Month: May 2017

Hypocrite Heinrich Is Killing Rural New Mexico

A recent Wall Street Journal analysis shows what any of us who travel outside cities already know: since the 1990s, rural counties have become America’s most troubled areas — and the decline is accelerating.

In terms of poverty, educational attainment, teenage births, divorce, death from heart disease and cancer, opioid addiction, reliance on federal disability insurance, and male labor-force participation, rural areas now rank the worse off than small- to medium metro areas, suburbs, or big cities. Not surprisingly, total rural population – accounting for births, deaths and migration – has declined for five straight years.

Rural New Mexico is worse off than the national averages. Our #1 in the nation unemployment rate and #2 poverty rate disproportionately hurt our rural counties.

Into this problem wades New Mexico’s junior senator, Martin Heinrich, who, along with his fellow congressional Democrats, spent untold tax dollars and staff time to produce a report titled, “Understanding Economic Challenges in Rural America.”

The report brings less information and understanding than The Wall Street Journal’s, which begs the question why Senator Heinrich did not simply pay for a newspaper subscription and save hard-working taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars.

But we know why: Heinrich’s votes have hurt rural America and New Mexico. Producing a report about the problems he made worse is his limp attempt to cover his failures as he faces his first re-election challenge in 2018.

Who does Martin Heinrich blame for rural America’s problems? Wall Street and President Trump. Ignoring how ridiculous it is to blame President Trump for a problem that his own report says has existed since the Great Recession of 2008, Heinrich also brands himself a hypocrite, because it is his votes that have decimated rural New Mexico. In Heinrich’s nine years in Congress, he has consistently voted:

  • Against New Mexico’s military jobs
  • Against New Mexico’s national laboratory jobs
  • Against New Mexico’s energy and natural resources jobs
  • Against New Mexicans’ use of public lands to earn a living
  • Against securing our southern border to keep out drugs and gangs

What does Martin Heinrich suggest will solve rural America’s problems? “Congress must invest in developing the next generation of grant writers and civil servants to serve in small rural communities.”

Seriously, Sen. Heinrich? Your solution to rural unemployment is for the government to pay for more grant writers who will apply for more government handouts?

Talk about a coastal elite, nanny state worldview. You can’t make this stuff up.

“I can promise you,” Heinrich wrote when he released his report, “that I am working to develop real solutions that will actually work to make life better in rural America.”

Here is Martin Heinrich’s true view of rural New Mexico, based on his votes, not his promises. He is either:

  • Unaware of what our state’s needs are – he represents California, not New Mexico
  • Unaware of the consequences of his actions on our state
  • Or, he just doesn’t care about us

The most obvious and devastating conclusion is that Sen. Heinrich cares more about his own career in the Democratic Party than he does for the people he was elected to represent.

Heinrich’s Record of Voting Against New Mexico Includes Public Lands

On May 9, New Mexico’s congressional delegation sent a letter to the EPA urging it to implement a $4 million long-term water monitoring plan for areas impacted by the Gold King Mine spill. Those areas include the San Juan and Animas Rivers in northwest New Mexico.

This is a classic example of Washington politicians doing too little, too late.

Note that the $4 million is for monitoring, not cleanup. Sen. Martin Heinrich asked all New Mexicans to stand up for safe drinking water in Flint, MI. Flint got what it wanted. Why didn’t he do the same for New Mexico? He could have held up Flint water bill to ensure the EPA cleaned up the drinking water that it contaminated in the San Juan and Animas Rivers.

But this is only the most recent example of Martin Heinrich’s misplaced legislative priorities and loyalties. His record regarding public lands, the environment, and natural resources betrays his “federal bureaucracy knows better than you” attitude.

  • Heinrich voted against irrigation water for farmers in the San Joaquin Valley of California. The drought there not only wiped out farms and agricultural jobs, it threatened America’s food supply.
  • Heinrich voted against mining of critical strategic minerals in national forest lands. These minerals are necessary for our national defense and economic security. China now controls 90 percent of the world’s production of these minerals.
  • Heinrich voted against giving states authority over coal mining. In his view, global CO2 emission goals are more important than local mining jobs. Coal produces more than 70 percent of New Mexico’s energy.
  • Heinrich voted against allowing oil and gas leasing on federal lands. If you care about America’s energy freedom, and don’t want us to be dependent on Mideast oil kingdoms that fund radical Islamic terrorism, this was a bad move.
  • Heinrich voted for “Cap and Trade,” a carbon emission reduction scheme by global elitists that forces industrial nations such as the United States to pay non-industrialized nations cash penalties for air pollution.
  • Heinrich voted to remove federal lands from public use. This may be his most damaging vote against New Mexicans and their right to earn a living, because unlike every issue above, this bill passed and was signed into law by President Obama.

