The Root of All Kinds of Evil

It's that time of the cycle again. We're seeing a downpour of campaign finance reports. And of course, reporters and pundits are "analyzing" "who's up & who's down" due to how much each has raised.

We're seeing tremendous fundraising hauls for candidates in hot races... And we're even seeing tremendous fundraising hauls for candidates who aren't in hot races. So what does this all mean?

Now, we're even seeing attack ads over "gifts" paid for by "gifts" from "high friends in low places". Hell, these "high friends in low places" are even paying for attack ads that indirectly attack them! What on earth are we supposed to make of this?



This is actually what US Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) was talking about yesterday. This is what happens we allow so much corporate money to flood our politics.

Want to know why we're now having to decide major tax policy in the voting booth this year? Look no further than here... Or here... Or here.

Want to know why we're all too often subjected to a vapid debate over "optics" instead an actual, substantive debate on the issues we truly care about? Take a look here. Need we say more?



There's a reason why we keep harping on this. And there's a reason why religious texts, such as The Bible, have warned about the love of money.

Want to get to the root of all the evil that's seeped into our politics? Follow the money. And if you want to uproot this evil, you need to get this dirty money out of our politics.

Why Hillary? Why Bellagio? (Follow the $.)

After so much anticipation and so much "controversy", it finally happened. And surprise, it raised money for UNLV! Who could have guessed?

Oh, yes. That's right. We've been saying all along that the Hillary Clinton UNLV fundraiser will raise money for UNLV. And whaddya know, the event itself turned in at least a $10,000 profit for the UNLV Foundation. In addition, the announcement was made of a $12 million gift to the school outside the Bellagio fundraiser.



Of course, speculation is running rampant today about why Hillary Clinton came and what she will be doing next time she returns to Nevada. Ironically, hardly anyone is talking about the reason why this event occurred in the first place.

Why, oh why, did UNLV (Foundation) have to pay Hillary Clinton to show up at some fancy Bellagio fundraiser? Look no further than Governor Brian Sandoval (R), Former Governor Jim Gibbons (R), and the severe budget cuts that UNLV endured in 2009 & 2011. And even before then, UNLV and the other public colleges in Southern Nevada were underfunded.

So what are public colleges supposed to do when confronted with severe state budget cuts? Ironically, they've been turning to private donors to try to fill as many gaps as possible. And due to rising tuitions and dwindling financial aid resources for poorer students, we're seeing a growing education gap exacerbate the already alarming inequality crisis.

Keep this in mind today as you read commentary from certain media pundits on the "optics" of last night's UNLV Foundation fundraiser. If you hear from someone who's "disturbed" by Hillary Clinton's visit, ask that someone if one truly believes public institutions of higher education should serve the public. If so, then shouldn't those institutions receive better public support? If so, shouldn't our public colleges receive better finding from our state & federal government?

If UNLV could count on better public funding, it wouldn't have to do so many of these private fundraisers.

Still "Grossly Underfunded"

(Surprise, surprise. The local "newspaper" decided to run another in-house ad against The Education Initiative [TEI, aka Question 3]. This time, the "newspaper" ran a "myth busting column" that actually did nothing but propagate long ago debunked myths.

So today, let's take a trip into the Nevada Progressive archives. Let's go back to May 2013 and remember just how "grossly underfunded" public education is in this state. FYI, this is why TEI is on the ballot.)

At first glance, yesterday's Las Vegas Metro Chamber of Commerce luncheon seemed like the typical chamber of commerce luncheon. It was full of glitz and glamour... And many who are part of Nevada's ruling gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex. Let's just say this typically isn't the kind of event where long held social injustices are bemoaned... Or even uttered aloud.

Yet yesterday, newly minted Nevada State Board of Education President Elaine Wynn did just that. She uttered aloud what's been a glaring injustice here in Nevada. And she bemoaned it. After mentioning the typical "reform" talking points that Governor Brian Sandoval (R-Denial) would happily say himself, Wynn pivoted to declare this.

However, not enough is being done, especially for minority students — which constitute the majority of students in Nevada, Wynn said.

"Our melting pot is curdling," Wynn said. "The achievement gap between the haves and have-nots is widening. … There is a sense of urgency to break the cycle of poverty, and we know it can only be done through education." [...]

However, Nevada must change, Wynn said. To effectively reform schools, Nevada lawmakers must allocate more funding for education, she said.

"Conceptually speaking, we are grossly underfunded," she said, to applause from the audience.

Wynn recalled a dinner she recently had with education philanthropist Eli Broad, founder of the Broad Superintendent Academy and the Broad Prize for Urban Education. Broad asked Wynn what Nevada's annual per-pupil expenditure was.

"When I told him, he just shook his head," Wynn said. "And he said, 'You'll never get anywhere with that.'"

How often does this happen at a Chamber of Commerce luncheon? No really, think about that. At a Chamber of Commerce luncheon, Elaine Wynn laid it all out for the audience to see.

