Here's the Truth.

Perhaps you've been reading about the scary new attack ads bombarding our TVs, radios, and even internet enabled devices. They've all been spreading the same message: "WE'RE DOOMED!!!"



Yes, we've seen the actual ads, including the one starring the very person who started The Education Initiative (TEI) in the first place. "The Coalition to Stop Any Effort to Make Them Pay Their Fair Share" is hoping its bribes to this person will be enough to sway us to "STOP THE SCAWEEEEEE MAAAAARRRRGGINN TAX!!!"

Here's the problem: They have nothing. They literally offer nothing. And that's deliberate, as these "big bid'ness" types are the same folks who have always fought any & every effort to properly fund public education in this state. What makes anyone think they actually now "believe the children are our future"?

Here's what really scares them: More & more Nevadans are finally realizing what they're truly up to. And now that TEI is on our fall ballot, We the People finally have the opportunity to do what they've been preventing in Carson City for far too long.

Here's the truth behind their scary attack ads: They can't prove what they're claiming. If TEI is so "job killing", then why isn't Nevada doing better under the "no tax" status quo? Why are states with higher "tax burdens" seeing better job growth and balanced budgets while we lag behind?

Yesterday, new independent analysis from two UNR economists confirmed what we've been saying for some time: TEI will help Nevada's economy by restoring investment in public education. This is why a number of local business owners, such as Ron Nelsen & Cassie Rice, have come forward to explain why they're more than willing to invest more to build a better future for our kids.





Here's the truth behind all the media spin surrounding Question 3: Our schools are "grossly underfunded". And as long as they remain "grossly underfunded", our economy will suffer. But if we break this cycle of underfunding and failure, we can retool our economy so that it's no longer reliant upon "bubbles" and "winnings". TEI gives us the chance to invest in a stronger economic foundation instead of relying upon quicksand.

That's the truth that TEI's opponents don't want you to hear. So instead, they load up on scary attack ads featuring slick political insiders preaching a frightening message of "DOOM!" Don't fall for their crap. Just look behind the curtain to uncover the truth.

It's Back! NSEA Walking Back to AFL-CIO Tax Initiative

Apparently, NSEA Chief Lynn Warne was in the mood to "make news" on "The Agenda" today. Last month, the state teachers' union walked away from the AFL-CIO tax reform initiative. Now, they look to be walking back to it.



I guess teachers are finally getting sick and tired of being spat upon, treated like crap, and blamed for the problems that are actually caused by certain politicians in Carson City playing the usual political games. Perhaps after the last month of turmoil at CCSD & WCSD along with Brian Sandoval's "moderate" denial of reality, NSEA leadership are now realizing this may be progressives' one best opportunity to finally begin changing Nevada's tax code for the better and funding public education at a more appropriate level.

So yet again, we see major twists and turns on the path to meaningful tax reform in The Silver State. But this time, this turn of events may lead to more justice for the 99% and a healthier path forward for the state's economy.

(The Need for Change Is) Still at the Center of It All

Yesterday, Governor Brian Sandoval razzle-dazzled the far right wing of the gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex with his moving speech. Really, do you need me to tell you what he said?

Economic development is “a contact sport,” Sandoval said Wednesday during a speech at the Silverton for members of the Keystone Corporation, a conservative anti-tax business group. “If we want to be in the game, we have to have a cutting-edge approach.”

Earlier this year, Sandoval unveiled a new state economic development plan that relies on regional development authorities and “industry specialists” who will work with specific business sectors to increase exports, research and development.

Wow. I wonder what's "cutting-edge" about Sandoval's approach. Could it be? Could it possibly be... Oh, never mind.

Gov. Brian Sandoval today told conservative business group Keystone Corporation that his decision to support a two-year extension of taxes that were scheduled to expire eliminates the need for any new taxes to balance the state budget.

The governor received a standing ovation from the large gathering of business and political leaders at the Silverton in Las Vegas when he said he will block any new business taxes.

Of course, that isn't stopping the G-O-TEA wing of Sandoval's party from screaming "SELLOUT!!!" over his decision to extend the 2009/2011 "sunset tax" deal. And really, that's the point. By basking in the glow of "Bid'ness Establishment" praise while fending off nasty-grams from the likes of Chuck Muth and NPRI, Sandoval looks so "moderate" and "reasonable" by comparison.

But seriously, how "reasonable" is continuing the status quo? Can we really handle any more "moderate" solutions to the serious problems crippling our state's economy?

