On Monday, the Texas House and Senate approved House Resolution 853, lavishing praise on Bill Richardson and honoring him for his "brilliant career" (link). During his acceptance speech, he said this:
"The [border] wall should be torn down... It's bad policy. It was done to get election votes... And the next president should not build it. I wouldn't build it."
First, despite what both he and W. Gardner Selby of the Austin American-Statesman say, it's not a "wall", it's a fence.
Second, the question becomes who exactly Bill Richardson was speaking on behalf of. Just himself? The citizens of New Mexico? Or, others?
Last year, the Organization of American States named him as their Special Envoy to 'promote dialogue on issues... such as immigration and free trade' [1]. While the OAS includes the U.S. and Canada, every other member state has a "people export" policy to the U.S., in particular Mexico. In his press conference, he also came out against building the fence, and the OAS also nearly passed a resolution opposing the fence.
Was Bill Richardson representing the OAS when he came out against the "wall"? It isn't entirely clear, and that's always going to be the case when dealing with people who clearly have divided loyalties such as Richardson.
[1] See nomoreblather.com/bill-richarson-registered-foreign-agent