And think about this. We're now reaching the point where hardly any one can avoid the painful reality of Nevada's shortchanged schools. I've said it before, and I'll say it again today: We have been incredibly penny wise and pound foolish by failing to fund public education.

We've been neglecting our schools for far too long. And really, we've been neglecting the entirety of our public infrastructure for far too long. And without that foundation, we can never achieve a stable economy.

How many more years must we wait before we do something? Remember when we discussed this in May 2011?

Silicon Valley is the epicenter of hi-tech and e-commerce because of the presence of Stanford and UC Berkeley. San Diego has become the epicenter of biotech and medical research because of the presence of UCSD. And similar stories can be told in other western locales, such as Salt Lake City, Denver, and Tucson, where the strong presence of strong universities has led to stronger economies with more stable job markets.

But because Nevada hasn't invested as much in [...] education, we in turn have lagged behind. We mistakenly thought we could "grow our way" out of this problem by the way of artificially inflated real estate development fueled by personal debt. Now we are paying the consequences of that huge mistake. Simply put, we can't expect another "bubble" of "irrational exuberance" to "grow" us out of this crisis. The only realistic long-term solution to Nevada's economic problems involve developing the [...] educational opportunities we desperately need to grow the workforce new industries will want, leading to a more stable and diversified economy.

I stick by those words today. And I'll add PreK-12 to the mix. We can't keep ignoring this gross mistake. That's just grossly unacceptable.

The Grossest Love Story Ever Told

The way some media pundits tell this story, it's the greatest love story ever told. And perhaps it is for Carson City's top corporate lobbyists. In fact, we won't be surprised if they read this column by the fireplace tonight with a nice glass of vintage port paired with some luscious dark chocolate.

But for the rest of us, another column on the many wonders of Tesla's extra sweet sweetheart deal is just another reminder of all that's wrong with Carson City.



Down here in Southern Nevada, Clark County School District (CCSD) hit a new record high for enrollment last month. And up north, Washoe County School District (WCSD) is about to receive the rude awakening that Tesla isn't offering any kind of free lunch. Instead, the deal blew an immediate $195 million hole in the state budget and threatens to place an additional strain on state government by encouraging more demand for public infrastructure (such as schools, roads, and health care) without providing needed funding for it.

Boulder City High School and Rex Bell Elementary School are just two examples of our crumbling public infrastructure in this state. Kids attend these and other CCSD schools. And this is what they and staff must endure every school day.



When we take a closer look at the decaying state of our public infrastructure, the very foundation of our economy, "The Great Tesla Giveaway of 2014" makes less and less sense. How can we afford to subsidize a multi-billion dollar corporation while telling teachers and students we can't afford school repairs? How can we afford to continue shortchanging our roads, our health care programs, and our other basic community building blocks while we keep doling out corporate welfare hand over fist? It just doesn't make sense.

There's a reason why we had such a visceral reaction yesterday to the two Southern Nevada newspaper columns opposing The Education Initiative (TEI). They just don't make sense. They and their friends at the No on 3 campaign like to scream about impending doom & gloom every chance they get, yet they can't produce any tangible proof that TEI will hurt our economy. Instead, even their own studies have suggested that TEI will help Nevada's economy by providing our schools with the funding they've been going without for far too long.



It's been a time honored love story here in Nevada. The "bid'ness establishment" types have loved their legal tax evasion schemes and corporate welfare handouts. And why not? It's been a very sweet sweetheart deal for them.

But for the rest of us, we've been told for far too long to "do more with less". We've been told for far too long that "we can't afford" even basic fixes for our schools. We've been told "we can't afford" to take care of our own people while multi-billion dollar corporations continue laughing all the way to the "erotic gift shop" with gift cards that we essentially paid for.

This may be their "greatest love story ever told", but we the people have a chance to close this chapter of our state's history. And really, can we afford to keep buying them all that chocolate & wine?

Don't Expect a "Free Lunch".

Earlier this month, Carson City was in ecstasy... Or was Carson City on Ecstasy? We're still trying to figure that one out.

We're also still trying to figure out what we can actually expect of our state government's giant wet kiss to Tesla. Already, Northern Nevada "tourism executives are salivating" over magically full airplanes and wondrous conventions popping up all over Reno. And already, Southern Nevada must endure yet another round of navel gazing over "why we didn't get Tesla" and "what Reno got right that Las Vegas gets wrong".

But what if the navel gazing that's considered "analysis" today is wrong? What if it's not based on actual facts?

Last week, the Los Angeles Times' Chris Kirkham interviewed some actual economists who have done some real analysis on what Governor Brian Sandoval (R) and the Nevada Legislature gave Tesla. Here's some of what they had to say.

"To assume that the economic impact is $100 billion assumes that everybody who was ever going to work at that battery plant was unemployed," said Enrico Moretti, an economics professor at UC Berkeley.

Choosing a 20-year time frame to analyze also makes the projected economic effect look huge compared with any benefits given to Tesla. But that's misleading, said [David] Swenson, the Iowa state economist.

"It doesn't mean anything," he said. "Let's assume I made $50,000 over the last 20 years. Therefore, I'm a millionaire, right?" [...]