Brian Sandoval claims he took his new position on the budget because he doesn't want to cut education funding any more. OK, that's a start. But still, that's not enough to fix what's fundamentally wrong with our state. Jim Rogers clearly pointed that out last week.

One must question the timing of Sandoval’s pledge to education, especially during an election year. The governor may simply be posturing when he says, "no more cuts to education.” When push comes to shove, he certainly will follow the Republican party line to destroy public education. Education has little or no blood left. For all practical purposes, public education is dead in Nevada and Sandoval’s promise not to take the last half pint of blood is meaningless.

The governor is delusional if he believes the education community does not know he is anti-public education. Politicians have their own set of rules for truthfulness. That is, there are no rules. A politician will say anything on day one and just the opposite on day two and will actually believe that the day two statement will control and that no one will remember the previous contradictory statement. Sandoval has done everything possible to eliminate Nevada’s public education system. He now seems to believe that with a little play on words the public will forget what he has done.

Nailed it.

No, really. Look at CCSD trustees fighting with teachers over cost-of-living increases and education benefits. Look at WCSD Chief Heath Morrison fleeing to North Carolina taking over Charlotte's schools and leaving Northern Nevada behind. Nevada, we have a problem. And no, "moderate" looking continuation of the status quo won't do anything to solve it.

Brian Sandoval's BFF Monte Miller recently dropped his tax initiatives because he's satisfied that Sandoval and the gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex want to continue the status quo. And remember, the status quo has only been delivering failure. The status quo is limiting our potential for future growth, development, and improvement.

Seriously, we can't afford any more of the status quo. At least the Nevada AFL-CIO seems to understand that. Maybe it really will take a full throated call to justice for Nevada's 99% to finally get some badly needed change.

Still Wondering Why We Need Tax Reform?

Just today, we've seen plenty of scary headlines. CCSD is fighting the local teachers' union over salary step and education increases that the district once promised to teachers.



Meanwhile on the actual infrastructure side of things, some heavy hitters have emerged to help CCSD survive that.

As the Clark County School District contemplates a new, $5.3 billion capital program, four former Nevada first ladies filed paperwork Tuesday to form a political action committee to support the potential ballot initiative.

With the 1998 bond program comes to a close, the School District is likely to seek public approval for a new capital campaign, which may raise property taxes as much as $74 a year on a $100,000 home. The district estimates it will need to issue $5.3 billion in school construction bonds to repair and modernize its aging school buildings over the next decade. Voter approval is needed for the School District to increase its debt limit.

Former first lady Sandy Miller filed paperwork with the Nevada Secretary of State's Office to form a PAC to help get the vote out for the potential school bond program.

Sandy Miller, Secretary of State Ron Miller's mother, will chair the PAC, according to the PAC filing. Other members of the PAC include former first ladies Bonnie Bryan, Dawn Gibbons and Dema Guinn. [...]

If the new capital bond program were approved, the majority of the money - about $3.4 billion - would go toward renovating and replacing old schools. About $1 billion would go to new technology and equipment for schools. The rest of the bond money would help build new schools in growing regions of the valley, and help the district strive for "educational equity" among its schools.

Especially since "The Great Recession" hit, Nevada's K-12 schools have been hurting. Yet even before the recession hit, Southern Nevada schools especially had a hard time keeping up with rampant population growth. And for some time now, local teachers have been hit hard by the cuts and the continued denial of once promised benefits that help them survive. And of course, the students here have probably suffered the most as their future career opportunities have been limited by the poor state of public education in Nevada.

So now, CCSD and the teachers have to fight over a budget that's been slashed to the bone, and four former Nevada First Ladies are stepping up to rescue a school bond measure that should be a "no-brainer" (except for the fact that it will be paid for by raising property taxes). This is really looking pathetic.

Perhaps this explains why the state teachers' union at least looks to be having some change of heart after initially turning down the AFL-CIO's business tax initiative.

Lynn Warne, president of the Nevada State Education Association [NSEA], welcomes the attention all three tax initiatives are bringing to the state's need for new sources of revenue. In terms of education, Warne says, Nevada classrooms are operating with less funding than was allocated in 2003.

"We've gone backwards in funding for nearly a decade in the state. The initiative efforts demonstrate the frustration on the part of voters and parents that the legislature hasn't done right by our kids and schools, so they are taking it right to the voters."

Proposals are also being floated to raise taxes on mining and gaming in Nevada, but Warne says only the AFL-CIO initiative specifically targets dollars for education. Backers of the business profits tax have until mid-November to gather enough signatures to send the issue to lawmakers, and if they refuse to act, it goes on the ballot in 2014.

