This has been nothing short of awkward. And now, it's starting to become quite scary. What on earth is going on here?
Most polls (particularly the credible ones) haven't shown it. The campaigns weren't behaving like this was the case... At least not until very recently. And we've heard plenty of credible reports from the field that didn't indicate this at all.
So why have so few Nevadans voted so far? That's the question on nearly everyone's mind.
Already, we've seen speculation of why turnout has been so damned low. Has the lack of a traditional "top of the ticket" been keeping voters away from the polls? Are people not voting as some sort of strange "protest (non)vote"? Is there something else that's causing this very anemic turnout?
We believe there are several factors. We know Clark County has been slow (again) to send sample ballots. We know there are no Presidential or high-profile statewide campaigns pushing hard to bank early votes. And we know the 2014 election cycle has already revealed some strange dynamics.
But ultimately, this election matters. Don't listen to media pundits trying to convince you otherwise. And don't even try to convince yourself that "voting doesn't matter".
In case you're still wondering why your vote matters, talk to people in Pennsylvania who are wondering why it's still legal in their state to shoot live pigeons, cook cats & dogs for dinner, and discriminate against LGBTQ workers. Go ahead and talk to people in Wisconsin about how hard it is to make ends meet because their state government cares more about restricting women's health care than paying ensuring those who work hard can earn a living wage. Try talking to people in North Carolina about how and why it's become so difficult to access access reproductive health care, make ends meet, or even cast a ballot (ironically enough). And please, please talk to those unfortunate souls in states where their respective governments rejected Obamacare Medicaid expansion.
Still wondering why your vote matters? Karl Rove and his "TEA Party, Inc." besties are hoping you don't vote. That's because they're hoping they can start doing here in Nevada what they've been "accomplishing" in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Arizona, and elsewhere.
Right now, they're jumping for joy over the early vote numbers. That really says a lot. And that should easily dispel any questions on whether your vote matters this year.
If you've just been taking your time to study the whole ballot, we preemptively apologize for this rant. As long as you vote, we're happy. Just remember that early voting ends this Friday.
And for everyone else, pay attention. Realize what's at stake now. And then... Well, now you know just how much your vote matters.
Showing posts with label Nevada Government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nevada Government. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Monday, October 27, 2014
Farley's Closet
They can run, but they can't hide. Ever since primary season concluded, State Senate Republican Leader Michael Roberson has been trying hard to convince everyone that he and his hand-picked running mates are "not your typical Republicans"... By hiding from public view. We're trying to remember the last time Senator Roberson spent this much time away from the media spotlight.
But why are he and his hand-picked running mates staying so far away from the media spotlight? Last week, we took a closer look at Becky Harris (R). And today, we're taking a closer look at Patricia Farley (R).
At first glance, Farley actually looks like "not your typical Republican". After all, she did preside over the board of AFAN (or Aid for AIDS in Nevada). How many Republican candidates have a record like this?
But wait, what really happened during Farley's tenure at AFAN? ProgressNow Nevada and Progressive Kick are back with a very well sourced report on Patricia Farley's history at AFAN (when she was known as Patricia Saavedra), as well as her positions on other key issues.
We distinctly remember this period of turmoil at AFAN. It ultimately led to painful fissures in Southern Nevada's LGBTQ community as people began asking questions on where the money was going, who was being treated (& who wasn't), and why so many staffers were being thrown out.
Back then, Patricia Farley spoke out and defended her organization. Why won't she do the same now? She occasionally issues press releases alluding to her service at AFAN, but she hasn't answered any questions on AFAN's finances and human resources policy since she announced her campaign for State Senate. Why is that? She now wants to have authority over the State of Nevada's budget. Shouldn't voters have the opportunity to know more about Farley's oversight of AFAN's budget?
No wonder why it seems like Michael Roberson is keeping himself, along with Patricia Farley & Becky Harris, hidden in some secret closet at some undisclosed location.
But why are he and his hand-picked running mates staying so far away from the media spotlight? Last week, we took a closer look at Becky Harris (R). And today, we're taking a closer look at Patricia Farley (R).
