Insurance coverage, personal healthcare spending, longevity, mortality, health risks, and provider shortages.
Uninsured rate · all ages10.1%2024 · #9 of 50 · highest first
Uninsured rate · under age 6512.4%2024 · #9 of 50 · highest first
Private coverage · under age 6553.3%2024 · #50 of 50 · highest first
New Mexico over time
Explore New Mexico readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. New Mexico officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a New Mexico effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a New Mexico change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Uninsured rate · all ages New Mexico · source units
New MexicoPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
10 of 10 reviewed New Mexico actions match · 10 date markers shown. 21 major events shown separately.
New Mexico · 2024: 10.1% · Rank #9 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2%
FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population. ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
View observations and export data
New Mexico Uninsured rate · all ages · source units
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
New Mexico · state comparison
Who has health coverage?
Compare ACS annual estimates for all ages or people under 65. Coverage categories can overlap and do not sum to the insured share.
New Mexico · 202410.1%
New Mexico rank#9among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark8.2%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Uninsured rate · all ages
FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population.
ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
New Mexico
2024 · New Mexico: 10.1% · Rank #9 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
New Mexico Uninsured rate · all ages history
Period
New Mexico
Compare
2014
14.5%
2015
10.9%
2016
9.2%
2017
9.1%
2018
9.5%
2019
10%
2020
Not available
2021
10%
2022
8.2%
2023
9.1%
2024
10.1%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. New Mexico stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. New Mexico has a dark outline.
Lower value · 2.8%Higher value · 16.7%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
New Mexico · 10.1%2024 · Rank #9 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare New Mexico with every state · 50 ranked
Uninsured rate · all ages · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
16.7%
—
#2
Georgia
12%
—
#3
Oklahoma
11.5%
—
#4
Nevada
11.4%
—
#5
Alaska
11%
—
#6
Florida
10.9%
—
#7
Arizona
10.3%
—
#7
Wyoming
10.3%
—
#9
New Mexico · your comparison
10.1%
—
#10
Mississippi
9.7%
—
#10
Tennessee
9.7%
—
#12
Arkansas
9.4%
—
#13
Idaho
9.2%
—
#14
South Carolina
9%
—
#15
Montana
8.8%
—
#16
North Carolina
8.6%
—
#17
Kansas
8.5%
—
#18
Utah
8.3%
—
#19
Alabama
8.2%
—
#20
South Dakota
8.1%
—
#21
Colorado
7.9%
—
#22
Louisiana
7.7%
—
#22
Missouri
7.7%
—
#22
New Jersey
7.7%
—
#25
Indiana
7.5%
—
#26
Nebraska
7.1%
—
#27
Delaware
6.9%
—
#27
Illinois
6.9%
—
#27
Virginia
6.9%
—
#30
Kentucky
6.8%
—
#31
Ohio
6.7%
—
#32
Washington
6.5%
—
#33
Maryland
6.3%
—
#34
North Dakota
6.1%
—
#35
California
5.9%
—
#36
Connecticut
5.8%
—
#36
Pennsylvania
5.8%
—
#36
West Virginia
5.8%
—
#39
Maine
5.5%
—
#40
Iowa
5.4%
—
#41
Wisconsin
5.3%
—
#42
Oregon
5.2%
—
#43
Michigan
5.1%
—
#43
Minnesota
5.1%
—
#45
New York
5%
—
#46
Rhode Island
4.6%
—
#47
New Hampshire
4.5%
—
#48
Vermont
4.2%
—
#49
Hawaii
3.5%
—
#50
Massachusetts
2.8%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Share of New Mexico’s civilian noninstitutionalized residents under age 65 who lacked comprehensive health-insurance coverage at the time of the ACS survey.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
Method and limitations
U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts, sourced from the 2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimate.
This is a survey estimate for people under 65 and does not describe coverage type or continuity of coverage.
Insurance status alone does not measure affordability, access, quality, or health outcomes.
State spending is reported for 2020, the latest year available in this CMS state series. Choose a service to compare New Mexico with every state.
New Mexico · 2020$8,902
New Mexico rank#42among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$10,191Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Personal healthcare spending per resident
Personal health care expenditure per resident, assigned to the state where the patient resides.
2020 is the last year in this CMS state series. Personal health care excludes administration, public health, and investment included in national health expenditures. This is spending by all payers, not a household bill.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
New Mexico
2020 · New Mexico: $8,902 · Rank #42 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
New Mexico Personal healthcare spending per resident history
Period
New Mexico
Compare
2014
$7,010
2015
$7,418
2016
$7,717
2017
$7,973
2018
$8,154
2019
$8,459
2020
$8,902
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. New Mexico stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. New Mexico has a dark outline.
Lower value · $7.52KHigher value · $14.01KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
New Mexico · $8,9022020 · Rank #42 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare New Mexico with every state · 50 ranked
Personal healthcare spending per resident · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New York
$14,007
—
#2
Alaska
$13,642
—
#3
Massachusetts
$13,319
—
#4
Delaware
$12,899
—
#5
West Virginia
$12,769
—
#6
Vermont
$12,756
—
#7
South Dakota
$12,495
—
#8
Connecticut
$12,489
—
#9
Maine
$12,077
—
#10
New Jersey
$11,868
—
#11
New Hampshire
$11,793
—
#12
Rhode Island
$11,694
—
#13
Pennsylvania
$11,603
—
#14
North Dakota
$11,301
—
#15
Wyoming
$10,989
—
#16
Minnesota
$10,846
—
#17
Maryland
$10,839
—
#18
Indiana
$10,517
—
#19
Louisiana
$10,515
—
#20
Nebraska
$10,514
—
#21
Ohio
$10,478
—
#22
California
$10,299
—
#23
Hawaii
$10,291
—
#24
Kentucky
$10,257
—
#25
Montana
$10,212
—
#26
Illinois
$10,190
—
#27
Oregon
$10,071
—
#28
Wisconsin
$9,982
—
#29
Missouri
$9,921
—
#30
Michigan
$9,897
—
#31
Florida
$9,865
—
#32
Iowa
$9,789
—
#33
Oklahoma
$9,444
—
#34
Kansas
$9,408
—
#35
Mississippi
$9,394
—
#36
Arkansas
$9,338
—
#37
Tennessee
$9,336
—
#38
Alabama
$9,280
—
#39
Washington
$9,265
—
#40
Virginia
$9,195
—
#41
North Carolina
$8,917
—
#42
New Mexico · your comparison
$8,902
—
#43
South Carolina
$8,766
—
#44
Georgia
$8,758
—
#45
Arizona
$8,756
—
#46
Colorado
$8,583
—
#47
Texas
$8,406
—
#48
Nevada
$8,348
—
#49
Idaho
$8,148
—
#50
Utah
$7,522
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Use age-adjusted mortality to account for different age distributions; life expectancy summarizes period death rates.
New Mexico · 202274.5 years
New Mexico rank#42among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark77.5 yearsSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Life expectancy at birth
FactVote uses CDC National Center for Health Statistics annual complete life-table estimates for the total New Mexico population. Values are rounded to the published tenth of a year.
The latest published comparable state series ends in 2022, even though newer national life-expectancy estimates may be available. Period life expectancy summarizes current mortality rates; it is not a forecast of how long a particular person will live. The 2020 and 2021 estimates reflect the mortality shock during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
New Mexico
2022 · New Mexico: 74.5 years · Rank #42 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
New Mexico Life expectancy at birth history
Period
New Mexico
Compare
2018
77.2 years
2019
76.9 years
2020
74.5 years
2021
73 years
2022
74.5 years
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. New Mexico stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. New Mexico has a dark outline.