While NSEA still won't commit to endorsing the AFL-CIO tax initiative now, they're also not ruling out endorsing the initiative later this year. I guess they're realizing that Nevada AFL-CIO is determined to collect signatures this year, the workers have a powerful message of economic justice behind them, and some badly needed $1 billion a year in public school funding is at stake. Oh yes, and they must be realizing that our problems won't ever be solved if we keep delaying tax reform.

And that's really at the center of this. For far too long, Nevada has ignored the trouble in our tax code and the woes in our public schools. Now that we're just emerging out of the greatest recession experienced since "The Greatest Generation" were youngsters, we're really feeling the pain. Brian Sandoval may continue to try to spin it all away by showing us a pretty "sunset", but at the end of the day we must realize we have to prepare for tomorrow. We'll never really be ready for the challenges that lie ahead if we keep denying that they even exist.

Can AFL-CIO Go It Alone on Tax Reform?

As mentioned yesterday, we've been on quite the wild roller coaster ride this year when it comes to tax reform. It's up... No, it's down... No, it's all around! Yesterday, we saw another twist in the form of a federal law suit being filed by the City of Fernley that threatens to take down Nevada's Consolidated Tax (or "C-Tax") system. And today, we're seeing an interesting turn at Nevada AFL-CIO. After NSEA turned down AFL-CIO's margin tax initiative over legal concerns, Danny Thompson is now claiming the state's largest union alliance is ready to pass the initiative all on its own.

After months of talks, teachers, gaming, mining and other Nevada power players are unwilling to join the initiative campaign, but AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Danny Thompson said that won’t doom the proposal to increase funding for education.

“We’re going to do this with or without the teachers,” Thompson said. “We’re going to do this with or without anyone.”

And here's where it gets really interesting. There have been rumors for several weeks about Brian Sandoval's power brokers bleeding dry both organizational and financial support for Nevada AFL-CIO's tax initiative. So obviously, there have been questions about how Danny Thompson can somehow make this work. In today's Sun article, Thompson himself provided us with some clues.

Thompson said he would have no problem collecting the signatures needed to qualify his ballot initiative.

“I can get the signatures internally,” he said. “I can go to the unions. I don’t even need to go out to the streets.”

Thompson wouldn’t disclose how many members unions affiliated with the state’s AFL-CIO have but noted that the Culinary alone has 65,000 members.

Thompson said despite rumors to the contrary, his organization has money to support an initiative campaign. He declined to reveal how much money the organization has.

“We have money,” he said. “We’re just not giving it away to candidates.”

It's funny that Danny Thompson brought up Culinary 226. Lately, they've been awfully busy fighting Station Casinos over both unionizing Station properties and heading off anti-union campaigns on The Strip. Yet last month in a stunning display of solidarity, the national AFL-CIO put aside past differences with Culinary's national partners (who joined SEIU in breaking away from AFL-CIO in 2005) to voice strong support for Culinary, and for Station workers looking to join the union.

Is there more to that alliance than what we saw last month outside Red Rock Resort & Casino? And is this why Danny Thompson doesn't seem to be shedding tears over the loss of the state teachers' union from his margin tax coalition and the deafening silence from Billy Vassiliadis and the R&R powerhouse business leaders? Thompson indeed makes a valid point about the grassroots might of Culinary's 65,000 members. If Culinary goes all in for this initiative, it will indeed mark a key turnaround for this initiative.

Thompson also noted something important in stating unions won't just be "giving away" money to candidates this year. This looks to be in line with the national AFL-CIO plan to focus more on its own campaign instead of just donating to Democratic party committees and candidates. We have been seeing Labor in full force in Wisconsin since last year, and now they're hoping to take the energy and momentum nationwide. And while Brian Sandoval has been trying hard lately to avoid becoming "The West's Answer to Scott Walker", Danny Thompson may nonetheless see opportunity in rallying workers behind a tax initiative that has the potential to carry a powerful "99%" economic justice message in making big business pay its fair share so working class kids can have a better education.

We'll have to wait and see where Danny Thompson and Nevada AFL-CIO ultimately go with this margin tax initiative. But now, it looks like there may actually be a path forward for it regardless of what NSEA and the Nevada Resort Association ultimately decide to do with it. Can the kind of Labor powered grassroots energy that reawakened progressive activism in Wisconsin and catapulted the Occupy message of economic justice to the national spotlight redefine the conversation on taxes and investment in public education here in Nevada?