At first glance, Farley actually looks like "not your typical Republican". After all, she did preside over the board of AFAN (or Aid for AIDS in Nevada). How many Republican candidates have a record like this?
But wait, what really happened during Farley's tenure at AFAN? ProgressNow Nevada and Progressive Kick are back with a very well sourced report on Patricia Farley's history at AFAN (when she was known as Patricia Saavedra), as well as her positions on other key issues.
We distinctly remember this period of turmoil at AFAN. It ultimately led to painful fissures in Southern Nevada's LGBTQ community as people began asking questions on where the money was going, who was being treated (& who wasn't), and why so many staffers were being thrown out.
Back then, Patricia Farley spoke out and defended her organization. Why won't she do the same now? She occasionally issues press releases alluding to her service at AFAN, but she hasn't answered any questions on AFAN's finances and human resources policy since she announced her campaign for State Senate. Why is that? She now wants to have authority over the State of Nevada's budget. Shouldn't voters have the opportunity to know more about Farley's oversight of AFAN's budget?
No wonder why it seems like Michael Roberson is keeping himself, along with Patricia Farley & Becky Harris, hidden in some secret closet at some undisclosed location.
Wednesday, October 22, 2014
The Real Deal
Earlier this month, Las Vegas Sun publisher Brian Greenspun shocked us... Not with his expected column opposing The Education Initiative (TEI), but with his assertion that LVGEA's gawd-awful Whitney Houston lip sync is somehow praiseworthy.
Queue today's Las Vegas Sun editorial on this year's ballot questions. While The Sun makes good points on Questions 1 & 2, it again ventures off to Neverland in search of a cohesive opinion on Question 3.
Here we go again with "The Deal". What is "The Deal"? What's in "The Deal" for our kids? And why can't we know how "The Deal" is being made? Maybe this is because "The Deal" is like all the other past "deals" that have gone nowhere?
As we've said before, why are we now to believe the very forces who have always fought against any kind of meaningful progressive tax reform suddenly want to give us "The Deal"? What have they ever done to earn our trust?
Think about this: They're spending millions on their campaign to defeat a mere 2% tax on $1,000,000+ of corporate income. If they're spending so much to defeat this at the ballot box, what makes us think they'll agree next year to any kind of tax reform that makes them pay something closer to their fair share?
So "Deal or No Deal"? Actually, how about we settle for The Real Deal?
Queue today's Las Vegas Sun editorial on this year's ballot questions. While The Sun makes good points on Questions 1 & 2, it again ventures off to Neverland in search of a cohesive opinion on Question 3.
The solution is one we’ve already seen developing: Business groups are banding together and finding ways to fix the situation. They plan to come to the Legislature with a plan that will better fund education in a way that won’t break the backs of small businesses.
That’s what should happen and that’s the best way to go. This is a discussion for the Legislature, and seeing businesses involved in the process is encouraging. The bottom line is Question 3 is bad policy and would be disastrous for the state, especially when businesses are ready and willing to work with the Legislature to find a better way forward.
Here we go again with "The Deal". What is "The Deal"? What's in "The Deal" for our kids? And why can't we know how "The Deal" is being made? Maybe this is because "The Deal" is like all the other past "deals" that have gone nowhere?
As we've said before, why are we now to believe the very forces who have always fought against any kind of meaningful progressive tax reform suddenly want to give us "The Deal"? What have they ever done to earn our trust?
Think about this: They're spending millions on their campaign to defeat a mere 2% tax on $1,000,000+ of corporate income. If they're spending so much to defeat this at the ballot box, what makes us think they'll agree next year to any kind of tax reform that makes them pay something closer to their fair share?
So "Deal or No Deal"? Actually, how about we settle for The Real Deal?
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
And Now, A Word on Those Who Didn't Even Show Up
Last night, the main attraction... Wait, scratch that. The NV-03 debate was the only debate at Ner Tamid Synagogue in Henderson. For some reason, the other candidates backed out of the candidates' debate.
Hmmmm, we wonder why...
So Ralston was left having a live "Face to Face" chat with Lt. Governor candidate Lucy Flores (D). During their chat in stage, Flores had the opportunity to speak directly to voters on why she's running for this office and what's the truth to all the TV ads they've been seeing lately. And yes, she actually took it.