"They're treating all this revenue as if it's free profit that's just going to be sent back to everyone as a rebate," said Dan Rickman, an economics professor at Oklahoma State University who specializes in regional economic analysis and reviewed the Nevada studies for The Times.

Further, Tesla will collect benefits upfront, which could starve local governments of vital revenue, said Peter Fisher, an Iowa expert on tax incentive programs.

"They're giving back 99% of Tesla's direct taxes in the first nine years, yet there are going to be all these new workers with families and children," said Fisher, research director of the Iowa Policy Project and a professor emeritus of urban and regional studies at the University of Iowa. "One way or another, I think the locality is going to find themselves with a strain on local government services."

Hmmmm... We wonder where we've heard this before. Oh, yes. That's right. The Atlantic's Richard Florida and the LA Times' Michael Hiltzik were among several actual economic thinkers who were warning us not to buy into #Teslamania. And there's a reason why Good Jobs First has been criticizing the Tesla deal. While Tesla and its technology hold plenty of promise for the future, there's no guarantee that the State of Nevada's $1.2 billion corporate welfare gift card to this company will magically wash away all of Nevada's economic woes.

But hey, what do public policy think tanks and top-grade columnists (who actually know what they're talking about) know about any of this? According to certain local media pundits, they just don't know how to "play long ball" because they refuse to sit back and enjoy the bright & sunny "optics" emanating from The Governor's Mansion.

Even some local officials in Reno & Washoe County are now admitting there are indeed high costs to the Tesla deal. After all, this deal was never truly "free". Roads, schools, mass transit, and water infrastructure will be needed. And last we checked, those are never free.

And we'll eventually discover how much economic benefit the state will gain from this. Hopefully, it will eventually be enough to make this trade-off worthwhile. But now, it's becoming increasingly obvious that the Governor's rosy projections were way too rosy.

Economists often like to joke that there's truly no such thing as a "free lunch". Here in Nevada, it looks like we'll have to learn that lesson the hard way. Again. Even after we took a bite out of that rotten Apple.

The Waiting Game

Last week, the State of Nevada had no one present. No one even bothered to show up for court in San Francisco. Instead, the judges of the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals instead had to endure this bucket full of crazy last week.

We will likely receive a ruling from the Ninth on Sevcik v. Sandoval fairly soon. And so far, marriage equality seem to be liking their odds.

Yet now, other states may have leapfrogged ahead of Nevada on the way to the US Supreme Court. However, Nevada may yet slip onto The Supremes' docket if the Ninth issues a ruling on Sevcik this week.



As we've discussed before, the US Supreme Court set this chain of lower court marriage rulings with its US v. Windsor. Will the SCOTUS Justices who ruled so passionately in favor of LGBTQ civil rights reverse course so suddenly? We seriously doubt it, but we can't take anything for granted there.

Now here's where it becomes even more interesting. The State of Nevada dropped its legal defense of marriage discrimination in February. That's why no one from the State of Nevada even bothered to show up in San Francisco last Monday to argue for the Question 2 marriage ban. And that's why US Supreme Court Justices will have to determine standing (a la Prop 8 California) should the usual suspects decide to appeal the Ninth's ruling.

This is why we're now playing the waiting game. If the Ninth Circuit rules in favor of equality, Nevada may become State #18 for marriage equality by next month. Or we may not, should SCOTUS decide to place that ruling on hold. Perhaps our case may be one of the marriage cases that will set a national precedent next year. Or perhaps not, should SCOTUS decide not to take up Sevcik at all.

Whatever happens, this month promises to be an exciting one for civil rigts activists here in The Silver State. We're just waiting to see what comes next.

"Play Long Ball"

Did you hear? Everything is coming up roses! We will be greeted as liberators! Just take a look on the bright side of life! And no matter what, always make sure to admire the bright & sunny "optics".

Last week, the mantra was supposed to be, "Ratification is different from rubber-stamping." But now that Tesla secured the deal it always wanted from Carson City, even the media pundit who uttered those words before the 28th Special Session of the Nevada Legislature is now upset because some legislators didnt rubber-stamp the Tesla deal quickly enough.

Wait, what?! Sadly, even some highly esteemed leaders of the Fourth Estate have caught #Teslamania.



Last week, The Atlantic's CityLab Editor-at-Large, Richard Florida, tried to warn those in Carson City of the risks of placing all of Nevada taxpayers' eggs in one "economic development" basket. And now, Los Angeles Times business columnist Michael Hiltzik is essentially calling our state's leaders "suckers" for approving the Tesla deal so quickly without analyzing the true cost of all the giveaways Tesla demanded along with the possibly way-too-rosy economic forecasts from the Governor's Office. Oh, and Good Jobs First continues to question the wisdom of allowing such a profitable company to operate in Nevada completely tax free for the next decade.

