Opponents of a constitutional amendment that would provide some of the highest legislative salaries in the nation to New Mexico lawmakers are confident they can defeat it, but they could easily lose if they don't get a quick cash infusion to spread their message.  

National and local progressive groups have banded together to push the amendment and had a stunning $1.8 million in cash on hand in the early September financial reports. With that kind of cash, TV and digital ads, radio spots, and plenty of mail are all on the table to persuade voters to do something they have repeatedly rejected—pay lawmakers a salary that would come at $68,000 a year.

Late Wednesday, we learned that the Our Values PAC that is helping Republican legislative candidates and had a cash balance of $354,000 as of early September will join the fight against the amendment. However, the PAC will continue to support GOP candidates so they need to raise more to compete against the progressive money. Oilman Peyton Yates gave the Values PAC $100,000 as did Chevron. The PAC's first digital ad is here. The transcript:

Politicians caught red-handed, but instead of accountability, they're asking you for a huge pay raise to almost $70,000 a year. They claim they're unpaid, but they don't want you to know they can get a big state pension for life. New Mexico schools ranked 50th. Instead of investing in our kids, they're investing in themselves. Don't let corruption win. Vote no on Amendment 4, the politician pay package. 

An ABQ Journal poll on Amendment 4 had ambiguous findings when conducted in late August. It showed 39% of likely voters surveyed said they support the proposal to pay lawmakers a salary, while 21% said they oppose the idea. The remaining 40% of voters said they were undecided or wanted more details.

The wording of the poll followed the phrasing that is on the ballot including to "allow legislative compensation that is limited to the median household income for New Mexico.” That may have led to more support being expressed for the measure.

But if that $1.8 million PAC stash goes largely unanswered, many of those 40 percent of the undecided would hear only one message and could be persuaded to pass a salaried legislature—a proposal that has been defeated multiple times in state history.

Not only a salary, but the eight largest salary among the 50 states, and far bigger than any of our neighboring states. (And with cost-of-living adjustments.)

The $68,000-a-year proposed salary represents the current median household income in the state. If salaries are approved the 112 solons would get that and still be paid $247 in per diem—daily expense money—for each day they meet in session or attend an interim committee meeting. That's about $15,000 for a sixty-day session they already receive. Then, as the chart above notes, there's that $31,000-a-year pension after ten years ($62,000 after 20 years) of service that is adjusted for inflation.

Obviously, this is over the top, and if voters were made fully aware of the reach of the proposal, it would likely again be defeated.

DEFEATING 4 

The good news for those against the amendment is that by today's standards it could take a modest amount of money to defeat it, perhaps a third of that $1.8 million progressives are banking on.

That's because voters are inclined to vote against a salaried legislature and won't need much to persuade them to vote that way, especially when the details of what lawmakers are currently getting are presented. Besides the healthy per diem and the pensions they already receive, each legislator is now awarded a full-time whose pay can be up to $90,000 a year, and each legislator also gets a paid district office--all for a part-time job. 

And get this: Legislators would still be able to hold down other jobs even as they collect the full-time salaries. A lawyer currently in the legislature often puts his business on hold for a month or two during the legislative sessions but now they would get $68,000 to do it. That more than makes up for the two months the practice is on pause. Sounds good if you're an attorney but the amendment is supposed to attract mostly middle-class candidates whose voices are not heard at the Roundhouse?

If the PAC against the amendment gets solid  have the right financial backing, defeating the salary plan may be just a matter of pushing the first domino over.  

FOLLOWING THE MONEY 

Vote for Change, a political committee created in June, has reported raising more than $1.8 million in donations to support the salary amendment. Among the groups that have contributed to the political committee is the Wyoming-based Western Futures Fund, a nonprofit group that gave a $1.2 million donation earlier this month: 

The website of the Western Futures Fund did not list the leaders or employees of the organization. According to the group’s 2024 public tax records, at that time Michael Hennesy was president, Christopher Hirsch was secretary, and Jeremy Krones was treasurer. A 2026 article from Must Read Alaska, a political and cultural media outlet, reported that Hennesy, Hirsch, and Krones are part of the “who’s who of progressive philanthropy” leaders in Alaska. 

New Mexico based progressive nonprofits Center for Civic Action and Center for Civic Policy together donated $500,000 to Vote for Change. 

A who's who of Santa Fe lobbyists made donations including JD Bullington ($500), Jason Weaks ($1,500), Larry Horan ($500) and Andrew Setter ($500).  

The pros and cons of the four constitutional amendments voters will decide in the election are in this guide from the Secretary of State.

VOX POPULI 

We'll kick off reader opinion on the salary measure with this hard-hitter from Arcy Baca.

Joe, I've been pushing people to vote no on Amendment 4! What would New Mexicans get in exchange? A clawback on the their already golden parachute pensions? No! Would it get lobbyists money out of our politics? No! In fact legislators have gotten more blatant with lobbyists money. Lobbyists are paying for commercials endorsing pay for legislators. 

What have legislators done? They have recently passed two increases to their pensions--27 percent the first year and 50 percent the second year! These increases were overwhelming bipartisan. Democrats and and Republicans were both at the trough. That is why you see a lot of these old dinosaurs retiring. New Mexico is being controlled by the lobbyists. PERA retirees have received just a little over 1 percent COLA s total in the last 8 years! MLG never even got 1 bill to sign helping retirees! Again vote no on paying these clowns!

Don't fret amendment backers. We'll have your side as we move along.  

Back here tomorrow with more interesting stuff.

This is the Home of New Mexico politics.