Flores explained to Ralston and the audience how she can use the Lt. Governor's Office as a platform to pursue progress on a host of issues. She promised to work for better support for public education if elected. And she promised to ensure that efforts to bring more business to Nevada actually employ Nevada businesses.
Ralston was probably hoping for at least some of the fireworks that exploded at Vegas PBS studios last week, but that didn't happen here. Nope, Mark Hutchison (R) was nowhere to be found.
And the same could be said about Clark County Sheriff candidate Joe Lombardo. He also backed out of the Ner Tamid debate. But why? Especially why would the "frontrunner" who likes to boast of his "superior qualifications" back out of a chance to directly show voters his "superior qualifications"?
So Ralston was left to interview Larry Burns solo. He answered a couple questions, somewhat evaded Ralston's final question, then stayed after Ralston left to speak directly with voters.
Can anyone guess the pet peeve that's irritating us today? At least Rep. Joe Heck (R) and Erin Bilbray (D) showed up to debate each other. Why couldn't Mark Hutchison and Joe Lombardo extend the same courtesy to Mr. Ralston, Ner Tamid, and local voters?
And don't get us started on the certain State Senator who was more than happy to saunter across the Ner Tamid stage in 2010, only to go into hiding now. We know exactly what he's up to. He can't stay in hiding forever.
Hmmmm, we wonder why...
Yep, this happened. pic.twitter.com/PatJmWufEh
— Andrew Davey (@atdleft) October 21, 2014So Ralston was left having a live "Face to Face" chat with Lt. Governor candidate Lucy Flores (D). During their chat in stage, Flores had the opportunity to speak directly to voters on why she's running for this office and what's the truth to all the TV ads they've been seeing lately. And yes, she actually took it.
Flores explained to Ralston and the audience how she can use the Lt. Governor's Office as a platform to pursue progress on a host of issues. She promised to work for better support for public education if elected. And she promised to ensure that efforts to bring more business to Nevada actually employ Nevada businesses.
Let's try this again. @LucyFlores w/ supporters after her opponent was no show. #DebateTime #Vegas #NVGov #lf4lg pic.twitter.com/jnGeC181eL
— Andrew Davey (@atdleft) October 21, 2014Ralston was probably hoping for at least some of the fireworks that exploded at Vegas PBS studios last week, but that didn't happen here. Nope, Mark Hutchison (R) was nowhere to be found.
And the same could be said about Clark County Sheriff candidate Joe Lombardo. He also backed out of the Ner Tamid debate. But why? Especially why would the "frontrunner" who likes to boast of his "superior qualifications" back out of a chance to directly show voters his "superior qualifications"?
So Ralston was left to interview Larry Burns solo. He answered a couple questions, somewhat evaded Ralston's final question, then stayed after Ralston left to speak directly with voters.
@BurnsForSheriff @ Ner Tamid, but no debate b/c opponent didn't show up. #Vegas #LVSheriff pic.twitter.com/mLkp00HH4G
— Andrew Davey (@atdleft) October 21, 2014Can anyone guess the pet peeve that's irritating us today? At least Rep. Joe Heck (R) and Erin Bilbray (D) showed up to debate each other. Why couldn't Mark Hutchison and Joe Lombardo extend the same courtesy to Mr. Ralston, Ner Tamid, and local voters?
And don't get us started on the certain State Senator who was more than happy to saunter across the Ner Tamid stage in 2010, only to go into hiding now. We know exactly what he's up to. He can't stay in hiding forever.
"Dead" Already?
(Ever since it was first born, it's been declared "dead". Yet after every attempt to schedule a funeral and bury it, The Education Initiative [TEI] has somehow chugged on. Can it happen one more time? Will more people finally start turning out for TEI?
Here's a gem from the Nevada Progressive archives, all the way back from November 2012. Maybe TEI can come back from the "dead" one more time?
If you want to prove the pundits wrong, you need to vote. Check out our "one stop voter shop" for all the 411 you need to be a good citizen and exercise your right to govern. Early voting continues through the 31st.)
Yesterday, we discussed the continuing need for real, progressive tax reform. And thankfully, the teachers refuse to give up this fight.