A cool $195 million is already leaving the state's coffers for Tesla corporate headquarters. And that's while Northern Nevada local authorities are just starting to realize the strain on local infrastructure that they just agreed to. How will we pay for the new roads and schools in Washoe, Storey, & Lyon Counties? And how will this affect state funding for the already overcrowded Clark County School District (CCSD), the already overburdened Southern Nevada transportation system, and still-in-need-of-some-TLC Southern Nevada economy?

Yesterday, the above mentioned media pundit used his Sunday Column to chide all the "ivory tower know-nothings and southern partisans" who dared to question Governor Brian Sandoval's (R) "play long ball"/"swing for the fences" strategy. Oh, really? What in any of this deal is "long ball"? How did Sandoval's "economic development team" "swing for the fences" by agreeing to the same old corporate welfare that this state has always tried to use to "diversify our economy"? How's that working out for us? The only difference this time is that the Tesla corporate welfare package is 14 times greater than the previous record setting Nevada corporate welfare package (cough- Apple -cough).

Look, we know Tesla likely has a bright future ahead. We even realize Tesla's potential role in a climate change/clean energy/human survival breakthrough. We can't understate the promise of the ground Tesla broke in Storey County.

We're just wondering why we're once again trying to substitute short sighted corporate welfare for long sighted economic planning. If we truly care about the well being of our state and our people, we know how to secure a far better bang for our buck. Yet in order for us to score this kind of real "long ball" deal, we'll need to approve it ourselves.

Done Deal: The #Teslamania Postscript

It's official. It's happening. And it's unanimous.

Late last night, the Nevada Legislature unanimously passed the Tesla deal. Governor Brian Sandoval (R) quickly signed it into law as US Senator Harry Reid (D) signaled his approval from DC.



Ultimately, Tesla got the $1.25 billion in tax credits it wanted. However, the final bill was slightly modified to ensure Tesla factory workers receive decent wages and health insurance benefits. The final bill also included more oversight should Tesla request a waiver for the 50% Nevada workers hiring requirement.

So it's a done deal. A bunch of legislators and media pundits are smiling as they await their return flights to Las Vegas. And of course, Tesla executives must be grinning from ear to ear this morning.



But what about all the rest of us? After the State Senate wrapped up their voting, they had just enough time for a few speeches. And yes, a handful of Senators actually addressed the 900 pound gorilla in the room.

Senator Tick Segerblom (D-Las Vegas) went even further in addressing the problem... And the solution. He pretty much channeled "The Original Gleaner" Hugh Jackson in pointing out the obvious. Why is it so damned easy for our state government to hand out corporate welfare like candy while failing repeatedly to properly fund public education?



It's a done deal. Tesla just got its sweetheart deal... But what about the rest of us? Where's our sweetheart deal?

Here's what isn't yet a done deal: this year's election. In particular, we have our solution: The Education Initiative (TEI). As Senator Segerblom and Hugh Jackson yesterday, we need to secure a good deal for our communities by making it happen ourselves.

#Tesla Update(s)

And it's on! We knew this was eventually coming. But now, it's official. "The Tesla Session" is officially underway in Carson City.



And what have we learned since this morning? Perhaps there will be no Switch, after all?

Remember when we told you about the last minute move by the Southern Nevada data center company to land tax credits for a Nevada expansion? So far, Governor Brian Sandoval (R) is saying no. It remains to be seen how many allies Switch has in the Legislature Building.

In the mean time, Steve Sebelius notes the slippery slope this state will approach if the deal is approved. Why Tesla? Why Apple? Yet why not Switch? And why not any other company willing to tell us what we want to hear about "economic development"?

Also, PLAN made it official this morning. Folks there are concerned about the glossy numbers Governor Sandoval's office has released about the economic impact of Tesla's Gigafactory, as well as shifting the tax burden from Tesla to working families. Oh, and PLAN added this at the end: "One last question, which has been asked by others but only answered by silence: Why can’t the state of Nevada come together on a plan to raise revenues to fix our broken education system as enthusiastically as the rush to create a $1.3 billion package of corporate subsidies for a single company in one part of the state?" Ouch. (This is actually the reason why The Education Initiative [TEI] is on our fall ballot.)



At least now, we're starting to see the Tesla bills emerge. We're also continuing to see strong reviews for the very technology Tesla wants to bring to Northern Nevada. The Tesla Gigafactory may even end up producing 20% more renewable electricity than it actually needs.

The Guinn Center just endorsed the Tesla deal, provided there are benchmarks Tesla must meet in order to continue enjoying those tax credits. Reno News & Review's Dennis Myers, however, calls foul on what he sees as naked corporate welfare. And of course, NPRI is against anything that doesn't perfectly fit its ideological mold.

We probably won't have more #Tesla details until around 4:00 PM. We'll do our best to stay on top of it all. And if there's any critical breaking news tonight, we'll do our best to cover it here. So go ahead and stay tuned as #TeslaMania continues in Carson City.

Prelude to Tesla

Consider this a quick cheat sheet on "The Tesla Session" that will begin at high noon today in Carson City. Here's what you need to know about the 28th Special Session of the Nevada Legislature:

- The Tesla deal is now clocking in at about $1.3 billion cost to Nevada taxpayers.