One-issue environmentalists may look at this list and pat themselves on the back for voting for Martin Heinrich. But responsible, hard-working New Mexicans know otherwise. We see the full implications of federal legislation, including negative impacts on jobs and working families.

We see Martin Heinrich’s voting record for what it is: captive to liberal environmental contributions from out of state. We see Martin Heinrich’s career for what it is: favoring Martin Heinrich, not the people of New Mexico.

Heinrich’s Attack of Trump Tax Plan Puts Party Over People

The Trump Administration has released a one-page outline of how to reform America’s complex and unfair tax system. Predictably, the mainstream media criticized the outline’s simplicity. Just as predictably, New Mexico’s junior Senator, Martin Heinrich, immediately criticized the plan. Here is his full response:

“It took almost 100 days for President Trump to release a one-page tax proposal that reads like a wish list for big corporations and his wealthy friends. This outline lacks detail on how any of these many tax giveaways will be paid for. While President Trump continues to hide his tax returns, we can assume he is proposing to give himself tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks, rather than help struggling families to get ahead [emphasis added]. Democrats and Republicans all agree our tax code should be reformed but this certainly doesn’t pass the test. This proves that President Trump has no intention of reaching across the aisle to build consensus on reforms both parties can support.”

If we ignore Sen. Heinrich’s personal attacks on President Trump, his core argument – and core error – is: “rather than help struggling families to get ahead.” Let’s examine that statement against the actual proposal.

1) The plan calls for cutting the current seven tax brackets to three at 10, 25, and 35 percent. It doubles the standard deduction, which reduces the amount of tax paid by people who don’t itemize their deductions.

The three new tax brackets will significantly lower taxes paid by individuals and families. Increasing the standard deduction also will help hard-working taxpayers, because people who itemize their deductions tend to be in higher income brackets.

Senator Heinrich, how does this part of the plan not help struggling families?

2) The plan calls for tax relief for childcare expenses and a repeal of the death tax.

Families often struggle with the cost of childcare, which is so high that many couples decide only one of them can work so the other can take care of the kids. Getting a tax break for childcare expenses means more couples will be able for both mom and dad to work, raising their family’s income.

As for eliminating the death tax, is Senator Heinrich arguing that the death tax (the tax on inheritance) helps families? The death tax is nothing more than double taxation: making you pay taxes on income your parents already paid taxes on.

Senator Heinrich, how does this part of the plan not help struggling families?

3) The plan keeps deductions for mortgage interest and charitable giving, but it would eliminate most deductions, including those for state and local taxes.

Again, people who itemize deductions tend to be in higher income brackets. So reducing the number of deductions not only will simplify the tax code, it will favor hard-working taxpayers who don’t itemize deductions. This makes the tax code fairer.

The American dream includes owning a home. Keeping the mortgage interest deduction helps promote home ownership, which is the #1 way that Americans build financial security for their families.

Regarding the deduction for charitable giving: Americans give more money to their churches than to any other category of nonprofit organization. Churches then redistribute those donations to programs that help our communities – often to families who are most in need.

Senator Heinrich, how does this part of the plan not help struggling families?

As for eliminating the deduction for state and local taxes, I can understand why Senator Heinrich objects, because this deduction is most loved by high-tax states on the coasts, including California and New York. Here, Mr. Heinrich again demonstrates that he serves as California’s third Senator, instead of New Mexico’s junior Senator.

4) The plan proposes a flat 15 percent tax rate for businesses, and eliminates tax breaks for special interests.

We all rightly complain about how Washington power brokers and career politicians favor special interests. President Trump’s plan eliminates tax breaks for special interests. How is that not more fair?

America’s tax on corporate earning – currently 35 percent – is the highest in the developed world. I can personally attest that if my family’s business were taxed at 15 percent instead of 35 percent, we would reinvest that savings into the company by creating more jobs. The fact is, tax cuts for business create job growth. New Mexico desperately needs more jobs.

Senator Heinrich, how does this part of the plan not help struggling families?

Martin Heinrich no longer acts as a voice for New Mexicans in Washington, D.C. He votes with his Democratic Party masters, Nancy Pelosi of California and Chuck Schumer of New York, 94.4 percent of the time. But the interests of New Mexico and New York are quite different, as Mr. Heinrich’s statement about the Trump tax plan proves.

It is time to abandon empty party politics, and return common-sense government to Washington. It is time to let hard-working Americans lead the way, and reduce the federal government’s interference in our lives. It is time to shrink government instead of growing it, and reduce taxes instead of increasing them. It is time to send hard-working Americans to Congress instead of career politicians.

The Trump tax plan makes sense for America, and it makes even more sense for New Mexico. Mr. Heinrich, you are not fooling anyone with your automatic rejection of everything our President proposes. You are simply making yourself look foolish.