Wither Tax Reform (Again)?

Just as I was getting hopeful again, we're now seeing this.

“We have some concern regarding language,” Lynn Warne, president of the Nevada State Education Association, said of the proposed ballot initiative. “As of now, we’re not signed on.”

Warne said she supports in concept the effort by AFL-CIO head Danny Thompson to raise money for schools. But her position highlights growing uncertainty about the fate of the tax effort.

“There was a deadlocked certainty there’d be an initiative two or three months ago,” said one political operative. “Now, not so much.” [...]

Representatives of the gaming and mining industries, which are both being targeted with industry-specific tax initiatives authored by a conservative businessman, would not comment for this story.

Gov. Brian Sandoval’s announcement last month that he would support extending $620 million in taxes set to expire in 2013 appears to have dulled the sense of urgency behind the tax-related ballot initiatives.

The teachers union’s unwillingness so far to sign on to the AFL-CIO initiative presents two significant problems for the effort to get the tax passed. First, teachers are among the most visible, sympathetic faces of government services. Second, and most important at this stage, the teachers union has a reserve of cash that could be used to gather signatures.

If proponents of the initiative collect signatures, it would first go to the Legislature, which would have 40 days to pass it. If the measure doesn’t pass, it would be placed before voters in 2014.

This was one of the top goals of Brian Sandoval's "shift to the center" and sudden embrace of the sunset taxes. In addition to making himself look "moderate" and encouraging Republican Legislature candidates in tough races to do the same, Sandoval also hoped this would blunt momentum for progressive tax reform that had been building since last year. Yet even as Sandoval may be hitting a snag on the former (thanks to Chuck Muth's "tea party temper tantrum" causing some G-O-TEA primary mayhem), he still seems to be reaping some success on the latter. But then again, just blunting momentum for tax reform may be enough to boost Sandoval, setting him up for the best possible negotiating position with a (still) Democratic controlled Legislature and a prime opportunity to campaign as a "bipartisan uniter" when he runs for reelection in 2014.

And now, the Nevada AFL-CIO and the state's top teachers' union look to be playing right into Brian Sandoval's hands. Early on, the business margin tax promised to be the most viable tax initiative, as it had the most potential to attract strong financial backing. But now that NSEA is threatening to join the Nevada Resort Association on the sidelines, it's unclear how Danny Thompson can mount an ongoing and hard hitting tax campaign for the next two years. Even if he can get the signatures this year, the initiative must still go to the Legislature next year. And if the Legislature can't muster the 2/3 super-majority to pass this tax, then it must go to the voters in 2014.

Oddly enough, progressives' best hope for serious tax reform may lie with none other than conservative activist Monte Miller. His campaign for mining tax reform is looking increasingly serious. Even Republican pollster Glen Bolger has shown strong support for mining tax reform, and legal eagle Maggie McLetchie has so far found success in turning back mining industry efforts to block the initiative in court. And since Miller's mining tax initiative is a constitutional amendment, it will go directly to the voters this year and in 2014.

So maybe tax reform isn't entirely dead yet, but it's certainly in a precarious position overall. At this point, it all depends on how committed Monte Miller is to his mining tax initiative as well as whether the AFL-CIO and NSEA can work out differences on the margin tax. However, at this point it also looks like Brian Sandoval has gained some more breathing room on the budget.

Who's Afraid of Kermitt Waters?

He's brilliant. He's edgy. He's visionary. He's radical. And perhaps he's managed to bring folks together (while simultaneously driving away powerful players on the left and on the right) in a way that hardly anyone else has.



He's Kermitt Waters, and he wants to lower your taxes... Unless, that is, you're a multinational corporation looking for an "onshore tax shelter" here in Nevada. If that's the case, watch out.

But before Waters can even launch a campaign for his tax initiative, he has to sue in court to strike down the state statute that's been holding him back. And he's formed a strange alliance on this law suit, one that actually scares some local progressives. (I'll explain this later.)

On Saturday, I finally had a chance to meet Mr. Waters myself and ask him the questions that I sense many Nevadans have been wanting to ask. I started with what I thought was the most obvious: Why bring forth such a complicated and radical restructuring of Nevada's entire state budget that openly violates the single subject rule that only allows for an initiative to address one policy matter? Waters gave me a simple deadpan of an answer: "You want to give me $500,000?"