Lower value · 72.2 yearsHigher value · 80 yearsStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
New Mexico · 74.5 years2022 · Rank #42 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare New Mexico with every state · 50 ranked
Life expectancy at birth · 2022 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
80 years
—
#2
Massachusetts
79.8 years
—
#3
New Jersey
79.6 years
—
#4
New York
79.5 years
—
#5
Connecticut
79.4 years
—
#6
California
79.3 years
—
#6
Minnesota
79.3 years
—
#8
Rhode Island
79.2 years
—
#9
Utah
79 years
—
#10
New Hampshire
78.7 years
—
#11
Colorado
78.5 years
—
#12
Idaho
78.4 years
—
#12
Washington
78.4 years
—
#14
Nebraska
78.3 years
—
#14
Vermont
78.3 years
—
#16
Wisconsin
78.1 years
—
#17
Florida
77.9 years
—
#17
Iowa
77.9 years
—
#17
North Dakota
77.9 years
—
#20
Maryland
77.8 years
—
#21
Oregon
77.7 years
—
#22
Illinois
77.5 years
—
#22
Virginia
77.5 years
—
#24
Montana
77.3 years
—
#24
Pennsylvania
77.3 years
—
#24
South Dakota
77.3 years
—
#27
Texas
77.1 years
—
#28
Michigan
76.8 years
—
#28
Wyoming
76.8 years
—
#30
Arizona
76.7 years
—
#31
Maine
76.6 years
—
#32
Delaware
76.5 years
—
#32
Kansas
76.5 years
—
#34
Nevada
76.4 years
—
#35
Georgia
75.9 years
—
#35
North Carolina
75.9 years
—
#37
Alaska
75.8 years
—
#38
Ohio
75.6 years
—
#39
Indiana
75.4 years
—
#40
Missouri
75.2 years
—
#41
South Carolina
75.1 years
—
#42
New Mexico · your comparison
74.5 years
—
#43
Arkansas
73.9 years
—
#44
Alabama
73.8 years
—
#44
Louisiana
73.8 years
—
#44
Oklahoma
73.8 years
—
#44
Tennessee
73.8 years
—
#48
Kentucky
73.6 years
—
#49
Mississippi
72.6 years
—
#50
West Virginia
72.2 years
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare age-adjusted adult prevalence using the same survey year and definition.
New Mexico · 202310.8%
New Mexico rank#18among 48 states with data
U.S. benchmark10.7%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted
Adult self-reported prevalence, age-adjusted to a common population.
Published CDC 2019–2023 series. Missing or suppressed estimates remain unranked. Confidence intervals describe sampling uncertainty; point ranks are not significance tests.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
New Mexico
2023 · New Mexico: 10.8% · Rank #18 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
New Mexico Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
Period
New Mexico
Compare
2019
11.1%
2020
11.2%
2021
12%
2022
11.2%
2023
10.8%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. New Mexico stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. New Mexico has a dark outline.
Lower value · 7.8%Higher value · 15.1%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
New Mexico · 10.8%2023 · Rank #18 of 48, highest first95% confidence interval: 9.3% – 12.6%Selected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare New Mexico with every state · 48 ranked, 2 unavailable
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted · 2023 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Mississippi
15.1%
95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1
West Virginia
15.1%
95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3
Louisiana
14.6%
95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4
Alabama
14%
95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5
Arkansas
13.1%
95% CI: 12–14.3
#6
South Carolina
12.7%
95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6
Tennessee
12.7%
95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8
Texas
12.1%
95% CI: 11–13.3
#9
Indiana
11.7%
95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10
Georgia
11.5%
95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10
Ohio
11.5%
95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12
Oklahoma
11.3%
95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13
Delaware
11.1%
95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14
North Carolina
11%
95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15
Illinois
10.9%
95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15
Maryland
10.9%
95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15
Michigan
10.9%
95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18
Nevada
10.8%
95% CI: 8.9–13
#18
New Mexico · your comparison
10.8%
95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20
Missouri
10.7%
95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20
South Dakota
10.7%
95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22
California
10.6%
95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23
Kansas
10.5%
95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24
Virginia
10.4%
95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25
Florida
10.1%
95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26
Rhode Island
10%
95% CI: 9.1–11
#27
Arizona
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27
Iowa
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29
Nebraska
9.7%
95% CI: 9–10.3
#30
Wisconsin
9.6%
95% CI: 9–10.2
#31
Hawaii
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31
New York
9.5%
95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31
Oregon
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34
Wyoming
9.4%
95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35
Minnesota
9.3%
95% CI: 8.6–10
#36
New Jersey
9.1%
95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37
Maine
9%
95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38
North Dakota
8.9%
95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39
Idaho
8.7%
95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40
Washington
8.6%
95% CI: 8.2–9
#41
Massachusetts
8.5%
95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42
Connecticut
8.4%
95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43
Alaska
8.2%
95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44
Utah
8.1%
95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45
Colorado
8%
95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46
Montana
7.9%
95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46
New Hampshire
7.9%
95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48
Vermont
7.8%
95% CI: 7–8.7
—
Kentucky
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—
Pennsylvania
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare coverage of need, practitioners needed, or affected population for each discipline.
New Mexico · June 30, 202631.4%
New Mexico rank#46among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark47.4%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Primary care · need met
HRSA-designated shortage areas; measures describe need within those areas, not the entire state population.
National report totals can include territories. Designation rules and populations differ by discipline; do not add disciplines. Absolute population and practitioner ranks also reflect state size.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. New Mexico stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. New Mexico has a dark outline.
Lower value · 11.2%Higher value · 83.2%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
New Mexico · 31.4%June 30, 2026 · Rank #46 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare New Mexico with every state · 50 ranked
Primary care · need met · June 30, 2026 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New Jersey
83.2%
—
#2
Vermont
82.6%
—
#3
South Carolina
79.4%
—
#4
New Hampshire
74.8%
—
#5
Rhode Island
74.3%
—
#6
Louisiana
72.1%
—
#7
Hawaii
67.1%
—
#8
Utah
65.4%
—
#9
Wisconsin
65.2%
—
#10
Alabama
63%
—
#11
Connecticut
60.3%
—
#12
Massachusetts
58%
—
#13
Tennessee
58%
—
#14
Virginia
57.2%
—
#15
Pennsylvania
56.7%
—
#16
Maine
56%
—
#17
Minnesota
55.4%
—
#18
Wyoming
54.4%
—
#19
Indiana
54.2%
—
#20
California
53.2%
—
#21
Arkansas
52.6%
—
#22
Texas
49.8%
—
#23
Ohio
49.7%
—
#24
Nebraska
49.1%
—
#25
Alaska
48.9%
—
#26
North Carolina
48.1%
—
#27
Colorado
47.5%
—
#28
Michigan
44.9%
—
#29
Oregon
43.9%
—
#30
Idaho
43.9%
—
#31
Washington
42.4%
—
#32
Illinois
41.5%
—
#33
Nevada
41.5%
—
#34
Arizona
41.2%
—
#35
Kansas
41.1%
—
#36
Iowa
40.5%
—
#37
Florida
39.7%
—
#38
Georgia
39.1%
—
#39
Montana
38.5%
—
#40
West Virginia
38.3%
—
#41
North Dakota
36.5%
—
#42
New York
35.3%
—
#43
South Dakota
34.6%
—
#44
Mississippi
34.1%
—
#45
Maryland
31.6%
—
#46
New Mexico · your comparison
31.4%
—
#47
Kentucky
30.8%
—
#48
Oklahoma
28.6%
—
#49
Missouri
23.7%
—
#50
Delaware
11.2%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Premium comparisons use a published historical all-state employer survey. Total premiums combine employer and employee payments.
New Mexico · 2020$7,424
New Mexico rank#12among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$7,149Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Single coverage premium · all firms
Average total annual employer-plan premium per enrolled employee at private-sector establishments offering coverage.
Historical 2020 published all-state table; not a current quote. Includes both employer and employee contributions, rather than just a worker’s payment. Survey estimates and small firm samples carry uncertainty. Missing estimates remain unavailable.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. New Mexico stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. New Mexico has a dark outline.