- It still looks likely to be approved, but signs of discontent at the Legislature Building are starting to appear.

- Among those grumbling about Tesla are the "TEA" powered NPRI & AFP (fossil fuels forever!), progressive PLAN (worried about corporate welfare), car dealers (upset over the bill to authorize direct-to-consumer Tesla car sales), and the entertainment industry (Sorry, Nicholas Cage, but no more film tax credits for you!).

- Yet as Tesla keeps blazing trails in clean technology, Nevada now has the opportunity to lead the way in the clean energy (r)evolution.

- It's no secret that US Senator Harry Reid (D) pushed hard for this Tesla deal, as he's a big believer in the potential Tesla's gigafactory has to turbo-charge Nevada's economy.

- And he's not alone. From Northern Nevada business leaders to UNR & UNLV economists and state economic development officials, they're liking the $1.9 billion Tesla's gigafactory is expected to generate in tax revenue for the state, along with the roughly 21,000 jobs (directly and indirectly) that may result from Tesla's big move.

- But wait, there's more?! Perhaps Tesla won't have this special session all to itself. Last night, Jon Ralston reported that Enterprise (Southwest Las Vegas Valley) based Switch now wants to strike while the iron is hot. The data center company is now asking for its own tax credits for its proposed $750 million Southern Nevada facility and $250 million Northern Nevada project.

This is about to get even more interesting. Stay tuned here for more as the 28th Special Session of the Nevada Legislature commences.

"Ratification Is Different from Rubber-stamping."

No, we don't always agree with him. Yes, this only touches the surface of what's increasingly looking like an incredibly thorny issue. But yes, Jon Ralston's advice to state legislators on Tesla is very sound advice that they should pay attention to.



"Ratification is different from rubber-stamping." Just since the deal was announced last Thursday, the price tag has swollen from $400 million to $1.25 billion. Why? This gigafactory isn't cheap.

Ironically, Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center (& Mustang Ranch brothel) owner Lance Gilman claimed "no public money" has been used to develop Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center. Even if that statement was completely true last week, it certainly will not be going forward. If the Nevada Legislature approves the deal US Senator Harry Reid (D) encouraged and Governor Brian Sandoval's (R) economic advisers negotiated, Tesla will be exempt from paying sales taxes on construction materials and factory equipment for 20 years. That alone essentially serves as an estimated $725 million state subsidy for Tesla and Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center.



In addition, Tesla will receive $195 million worth of transferable tax credits along with $332 million worth of exemptions from property taxes. And on top of that, the State of Nevada will pay Lance Gilman $43 million for right-of-way so it can invest at least another $60 million to build a highway through Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center in order to connect the Tesla Gigafactory to US Highway 50 and Interstate 80 Freeway.

Oh, and this may not even be the end of it. Take a look at the growing list of registered lobbyists for the 28th Special Session of the Nevada Legislature. We can only wonder what may come next.

At least some legislators are demanding certain conditions for all these giveaways, such as guarantees for prevailing wage and Nevada workers being considered first for the new Tesla jobs. And quite a few legislators are insisting the tax credits will be tied to Tesla's progress in building the gigafactory (perhaps because they want to avoid another Apple boondoggle?).

Let's be upfront here. The reward will be quite high if this Tesla project succeeds. Nevada will have cemented our reputation as the hub of the 21st century clean energy revolution. And the Reno/Sparks/Tahoe region may finally have secured economic growth and diversification...

But at what cost? The Atlantic Senior Editor Richard Florida has already decried the $56,000-$300,000+ the State of Nevada may pay for each Tesla job that may or may not last into the distant future. Already, critics are accusing the state of overpaying for a "trophy". And opposition to the Tesla deal is already creating some very strange bedfellows, from the "TEA" powered NPRI and AFP to progressive stalwart PLAN.



"Ratification is different from rubber-stamping." At least one legislator seems to fully understand this. Pretty soon, we'll find out how many more also do... And/or how many simply don't.

Meet Its Match

Remember this gem from last month? NRA lobbyist Brian Judy was very upset over Nick Hanauer donating to the pro-I-594 campaign in Washington State. So he went Godwin and slid down the rabbit hole into "libertarian populist" gibberish.



We can't help but wonder what Brian Judy is saying now. Nick Hanauer just delivered on a $1,000,000 pledge he made in June for I-594. And none other than Bill & Melinda Gates. The philanthropists and tech industry legends also donated $1,000,000 to the Yes on I-594 campaign.

Go ahead and queue the "libertarian populist OUTRAGE!!!!11111!!!111" now.

Also go ahead & ask this: If the NRA is so "OUTRAGED!!!" at the likes of Bill Gates, Nick Hanauer, and Michael Bloomberg spending on pro gun safety campaigns, why did the NRA spend over $25 million during the 2012 election cycle? Why have the NRA and its gun industry backers spent so heavily on lobbying and campaigning during the past couple of years?