Waters complained about how expensive it is to push a ballot initiative. This led me to my next question: Why do this? Isn't this why we have a Legislature? Again, he gave a clear and concise answer: "Gaming and mining own The Legislature." He then went on to express his deep distrust of pretty much anyone and everyone in Carson City, and especially of what he considers the center of "booze, broads, and bribes". It seems that he's felt the same frustration with the way business is done in Carson City that most voters in Nevada (and especially Clark County) feel... But he's taking it to another level in threatening their power over perhaps the biggest decision made there, which is the one made every two years on the state budget.

Waters and I then went back to the matter of his law suit. He sounded especially frustrated over The Legislature intervening in the law suit, as well as Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) sending this law suit to federal court.

I then asked about the other big elephant in the room: Is Kermitt Waters about to open a "Pandora's Box" of "tea party" crazy by making it easier for the likes of Chuck Muth and Richard Ziser to unleash the full radical right wish list, from TABOR to zygote personhood to domestic partnership repeal and more, on our ballots? After all, it's impossible that Chuck Muth is backing Waters' law suit because he likes Waters' tax plan. (Remember that if Waters wins this law suit, a precedent is set that will allow virtually everyone else to start collecting signatures to put whatever one wants on the ballot.) So what was Waters' answer? Simple: "If you don't like it, beat it at the damned polls. Don't kill the goose. Just beat them at the polls."

It's interesting. Kermitt Waters may be very cynical and pessimistic when it comes to the death of good policy caused by the people running Nevada's government, but he sounds hopeful and downright optimistic about the triumph of good policy among the people voting in Nevada elections. It sounded like he genuinely believes Nevada will be better off with more of the California/Arizona style direct democracy regularly practiced there than with what we have now.

OK, so Kermitt Waters likes direct democracy. But again, why pursue this long, complicated initiative when there are simpler initiatives floating around that are not being challenged in court? When I asked about the AFL-CIO's proposed business margin tax, Waters flatly dismissed it. "It's a waste of time. In three years, they'll take it off." And since the AFL-CIO proposal is just a statute instead of a constitutional amendment, he thinks it may face the same fate in the hands of The Legislature that the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act has experienced. Waters pretty much said the same thing about Monte Miller's proposed gaming and mining tax initiatives when I asked about those.

At this point, Kermitt Waters then dropped a bomb on me. He told me that other progressive organizations did not want to work with him on his initiative, and that they didn't want to touch this because of his association with Chuck Muth, and because they fear Waters' victory in court would lead to the likes of Muth and Ziser throwing the entire "tea party" wish list on Nevada ballots in a matter of no time.

When I asked him if the concerns of other progressives should be noted, Waters stood behind his plan. "We're trying to accomplish something. We'll get nothing done if we don't [change the rules on initiatives]. We'll all starve to death if we don't let someone get two hamburgers. This is just insane."

Now before I wrap this up, I want to give a reminder of what's at stake with Waters' initiative. If Kermitt Waters succeeds, his initiative will:

- Eliminate the property tax for single family homes

- Establish a 20% levy on mining companies

- Set up a gross receipts tax on businesses earning over $1 million a month

AND

- Use the new revenues to set up a fund separate from the state's general fund (so legislators and the Governor can't use any of this new money to cover everything else in the general fund and/or pay for new tax cuts somewhere else) to pay for a new system of Nevada appeals courts, increased investment in public education, more renewable energy investment, expanded health care coverage, and more.

Honestly, this is why I've personally been at conflict with myself on this. And this is why I was willing to meet with Kermitt Waters himself last weekend to hear his side of the story.

I personally believe Kermitt Waters is genuine in his desire to remake Nevada Government, and especially Nevada's broken budget process, for the better. And when glancing at everything in Waters' initiative, from renewable energy investment to public education investment to generating the new revenue our state so desperately needs, it really does read like a progressive's wish list come true.

However, I can also see that Waters' route isn't the only route that progressives have to use to enact needed reforms to our budget and our tax system. That's why later this week, we'll be looking at the other progressive tax proposal making waves: the AFL-CIO's. We'll probably also do more analysis, along with some needed comparison & contrast, on both initiatives later this week.

In talking with Kermitt Waters, I can see why he's become feared in recent years. He may be dismissed at times as a "gadfly", but he truly does have the determination to follow through on his fights. We'll have to see how far he wants to go on this one.

Nevada Past... California Future?

This weekend, we've been seeing plenty of reflection on the life and legacy of Bill Raggio. The RGJ's Ray Hagar perhaps summed it up best.

As Nevada mourns the death of the “Lion of the Legislature,” some also mourn the end of an era, when bipartisanship ruled the day.