Lower value · $6.39KHigher value · $8.64KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
New Mexico · $7,4242020 · Rank #12 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare New Mexico with every state · 50 ranked
Single coverage premium · all firms · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Alaska
$8,635
—
#2
New York
$8,177
—
#3
New Hampshire
$7,991
—
#4
Vermont
$7,868
—
#5
Wyoming
$7,743
—
#6
Nebraska
$7,611
—
#7
South Carolina
$7,516
—
#8
Connecticut
$7,501
—
#9
Maine
$7,496
—
#10
Massachusetts
$7,452
—
#11
Washington
$7,440
—
#12
New Mexico · your comparison
$7,424
—
#13
Illinois
$7,376
—
#14
New Jersey
$7,373
—
#15
Maryland
$7,352
—
#16
Rhode Island
$7,326
—
#17
Indiana
$7,319
—
#18
Delaware
$7,280
—
#19
Wisconsin
$7,250
—
#20
Pennsylvania
$7,246
—
#21
North Dakota
$7,216
—
#22
Colorado
$7,206
—
#23
Missouri
$7,179
—
#24
California
$7,173
—
#25
Florida
$7,078
—
#26
South Dakota
$7,070
—
#27
Oklahoma
$7,058
—
#28
Hawaii
$7,040
—
#29
North Carolina
$7,036
—
#30
Texas
$7,017
—
#31
West Virginia
$6,993
—
#32
Ohio
$6,989
—
#33
Kentucky
$6,949
—
#34
Iowa
$6,932
—
#35
Virginia
$6,928
—
#36
Oregon
$6,917
—
#37
Minnesota
$6,910
—
#38
Georgia
$6,876
—
#39
Montana
$6,860
—
#40
Idaho
$6,744
—
#41
Louisiana
$6,713
—
#42
Michigan
$6,683
—
#43
Kansas
$6,675
—
#44
Arizona
$6,612
—
#45
Utah
$6,593
—
#46
Mississippi
$6,561
—
#47
Nevada
$6,493
—
#48
Tennessee
$6,485
—
#49
Arkansas
$6,414
—
#50
Alabama
$6,393
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Adult statewide estimates use the same SAMHSA model and survey period. Treatment use is a share of all adults, not a share of adults with mental illness.
New Mexico · 2023–202423.9%
New Mexico rank#28among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark23.1%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+
Civilian noninstitutionalized adults age 18+, past-year prevalence or treatment use, estimated by small-area survey models.
Mental illness and depression estimates pool 2023–2024; treatment use covers 2024 only. Definitions and model-based uncertainty differ from the national page’s annual 2025 survey estimates. Point-estimate ranks do not establish significant differences. Serious mental illness is a subset of any mental illness, so their percentages must not be added.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. New Mexico stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. New Mexico has a dark outline.
Lower value · 18.1%Higher value · 31.6%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
New Mexico · 23.9%2023–2024 · Rank #28 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare New Mexico with every state · 50 ranked
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+ · 2023–2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Oregon
31.6%
—
#2
Vermont
29.1%
—
#3
West Virginia
28.1%
—
#4
Washington
27.9%
—
#5
New Hampshire
27.7%
—
#6
Tennessee
27%
—
#7
Utah
26.7%
—
#8
Maine
26.7%
—
#9
Arkansas
26.6%
—
#10
Colorado
26.4%
—
#11
Rhode Island
25.8%
—
#12
Missouri
25.7%
—
#13
Montana
25.6%
—
#14
Indiana
25.3%
—
#15
Kentucky
25.3%
—
#16
Georgia
25.2%
—
#17
Iowa
25%
—
#18
Massachusetts
24.9%
—
#19
Wyoming
24.7%
—
#20
Nevada
24.6%
—
#21
Arizona
24.6%
—
#22
Wisconsin
24.6%
—
#23
Idaho
24.5%
—
#24
Nebraska
24.1%
—
#25
Louisiana
24.1%
—
#26
Alaska
24%
—
#27
Pennsylvania
23.9%
—
#28
New Mexico · your comparison
23.9%
—
#28
Ohio
23.9%
—
#30
Connecticut
23.7%
—
#31
Kansas
23.7%
—
#32
Michigan
23.6%
—
#33
Virginia
23.1%
—
#34
Alabama
23%
—
#35
North Dakota
23%
—
#36
Maryland
22.7%
—
#37
Oklahoma
22.6%
—
#38
Minnesota
22.6%
—
#39
Illinois
22.2%
—
#40
Delaware
22.1%
—
#41
New York
21.9%
—
#42
South Dakota
21.8%
—
#43
California
21.6%
—
#44
North Carolina
21.4%
—
#45
Florida
20.8%
—
#46
Texas
20.7%
—
#47
Mississippi
20.5%
—
#48
Hawaii
19.8%
—
#49
South Carolina
19.8%
—
#50
New Jersey
18.1%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
10 of 10 reviewed New Mexico actions · newest first
Mar 9, 2026 · HB 124 · NEW AMERICANS DIVISION IN WSD · Enacted · Chapter 61New Mexico Legislature · HB 124
NEW AMERICANS DIVISION IN WSD
Mar 9, 2026 · Enacted · Chapter 61
Cristina Parajón · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
HB 124 creates a New Americans Division in the Workforce Solutions Department. The act defines new Americans as U.S. residents who are not citizens or were not citizens at birth; it does not impose a recent-arrival requirement. The reviewed section directs workforce and educational initiatives, identification of professional-licensing pathways, support for employers and economic sectors, and an information center that includes assistance to eligible lawful permanent residents seeking naturalization. The division’s report is due August 1, 2027, then July 1 each year, covering the preceding twelve months. These duties do not themselves grant citizenship, employment or a professional license.
Signed by Governor on 2026-03-09, Chapter 61 of the 2026 Regular Session. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and present enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
Foreign-born residents include naturalized citizens and both lawfully and unlawfully present noncitizens. The reviewed immigration provisions address subsets of this population and do not change birthplace or determine any particular resident’s status. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. Section 9-26-3 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 2007, Chapter 200, Section 3) is amended to read: "9-26-3. DEFINITIONS.--As used in the Workforce Solutions Department Act: A. "department" means the workforce solutions department; B. "new Americans" means people residing in the United States who are not citizens of the United States or who were not citizens of the United States at birth; and C. "secretary" means the secretary of workforce solutions." SECTION 2. Section 9-26-4 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 2007, Chapter 200, Section 4) is amended to read: "9-26-4. WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS DEPARTMENT CREATED.--The "workforce solutions department" is created in the executive branch pursuant to the Executive Reorganization Act. The department is a cabinet department that includes: A. the office of the secretary; B. the administrative services division; C. the unemployment insurance division; D. the labor relations division; E. the workforce technology division; F. the workforce transition services division; and G. the new Americans division." SECTION 3. A new section of the Workforce Solutions Department Act is enacted to read: "NEW AMERICANS DIVISION--PURPOSE--DUTIES.-- A. The purpose of the new Americans division of the department is to support new Americans residing in New Mexico in achieving their maximum economic potential in New Mexico's workforce and as entrepreneurs. In furtherance of this purpose, the division shall: (1) support and expand educational, workforce training and other initiatives that improve the integration of new Americans into the state's economy; (2) identify strategies for improving licensure pathways for new Americans who have been professionally trained or licensed in another country; (3) assist businesses that employ new Americans by identifying, attracting and retaining top global talent required to remain competitive in a global economy; (4) identify and support pathways for new Americans to advance priority sectors identified in the state's workforce development and economic development plans; and (5) serve as an information center by providing resources and engagement opportunities to businesses, community-based organizations, workers, community members, state agencies and local governments on policies and legislation affecting new Americans, including supporting eligible lawful permanent residents in becoming naturalized United States citizens. B. The new Americans division shall, as deemed necessary and appropriate by the department, work with other divisions within the department, the economic development department, the higher education department, the public education department, the department of health, the health care authority, the homeland security and emergency management department, the department of public safety or the regulation and licensing department to fulfill the duties of the new Americans division. C. By August 1, 2027, and by July 1 of each year thereafter, the new Americans division shall provide a report to an interim committee that studies economic and rural development and policy, the secretary, the governor and members of the legislature on the activities of the division in the preceding twelve months, including an analysis of the economic impact, status, population and workforce numbers of new Americans in the state."
Michelle Lujan Grisham signed HB 124. HB 124 creates a New Americans Division in the Workforce Solutions Department. The act defines new Americans as U.S. residents who are not citizens or were not citizens at birth; it does not impose a recent-arrival requirement. The reviewed section directs workforce and educational initiatives, identification of professional-licensing pathways, support for employers and economic sectors, and an information center that includes assistance to eligible lawful permanent residents seeking naturalization. The division’s report is due August 1, 2027, then July 1 each year, covering the preceding twelve months. These duties do not themselves grant citizenship, employment or a professional license.