We've seen the results of the NRA's political shopping spree here in Nevada and nationally. A basic background checks bill was filibustered in Congress last year. Similar state level background checks legislation was vetoed by Governor Brian Sandoval (R-NRA) shortly after. And the NRA has bought itself "open carry orgies" across the nation, from Georgia to Idaho to Florida and elsewhere.



But now, the NRA wants us to believe it's concerned about the overflow of money in politics? That's funny. We don't remember the NRA endorsing any kind of state or federal campaign finance reform legislation. (That's because the NRA never has.)

So why are NRA mouthpieces now screaming at Bill Gates? They're just worried about the NRA finally meeting its match. And now that Nevada is now considering The Background Check Initiative, the NRA is running scared.

In an ideal world, none of this would be necessary. In an ideal world, we'd have a clean money system in place so that no well heeled special interest could buy oneself whatever policies one wants. Hell, in an ideal world, we wouldn't have to resort to ballot initiatives to make major policy changes!

But alas, we don't live in the ideal world. We live in the real world. Yet in this real world, the NRA has finally met its match. And that's why it's suddenly worrying about the big money rolling in for gun safety reform.

Where's the Scandal?

Must we do this again? Apparently, yes. While one local media pundit continues to beat this dead horse, national G-O-TEA media spinners have begun beating the "ZOMG!!! Hillary Clinton is a rich b---h!!!!" dead horse of a "scandal".



What Fox "News" talking heads call "rock star diva outrageous demands" are actually considered standard operating procedure for high profile politicians. If Hillary Clinton is a "rock star diva" making "outrageous demands", then so are George W. Bush, Rudy Giuliani, Sarah Palin, and Newt Gingrich.

But of course, Hillary Clinton is different... Because she's "stealing money from UNLV students"! Except she's not.

No really, the UNLV Foundation relies on private donations to fund its efforts to raise private money for UNLV (since the public college doesn't receive enough public funding). Since Hillary Clinton's speech will be for the UNLV Foundation, her speaking fee came from private donations. Already, there have been more than enough private donations to cover the fee. She has already donated that fee to charity. And the October event will likely raise a hefty sum... For the benefit of UNLV and its students.

So where's the "scandal"? Where were all these media pundits when politicians like Rudy Giuliani cashed in on big speaking fees? And where were they when Governor Brian Sandoval (R) pushed for more UNLV budget cuts in 2011?

Ironically, one of the most vocal critics of Clinton's UNLV Foundation gig accepted a for-pay speech at UNLV herself. And she's not alone on the list of high profile individuals UNLV and/or the UNLV Foundation paid to give a speech. So why are we still wasting so many characters arguing over this Hillary Clinton speech?

Whenever a Clinton runs for President, strange things happen. Extramarital affairs become "impeachable offenses". A money losing land deal becomes some horrifically sophisticated money laundering scheme. A tragic attack on a US consulate becomes some bizarre mass murder conspiracy. And a speaking fee becomes some heinous crime against higher education.

Perhaps if Republican political operatives and their media enablers were to spend less time hyperventilating over fictitious "scandals" and more time preparing better policies for their preferred Presidential candidates to espouse (along with decent candidates for them to prefer), they'd actually have a viable 2016 alternative to Hillary Clinton.

The Final Say

So it finally happened yesterday. The first signatures were recorded for the The Background Check Initiative. State Senator Justin Jones (D-Enterprise), Victory Baptist Church Pastor Robert E. Fowler, Former Clark County Sheriff Bill Young, and Safe Nest Community Relations Director Lisa Lynn Chapman were the very first Nevadans to sign at Victory Baptist Church in Las Vegas. And they'll be far from the last.

Nevadans for Background Checks must collect at least 101,667 signatures by November 11. This means they must collect at least 25,416 signatures from each of Nevada's Congressional Districts by November 11. That's one tall order.



However, that's an order they're confident they can fill. And why's that? Check the poll numbers. Well over 80% of Americans (and Nevadans) support expanding background checks for gun purchases. And for the first time ever, gun violence was one of the top concerns for American parents in the University of Michigan's national poll on children's health.

Of course, the actual campaign going forward may not be as easy as those national poll numbers suggest. After all, we know the NRA will do anything to stop even modest gun safety reform (and spend plenty of money while doing it). Despite the NRA's own history of supporting gun safety reform legislation in the past, it now even fights against expanding background checks.

Already, Senator Jones' Republican opponent is trying to have it both ways on gun violence. While she claims she "hasn't made up her mind yet" on The Background Checks Initiative, she stridently opposed SB 221 (last year's bill on which the new initiative is based) because she wanted to argue over the definition of "transfer". Apparently, she hasn't read the initiative. And apparently, neither she nor her political mentor will admit that someone who's planning to use firearms for nefarious purposes does not "volunteer" for background checks.

So it's finally happening. The Background Checks Initiative is moving forward. Signatures are now being gathered. And despite the best efforts of the usual G-O-TEA suspects to obfuscate and delay this matter to death, the people of Nevada are about to have the final say on this matter.

General Issue

It happened again. Another court weighed down on the side of equality. However, this time was special.