Nevada’s legislative process has gone from one of compromise to polarization, experts said. Raggio’s death only enforces the point.

“It’s been bad for a couple of sessions,” said former Assembly Speaker Joe Dini, D-Yerington, who began is legislative career in 1967 and ended it after the 2002 special session on medical malpractice. “I don’t know if will be any worse than it has been. I don’t think it will get any better.” [...]

“Clearly, that had a lot to do with it (resignation), the fact that Bill Raggio was a man who would set aside partisanship for the greater good,” said Billy Vassiliadis, a Nevada political consultant based in Las Vegas.

“He worked with three Democratic governors and three Republican governors and always worked in the spirit of getting something done,” Vassiliadis said. “And today, politics puts a premium on stopping things rather than making things happen. To stand in place rather than move forward was something he could not abide in.”

It's certainly something no one can deny at this point. And this is something we've been talking about here for quite some time. And at times, it seemed like Bill Raggio really came from a different era and represented the kind of politicking and governing that Nevada has been quickly losing. I really think Jon Ralston hit the nail on the head here.

In his later days, Raggio frequently lamented the propensity for Republicans to bow to the Temple of Norquist, pledging fealty to a no-tax pledge when circumstances could always change. In a world of one-note politicians, Raggio was operatic, often giving floor speeches that were the equivalent of arias. Indeed, one lobbyist, marveling at a Raggio performance, looked at me and said, “Like Pavarotti at the Met.”

Raggio also railed against those who only cared about re-election, a common affliction in Carson City, fearing they would never help move the state forward. As ex-Sen. Paul Laxalt said Friday, “Throughout my political career, I adhered to a policy of not allowing political differences to transform into personal differences. That was the essence of Bill Raggio. Sadly, that quality is sorely missing in today’s toxic political environment.”

I believe one of the more painful decisions of Raggio’s career was to endorse Harry Reid for re-election in 2010. Yes, he was furious that Sharron Angle had challenged him in a primary, but it was much more than personal. He thought she would be a disaster for the state, so he endorsed whom he considered the lesser off two evils.

There was nothing in it for him — he knew the blowback would be vicious, although I doubt he knew he would lose his leadership position because of his craven colleagues, some of whom I would bet a fortune voted for Reid but were afraid to say so.

A man of his word? Yes. A man of principle? Indeed. A man for all seasons, especially every other winter and spring in Carson City? Absolutely.

Perhaps none of Carson City's powers that be was surprised by Raggio's final act in 2010, but a whole lot of political junkies outside Nevada were. After all, why would someone of Raggio's stature do that to his own party? It's something that would be unheard of anywhere except Nevada...

But will we ever see something like that here in Nevada again?

Throw the party's base supporters some choice red meat... and risk that persuadable voters who tune into the media coverage recoil. But tamp down the fiery rhetoric in hopes of projecting a "kinder, gentler" image... and risk leaving the party faithful full of accusations that moderates are trying to water down the GOP brand.

'Tis a dilemma to be sure.

That's what's been happening just south of San Francisco, where California Republicans have been holding their convention. Newt Gingrich showed up yesterday to rally the base with cries of, "Drill, Baby, Drill!!!" And yes, reporters and observers there may have caught a glimpse of the Nevada Republican Party's future.

We've definitely seen a rightward shift of GOP legislators in recent sessions... And that really seemed to accelerate once Bill Raggio left Carson City for good. And now because of what's become endless intransigence on implementing long term budget solutions, some are now pushing for voters to take matters into our own hands. However, that isn't without its own risks.

The Field Poll showed the strongest backing for the tax hike on millionaires, with 63% of voters saying they were inclined to vote yes. Next came Brown's proposal, a temporary half-cent sales tax increase combined with higher income taxes on the wealthy, which drew 58% support.

But voters appear to reject a broad-based income tax hike proposed by wealthy Los Angeles civil rights lawyer Molly Munger, which received only 45% support, with 48% opposed. All three initiatives are in the signature-gathering phase before they can be placed on the November ballot.

The results roughly parallel a poll that Brown's political aides released in summary form this week. That showed Brown's proposal and the proposed levy on millionaires both with more than 50% support, while Munger's languished. Brown's aides also tested whether voters would support the taxes if all three appeared on the ballot and found in that scenario none would pass.

That's been the argument the governor and his aides have been pushing for three months now -- that Munger and the unions and activists who back the millionaire's tax need to drop their measures so they don't doom all of them.

But backers of the millionaire's tax seemed emboldened by the newest poll that continued to show theirs as the most popular. Nonetheless, the governor's aides and allies continued to urge others to back down.

