of us, cruises are the sponsors. Some other bills expected to be controversial, provide for a multi-million dollar low interest mortgage loan program. The inclusion of yellow page revenue in the phone company's rate base and a resolution to give back to the corrections commission a policy making rather than an advisory role to the state corrections department. At the Capitol on Diana Stoffer.

Tomorrow is the first Friday of the regular legislative session and everyone's leaving the Capitol today. It's now traditional for lawmakers to take the day off. That's in part due to the delay of printing the many bills that have been introduced in the first few days. And it's also the only chance for some relaxation before the serious job of lawmaking commences. Another tradition observed this first week legislation to raise per-dem payments to elected officials. Representative John Lee Thompson is introduced a bill to ask voters to raise per-dem from its present $40 to $75. Gas mileage would also be increased. The room, food, cleaning, all parts of a cost of living and Santa Fe increase. So certainly the legislators do not need to be paid and they're not, but they need to at least be able to meet expenses. $75 would take care of the situation now and would probably be good for about seven or eight years with inflation going as it has in the last couple of years. The last time legislative per-dem was increased was in 1971.

Yet Thompson charges that inflation is not the only justification for a raise. The per-dem for state employees or county employees or city employees is $14 more than it is for legislators. So it's about $54 maximum in New Mexico and it's less to legislators. So you can see there's been adjusted because it doesn't have to be voted on by the people. Thompson also says the ceiling on per-dem for legislators prevents many people from serving. As they don't have the money to pay for even one month of high priced Santa Fe living. So it discriminates against women and lower income people. So we're going to end up with a rich man's legislature if we don't get a change pretty soon. The issue is a perennial one and in the past when the measure has received approval from legislators, voters have rejected it. As could be the case if the per-dem raise is placed on the 1983 ballot. Another measure voters might have the opportunity to vote on is mandatory jail sentences for drunk drivers.

Senator Les Houston, also a candidate for governor, says it's time to act against the drunk driver. This is not offered as a solution to try to solve the problems of the real confirmed alcoholic. We need to do additional work on that. But I would suspect that in this state we'll lose several lives this year. Not from what we call the confirmed alcoholic driving. But from people who don't even consider themselves really a user of alcohol once a week or once a month or whenever it is, they go out with friends or whatever and have more to drink than they should have. Those people are going to think twice before getting behind the wheel of a car. And when they think twice they're going to save some lives. If Houston's constitutional amendment is approved by voters, first offenders would be sentenced to a minimum of five days or a maximum of 30 days in jail. And he has no problem at all with placing the DWI penalty in the state constitution. Constitutional amendment will provide an opportunity if it were to pass the legislature for the public to discuss the pros and cons in all types of public meetings.

And see if the public collectively, you said it's harsh and they're crying out for something to be done. To see if collectively, if they'll put their vote where their mouth is, is what it really boils down to. And if, in fact, they were to approve it at the polls, then that means the majority of those voting voted for it, it would create a greater acceptance and it would create a greater awareness of the law and what the problems are. The gubernatorial candidate also made a campaign promise regarding the amendment. That is that he can help change human behavior. I promise you that if this becomes law, you will see a drastic change in people's behavior. For instance, when you go to neds and people realize they can go jail for five days, having three or four drinks, you're going to start seeing some of them not drink. It'll be somebody else's turn and they'll be driving them home. And in doing that, if we change some behavior, and I definitely would admit that I'm trying to do that. Because by changing their behaviors, we're going to save over a period of years in this state hundreds of innocent lives.

That we should not be losing anyway. Senator Houston, one will recall, was the prime mover behind last year's liquor reform bill, which permits more alcohol sales. Beer and wine is now available in most restaurants. This morning, soon before legislators jumped in their cars to go home for a long weekend, Congressmen Manuel Lohan made an appearance. Lohan's address focused on natural resources, especially water. And as a member of the House Interior Committee, he just might be in a position to affect water law and its availability in the air at Southwest. Senator Jackson, many years ago, said that we could not even look at that. We couldn't even study, couldn't spend any federal monies on transferring Columbia base and water into the Southwest. And the time, I think, has come to remove that prohibition of spending federal funds to study the idea of interbasin transfer. And during the next section of the session of Congress, I hope to further explore that idea. Lohan also had some comments on El Paso's fight to grab billions of gallons of New Mexico groundwater.