Signed by Governor on 2026-03-09, Chapter 61 of the 2026 Regular Session. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and present enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
Foreign-born residents include naturalized citizens and both lawfully and unlawfully present noncitizens. The reviewed immigration provisions address subsets of this population and do not change birthplace or determine any particular resident’s status. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. Section 9-26-3 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 2007, Chapter 200, Section 3) is amended to read: "9-26-3. DEFINITIONS.--As used in the Workforce Solutions Department Act: A. "department" means the workforce solutions department; B. "new Americans" means people residing in the United States who are not citizens of the United States or who were not citizens of the United States at birth; and C. "secretary" means the secretary of workforce solutions." SECTION 2. Section 9-26-4 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 2007, Chapter 200, Section 4) is amended to read: "9-26-4. WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS DEPARTMENT CREATED.--The "workforce solutions department" is created in the executive branch pursuant to the Executive Reorganization Act. The department is a cabinet department that includes: A. the office of the secretary; B. the administrative services division; C. the unemployment insurance division; D. the labor relations division; E. the workforce technology division; F. the workforce transition services division; and G. the new Americans division." SECTION 3. A new section of the Workforce Solutions Department Act is enacted to read: "NEW AMERICANS DIVISION--PURPOSE--DUTIES.-- A. The purpose of the new Americans division of the department is to support new Americans residing in New Mexico in achieving their maximum economic potential in New Mexico's workforce and as entrepreneurs. In furtherance of this purpose, the division shall: (1) support and expand educational, workforce training and other initiatives that improve the integration of new Americans into the state's economy; (2) identify strategies for improving licensure pathways for new Americans who have been professionally trained or licensed in another country; (3) assist businesses that employ new Americans by identifying, attracting and retaining top global talent required to remain competitive in a global economy; (4) identify and support pathways for new Americans to advance priority sectors identified in the state's workforce development and economic development plans; and (5) serve as an information center by providing resources and engagement opportunities to businesses, community-based organizations, workers, community members, state agencies and local governments on policies and legislation affecting new Americans, including supporting eligible lawful permanent residents in becoming naturalized United States citizens. B. The new Americans division shall, as deemed necessary and appropriate by the department, work with other divisions within the department, the economic development department, the higher education department, the public education department, the department of health, the health care authority, the homeland security and emergency management department, the department of public safety or the regulation and licensing department to fulfill the duties of the new Americans division. C. By August 1, 2027, and by July 1 of each year thereafter, the new Americans division shall provide a report to an interim committee that studies economic and rural development and policy, the secretary, the governor and members of the legislature on the activities of the division in the preceding twelve months, including an analysis of the economic impact, status, population and workforce numbers of new Americans in the state."
Michelle Lujan Grisham signed SB 30. SB 30, officially titled Reporting of Induced Abortions, repeals Section 24-14-18 NMSA 1978. This connection concerns the statutory reporting framework behind abortion statistics. It does not establish a restriction on abortion access, a change to the earlier 2023 count, or that every other source of abortion reporting ended.
Signed by Governor on 2026-03-06, Chapter 48 of the 2026 Regular Session. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and present enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
This fact counts abortions obtained by New Mexico residents and reported as occurring in New Mexico in 2023. It excludes nonresidents and resident abortions obtained elsewhere. Repealing a reporting provision concerns future measurement and does not by itself establish changed abortion access or a change in the earlier reported count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Resident abortions reported in New Mexico. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. REPEAL.--Section 24-14-18 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 1977, Chapter 206, Section 2, as amended) is repealed.
SB 30, officially titled Reporting of Induced Abortions, repeals Section 24-14-18 NMSA 1978. This connection concerns the statutory reporting framework behind abortion statistics. It does not establish a restriction on abortion access, a change to the earlier 2023 count, or that every other source of abortion reporting ended.
Signed by Governor on 2026-03-06, Chapter 48 of the 2026 Regular Session. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and present enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
This fact counts abortions obtained by New Mexico residents and reported as occurring in New Mexico in 2023. It excludes nonresidents and resident abortions obtained elsewhere. Repealing a reporting provision concerns future measurement and does not by itself establish changed abortion access or a change in the earlier reported count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Resident abortions reported in New Mexico. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. REPEAL.--Section 24-14-18 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 1977, Chapter 206, Section 2, as amended) is repealed.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Feb 12, 2026 · SB 17 · STOP ILLEGAL GUN TRADE ACT · Action postponed indefinitelyNew Mexico Legislature · SB 17
STOP ILLEGAL GUN TRADE ACT
Feb 12, 2026 · Action postponed indefinitely
Micaelita Debbie O'Malley · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The reviewed introduced sections 3–4 of SB 17 proposed security rules for covered federally licensed firearm dealers in New Mexico, including alarms, entry protection and at least two years of video retention. The Department of Public Safety would determine which security rules apply to gun shows. Employees handling, selling or delivering firearms would have to be at least 21 and legally eligible to possess them. The proposal requires training within 30 days of hire and annually thereafter, with training before participation in sales from December 1, 2026. Topics include unlawful purchases, self-harm warning signs, theft prevention and safe storage. Use of the federal background-check system remains contingent on federal permission. The bill was action-postponed indefinitely; these are introduced-version proposals, not enacted rules or a review of later substitutes.
The official history records Action Postponed Indefinitely (API). The displayed date is the latest dated legislative action, not an independently dated postponement. This relationship reviews the introduced version; later substitutes and amendments are outside its selected excerpt. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.
Why this record is included
The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
D. "dealer" means a person or business in the state that holds a federal firearms license issued in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 923(a)(3); E. "department" means the department of public safety; […] SECTION 3. A new section of Chapter 30, Article 7 NMSA 1978 is enacted to read: " REQUIRING DEALER SECURITY MEASURES TO PREVENT THEFT AND LOSS OF FIREARMS.-- A. No later than July 1, 2026, the department, in collaboration with the attorney general, shall promulgate rules governing the physical security of dealer premises and inventory. The rules shall be effective beginning December 1, 2026 and shall require: (1) installation and use of security alarm systems on dealer premises that meet quality and other standards established by the department. Eligible security alarm systems shall have the capacity to be monitored by a central station and shall provide protection and monitoring for all accessible openings and partial motion and sound detection at all other areas of the premises; (2) site hardening, including locks on doors and windows and other features. Features shall be designed to prevent unauthorized entry, which may include bars or grates, security screens and commercial-grade metal doors; (3) installation and use of video surveillance systems, including video recording devices at each point of sale and each entrance and exit to the premises, which shall be recorded from both the indoor and outdoor vantage point, and the dealer shall maintain such recordings for a period of not less than two years; and (4) other reasonable requirements, as determined by the department and the attorney general, to reduce the risk of burglaries at dealers' premises and the theft of firearms in shipment to and from dealers' premises. B. The department shall specify in rules which, if any, of the security measures identified in Subsection A of this section apply to gun shows." SECTION 4. A new section of Chapter 30, Article 7 NMSA 1978 is enacted to read: " MINIMUM AGE OF EMPLOYMENT--REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS AND TRAINING FOR DEALER EMPLOYEES.-- A. A dealer shall not employ a person to handle, sell or deliver firearms unless the person is at least twenty- one years of age and is not prohibited from possessing a firearm under state, municipal, tribal or federal law. The department shall promulgate rules to address dealer employee criminal history checks no later than August 1, 2026. The rules shall direct dealers to use the national instant criminal background check system to determine eligibility for current and prospective dealer employees only if the use of the national instant criminal background check system is permitted by federal regulations. B. A dealer shall complete the training developed by the department pursuant to Subsection C of this section and shall provide the training to all new employees within thirty days of employment and to all employees annually thereafter. Beginning December 1, 2026, no employee of any dealer shall participate in the sale or disposition of firearms unless that person has first received the training required by this section. The department shall promulgate rules setting forth minimum requirements for the maintenance of records of the training no later than August 1, 2026. C. No later than August 1, 2026, the department shall develop and make available to each dealer a training course in the conduct of firearm transfers, including: (1) federal and state laws governing firearm transfers and transactions; (2) how to recognize, identify, respond to and report straw purchases, illegal purchases and fraudulent activity; (3) how to recognize, identify, respond to and report an individual who intends to use a firearm for unlawful purposes or for self-harm; (4) how to prevent, respond to and report theft or burglary of firearms and ammunition; (5) how to educate customers on gun safety practices, including the safe handling and storage of firearms and ammunition; and (6) other topics the department deems necessary and appropriate."