Yes, believe it or not, California is also providing us with this glimpse into Nevada's future. There, Governor Jerry Brown (D) is pushing his own tax initiative that raises the income tax on top earners while also keeping in place a hike of the state's sales tax. However, he's now getting competition from both civil rights attorney Molly Munger's broad-based income tax and Courage Campaign's "Millionaires Tax". For so long, California's Legislature couldn't agree to much of any tax reform. But now, they're seeing an increasingly complicated and messy "ballot royale" over the competing tax initiatives.

And guess what? That's where we also seem to be headed... Except that I'm hoping we won't see an ugly food fight that pulls down all the tax reform initiatives. Instead, I want to do my part to inform and enlighten Nevada voters by starting a discussion this week on tax reform, ballot initiatives, and the future of Nevada Government. I'll be starting tomorrow by sharing with you a conversation I recently had with Kermitt Waters... Yes, the Kermitt Waters with the law suit causing so many Nevada politicos' heads to explode. Later this week, I'll also be posting conversations with those backing Nevada AFL-CIO whiz Danny Thompson's business margin tax initiative. Who knows, maybe we'll even dig more into Monte Miller's tax proposal?

As I've been saying here for some time, we in Nevada have to prepare for serious change. Since we first heard the saddening news of Bill Raggio's passing, we've been reflecting plenty on what's already been changing. And while I don't believe we're destined to become a carbon copy of California (or Arizona, or Colorado, or any other state, for that matter), we can no longer deny that both the dynamics of legislating in Carson City and the increasing frustration of Nevada voters outside Carson City are leading us to consider something never before seen here, even if it's something California and Arizona regularly see: ballot box budgeting.

There's obviously a reason why so many are so devastated by the loss of Raggio. In many ways, this does feel like the end of an era. But now if progressives want to embark on a new era and fix what's become regularly broken, then we may really need to rethink how we've advocated tax and budget reform. It may finally be time to face the voters, and face our future.

"Re-Funding" & Restoring Nevada

On Saturday, the RGJ ran an article on the precipitous drop in big casino property tax revenues that Washoe County has to deal with. And believe it or not, it's leading to an interesting discussion on Nevada's chronic tax woes.

Fifteen resort properties in Washoe County together are valued at $710 million for property taxes -- a loss of about half their value over four years — as their profits have shrunk or turned into losses.

It’s a dramatic piece of evidence that Nevada needs to change its tax policies, said Elliott Parker, University of Nevada economics department chairman in Reno. In all, Nevada gaming revenues have fallen hard, shrinking by 15 percent over the last four fiscal years.

“You can’t get anybody to do anything,” said Parker, who favors broadening the tax base to include services, the biggest part of the economy.

“Voters keep re-electing people who don’t do anything to fix the problem. Now that it’s here, we’re all shocked.” [...]

“Nevada cannot be as dependent on a single industry for tax revenues in the future as it has been in the past,” Bill Eadington, UNR’s gaming professor, wrote in a paper last year. “Economists in the state have been warning about this for 50 years. With the Great Recession, Nevada has finally got burned.”

Nevada has indeed been burned this time... But is someone finally coming to our rescue? On Friday, Ralston interviewed none other than Kermitt Waters. Remember him? He's pushing the tax reform initiative that has all of Nevada's big power players running scared.



Remember, Waters' initiative would levy a 20% tax on mining and a gross receipts tax on businesses earning more than $1 million a month if passed. It would definitely go great lengths to broaden Nevada's tax base. But since it would do so in a way that eats into the profits of the biggest corporations doing business here, they don't like it.

And remember, Waters' proposal isn't the only tax plan floating around. Monte Miller is following through on his threat to introduce gaming and mining tax initiatives, and Nevada AFL-CIO chief Danny Thompson continues to rally troops for his planned initiative to implement a business margin tax. 2012 may finally be the year that Nevadans get serious about talking tax reform.

And apparently since incoming revenue is still nowhere near levels that state and local government need, and since Nevada families are getting sick and tired of seeing any more teachers fired and classrooms shut down while roads remain in disrepair and parks remain closed, we may actually see more willingness to finally do something about it.

"The T Word" & 2012

This morning, The Sun asked Mitt Romney to come clean on where he really stands on storing nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain while the RGJ begged all the G-O-TEA contenders to have an honest conversation with Nevada voters on what to do to fix the economy (Ha! Like that's possible...). Of course all the attention is going toward the upcoming caucuses, but there's another big issue looming this year. And while the discussion was dominated last year by which of Nevada's big power players would line up behind which initiative, someone else has emerged to fire the opening shot.