So now, The Education Initiative has more than enough signatures to go to the Legislature next spring. And even if Nick Di Archangel is wrong and the Legislature does not want to approve it, that just means voters can approve it in 2014.
However, the path forward is not completely clear yet. The Education Initiative still has to overcome the legal challenge.
So "The Supremes" (of Nevada) must render their final verdict before we know for sure if The Education Initiative will go to Carson City next spring.
But at least for now, this initiative lives on. And at least for now, progressives can keep hope alive for meaningful tax reform. Already, the usual suspects in Carson City are working to silence all talk of tax reform. But as long as teachers and their fellow union activists keep turning up the heat with The Education Initiative, this issue will not go away.
And at this point, even a final ruling against the initiative may not be enough to silence activists demanding real solutions for better schools and a fairer tax code. Simply put, progressives are mad as hell and they won't take it any more. So expect more sound and fury from a typically unexpected source during next year's legislative session. And regardless of the final fate of this specific initiative, progressive tax reform is far from dead.
Here's a gem from the Nevada Progressive archives, all the way back from November 2012. Maybe TEI can come back from the "dead" one more time?
If you want to prove the pundits wrong, you need to vote. Check out our "one stop voter shop" for all the 411 you need to be a good citizen and exercise your right to govern. Early voting continues through the 31st.)
Yesterday, we discussed the continuing need for real, progressive tax reform. And thankfully, the teachers refuse to give up this fight.
[The Education Initiative] has more than 100,000 signatures of voters on its initiative petition and they will be presented Tuesday to the counties for verification of the names, says Nick Di Archangel, director of communications for the Nevada State Education Association.
Di Archangel says he thinks the petition has a good chance of gaining legislative approval.
The law requires 72,352 signatures on the initiative to be filed by the Tuesday deadline. And there must be 18,008 signatures in each of the four congressional districts.
So now, The Education Initiative has more than enough signatures to go to the Legislature next spring. And even if Nick Di Archangel is wrong and the Legislature does not want to approve it, that just means voters can approve it in 2014.
However, the path forward is not completely clear yet. The Education Initiative still has to overcome the legal challenge.
At the same time, the Nevada Supreme Court has decided to speed up an appeal by the union over a ruling by a lower court that the petition is invalid.
The Supreme Court Wednesday filed an order that it will hear oral arguments on the first available date and all seven justices will be sitting on the case. The court said it will not be necessary for the union and its opponent, Committee to Protect Nevada Jobs, to file briefs, a normal procedure.
The court, in expediting the process, will examine the record in the case before Carson City District Judge James Wilson, who ruled the petition was faulty, misleading and could not be presented to the Legislature.
The initiative would impose a 2 percent margins tax on businesses with more than an annual income of $1 million. It is expected to raise $800 million a year to go toward funding the public schools.
So "The Supremes" (of Nevada) must render their final verdict before we know for sure if The Education Initiative will go to Carson City next spring.
But at least for now, this initiative lives on. And at least for now, progressives can keep hope alive for meaningful tax reform. Already, the usual suspects in Carson City are working to silence all talk of tax reform. But as long as teachers and their fellow union activists keep turning up the heat with The Education Initiative, this issue will not go away.
And at this point, even a final ruling against the initiative may not be enough to silence activists demanding real solutions for better schools and a fairer tax code. Simply put, progressives are mad as hell and they won't take it any more. So expect more sound and fury from a typically unexpected source during next year's legislative session. And regardless of the final fate of this specific initiative, progressive tax reform is far from dead.
Monday, October 20, 2014
Why "No Comment"?
Today, our big "H/T of the Day Award" goes to the one & only Gleaner himself, Hugh Jackson. What else are we supposed to add to this?
Well of course, we can always add this:
And now, ProgressNow Nevada Action and Progressive Kick are adding this. Becky Harris (R) has been trying her best to hide from the voters since June, along with her running mates Patricia Farley (R) and Michael Roberson (R). They're all running for State Senate (and in Roberson's case, running for reelection), yet none of them has spoken to anyone in the press since August and all of them have have been severely limiting public exposure since June. Why?