Without getting into the political arena, I agree with both Bob Grant and Aubrey Dunn and others who say that there's more to that than meets the eye. My personal belief is that it's a test case leading to the interstate sale of water for energy projects that are coming. And we can see that taking place with these large energy projects that are coming. If El Paso wins the lawsuit, Lohan says New Mexico's growth will be severely curtailed. And Lohan indicated he will urge Congress to address the issue of groundwater law and interstate commerce, which is regulated by the federal government. He will also ask for hearings on the matter. While Congressman Lohan addressed legislators in a packed house gallery, protesters marched outside to remember a Supreme Court ruling issued nine years ago Friday. That's the day the High Court ruled abortion legal in the U.S. Both pro-choice and pro-life advocates marked the anniversary with demonstrations. The state coalition for abortion choice held a prayer service and pro-lipers gave out red roses.

There will be no abortion-related legislation introduced in this session. Until Monday, I'm Diana Stoffer at the Capitol. There was one big surprise revealed in the governor's state of the state address this afternoon. That is that he wants to roll back last year's property tax cut for business. The proposal to strip commercial property owners and the oil and gas industry of their reductions would provide $22 million to financially strapped counties and cities. I ask you to consider this session. A bill which will increase revenues for all our counties by repealing property tax reductions for all gas and other non-residential property and appropriating their revenues from these property taxes to our counties in a netable manner. This proposal will provide $22 million in new revenue for our counties with a minimum county distribution of $250,000. Last year, Governor King attempted to prevent those cuts, but failed, and he's likely to fail again this year in an effort to have them repealed. The most powerful opposition comes from House Taxation and Revenue Committee Chairman Colin McMillan, the architect of last year's tax cut.

Last year, we increased funding for county government by 22%, I mean by 22 million dollars or about 42% increase. And I'm having a document prepared this afternoon that it gives a county by county breakdown. What each county got, but it's a significant number and I'm not sure that they could spend it as fast as we could put it out for them. McMillan has another tax cut measure in his pocket. It would abolish the gross receipts taxes on medicine and hospital bills. If there is agreement among lawmakers that counties really need more revenue, the favorite solution will be to authorize them to raise gross receipts taxes following a referendum of local voters. In the areas of funding, Governor King today recommended the state pick up about 63% of the seven and a half million dollars in federal cuts to various health and human services program. This amounts to more than four and a half million dollars on top of current state contributions to the programs. Democrat Jerry Sandell, a farmer, and spent the summer examining the federal cuts to New Mexico. And he predicts the state will not even shell out 20% of the money needed to run the programs at the current levels.

And some may be abandoned altogether. And they are abuses in these programs. They were brought up this summer. And I think the more we dig into it, we can find more abuses. And so I think the people of the state want to see the programs funded in the money used wisely, but the abuses cut out. Another sore point in coping with federal cuts is just who will allocate the federal block grants, a governor or the legislature. Other King funding proposals mentioned in today's address include more than 70 million dollars in highway improvements over five years, 11% budget increase for public schools, 12.2% for higher education, a whopping 45% budget increase for vocational educational schools, and 47 million dollars in capital outlay projects for the state's public schools and universities. One topic under scrutiny by residents is accelerated utility costs and the governor addressed that issue. He urged lawmakers to get greater power to the public service commission, and he wants to give that commission authority to examine the books of utility subsidiaries for hidden costs to consumers. He also opened the door today to other issues, like community-based corrections.

