Andrea Romero
DemocraticQ1 Q1 (Produced Water and Oil and Gas): New Mexico’s oil and gas industry generated 2.7 billion barrels of produced water in 2025. This wastewater can contain salts, chemicals, and radioactive materials, and underground disposal has raised concerns about earthquakes in the Permian Basin. State regulators have also identified gaps in evidence about treatment and environmental safety. What policies, if any, would you support for produced-water treatment, monitoring, disposal, or reuse outside oil and gas operations? What scientific evidence would inform your position?
In New Mexico, produced water is an ongoing area of study, and our office has participated in numerous forums, including with the NM Produced Water Consortium, to better understand the current science and ensure that any legislation we support is grounded in sound research. We are open to policies that advance research into how produced water can be safely treated and potentially utilized outside of oil and gas operations. However, at the same time, we need strong monitoring, treatment, and disposal standards to protect our water resources and communities. Before expanding reuse, we need reliable scientific evidence about treatment methods, contaminants, long-term environmental impacts, and public-health risks. Our office is committed to understanding the science and supporting legislation that puts New Mexico in a position to make responsible, evidence-based decisions about produced water. We committed to new water resources, and this has some promising potential, but other alarming results, so far.
Q2 Q2 (Water Security): New Mexico’s 50-Year Water Action Plan identifies water conservation, improved storage and delivery, groundwater monitoring, and protection of existing water resources as approaches to long-term water challenges affecting communities, agriculture, and economic development. What policies, investments, research, or new technologies would you prioritize to strengthen New Mexico’s long-term water security? How would you measure whether they increase water availability or reduce water loss?
Our district has been a strong supporter of New Mexico’s 50-Year Water Action Plan. The strategies outlined in the plan, including conservation, improved water infrastructure, groundwater monitoring, and protecting existing water resources, are an important starting point for addressing the long-term challenges facing our state. We should continue investing in water conservation and efficiency, repairing and modernizing aging infrastructure, expanding groundwater monitoring, and supporting research into water reuse and other technologies that can help us make the most of the water we have, including investing substantially in conservation. We also need to ensure that Tribal communities, agricultural producers, local governments, and other water users have a meaningful role in shaping these policies.
Q3 Q3 (Uranium Mining and Cleanup): The EPA reports 523 abandoned uranium mines on or near the Navajo Nation, including 30 mines in New Mexico within one mile of Navajo Nation lands. Past uranium mining and milling have raised environmental and public-health concerns, while new proposals raise questions about water use and contamination. What policies, if any, would you support regarding existing sites, cleanup costs, and new uranium mining proposals? What role should scientific evidence and the decisions of affected Tribal governments play?
New Mexico has a responsibility to address the legacy of uranium mining and the contamination and health impacts that communities have experienced. Cleanup of abandoned uranium sites should remain a priority, and companies responsible for environmental damage should be responsible for remediation. Any proposal for uranium mining should be evaluated based on potential impacts to groundwater, surface water, public health, wildlife, and surrounding communities. We should also require strong monitoring, financial assurance, and reclamation plans before projects move forward, or even consider any new permits. I’m not convinced we need to stay in the uranium business whatsoever, and have not yet heard a compelling reason to continue this extractive and dangerous practice.
Q4 Q4 (Commercial Aerospace): New Mexico has invested public funds in Spaceport America and the commercial aerospace sector, prompting questions about environmental impacts and taxpayer investment. What conditions, if any, would you place on future state investment, and how should operating, infrastructure, and environmental costs be divided between public and private entities? How would you evaluate economic benefits alongside safety, wildfire, debris, and community impacts?
New Mexico’s investments in commercial aerospace should produce meaningful benefits for New Mexicans while protecting public resources and surrounding communities. We know that aerospace can be an amazing place for invention, including more sustainable flight attainment, but it must be aligned with our cultural, social, and environmental values. Future state investment, tax breaks, and other taxpayer dollars, should be evaluated carefully and should include clear expectations for economic development, job creation, public safety, environmental protection, and accountability for taxpayer dollars.
Q5 Q5 (Nuclear Waste): The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad is the nation’s only deep geologic repository for defense-related transuranic waste, storing radioactive waste like plutonium and americium. What position would you take on WIPP’s future mission and proposals to change the types or amount of waste it accepts? What oversight policies, if any, would you support for transportation safety, worker safety, and radiation protection, and how would you evaluate their effectiveness?