Perhaps ProgressNow is onto something. Who is Becky Harris? While we've been doing plenty of sleuthing ourselves to uncover her radical G-O-TEA allegiances, ProgressNow has uncovered even more damning evidence. She testified not only against marriage equality, but also domestic partnerships (??!!), at the Nevada Legislature in 2001. She even endorsed "conversion therapy", the horrifically dangerous practice of attempting to "pray the gay away" from LGBTQ people. So why are we now supposed to believe Becky Harris won't (again) pursue what she's already gone to Carson City to advocate?
But wait, there's more. Last week, we told you about Becky Harris' internship at the Utah Legislature during the early 1990s. Back then, she took part in crafting anti-choice legislation. Now we know she took part in creating the infamous Utah law that would have threatened 15 year prison sentences for doctors performing abortions... If the US Supreme Court hadn't overturned that and other severe state level abortion restrictions in 1992. But now that the religiousright wrong is waging another War on Women, we're again at risk of seeing women's reproductive rights taken away. How do we know Becky Harris won't join in (again)?
And of course, we all remember Becky Harris' now infamous August interview with Steve Sebelius. Funny enough, this was her very last media appearance before "The Blackout". Perhaps that's because Becky Harris let it slip that she's vehemently against even modest legislation to close Nevada's background check loopholes that allow dangerous criminals to get their hands on very dangerous weapons. According to Harris, it's more important to argue over the definition of "transfer" than to keep dangerous firearms away from the next Jerad Miller and Christopher Dorner.
All this helps explain why Becky Harris' spokespeople (and their boss, Michael Roberson) are making "No Comment". They don't want you to know her real record. They don't want you to know what she really wants to do in Carson City. So Roberson is keeping Harris in hiding in hopes they can trick the voters of Senate District 9 into electing her.
Perhaps Roberson's operatives think they can enjoy some "political trick-or-treat-ing" here, but voters deserve better. They deserve to know what Becky Harris is actually running on. And they deserve far more than "No Comment".
http://t.co/uPW6EQlry6 @beckyharrisnv campaign slogan: pic.twitter.com/e2MZvtKhYA
— Hugh Jackson (@JHughJackson) October 20, 2014Well of course, we can always add this:
And now, ProgressNow Nevada Action and Progressive Kick are adding this. Becky Harris (R) has been trying her best to hide from the voters since June, along with her running mates Patricia Farley (R) and Michael Roberson (R). They're all running for State Senate (and in Roberson's case, running for reelection), yet none of them has spoken to anyone in the press since August and all of them have have been severely limiting public exposure since June. Why?
Perhaps ProgressNow is onto something. Who is Becky Harris? While we've been doing plenty of sleuthing ourselves to uncover her radical G-O-TEA allegiances, ProgressNow has uncovered even more damning evidence. She testified not only against marriage equality, but also domestic partnerships (??!!), at the Nevada Legislature in 2001. She even endorsed "conversion therapy", the horrifically dangerous practice of attempting to "pray the gay away" from LGBTQ people. So why are we now supposed to believe Becky Harris won't (again) pursue what she's already gone to Carson City to advocate?
But wait, there's more. Last week, we told you about Becky Harris' internship at the Utah Legislature during the early 1990s. Back then, she took part in crafting anti-choice legislation. Now we know she took part in creating the infamous Utah law that would have threatened 15 year prison sentences for doctors performing abortions... If the US Supreme Court hadn't overturned that and other severe state level abortion restrictions in 1992. But now that the religious
And of course, we all remember Becky Harris' now infamous August interview with Steve Sebelius. Funny enough, this was her very last media appearance before "The Blackout". Perhaps that's because Becky Harris let it slip that she's vehemently against even modest legislation to close Nevada's background check loopholes that allow dangerous criminals to get their hands on very dangerous weapons. According to Harris, it's more important to argue over the definition of "transfer" than to keep dangerous firearms away from the next Jerad Miller and Christopher Dorner.
All this helps explain why Becky Harris' spokespeople (and their boss, Michael Roberson) are making "No Comment". They don't want you to know her real record. They don't want you to know what she really wants to do in Carson City. So Roberson is keeping Harris in hiding in hopes they can trick the voters of Senate District 9 into electing her.