S 3256 would restrict firearm transfer and possession for people convicted of the defined misdemeanor hate crimes or receiving the specified enhanced misdemeanor sentences. Its definitions require covered force, weapon threats or credible physical-safety threats and preserve counsel, jury-trial and specified expungement, pardon or restoration safeguards. Ben Ray Luján is the primary sponsor. The bill remains a proposal, with no mortality effect established.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2.Prevention of person who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, or received an enhanced sentence for a misdemeanor because of hate or bias in its commission, from obtaining a firearm(a)DefinitionsSection 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:(39)The term convicted in any court of a misdemeanor hate crime—(A)means being convicted by a court of an offense that—(i)is a misdemeanor under Federal, State, or Tribal law;(ii)has, as an element, that the conduct of the offender was motivated by hate or bias because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity (as defined in section 249), or disability of any person; and(iii)involves the use or attempted use of physical force, the threatened use of a deadly weapon, or another credible threat to the physical safety of any person; and(B)does not include—(i)a conviction of an offense described in subparagraph (A), unless—(I)the person—(aa)was represented by counsel in the case; or(bb)knowingly and intelligently waived the right to counsel in the case; and(II)in the case of a prosecution for an offense described in subparagraph (A) for which a person was entitled to a jury trial in the jurisdiction in which the case was tried—(aa)the case was tried by a jury; or(bb)the person knowingly and intelligently waived the right to have the case tried by a jury, by guilty plea or otherwise; or(ii)a conviction of an offense described in subparagraph (A) if—(I)the conviction—(aa)has been expunged or set aside; or(bb)is of an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored (if the law of the applicable jurisdiction provides for the loss of civil rights under such an offense); and(II)the expungement, pardon, or restoration of civil rights does not expressly provide that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.(40)The term received from any court an enhanced hate crime misdemeanor sentence—(A)means a court has imposed a sentence for a misdemeanor under Federal, State, or Tribal law—(i)that involves the use or attempted use of physical force, the threatened use of a deadly weapon, or another credible threat to the physical safety of any person; and(ii)based, in whole or in part, on a judicial finding that the conduct of the offender was motivated, in whole or in part, by hate or bias for any reason referred to in paragraph (39)(A)(ii); and(B)does not include—(i)the imposition of a sentence described in subparagraph (A), unless—(I)the person—(aa)was represented by counsel in the case; or(bb)knowingly and intelligently waived the right to counsel in the case; and(II)if the sentence described in subparagraph (A) was imposed in a prosecution for an offense for which a person was entitled to a jury trial in the jurisdiction in which the case was tried—(aa)the case was tried by a jury; or(bb)the person knowingly and intelligently waived the right to have the case tried by a jury, by guilty plea or otherwise; or(ii)the imposition of a sentence described in subparagraph (A) if—(I)(aa)the conviction of the offense for which the sentence was imposed has been expunged or set aside; or(bb)the offense for which the sentence was imposed is an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored (if the law of the applicable jurisdiction provides for the loss of civil rights under such an offense); and(II)the expungement, pardon, or restoration of civil rights does not expressly provide that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms..(b)Prohibition on sale or other disposition of firearmSection 922(d) of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the first sentence—(1)in paragraph (10), by striking or at the end;(2)by redesignating paragraph (11) as paragraph (12);(3)in paragraph (12), as so redesignated, by striking through (10) and inserting through (11); and(4)by inserting after paragraph (10) the following:(11)has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor hate crime, or has received from any court an enhanced hate crime misdemeanor sentence; or.(c)Prohibition on possession, shipment, or transport of firearmSection 922(g) of title 18, United States Code, is amended—(1)in paragraph (8), by striking or at the end;(2)in paragraph (9), by striking the comma and inserting ; or; and(3)by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:(10)who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor hate crime, or has received from any court an enhanced hate crime misdemeanor sentence,.
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified New Mexico officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health from FactVote’s New Mexico candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
44 statements from 9 candidates
2026 New Mexico Attorney General — General Election
1 candidate with matching statements · 2 statements
The Medicaid Fraud Control Unit Investigates and prosecutes fraud committed by Medicaid providers, including hospitals, nursing homes, care facilities, laboratories, doctors, dentists, nurses, personal care providers, and therapists. We conduct investigations into billing for services not rendered, …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Medicaid Fraud Control Unit
Candidate campaign source
The Medicaid Fraud Control Unit Investigates and prosecutes fraud committed by Medicaid providers, including hospitals, nursing homes, care facilities, laboratories, doctors, dentists, nurses, personal care providers, and therapists. We conduct investigations into billing for services not rendered, billing for a higher level of service than provided, fraudulent prescriptions for dangerous opioids and narcotics, and whistleblower actions brought by an individual on behalf of the government. How Medicaid providers commit fraud is constantly evolving and the Unit must adjust accordingly to protect the system that helps so many New Mexicans.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026
Torrez has gone after the industries hitting New Mexico families’ wallets hardest. He capped the price of insulin at $35. He blocked a grocery merger that would have pushed prices even higher. He forced utilities to return $115 million to overcharged customers. And when hotels and contractors tried …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Protecting Families' Pocketbooks
Candidate campaign source
Torrez has gone after the industries hitting New Mexico families’ wallets hardest. He capped the price of insulin at $35. He blocked a grocery merger that would have pushed prices even higher. He forced utilities to return $115 million to overcharged customers. And when hotels and contractors tried to gouge families displaced by the South Fork and Salt fires, his office sent cease-and-desist letters and recovered thousands of dollars for the families affected.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026
Healthcare is under attack. Trump is gutting Medicaid and healthcare premiums are skyrocketing across the country. Cuts to Medicaid could mean longer drives, rural hospital closures, longer wait times to see a doctor, and more medical debt for everyone. The state stepped up to subsidize premiums, le…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
Healthcare is under attack. Trump is gutting Medicaid and healthcare premiums are skyrocketing across the country. Cuts to Medicaid could mean longer drives, rural hospital closures, longer wait times to see a doctor, and more medical debt for everyone. The state stepped up to subsidize premiums, leading to record enrollment in New Mexico’s Affordable Care Act marketplace. In New Mexico, we also have a historic doctor shortage. As governor, Deb will fight to protect access to healthcare, address the shortage of healthcare providers, and ensure the state is always fighting for the health of our communities.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
“I understand what it’s like to not be able to make ends meet despite working multiple jobs – it shouldn’t be this way. We need to make groceries, housing, and health care more affordable.” New Mexicans are struggling to make ends meet – they are doing everything right and still can’t get by. Deb kn…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
“I understand what it’s like to not be able to make ends meet despite working multiple jobs – it shouldn’t be this way. We need to make groceries, housing, and health care more affordable.” New Mexicans are struggling to make ends meet – they are doing everything right and still can’t get by. Deb knows this firsthand – she relied on benefits like SNAP, WIC, and Medicaid and moved forward after starting her own business selling salsa. New Mexicans need higher wages and lower bills, cheaper rent, and a stronger economy. We have the potential to lead in tech, energy, film, and our outdoor economy. Deb will create jobs and deliver on making New Mexico more affordable.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Deb Haaland is a fierce leader who stood up against attacks on our rights and the millionaires and billionaires rigging the system against hard working New Mexicans. When she’s Governor, Deb will protect our communities from Donald Trump and ICE so that we can focus on our biggest challenges – reduc…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
Deb Haaland is a fierce leader who stood up against attacks on our rights and the millionaires and billionaires rigging the system against hard working New Mexicans. When she’s Governor, Deb will protect our communities from Donald Trump and ICE so that we can focus on our biggest challenges – reducing crime, bettering education, and bringing down prices on everything from healthcare to weekly groceries.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Expand down payment assistance programs for first time home buyers and assistance programs for workers in critical sectors such as education, healthcare, public safety, and social work.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Public safety and justice
Candidate campaign source
Expand down payment assistance programs for first time home buyers and assistance programs for workers in critical sectors such as education, healthcare, public safety, and social work.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
“As Governor, I will focus every day on stopping violent crime, getting guns and drugs off our streets, and addressing the root causes of crime.” New Mexicans should feel safe and Deb knows that we have a lot of work to do to prevent and fight crime. She will work to keep violent criminals and illeg…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Public safety and justice
Candidate campaign source
