News

Boise, ID – Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador is urging the state legislature to reinstate nearly $1 million in funding cuts, warning that the reductions will necessitate significant furloughs or layoffs within his office. The request comes as the state grapples with budget rescissions impacting numerous agencies, raising concerns about the capacity of critical state functions.

The proposed cuts, totaling $1.3 million for the current fiscal year and $1.6 million for the next, represent a substantial blow to the Attorney General’s office, where approximately 89% of the budget is allocated to personnel costs. Labrador stated that absorbing these reductions would be “devastating,” potentially impacting the office’s ability to effectively serve the state’s legal needs. The situation highlights a growing tension between the legislature’s fiscal conservatism and the operational requirements of state agencies.

Impact on Staff and Operations

To address the current year’s budget shortfall, Attorney General Labrador indicated that all office employees would be required to seize 11 unpaid furlough days between now and June 30. For the next fiscal year, the deeper cuts would necessitate 14 furlough days, impacting the 227 employees within the office. This equates to a nearly 5% reduction in employee salaries, potentially leading to staff departures, according to Labrador. The Attorney General’s office is responsible for a wide range of legal services, including criminal prosecutions, consumer protection, and representing the state in legal disputes.

Labrador explained that while the office could absorb “minor reductions,” the scale of the proposed cuts would severely hamper its operations. He expressed surprise at the cuts, noting that Governor Brad Little did not initially recommend a holdback for the Attorney General’s office. The Joint Finance-Appropriation Committee, however, subsequently enacted the cuts as part of broader budget adjustments. You can uncover more information about Idaho’s Attorney General at the Idaho Office of Attorney General website.

Legislative Response and Ongoing Debate

The Attorney General’s appeal to the legislature comes amid a broader debate over state spending and budgetary priorities. Lawmakers are facing pressure to balance the state budget while also addressing competing demands for funding in areas such as education, healthcare, and public safety. The rescission legislation remains pending, and the legislature will need to weigh the potential consequences of the cuts against the need for fiscal restraint.

Labrador testified before the Joint Finance-Appropriation Committee, urging members to reconsider their prior decision. He emphasized the critical role his office plays in protecting the state’s interests and ensuring public safety. Raúl Labrador has served as Idaho’s 33rd Attorney General since January 2, 2023, according to his Wikipedia page. Prior to this role, he served as a U.S. Representative for Idaho’s 1st congressional district from 2011 to 2019 and as chair of the Idaho Republican Party from 2019 to 2020.

Concerns Over Child Exploitation Cases

The timing of the proposed cuts is particularly concerning given the increasing number of child exploitation cases being handled by the Attorney General’s office. Labrador warned that the reductions could jeopardize the office’s ability to effectively investigate and prosecute these crimes, potentially putting vulnerable children at risk. The Idaho Press reported that Labrador voiced opposition to the budget cuts as the state sees an increase in these types of arrests.

The Idaho Capital Sun reported on February 25, 2026, that Labrador is actively seeking to restore the funding, emphasizing the potential for widespread disruption within the office.

As the Idaho legislature continues its deliberations, the fate of the Attorney General’s budget remains uncertain. The outcome will have significant implications for the office’s ability to fulfill its legal obligations and protect the interests of the state and its citizens. The next step will be the legislature’s decision on the rescission legislation, which is expected in the coming weeks.

What are your thoughts on the proposed budget cuts and their potential impact on the Idaho Attorney General’s office? Share your comments below, and please share this article with your network.

Albuquerque, NM – Over 100 New Mexico residents voiced strong opposition to Blackstone’s proposed acquisition of Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) during a public comment session held Tuesday, February 17th at the University of New Mexico Student Union Building, according to reports from the Daily Lobo. The proposed $11.5 billion deal, announced last May, would transfer ownership of TXNM Energy, PNM’s parent company, to a Blackstone subsidiary.

The lengthy public comment period saw speaker after speaker express concerns ranging from the environmental impact of increased energy demands from AI data centers to the ethical implications of Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman’s past associations. The New Mexico Public Regulation Commission (PRC) is currently reviewing the acquisition, which requires their approval, alongside federal and other state regulatory clearances.

Concerns Over Data Centers and Past Associations

Many speakers focused on Blackstone’s significant investments in artificial intelligence data centers and the potential strain these facilities could place on New Mexico’s resources, particularly water. Natalie Rojas, a PhD student at UNM, highlighted the environmental costs of AI, referencing concerns about water usage for AI-generated imagery and urging the PRC not to support a company linked to activities she described as exploitative. Rojas similarly pointed to the New Mexico House of Representatives’ unanimous approval of an investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch property near Santa Fe, suggesting a connection to Schwarzman through a 2013 email listing him as a host at a New York City cocktail party alongside Epstein and other prominent figures, including former President Donald Trump and Harvey Weinstein.

The concerns raised extend beyond environmental issues and personal associations. Speakers criticized the broader practices of private equity firms, questioning their commitment to long-term public benefit compared to publicly held utilities. George Schroeder, a PNM customer, stated that residents are “being duped” by the proposed acquisition, according to the Daily Lobo.

Regulatory Landscape and Recent Developments

The acquisition process has been complex and drawn scrutiny from multiple regulatory bodies. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) authorized the application for TXNM Energy to be acquired by Blackstone Infrastructure on February 20, 2026, finding the transaction consistent with the public interest. FERC stated there was “no evidence that either state or federal regulation will be impaired by the proposed transaction” and that it anticipated no adverse effects on rates or competition. The Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) also approved a settlement for the acquisition earlier this month.

However, the New Mexico PRC’s stance remains a critical hurdle. A key point of contention centers around a $400 million investment Blackstone made in TXNM shares through a private placement in June 2025, just a month after the acquisition was initially disclosed. New Energy Economy, a consumer advocacy group, argues this purchase occurred without the “prior express authorization” required by New Mexico statute governing utility acquisitions. Mariel Nanasi, senior attorney and executive director at New Energy Economy, described the transaction as “reckless disregard for New Mexico law and for the commission’s exclusive jurisdiction and authority,” as reported by the Prospect.

TXNM Energy shareholders overwhelmingly approved the merger in August 2025. The deal also requires approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the New Mexico PRC.

Blackstone’s Response and Ongoing Review

Blackstone has disputed the claims made by New Energy Economy, stating they “strongly disagree with the positions taken in the motion and will refute them in a formal response at the earliest opportunity,” according to the Prospect. The company maintains that the acquisition is in the best interests of customers and will support investments in New Mexico’s energy infrastructure.

The New Mexico PRC is currently reviewing staff and intervenor testimony, with direct testimony scheduled for March 25, 2026, according to filings on the TXNM Energy website. The commission’s decision will significantly impact the future of energy provision for over 800,000 customers in New Mexico and Texas.

The next step in the process is the PRC’s consideration of the submitted testimony and Blackstone’s formal response to the allegations raised by New Energy Economy. The commission’s ultimate decision will determine whether Blackstone can proceed with its acquisition of PNM and TXNM Energy, and will likely set a precedent for future utility acquisitions in the state.

Share your thoughts on this developing story in the comments below.