Perhaps Roberson's operatives think they can enjoy some "political trick-or-treat-ing" here, but voters deserve better. They deserve to know what Becky Harris is actually running on. And they deserve far more than "No Comment".
No "Deal", No Mirage, No Dilemma
We had a feeling this was coming. In his "Sunday Column" yesterday, Jon Ralston moaned about the difficult choice he has regarding Question 3. Dare we say the typically very opinionated pundit hasn't yet made up his mind?
We understand this is difficult for him. He wants to believe. He wants to believe the Governor & Legislature will magically reach "The Deal" that Las Vegas Sun publisher Brian Greenspun alluded to in his column announcing his opposition to The Education Initiative (TEI). If we just give the "bid'ness establishment" just a little more time to "bring everyone together", can't we all just get along and praise the glorious arrival of "The Deal"?
However, Ralston has seen this same s--tshow play out so many times that he can sense "The Deal" is just a mirage. And when we say mirage here, we're not talking about the Strip casino resort with the volcano.
There's a reason why the very "bid'ness establishment" that's promising to usher in "The Deal" is spending so much to kill TEI. Every time anyone has suggested some kind of comprehensive and progressive tax reform, it's gone in to kill reform. Not even then Governor Kenny Guinn (R) could succeed at that front in 2003.
So why are we to believe "this time will be different"? And why are we to believe this time they will actually behave differently? We don't even know what's in this "Deal". And to be completely honest, we don't know if there will ever be a real "Deal".
However, we have the real deal on our ballot now. The No on 3 campaign offers a beautiful mirage of a miraculous "deal". But as with all mirages, this one is simply an illusion. Even Ralston seems to understand this.
As we've said before, our choice on Question 3 truly comes down to this: Something or nothing. We can either agree to the real deal for Nevada schools by saying yes to Question 3, or we can just say no and eventually realize there's no deal behind "Door No on 3".
We understand this may actually be a dilemma for Ralston and some other Nevada voters. Why must we be stuck with this decision? Why must we have to decide tax policy at the ballot box?
We just don't see this as a dilemma any more. That's because we're sick and tired of being offered nothing but enticing mirages and ficitious "deals" by the Carson City "bid'ness establishment". We want the real deal, and we now know exactly how to achieve it.
We understand this is difficult for him. He wants to believe. He wants to believe the Governor & Legislature will magically reach "The Deal" that Las Vegas Sun publisher Brian Greenspun alluded to in his column announcing his opposition to The Education Initiative (TEI). If we just give the "bid'ness establishment" just a little more time to "bring everyone together", can't we all just get along and praise the glorious arrival of "The Deal"?
However, Ralston has seen this same s--tshow play out so many times that he can sense "The Deal" is just a mirage. And when we say mirage here, we're not talking about the Strip casino resort with the volcano.
There's a reason why the very "bid'ness establishment" that's promising to usher in "The Deal" is spending so much to kill TEI. Every time anyone has suggested some kind of comprehensive and progressive tax reform, it's gone in to kill reform. Not even then Governor Kenny Guinn (R) could succeed at that front in 2003.
So why are we to believe "this time will be different"? And why are we to believe this time they will actually behave differently? We don't even know what's in this "Deal". And to be completely honest, we don't know if there will ever be a real "Deal".
However, we have the real deal on our ballot now. The No on 3 campaign offers a beautiful mirage of a miraculous "deal". But as with all mirages, this one is simply an illusion. Even Ralston seems to understand this.
As we've said before, our choice on Question 3 truly comes down to this: Something or nothing. We can either agree to the real deal for Nevada schools by saying yes to Question 3, or we can just say no and eventually realize there's no deal behind "Door No on 3".
We understand this may actually be a dilemma for Ralston and some other Nevada voters. Why must we be stuck with this decision? Why must we have to decide tax policy at the ballot box?
We just don't see this as a dilemma any more. That's because we're sick and tired of being offered nothing but enticing mirages and ficitious "deals" by the Carson City "bid'ness establishment". We want the real deal, and we now know exactly how to achieve it.