WIPP has been a “pilot” facility for over 25 years with no alternative repository developed—a failure of federal planning, not a solution. The 2014 radiological release and billion-dollar cleanup show the real costs of this approach. I oppose expanding the types or volume of waste WIPP accepts beyond its original defense-TRU mission and will use New Mexico’s permitting authority as leverage with the Department of Energy. On oversight, I support strong state-led monitoring of transportation routes and container integrity, independent verification of waste packaging at generator sites to prevent incidents like 2014, and continuous environmental monitoring with public reporting of results. Effectiveness should be measured by tracking transportation and operational incidents, worker dose records, environmental monitoring against baselines, and DOE’s compliance with permit conditions—all released publicly and reviewed by independent experts. Our federal partners control much of this work, so the state’s role is to set clear expectations, verify performance, and hold DOE accountable when it falls short.
Q6 Q6 (Data Centers): Large data-center proposals, including Project Jupiter in Doña Ana County, have raised community questions about jobs and investment, water use, electricity generation and prices, air quality, noise, and light. What standards, if any, should New Mexico apply when reviewing these projects, and what role should residents have in approval decisions? How should added infrastructure and resource costs be allocated, and what evidence would you use to evaluate promised benefits and actual impacts?
New Mexico should make sure that large data centers do not shift their environmental and infrastructure costs onto residents. Any major data-center proposal should receive a thorough review of water use, electricity demand, air quality, noise, light pollution, increased heat emissions, land use, and impacts on local infrastructure. We should also evaluate jobs created, tax revenue generated, water and energy consumption, impacts on utility rates and local infrastructure, inclusive of sustained community benefit to their existence. The spending power of AI companies have eclipsed all other economic development and construction projects, meaning we must be even more careful about how we allow these data centers to enter our landscape.
Q7 Q7 (Rural and Tribal Healthcare): A New Mexico analysis found that rural residents travel three to four times farther, on average, than urban residents for the hospital-based services it examined. What policies would you support to improve healthcare access in rural and Tribal communities? How would you work with Tribal governments on their priorities, and what measures would you use to assess progress?
New Mexico needs to continue investing in rural hospitals, clinics, behavioral health services, telehealth, transportation, and the healthcare workforce so that rural and Tribal communities can access care closer to home. We also need to address the workforce challenges that make it difficult for rural communities to recruit and retain doctors, nurses, behavioral health professionals, and other healthcare workers. That means supporting training pipelines, incentives for providers to practice in underserved communities, and partnerships with New Mexico’s colleges, universities, and healthcare institutions. We also need to bring healthcare to the community through telehealth and other opportunities to allow doctors to come directly to patients. We have to think creatively and innovatively about the future of healthcare, but it must center patients and our healthcare workforce first and foremost.
Q8 Q8 (K-12 Science Education): In 2025-26, science proficiency fell from 35% to 33% statewide and from 40% to 32% in Taos Municipal Schools in Northern New Mexico. In Southern New Mexico, Las Cruces Public Schools has described uneven broadband access for students in rural Doña Ana County communities. What policies would you support to strengthen K-12 science instruction across the state, particularly in rural and Tribal communities? How would you improve access to qualified teachers, laboratory learning, and advanced courses, and measure progress?
Reading reports this year that U.S. reading and math scores have nose-dived near a 25-year low should get us all asking questions. We see the repercussions in the misinformation running rampant in our scientific decision making. When science education is lacking, everyone is affected.
Every New Mexico student should have access to a strong science education regardless of whether they attend school in Santa Fe, a rural community, or a Tribal community. We need to invest in teachers, classroom resources, laboratory experiences, broadband access, and opportunities for students to participate in advanced coursework. Science should be experiential with hands-on learning, making it accessible and fun for all students.
Q9 Q9 (Federal Research Funding): Federal research supports jobs, scientific innovation, universities, and local businesses across New Mexico, while growth associated with major research facilities can affect housing and infrastructure. Changes to federal budgets and rules governing research grants and oversight can affect how institutions receive and administer funding. What priorities would guide your position on federal research funding in New Mexico, and what changes, if any, would you support? How would you evaluate scientific value, benefits to residents, local infrastructure and environmental costs, and accountability for public funds?
When evaluating research investments, we should consider both their scientific value and their broader community impacts. Institutions receiving public funding should be transparent about how those resources are used and should work with state, local, and Tribal governments when projects have significant infrastructure or environmental impacts. Research and data are critical for the future of our government’s contribution to discerning what our public resources can continue to invest in. Some areas of research are just too important to ignore, and we must look to shore up projects that the federal government is threatening to discontinue critical research, and find ways in which to support researchers to do great work in our state that will help our people.