Earlier in the day, the governor signed the Congressional Redistricting Bill, much to the relief of candidates who weren't sure where they should campaign. It's basically a north-south alignment, reached during a tough two-day bargaining session. There are some unhappy people, like Representative Vernon Kerr of Los Alamos. And I think what we've done here with this plan is to ensure that we will have a net vote of one out of the House of Representatives in the United States. I think effectively the district in the southern part of the state is going to cancel the Northern Representatives vote. And Mr. Speaker, I think that if we had indeed taken a north-south alignment, we probably would have provided nearly equal representative area with the numbers of people of various groups and representations. Being close to the same, we would have more nearly have created two seats to speak the voice of the state in New Mexico. But the way it is right now, we have locked it in.

Most lawmakers recognize the need for a given take in the notion of compromise, as expressed by Santa Fe Republican, Max Call. But I think, considering the position that both houses are taken, it's a really good compromise between the houses. And I can vote for and support this plan, especially since it keeps the North Central cluster of counties together. And I think that's important. It also keeps the southern and the eastern community of interests together. And I think that's important. Mr. Speaker, overall, I think it's the best plan we could come up with under the circumstances. With their political mandates behind them, both the House and the Senate went to work on other matters. On the first day of the regular session, 16 bills were introduced in the Senate, 23 in the House. At the Capitol, I'm Diana Stalker. Diana, what's happening up there? Why haven't we gotten a redistricting bill yet? Well, the State House and Senate are, in fact, locked in a stalemate over this issue.

A showdown, in fact, likely to occur in a conference committee. But nobody knows if that's going to be tonight or tomorrow morning. Many thought that would have happened earlier in the day, but there have been repeated delays in many last-minute caucuses. And that's all pointing to some late-night negotiations. Earlier today, we thought we were making progress on this bill. The Senate, in fact, passed the so-called Tinto bill. That measure places all Indians in one congressional district. But it also forces Lincoln County resident Congressman Joe Schien to run in the North. One Democrat broke ranks with his party over that. And the tie was broken by Senate President Lieutenant Governor Roberto Mondragon. Meanwhile, the Senate's arguing that the Pinto plan gives greater representation to Indians. But the Republicans are calling that argument a smoke screen designed to shut out Schien in the next election. They're also charging, of course, that the bill is divisive and artificially places traditional Northern counties like coal facts in the more conservative South and Southern counties like Lincoln and Catherine in the North. Eric, the bottom line on this really is power politics.

Of course, underlying it is Democratic Senators anger at the House Coalition, whose reapportionment plan forces aid incumbent Democrats to run against each other. And where's the bill now? Well, as Tinto bills currently tied up in the House voters in elections committee, that committee was supposed to immediately, after the House recessed at about 315. Well, in fact, it took more than an hour to gather all the members. And supposedly they were planning some strategy on how to proceed from there. There's a possibility, though, that two other bills could be brought out of that committee. One of them called the Berry Plan, which many House members tend to favor, splits the state east and west with the new third congressional district of Bernalio Torrance, Guadalupe, and DeBaca counties. The Senate, however, is not likely to swallow that bill. And there's a third one that's already referred to as a compromise measure. Not surprisingly, it's almost identical to the bills introduced in both chambers the first day of the special session. So we waste a lot of time, in fact, grappling with this.

This sounds like it's getting complicated. Will the legislators be able to complete their work before the governor opens the regular session at noon tomorrow? Well, everyone says they're going to be able to do that. Now, to use an old cliche, that remains to be seen. Currently, there's no real restrictions on that. They could continue to debate the issue into the regular session. But everyone hopes that it's going to be completed before noon tomorrow. Does that simply lob time off of the regular session or can it be extended? Well, they wouldn't have to extend the regular session. Hopefully, they could wrap up this portion of the work before they really got down to work dealing with these budget matters and such. So it's just hard to say. And the governor's been rather mum on this whole thing. We know he's not very happy about what the House coalition did to some of his liberal democratic friends. But he's not made any comments. So you feel that he has a position, but he's not making a public? Well, if he has a position, in fact, he's not making a public.

He had a bill that he thought would be a good redistricting plan, but no one has introduced that for him. So we're going to be hearing more on this tomorrow, is that right? Yes, I expect so. And we'll find out whether Joe Schien's going to have a safer territory in the South, or if he'll be in the North.