This time, an appellate court ruled unequivocally in favor of marriage equality. And unlike the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals' rather restrained ruling that overturned (just) California's marriage ban in 2012, the Fourth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals did not hold back when striking down Virginia's marriage ban. In fact, this ruling doesn't stop at the Virginia state line.



While the 3 judge panel at the Fourth Circuit specifically took on Virginia marriage law in this case, they ruled 2-1 in favor of a strong rebuke of marriage discrimination on 5th and 14th Amendment grounds that applies to the entire region covered by the Fourth Circuit. The majority opinion was strong enough for North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper (D) to declare he will no longer defend his state's marriage ban in court. And for the record, North Carolina also falls under the jurisdiction of the Fourth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals (along with Maryland, South Carolina, and West Virginia).

This Fourth Circuit ruling comes just month after the Tenth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals struck down Utah's and Oklahoma's respective marriage bans. And it comes about 4 months before the Ninth Circuit takes on marriage equality again as Nevada's own Sevcik v. Sandoval law suit arrives in San Francisco. And with Governor Brian Sandoval (R) and outgoing Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) both declining to defend Nevada's marriage ban any longer, Nevada may soon go the way of California and Virginia.



Outgoing Secretary of State and current Attorney General candidate Ross Miller (D) refused to mince words when he delivered a passionate legal and personal endorsement of marriage equality in Reno last month. His general election opponent, Adam Laxalt (R), has dismissed this and other LGBTQ civil rights matters as mere "political issues" that he prefers to mock and demean.

Funny enough, Virginia Republicans have been screaming at Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring (D) ever since he decided to drop the state's defense of its marriage ban. Perhaps they even sensed this was coming, as Virginia Republicans spent millions trying to defeat Mark Herring in the very hotly contested Attorney General race last year.

A State Attorney General's job is to defend both the state constitution and the federal constitution. But when the 2 are in conflict, the US Constitution trumps all. Ross Miller seems to understand this, yet Adam Laxalt does not. Keep an eye on this, as it may become a "political issue" this fall that Mr. Laxalt may later come to regret mocking.

Unhealthful Hot Air

Last week, we had the tale of the dueling appellate court rulings. This week, we just have a whole lot of hot air.

G-O-TEA media spinners had seized on comments made by Obamacare/Affordable Care Act (ACA) architect Jonathan Gruber suggesting that health insurance tax credits truly are supposed to be denied to consumers in the 36 states operating in the federal health insurance exchange. They figured this was their "smoking gun". But then, Jonathan Gruber himself refuted their misinterpretation of something he said 2 years ago.

And then, there's this. Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant (R) blamed President Obama and the ACA for what may be a growing number of uninsured Mississippi residents. He also declined to admit he refused to allow ACA Medicaid expansion in Mississippi, and that he's taken additional steps to disrupt ACA implementation in his state. Whoops.

Oh, and let's not forget House Speaker John Boehner (R-Courvoisier) and his incredibly confusing USA Today op-ed. He declared he's as fervently opposed to Obamacare as ever... And that's why he's preparing to impeach suing President Obama to implement Obamacare more quickly?! Oops?

Thanks to Obamacare, more Americans have health insurance. And Medicare is more solvent. And the federal budget dedicit is dropping. And states not run by G-O-TEA radicals (including Nevada) want to keep those lower insurance rates. And all this success is making G-O-TEA politicians livid.

So they're suing. And they're whining. And they're complaining. And of course, they're spinning.

They just fail to recognize all this toxic hot air isn't healthful. Really, they need to step back. Oh, and they should see how Obamacare gives them better options in treating what we hope isn't a preexisting condition.

Border Games

Wait, wasn't this a catastrophe? Wasn't this an "INVASION!!!"? Wasn't this some "declaration of war"?

All of a sudden, it isn't any more. Actually, it never actually was in the first place. Remember, we've been talking about refugees, and mostly child refugees at that.

But now that G-O-TEA politicians have turned the Central American refugee crisis into a political football game, they're throwing any & all serious policy questions over the goal post and out the window. Send in the National Guard (who can't make arrests)! Attack that YMCA bus! And don't forget to deport those DREAMers!



Yet while these G-O-TEA politicians wax poetic about their "philosophy of principles for (what reform?)", kids are stuffed into kennels. No really, these children are being kept in chain link cages. And this is the America we want the world to see?

We can only wonder if this is what Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) had in mind when he took to the Senate floor yesterday. While he spent some time debunking the "#SecureTheBorder" myths, he also addressed the real humanitarian crisis on our hands.



Yet instead of heeding this call to real action, the usual G-O-TEA suspects want to continue playing their Border Games. Even as they're being called out on their farce, they keep playing.

And to make this matter even worse, certain other politicians prefer to turn their backs to these refugees. "Children? What children?! Keep those dirty buggers away from my state!"

If only we had more leaders like Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (D) and Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley (D)...



And if only the above mentioned political "players" could stop playing Border Games with real people's lives.

Consider This

Another one? There was actually another one. Sadly, there was.

