WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HJR 1

SESSION LENGTH, SUBJECTS & OVERRIDES, CA

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Joe Cervantes and 4 co-sponsors

Constitutionally requires annual 45-day NM legislative sessions split evenly across years, ends even-year bill limits, and lets veto overrides be considered within the same two-year term.

action postponed indefinitely
#constitutionofnewmexico #legislature
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HJR 1

Summary — HJR 1 (Session Length, Subjects & Overrides) — New Mexico (2025)

Status: Action postponed indefinitely (filed 2025; committee work and amendments occurred earlier in 2025)
Type: House Joint Resolution — proposed constitutional amendment (Article IV, §5)
Primary sponsors: Rep. Matthew McQueen (sponsor of text); Sen. Joseph Cervantes listed among proponents. House Judiciary Committee adopted an amendment clarifying timing and day-division language.

Main purpose

HJR 1 proposes to amend the New Mexico Constitution to change how the Legislature’s regular sessions are scheduled and what may be considered in those sessions. The amendment would:

  • Split the existing biennial total of legislative days equally into two annual regular sessions (instead of a long and a short session), with each regular session capped at 45 days; and
  • Remove the subject-matter restriction on bills in even-numbered years so that “all bills” may be considered in those years; and
  • Allow consideration of veto override measures for bills enacted or vetoed during any regular, special, or extraordinary session within the same two‑year legislative biennium; and
  • Move the start date of regular sessions from the third Tuesday of January to the second Tuesday.

Key provisions / specific changes

  • Each regular session would convene annually at 12:00 noon on the second Tuesday of January and last no more than 45 days. (House Judiciary Committee amendment clarified that the current number of days in each legislative biennium would be divided equally between two sessions, not to exceed 45 days each.)
  • Eliminates the constitutional restriction that limited the subjects of bills that could be introduced in even-numbered years (the “limited” short session).
  • Explicitly permits consideration of veto override bills from any session within the same biennium (regular, special, or extraordinary).
  • Retains the constitutional 30-day cap on special sessions.

Who is affected

  • Legislature and legislative staff: changes session timing and workload distribution across odd/even years; Legislative Council Service (LCS) would need to update rules/procedures.
  • Secretary of State (SOS): required to prepare and publish ballot materials if the amendment is submitted to voters.
  • Public and stakeholders: timing for bill introduction, public hearings, and campaign‑related timing (e.g., prohibited periods for solicitations) could shift; public input windows may change.
  • No direct changes to programs or taxes; impacts are procedural/operational.

Fiscal and administrative impact

  • Election/ballot costs: estimated one‑time publishing and ballot costs of about $35,000–$50,000 (General Fund) to place the amendment before voters (printing samples in English/Spanish, paper/ballot impacts).
  • Ongoing legislative budget: LFC estimates net neutral over the biennium — potential savings in odd-numbered fiscal years and additional costs in even-numbered fiscal years that roughly balance; LCS recurring impacts expected to be minimal.
  • Administrative: LCS must revise internal rules and procedures if voters approve; existing staffing expected to manage updates.

Procedure / timeline

  • Because this is a proposed constitutional amendment, it must be submitted to voters. The resolution directs submission at the next general election (November 2026) or a special election called for that purpose. It would take effect if a majority of voters approve.
  • As of the latest action provided, the measure is listed as “action postponed indefinitely” (not enacted).

Notable issues & considerations

  • Statutory deadlines (e.g., NMSA §2-6-1 limits for introducing bills during a session) would remain unless separately changed; those deadlines may conflict with the new shorter/redistributed session calendar and affect time available to consider legislation and solicit public input.
  • Moving the start date and equalizing session days could provide more time to finalize the General Appropriation Act in some years but may reduce time for pre‑filing and shorten certain campaigning-prohibition windows in January.

For voters: if placed on a ballot, HJR 1 asks whether New Mexico should constitutionally adopt annual regular legislative sessions of equal (but capped) length, remove even‑year subject limits, change the January start date, and allow overrides across sessions within the same biennium.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.