Kermitt Waters seeks to place on the November ballot a proposed constitutional amendment calling for a sweeping overhaul of Nevada’s tax system — abolishing property taxes on single-family homes among other things while identifying and allocating new tax revenue.

Waters said last week his proposal is borne of frustration with the status quo in Carson City. The state’s 63 lawmakers represent the powerful interests who fund their campaigns, he said, not the voters who elect them.

“The people of Nevada don’t have a Legislature. Mining and gaming have a Legislature,” Waters said. “If the Legislature could get their hands on this money, none of this would ever happen.”

However, there's a big problem with Kermitt Waters' initiative... And ironically enough, his dilemma is the exact same one that has hampered anti-choice extremists from putting a "personhood initiative" (like the one that failed in Mississippi last fall) on the ballot this fall. Basically, both initiatives face major legal roadblocks because of the "single subject rule" that requires citizen sponsored initiatives to address one issue and one issue only. And with both the "call the zygotes people" anti-choice radicals and Waters continuing to fight it out in court, we'll have to see if 2012 is finally the year that unleashes more initiatives onto our ballots.

So what's the problem with Waters' initiative? Basically, he's out to:

- Eliminate the property tax for single family homes

- Establish a 20% levy on mining companies

- Set up a gross receipts tax on businesses earning over $1 million a month

AND

- Use the new revenues to set up a fund separate from the state's general fund (so legislators and the Governor can't use any of this new money to cover everything else in the general fund and/or pay for new tax cuts somewhere else) to pay for a new system of Nevada appeals courts, increased investment in public education, more renewable energy investment, expanded health care coverage, and more.

Wow. Now that's ambitious! Oh yeah, and now it's easier to see why Kermitt Waters' initiative runs into trouble with the "single subject rule". Theoretically one could argue that it all falls under the blanket subject of the state budget, but someone else could easily argue that Waters' proposal is a legal hot mess that change everything from state mining law to public education to private property rules to energy policy and more if passed.

Honestly, I'm still trying to wrap my head around Kermitt Waters' initiative myself... But regardless of whether or not his initiative makes this year's ballot, he kick-starts the much needed conversation on what kind of Nevada we want for the future. In addition, he also allows for the conversation to "shift more to the left" by bringing to the table more progressive tax solutions, like fixing our woefully outdated mining tax policy and making big corporations pay instead of shifting the burden to working class families. We should really appreciate that, even if some of us are leery of the unintended (????) consequences of messing with Nevada's "single subject rule" for initiatives. (If Waters succeeds, definitely expect more religious right lunacy and "tea party" nuttery to make their way onto our ballots as well.)

Now don't get me wrong, I also appreciate what groups like the AFL-CIO are doing in building a broad coalition for tax reform that takes us in a positive direction for a change. But then again, as I pointed out back in June, there may be a catch:

Of course, there has to be a catch somewhere. In this case, the powers that be in Nevada's gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex are afraid the angry mob of plebes just might come after them for years of pulling the puppet strings of "the best state government money can buy" that never seemed to care about the people very much. So now, out of desire not to bear the brunt of the people's wrath, these powers that be now want to help pass some kind of broad-based tax reform.

And now, none other than "Angry Plebe Champion" Kermitt Waters has stepped up with a bold and ambitious tax reform plan that threatens to steal thunder from the more moderate AFL-CIO plan that Danny Thompson is hoping to win over big business with, and from Nevada GOP big wig Monte Miller's tax proposals that ProgressNow fears may be a right-wing attempt to "rat f*ck" the other tax reform initiatives. At the very least, there's hope that we're finally reaching a "critical mass" here in Nevada where we can finally have an adult conversation on raising the revenue our state needs to properly function. Think about it. Not that long ago, "The T Word" was so "dirty" and "taboo" that hardly anyone wanted to even approach the subject. But with at least three different sets of tax initiatives that may come to a grocery store parking lot near you very soon, it feels like the sense of taboo is finally fading away.

It remains to be seen just how sincere Monte Miller is about his tax proposals, how Kermitt Waters intends to get the legal approval needed to start circulating petitions for his proposal, and whether the AFL-CIO can really coalesce a "grand business-labor coalition" behind its "trans-partisan consensus" proposal. But hopefully now that it's started, we can hope the conversation on real, progressive, 21st century tax reform in Nevada can continue in 2012.