This time, it happened at Fashion Show Tuesday night. Oh, yes. That's right. There was another Las Vegas Strip shooting this week.



So far, the wounded victim has declined to speak to Metro Police about what occurred. After initial speculation about gang involvement, Metro Police now say this shooting was likely not gang motivated. They're still asking the public for help as they investigate.

Last year, we witnessed several Las Vegas Strip shootings. Earlier this year, we saw an alarming near miss at "Thunder Down Under". And now, there's this.



Oh, and there's this. In Stockton, California, 3 bank robbery suspects shot at police officers with AK-47 style assault weapons. A shootout then broke out with both sides trading fire. And ultimately, an innocent hostage and 2 of the suspects were shot dead. 2 more hostages were also shot, and they remain in critical condition.

Consider this: Where did these individuals (in Las Vegas and Stockton) obtain these firearms? And how did they do so? Could it be that they took advantage of the same loophole that Jerad Miller exploited to kick off his bloody "revolution"?

Now consider this: What stood in the way of even modest efforts to strengthen background checks to keep dangerous weapons out of the wrong hands? Who stood in the way? And why did they do do?

Perhaps it's finally time for us to rethink our haphazard approach to all this #gunfail?

Bloody "Rebranding"

We know they like to go there. But really, must they go there? Don't they realize how moronic they sound whenever they go there?

But alas, NRA "News" internet eye candy commentator Dom Raso insists on going there.



Really, Mr. Raso? Really, NRA? Jim Crow? Seriously?

We know the NRA is trying hard to "rebrand" itself as "the nation's leading civil rights organization"... But that doesn't mean this statement is true. After all, where was the NRA when Trayvon Martin was brutally murdered?



Oh, yes. That's right. The NRA was busy enabling more George Zimmermans to "stand their ground" against innocent people. And the NRA & its "TEA" tinged allies were busy attacking Trayvon's family & friends for daring to fight for #JusticeForTrayvon.

And for the record, we saw the same reaction from the NRA after the murder of Jordan Davis. That's because the NRA always turns to "philosophical arguments" over "framing & language" whenever it's confronted with the ugly truth about "Stand Your Ground".



Jim Crow? Seriously? But of course, it's easier for the NRA to turn to rhetorical nonsense than to address its own history of enabling the likes of Johnny Lee Wicks, Cliven Bundy, Wayne Burgarello, Jerad & Amanda Miller, and Brent Douglas Cole. The NRA can "rebrand" itself as often as it wants, but it can't "rebrand" away its own bloody record.

The Fact of the Matter

In recent days, we've been bombarded with news of a new haute faux scandal. Now that Congressional Republican "leaders" are already embarking on their path to impeach President Obama for committing the heinous crime of doing his job, they're already embarking on their strategy to tar & feather the next Democratic President (while also revisiting their irrational hatred of the previous one).

Oh, yes. That's right. They're going there. And they're already going after Hillary Clinton.

They were hoping #Benghazi would net them "2 for the price of 1". But now that they're coming up empty there, they need to latch onto a new haute faux scandal to gin up more "OUTRAGE!!!" So of course, they're returning to the time honored tradition of "investigating" the Clintons' personal lives to death (cough- Whitewater- cough- Monica).

And now, G-O-TEA operatives think they've hit pay dirt with the "speaking fees scandal". How dare that she-devil steal food right out of starving students' mouths! How dare that haggardly witch unilaterally raise tuition at UNLV! How dare that...

Wait, what?! No really, this is what G-O-TEA media spinners are now claiming. Because Hillary Clinton accepted a $225,000 speaking fee from the UNLV Foundation to attend an October fundraiser (for UNLV!), she's somehow responsible for tuition hikes and budget cuts that she never approved. (Who's the Governor of Nevada again?) And now that Hillary Clinton is donating that $225,000 speaking fee to the Clinton Foundation, she's somehow horribly evil and selfish.

Give. Us. A. Break! Hillary Clinton was never the one eager to slash UNLV's budget. Hillary Clinton was never the one to direct state funding away from UNLV. And Hillary Clinton was never the one who voted to raise tuition for UNLV students.

Guess who did? Oh, yes. That's right. Nevada Republicans... And in particular, one Brian Sandoval.

We've seen first hand the pain & suffering caused by the budget cuts to higher education. And yes, we know that UNLV has especially been hit hard by the past 5 years of budget cuts.

The real perpetrators of the real scandal would like nothing more than for us to misplace our outrage and rage against those who actually have nothing to do with the real problems at our public colleges and universities. The fact of the matter is that the UNLV Foundation has already netted more money for this fundraiser (3 months before the event!) than it's paid Hillary Clinton/the Clinton Foundation. And the fact of the matter is that we wouldn't even need a UNLV Foundation hiring big names for big private fundraisers if the state's elected "leaders" were actually doing their job and properly funding public education.

But hey, let's not let some pesky facts get in the way of the hottest new haute faux scandal. Certain media pundits and political spinners find it so much "sexier" to hype a fictitious "SCANDAL!!!" than explain the real one.