“As Governor, I will focus every day on stopping violent crime, getting guns and drugs off our streets, and addressing the root causes of crime.” New Mexicans should feel safe and Deb knows that we have a lot of work to do to prevent and fight crime. She will work to keep violent criminals and illegal drugs off our streets and ensure law enforcement has the tools they need to fight crime, while addressing the root causes of crime. She will invest in mental health, substance abuse and rehabilitation programs to get people the help they need.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Adopt and expand statewide Community School Models that provide wrap-around services like counseling, school based health care, dental, family support, and community engagement at schools so parents and caregivers have convenient services while they’re working and caring for their families.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
Adopt and expand statewide Community School Models that provide wrap-around services like counseling, school based health care, dental, family support, and community engagement at schools so parents and caregivers have convenient services while they’re working and caring for their families.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Licensing should protect public health and safety, not trap people in paperwork. I support full license reciprocity for professionals licensed in good standing in another state unless there is a clear public safety concern. I also support firm timelines for licensing decisions, stronger accountabili…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Public safety and justice
Candidate campaign source
Licensing should protect public health and safety, not trap people in paperwork. I support full license reciprocity for professionals licensed in good standing in another state unless there is a clear public safety concern. I also support firm timelines for licensing decisions, stronger accountability for boards, reviewing or consolidating inactive boards, and eliminating licensing requirements that do not meaningfully protect health or safety, especially for entry-level jobs.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
At the same time, New Mexico must remove unnecessary barriers that keep skilled workers from getting to work. Overly complex occupational licensing rules slow hiring, discourage relocation, and make it harder to start or expand a small business. In health care, the trades, and service industries, qu…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
At the same time, New Mexico must remove unnecessary barriers that keep skilled workers from getting to work. Overly complex occupational licensing rules slow hiring, discourage relocation, and make it harder to start or expand a small business. In health care, the trades, and service industries, qualified professionals often face months-long delays that push them to work in other states.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Mental health must be addressed with accuracy and fairness. Many people live full, stable lives while managing conditions like anxiety, ADHD, or depression. These individuals should not be treated as automatic risks. The focus should stay on true crisis situations where there is clear, immediate dan…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
Mental health must be addressed with accuracy and fairness. Many people live full, stable lives while managing conditions like anxiety, ADHD, or depression. These individuals should not be treated as automatic risks. The focus should stay on true crisis situations where there is clear, immediate danger, not on broad labels that discourage people from seeking help or speaking honestly with doctors.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Interstate medical compacts make it easier for qualified healthcare professionals to practice across state lines, including through telemedicine. New Mexico should take full advantage of these tools to expand access.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
Interstate medical compacts make it easier for qualified healthcare professionals to practice across state lines, including through telemedicine. New Mexico should take full advantage of these tools to expand access.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Licensing should protect public health and safety, not trap people in paperwork. Right now, delays and inconsistent rules are making it harder to fill critical jobs across the state. In health care, qualified professionals often wait months just to get permission to work. Dentists, nurses, and docto…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Agriculture and rural policy
Candidate campaign source
Licensing should protect public health and safety, not trap people in paperwork. Right now, delays and inconsistent rules are making it harder to fill critical jobs across the state. In health care, qualified professionals often wait months just to get permission to work. Dentists, nurses, and doctors are needed urgently, especially in rural communities, yet the licensing process can drag on so long that many simply choose to practice somewhere else. A lack of meaningful reciprocity makes the problem worse by forcing professionals to repeat steps they’ve already completed in another state.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
With smart enforcement, strong due process, fair mental health policy, and support for responsible ownership, New Mexico can reduce violence while respecting the freedoms of law-abiding citizens.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
With smart enforcement, strong due process, fair mental health policy, and support for responsible ownership, New Mexico can reduce violence while respecting the freedoms of law-abiding citizens.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
As Governor, Gregg Hull will focus on practical reforms that expand access, stabilize rural healthcare, reduce costs, and make New Mexico a state where healthcare professionals want to practice and build their careers.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
As Governor, Gregg Hull will focus on practical reforms that expand access, stabilize rural healthcare, reduce costs, and make New Mexico a state where healthcare professionals want to practice and build their careers.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
At the same time, we must be honest about the growing list of responsibilities placed on police officers. Too often, they are asked to respond to mental health crises, addiction, and homelessness without the right tools or support. That is not fair to officers or the people they are trying to help. …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Public safety and justice
Candidate campaign source
At the same time, we must be honest about the growing list of responsibilities placed on police officers. Too often, they are asked to respond to mental health crises, addiction, and homelessness without the right tools or support. That is not fair to officers or the people they are trying to help. I support strengthening behavioral health services so trained civilian teams and medical professionals can assist on these calls, allowing police to focus on preventing crime, responding to emergencies, and enforcing the law.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
I will bring real experience to making the office of Lieutenant Governor work for all New Mexicans. I was a school teacher for 19 years and served Los Alamos for six years as a State Representative, fighting for more funding for our public schools, crime prevention, and addiction treatment. I then b…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Stephanie Garcia Richard for Lt. Governor: Fighting for our New Mexico
Candidate campaign source
I will bring real experience to making the office of Lieutenant Governor work for all New Mexicans. I was a school teacher for 19 years and served Los Alamos for six years as a State Representative, fighting for more funding for our public schools, crime prevention, and addiction treatment. I then became the first woman and first Hispana elected to be New Mexico's Commissioner of Public Lands, where I brought billions of dollars to New Mexico's public schools, increased renewable energy production sevenfold, restored stolen land back to Tribes, and protected more public land from federal land grabs than any Public Land Commissioner has done before.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026
As a pharmacist, Didi has spent her career on the front lines of our healthcare system. She will use that experience to create healthcare that is affordable and accessible for every New Mexico family, protecting quality of care, lowering costs at the pharmacy counter, and expanding access in the com…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
As a pharmacist, Didi has spent her career on the front lines of our healthcare system. She will use that experience to create healthcare that is affordable and accessible for every New Mexico family, protecting quality of care, lowering costs at the pharmacy counter, and expanding access in the communities that need it most.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026
ALBUQUERQUE – On day 24 of the Republican government shutdown, U.S. Representative Melanie Stansbury (NM-01) recapped a busy week at home connecting with New Mexicans and working to deliver for families across the state—while House Republicans continue to refuse to engage in bipartisan negotiations …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Government-published candidate material
ALBUQUERQUE – On day 24 of the Republican government shutdown, U.S. Representative Melanie Stansbury (NM-01) recapped a busy week at home connecting with New Mexicans and working to deliver for families across the state—while House Republicans continue to refuse to engage in bipartisan negotiations to save health care and fund the government.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026
This section matches specific health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health terms in retained, attributed source text from published New Mexico candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
New Mexico incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current New Mexico legislators and New Mexico’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from New Mexico’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
7 matching sponsorships or proposals · 7 New Mexico incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Cristina Parajón
New Mexico House of Representatives, District 25 · D–NM
HB 124 creates a New Americans Division in the Workforce Solutions Department. The act defines new Americans as U.S. residents who are not citizens or were not citizens at birth; it does not impose a recent-arrival requirement. The reviewed section directs workforce and educational initiatives, identification of professional-licensing pathways, support for employers and economic sectors, and an information center that includes assistance to eligible lawful permanent residents seeking naturalization. The division’s report is due August 1, 2027, then July 1 each year, covering the preceding twelve months. These duties do not themselves grant citizenship, employment or a professional license.
