A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Committee tables bill to raise and expand rural health-care tax credit amid questions about caps and effectiveness

February 13, 2026 | House of Representatives, Committees, Legislative, New Mexico


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Committee tables bill to raise and expand rural health-care tax credit amid questions about caps and effectiveness
Representative Silva presented House Bill 142 as a change to the rural health-care practitioner tax credit that would increase credit amounts and expand the definition of eligible areas to include underserved pockets in urban centers such as Albuquerque and Las Cruces while keeping higher credit levels for rural providers.

Christina Fisher of Think New Mexico and Matthew Stackpole of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce testified in support, with Fisher noting that the credit amounts have not been increased since the program’s creation and that inclusion of emergency medical technicians addresses a major shortage. Committee members pressed for data: Representative Duncan asked how much was expended last year and was told $13,900,000; committee members asked whether a cap exists (the sponsor said there is no cap) and whether the credit effectively recruits high-salary professionals.

Representative Lundstrom and others expressed concerns about expanding eligibility to urban areas, saying pockets of poverty exist in cities but rural communities face greater distance and access barriers. Lundstrom said she ‘‘does not see urban being underserved the way rural is’’ and worried expansion without caps could divert credits away from rural areas. Representative Cadena and others asked for more evidence on effectiveness and suggested further study or tailored provisions for differing regional needs.

After discussion, a motion to table HB 142 was made and seconded and the committee indicated no opposition; the motion was adopted and HB 142 was tabled. Sponsors and members said they would continue work on definitions and metrics before any floor action.

The hearing record notes the sponsor’s statement that the rural/underserved expansion would be limited to communities determined to be underserved under federal or program definitions, and that the last-year expenditure figure presented was $13,900,000.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee