Recent articles reporting on the current session of the Legislature have referred to the possibility that $1.3 million designated for the building of a rehearsal hall at The Santa Fe Opera would be eliminated.

We wish to clarify the matter. The opera is no longer seeking state funding for this project. Last fall we wrote to Gov. Bill Richardson requesting that capital outlay funds allocated to the building of a rehearsal hall be returned to the general fund to assist with budget relief.

Several years ago, in a very different economic climate, state funds had been designated for the rehearsal hall building project with a goal of strengthening the opera's artistic standards and its value as an education and tourism-generating resource. We are grateful to those who helped in making the case to the Legislature and who recognize the opera's importance to the state. However, at this time there are larger issues that need to be addressed in order to maintain essential services to New Mexicans and to achieve a better economic outlook for all our citizens.



My husband and I feel very strongly that the time is long past due to give all citizens of New Mexico their equal rights. Thus we support SB 183. In no way do we feel that civil unions threaten our or anyone's marriage. In fact, civil union strengthens the overall bonds of societal commitment.

In this matter, a bigger threat is that Catholic church leaders are violating the constitutional separation of church and state. They either need to allow the Legislature to function as the secular institution it was legally created to be or register as the lobbyists they are and lose their tax-exempt status. The bishops' thinly disguised homophobic stance undermines any moral authority they may have.



Please tell Catholic bishops and priests that legal matters are not in their jurisdiction. Leave these to the politicians. I pay taxes; the church does not. Don't take away my right to have a civil union with my partner. Sign me a Catholic lesbian.



I don't think Catholics need to be reminded by the Catholic church or the bishops that homosexuality, fornication and adultery are sinful, regardless of whether there is love between the partners. The Catholic church and the bishops must adhere to biblical principles and must continue to seek the defeat of the domestic partnership bill.

This is not a civil issue, but a moral one. If it were a civil-rights issue, then the murder of the unborn would be right up there with the domestic partnership bill. To reward immorality with benefits is unacceptable. If the governor and the legislators want to be independent of God's word, they have that choice. But they must also consider the consequences of the choices they make.



After several editorials promoting the Rail Runner train, this paper openly admitted in the Feb. 2 editorial, "High-speed rail gets overdue boost," that the project was poorly conceived in that the train is slow compared to car travel and is likely to get even slower as more stops are added. So government cannot design and implement a simple train system.

We should ask: What is the likelihood that ObamaCare (also promoted by this paper) can take over a sixth of the entire U.S. economy without us reading in this very newspaper about how the government fouled that up, too?

With all the unthinking, unjustified promotion of government intrusion into our lives related to ObamaCare, we had best step back now and begin to consider how poorly the Democrats' scheme could turn out. The people of New Mexico should follow their own instincts and ignore the trumpet call for a government-run health care system trumpeted by this paper.



Your February 2 editorial on the Rail Runner makes many good points, but still unfortunately emphasizes that it loses money. All transportation loses money. Highways lose money (but we never hear about "money-losing" interstates). Air travel loses money. Since the 1920s, government policy has heavily subsidized air and highway travel. Rail subsidies did not begin until the late 1960s (despite many pleas from railroad executives for help), and are minuscule compared to highway and air subsidies.

We all know trains in Europe are great, but the European rail system was rebuilt after World War II at the expense of the American taxpayer while we were telling American railroads that their well-patronized trains could not be subsidized. Yet at the same time, highways and airlines were heavily subsidized, far beyond any user fees. Trains are a public service, not a money-losing relic. And they are the transport of the future.



To solve our budget problem, let's sell Gov. Bill's Rail Runner to President Barack Obama. It would be a win-win for everyone!





Apparently state lawmakers have forgotten who put them in office. Middle-class taxpayers have made opinions clear regarding budget cuts: Reverse tax cuts on the wealthy, tax out-of-state corporations doing business in our state, tax alcohol and tobacco, and cut pork projects.

Legislators still refuse to rule out pay cuts and layoffs for state workers and teachers, even though they have taken multiple hits in 2009 (furloughs, retirement contribution and insurance increases). It is unconscionable for lawmakers to refuse to see the obvious places to generate income. I urge everyone to contact their legislators. Tell them we will not tolerate the financial burden being put on the middle class when obvious solutions exist; that a legislative housecleaning will occur, come election time if we are not heard!



I thought that our Legislature was controlled by Democrats. They are very Republican in taxation matters: tax cuts for the wealthy, letting big-box stores dodge paying taxes, handing out political patronage jobs and giving megabucks to "third-party" crooks (read political donors) that made bad investments with state retirement funds. The Legislature seems intent on shielding the wealthy and disproportionately soaking the rest of us.

Not to roll back income tax cuts for high wage earners, not to demand fair tax receipts from big-box stores (that New Mexico businesses have to pay), not to demand the firing of political appointees (and an actual list of those positions) by the governor is an outrage.

To consider making the poor and average wage earner bear a disproportional tax burden by taxing New Mexicans on food purchases and raising the sales tax is an insult to the very residents suffering most in this economy.



God knows we don't need more transparency or ethics reform, and God has weighed in through our local clergy on that pesky domestic partnership proposal, but it took an astute and caring legislative committee to kill cigarette taxes. Thirty-six million dollars for public schools? Who cares? They could always cut teachers pay, or better yet, add a $50 surcharge to every oxygen machine sold in the state to emphysema victims.

Who in their right mind elects these people? Just whose interests do they represent? Fifty thousand dollars for a "Bean Day"? New Mexico is certainly an unusual state. There is just about the same chance of our legislators for once doing the right thing as there is of the state recouping any of the estimated $100 million in movie production interest-free loans.

I'm angry and I'm going out for a drink, and I'll be packing a concealed weapon. No wonder our elected officials don't get a salary.



Forget about "We the People." With the recent right-wing-stacked U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing unlimited political campaign contributions by corporations, our country is set to become a plutocracy "of the corporations, for the corporations and by the corporations."

The alarms being raised that this ruling might allow foreign corporations to dominate our political process misses the point: It will allow domestic corporations to rule this land. Most U.S. corporations don't give a fig about the general public good; they care exclusively about their short-term profits and support policies that are often detrimental to the common good. And since when is a corporation a person? Our Constitution states that all citizens shall enjoy freedom of speech. Corporate leaders are free to personally give as much as they want to political campaigns; why should their businesses get a second shot at buying off politicians?

When corporations pour billions into campaigns, they will expect and receive favors. Our U.S. senators and representatives need to pass laws to rein in the absolute powers corporations are about to assume.



With due respect to recent letters regarding the Valles Caldera, historically known as the Baca Ranch, I would suggest that writers on this subject carefully read the enabling legislation that authorized the purchase of the ranch. The following legislative facts may be of interest: "The Congress found that history indicates the importance of this land, over many generations, for domesticated livestock production — and that the Baca Ranch can be preserved for current and future generations as a working ranch. The purchase was made with Federal Land and Water Conservation Funds, not taxpayers' money. The Preserve shall be managed as a working ranch, including visitor and recreation programs that, by common sense, are compatible with the ranching operation."

The Baca Ranch is a unit of the National Forest and is legislated to become part of the forest service system if the current management experiment fails.