Signed by Governor on 2026-03-09, Chapter 61 of the 2026 Regular Session. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and present enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
Foreign-born residents include naturalized citizens and both lawfully and unlawfully present noncitizens. The reviewed immigration provisions address subsets of this population and do not change birthplace or determine any particular resident’s status. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. Section 9-26-3 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 2007, Chapter 200, Section 3) is amended to read: "9-26-3. DEFINITIONS.--As used in the Workforce Solutions Department Act: A. "department" means the workforce solutions department; B. "new Americans" means people residing in the United States who are not citizens of the United States or who were not citizens of the United States at birth; and C. "secretary" means the secretary of workforce solutions." SECTION 2. Section 9-26-4 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 2007, Chapter 200, Section 4) is amended to read: "9-26-4. WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS DEPARTMENT CREATED.--The "workforce solutions department" is created in the executive branch pursuant to the Executive Reorganization Act. The department is a cabinet department that includes: A. the office of the secretary; B. the administrative services division; C. the unemployment insurance division; D. the labor relations division; E. the workforce technology division; F. the workforce transition services division; and G. the new Americans division." SECTION 3. A new section of the Workforce Solutions Department Act is enacted to read: "NEW AMERICANS DIVISION--PURPOSE--DUTIES.-- A. The purpose of the new Americans division of the department is to support new Americans residing in New Mexico in achieving their maximum economic potential in New Mexico's workforce and as entrepreneurs. In furtherance of this purpose, the division shall: (1) support and expand educational, workforce training and other initiatives that improve the integration of new Americans into the state's economy; (2) identify strategies for improving licensure pathways for new Americans who have been professionally trained or licensed in another country; (3) assist businesses that employ new Americans by identifying, attracting and retaining top global talent required to remain competitive in a global economy; (4) identify and support pathways for new Americans to advance priority sectors identified in the state's workforce development and economic development plans; and (5) serve as an information center by providing resources and engagement opportunities to businesses, community-based organizations, workers, community members, state agencies and local governments on policies and legislation affecting new Americans, including supporting eligible lawful permanent residents in becoming naturalized United States citizens. B. The new Americans division shall, as deemed necessary and appropriate by the department, work with other divisions within the department, the economic development department, the higher education department, the public education department, the department of health, the health care authority, the homeland security and emergency management department, the department of public safety or the regulation and licensing department to fulfill the duties of the new Americans division. C. By August 1, 2027, and by July 1 of each year thereafter, the new Americans division shall provide a report to an interim committee that studies economic and rural development and policy, the secretary, the governor and members of the legislature on the activities of the division in the preceding twelve months, including an analysis of the economic impact, status, population and workforce numbers of new Americans in the state."
The reviewed introduced sections 3–4 of SB 17 proposed security rules for covered federally licensed firearm dealers in New Mexico, including alarms, entry protection and at least two years of video retention. The Department of Public Safety would determine which security rules apply to gun shows. Employees handling, selling or delivering firearms would have to be at least 21 and legally eligible to possess them. The proposal requires training within 30 days of hire and annually thereafter, with training before participation in sales from December 1, 2026. Topics include unlawful purchases, self-harm warning signs, theft prevention and safe storage. Use of the federal background-check system remains contingent on federal permission. The bill was action-postponed indefinitely; these are introduced-version proposals, not enacted rules or a review of later substitutes.
The official history records Action Postponed Indefinitely (API). The displayed date is the latest dated legislative action, not an independently dated postponement. This relationship reviews the introduced version; later substitutes and amendments are outside its selected excerpt. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.
Why this record is included
The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
D. "dealer" means a person or business in the state that holds a federal firearms license issued in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 923(a)(3); E. "department" means the department of public safety; […] SECTION 3. A new section of Chapter 30, Article 7 NMSA 1978 is enacted to read: " REQUIRING DEALER SECURITY MEASURES TO PREVENT THEFT AND LOSS OF FIREARMS.-- A. No later than July 1, 2026, the department, in collaboration with the attorney general, shall promulgate rules governing the physical security of dealer premises and inventory. The rules shall be effective beginning December 1, 2026 and shall require: (1) installation and use of security alarm systems on dealer premises that meet quality and other standards established by the department. Eligible security alarm systems shall have the capacity to be monitored by a central station and shall provide protection and monitoring for all accessible openings and partial motion and sound detection at all other areas of the premises; (2) site hardening, including locks on doors and windows and other features. Features shall be designed to prevent unauthorized entry, which may include bars or grates, security screens and commercial-grade metal doors; (3) installation and use of video surveillance systems, including video recording devices at each point of sale and each entrance and exit to the premises, which shall be recorded from both the indoor and outdoor vantage point, and the dealer shall maintain such recordings for a period of not less than two years; and (4) other reasonable requirements, as determined by the department and the attorney general, to reduce the risk of burglaries at dealers' premises and the theft of firearms in shipment to and from dealers' premises. B. The department shall specify in rules which, if any, of the security measures identified in Subsection A of this section apply to gun shows." SECTION 4. A new section of Chapter 30, Article 7 NMSA 1978 is enacted to read: " MINIMUM AGE OF EMPLOYMENT--REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS AND TRAINING FOR DEALER EMPLOYEES.-- A. A dealer shall not employ a person to handle, sell or deliver firearms unless the person is at least twenty- one years of age and is not prohibited from possessing a firearm under state, municipal, tribal or federal law. The department shall promulgate rules to address dealer employee criminal history checks no later than August 1, 2026. The rules shall direct dealers to use the national instant criminal background check system to determine eligibility for current and prospective dealer employees only if the use of the national instant criminal background check system is permitted by federal regulations. B. A dealer shall complete the training developed by the department pursuant to Subsection C of this section and shall provide the training to all new employees within thirty days of employment and to all employees annually thereafter. Beginning December 1, 2026, no employee of any dealer shall participate in the sale or disposition of firearms unless that person has first received the training required by this section. The department shall promulgate rules setting forth minimum requirements for the maintenance of records of the training no later than August 1, 2026. C. No later than August 1, 2026, the department shall develop and make available to each dealer a training course in the conduct of firearm transfers, including: (1) federal and state laws governing firearm transfers and transactions; (2) how to recognize, identify, respond to and report straw purchases, illegal purchases and fraudulent activity; (3) how to recognize, identify, respond to and report an individual who intends to use a firearm for unlawful purposes or for self-harm; (4) how to prevent, respond to and report theft or burglary of firearms and ammunition; (5) how to educate customers on gun safety practices, including the safe handling and storage of firearms and ammunition; and (6) other topics the department deems necessary and appropriate."
1 proposalView proposals from Peter WirthNew Mexico Legislature · SB 30
REPORTING OF INDUCED ABORTIONS
Mar 6, 2026 · Enacted · Chapter 48
Peter Wirth · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
SB 30, officially titled Reporting of Induced Abortions, repeals Section 24-14-18 NMSA 1978. This connection concerns the statutory reporting framework behind abortion statistics. It does not establish a restriction on abortion access, a change to the earlier 2023 count, or that every other source of abortion reporting ended.
Signed by Governor on 2026-03-06, Chapter 48 of the 2026 Regular Session. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and present enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
This fact counts abortions obtained by New Mexico residents and reported as occurring in New Mexico in 2023. It excludes nonresidents and resident abortions obtained elsewhere. Repealing a reporting provision concerns future measurement and does not by itself establish changed abortion access or a change in the earlier reported count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Resident abortions reported in New Mexico. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. REPEAL.--Section 24-14-18 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 1977, Chapter 206, Section 2, as amended) is repealed.
The reviewed section 2 of the 2025 first-special-session HB 2 authorizes health-coverage rule and plan changes. If specified federal ACA changes would cause significant coverage loss, the Health Care Authority may expand eligibility to protect people at risk, subject to available funds. The separate plan concerns uninsured residents who do not qualify for federal premium assistance or exchange qualified health plans, with the stated exception for ineligibility by reason of incarceration, and prioritizes incomes below 200% of the federal poverty level. Reporting to the two specified legislative committees is due each October 31. This establishes authority and reporting requirements, not proof that the trigger occurred, rules were issued or additional people enrolled.
Signed by Governor on 2025-10-03, Chapter 1 of the 2025 1st Special Session. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and present enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
The fact measures people under age 65 without health insurance. Eligibility for coverage directly concerns this population; payment for a particular service for people already insured does not itself establish expanded insurance enrollment. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 2. Section 59A-23F-12 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 2021, Chapter 136, Section 5, as amended) is amended to read: "59A-23F-12. HEALTH CARE AFFORDABILITY PLAN-- RULEMAKING--REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.-- A. Rules covering the following provisions may be amended as the health care authority determines: (1) providing enhanced premium and cost- sharing assistance to individuals and families for the purchase of qualified health plans on the New Mexico health insurance exchange. In providing this assistance, the health care authority shall develop health care affordability criteria designed to reduce the amount that individuals pay in premiums and out-of-pocket medical expenses for qualified health plans offered on the New Mexico health insurance exchange; and (2) establishing income eligibility parameters for the health care affordability criteria for plan year 2023 and each subsequent calendar year based on available funds. New Mexico residents who qualify shall: (a) have a household income below four hundred percent of the federal poverty level and qualify for the advanced premium tax credit under the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; or (b) meet all eligibility criteria for the advanced premium tax credit under the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act except for household income requirements. B. If the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is repealed in full or in part by an act of congress, invalidated by the United States supreme court or administered by the United States department of health and human services in a way that alters eligibility criteria for the advanced premium tax credit in a manner that would cause significant coverage loss for New Mexico residents, the health care authority may promulgate rules to minimize loss of coverage by expanding eligibility to cover individuals at risk of losing coverage due to such changes, subject to available funds. C. The health care authority, in consultation with the superintendent, the New Mexico medical insurance pool, the department of health and stakeholder groups, including health care providers that serve uninsured residents, health insurance carriers and consumer advocacy groups, may update the plan for extending health care coverage access to uninsured New Mexico residents who do not qualify for federal premium assistance or, except by reason of incarceration, qualified health plans, through the New Mexico health insurance exchange. The plan shall include: (1) details about health care benefits; (2) health care affordability criteria designed to reduce the amount that individuals pay in premiums and out-of-pocket medical expenses under the plan and that result in, to the greatest extent possible, health care costs comparable to costs for New Mexico residents for whom assistance is provided under Subsection A of this section; and (3) income eligibility parameters that prioritize eligibility for New Mexico residents with incomes under two hundred percent of the federal poverty level. D. On or before October 31, 2024 and each October 31 thereafter, the health care authority shall submit a report to the legislative finance committee and the legislative health and human services committee that includes: (1) a summary of the affordability criteria implemented pursuant to Subsections A, B and C of this section; (2) the estimated number of uninsured New Mexico residents who enrolled in coverage following implementation of the affordability criteria pursuant to Subsections A, B and C of this section; and (3) the amount in reduced costs and coverage assistance the initiatives provided in the current and previous calendar years by income level, county and coverage source."
U.S. House of Representatives, New Mexico District 1 · D–NM
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Melanie A. StansburyU.S. Congress · New Mexico delegation · HR 4734
Hands Off Our Social Security Act
Jul 23, 2025 · In Congress
Rep. Melanie A. Stansbury · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The reviewed section 3 of HR 4734 would prohibit federal officers, special government employees and contractors from altering, withholding or delaying Social Security benefits without legal authorization, and would require an Act of Congress to modify benefits. Melanie Stansbury is the verified primary sponsor. The proposal concerns benefit administration, including OASDI, without establishing an increase in beneficiary counts or any completed benefit change.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
The fact counts OASDI retirement, survivor and disability beneficiaries in current-payment status. Rules governing benefit delivery concern that program without proving changes in the number of recipients. SSI, Medicare, taxation of benefits and Social Security number issuance are separate matters. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Social Security beneficiaries. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
3.Prohibition on tampering with social security benefits (a) No Federal officer, special government employee, or contractor shall alter, withhold, or delay Social Security benefits in any manner that is not authorized by law. (b)Any action to modify Social Security benefits shall require an Act of Congress.
1 proposalView proposals from Sen. Ben Ray LujánU.S. Congress · New Mexico delegation · S 3256
Disarm Hate Act
Nov 20, 2025 · In Congress
Sen. Ben Ray Luján · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
S 3256 would restrict firearm transfer and possession for people convicted of the defined misdemeanor hate crimes or receiving the specified enhanced misdemeanor sentences. Its definitions require covered force, weapon threats or credible physical-safety threats and preserve counsel, jury-trial and specified expungement, pardon or restoration safeguards. Ben Ray Luján is the primary sponsor. The bill remains a proposal, with no mortality effect established.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained New Mexico evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2.Prevention of person who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, or received an enhanced sentence for a misdemeanor because of hate or bias in its commission, from obtaining a firearm(a)DefinitionsSection 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:(39)The term convicted in any court of a misdemeanor hate crime—(A)means being convicted by a court of an offense that—(i)is a misdemeanor under Federal, State, or Tribal law;(ii)has, as an element, that the conduct of the offender was motivated by hate or bias because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity (as defined in section 249), or disability of any person; and(iii)involves the use or attempted use of physical force, the threatened use of a deadly weapon, or another credible threat to the physical safety of any person; and(B)does not include—(i)a conviction of an offense described in subparagraph (A), unless—(I)the person—(aa)was represented by counsel in the case; or(bb)knowingly and intelligently waived the right to counsel in the case; and(II)in the case of a prosecution for an offense described in subparagraph (A) for which a person was entitled to a jury trial in the jurisdiction in which the case was tried—(aa)the case was tried by a jury; or(bb)the person knowingly and intelligently waived the right to have the case tried by a jury, by guilty plea or otherwise; or(ii)a conviction of an offense described in subparagraph (A) if—(I)the conviction—(aa)has been expunged or set aside; or(bb)is of an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored (if the law of the applicable jurisdiction provides for the loss of civil rights under such an offense); and(II)the expungement, pardon, or restoration of civil rights does not expressly provide that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.(40)The term received from any court an enhanced hate crime misdemeanor sentence—(A)means a court has imposed a sentence for a misdemeanor under Federal, State, or Tribal law—(i)that involves the use or attempted use of physical force, the threatened use of a deadly weapon, or another credible threat to the physical safety of any person; and(ii)based, in whole or in part, on a judicial finding that the conduct of the offender was motivated, in whole or in part, by hate or bias for any reason referred to in paragraph (39)(A)(ii); and(B)does not include—(i)the imposition of a sentence described in subparagraph (A), unless—(I)the person—(aa)was represented by counsel in the case; or(bb)knowingly and intelligently waived the right to counsel in the case; and(II)if the sentence described in subparagraph (A) was imposed in a prosecution for an offense for which a person was entitled to a jury trial in the jurisdiction in which the case was tried—(aa)the case was tried by a jury; or(bb)the person knowingly and intelligently waived the right to have the case tried by a jury, by guilty plea or otherwise; or(ii)the imposition of a sentence described in subparagraph (A) if—(I)(aa)the conviction of the offense for which the sentence was imposed has been expunged or set aside; or(bb)the offense for which the sentence was imposed is an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored (if the law of the applicable jurisdiction provides for the loss of civil rights under such an offense); and(II)the expungement, pardon, or restoration of civil rights does not expressly provide that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms..(b)Prohibition on sale or other disposition of firearmSection 922(d) of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the first sentence—(1)in paragraph (10), by striking or at the end;(2)by redesignating paragraph (11) as paragraph (12);(3)in paragraph (12), as so redesignated, by striking through (10) and inserting through (11); and(4)by inserting after paragraph (10) the following:(11)has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor hate crime, or has received from any court an enhanced hate crime misdemeanor sentence; or.(c)Prohibition on possession, shipment, or transport of firearmSection 922(g) of title 18, United States Code, is amended—(1)in paragraph (8), by striking or at the end;(2)in paragraph (9), by striking the comma and inserting ; or; and(3)by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:(10)who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor hate crime, or has received from any court an enhanced hate crime misdemeanor sentence,.
Only current New Mexico officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a New Mexico statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
New Mexico snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to New Mexico, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.