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
Why "TEA Party, Inc." Fears "T Word" Honesty
(They did it again. Of course, they did it again! They're the powers that be who happen to run the state's largest [absolute embarrassment of a] "newspaper". Today, they published another in-house anti-TEI ad. But this time, they posted it on the front page and right under a story boasting about how much money the No on 3 campaign has raised!
Isn't it ironic, don't you think?
So we figured today is the perfect day to take a trip down the Nevada Progressive archives and back to June 2012. Let's review why we now have Question 3 on our fall ballot. Let's examine the truth behind the lies being propagated by opponents of The Education Initiative. And let's remember how this whole Question 3 campaign began.)
As we noted yesterday, the corporate margin tax is finally going live. And already, it's making a big splash. And already, the radical right is making noise on how "dangerous" this is.
The usual "tea party" suspects are kicking up the scare tactics. Who knew a simple margin tax, a tax proposal that some progressives complain doesn't go far enough[, could be so damned frightening?] That's why I had a good laugh when I saw NPRI's hand wringing, and why I then rejoiced when I saw Sebring's rebuttal of NPRI's fearmongering at The Nevada View.
For decades, the likes of NPRI have deceived Nevadans into thinking we could get something for nothing. But in the last decade, we've had to learn the hard way that we really can't get "money for nothing and chicks for free". Instead, our penchant for rewarding tax evasion has only caused us unnecessary pain and suffering as we've failed to invest in the public infrastructure (like public schools) necessary for growing a sustainable and diversified economy.
Even Ralston, who sometimes wants to like NPRI almost as much as he hates the initiative process, couldn't stay mum on NPRI's idiotic attempt to stifle reasonable discussion on badly needed tax reform. And that's what has "Tea Party, Inc." running scared. The frustration is real, the need for reform is real, and now the first step in building a lasting solution to our chronic budget AND economic development woes is real. They're trying desperately to stifle this, but their days of bullying Nevada into remaining a failed state (just so their corporate patrons can reap the rewards of our suffering) are numbered.
Isn't it ironic, don't you think?
So we figured today is the perfect day to take a trip down the Nevada Progressive archives and back to June 2012. Let's review why we now have Question 3 on our fall ballot. Let's examine the truth behind the lies being propagated by opponents of The Education Initiative. And let's remember how this whole Question 3 campaign began.)
As we noted yesterday, the corporate margin tax is finally going live. And already, it's making a big splash. And already, the radical right is making noise on how "dangerous" this is.
The usual "tea party" suspects are kicking up the scare tactics. Who knew a simple margin tax, a tax proposal that some progressives complain doesn't go far enough[, could be so damned frightening?] That's why I had a good laugh when I saw NPRI's hand wringing, and why I then rejoiced when I saw Sebring's rebuttal of NPRI's fearmongering at The Nevada View.
Anti-tax reform groups, like NPRI, feeling like they have duped and confused middle class citizens go on to state that “research shows there’s little to no correlation between $ and student achievement.” The facts are not on their side though. As the Student-Teacher Achievement Ratio (STAR) project and the Student Achievement Guarantee in Education (SAGE) project have shown, “Research concentrating on class size is important because the findings have largely concluded that smaller class size leads to increases in student achievement, helps to close the minority-majority achievement gap, and has several other long lasting benefits.” Class size reduction though isn’t possible without an increase in the number of teachers in classrooms within a district. Logic tells us that these increases in teacher counts will cost money. Thereby showing that increased financial investments in schools most certainly does increase student achievements, as well as providing other socially relevant benefits.
For decades, the likes of NPRI have deceived Nevadans into thinking we could get something for nothing. But in the last decade, we've had to learn the hard way that we really can't get "money for nothing and chicks for free". Instead, our penchant for rewarding tax evasion has only caused us unnecessary pain and suffering as we've failed to invest in the public infrastructure (like public schools) necessary for growing a sustainable and diversified economy.
Even Ralston, who sometimes wants to like NPRI almost as much as he hates the initiative process, couldn't stay mum on NPRI's idiotic attempt to stifle reasonable discussion on badly needed tax reform. And that's what has "Tea Party, Inc." running scared. The frustration is real, the need for reform is real, and now the first step in building a lasting solution to our chronic budget AND economic development woes is real. They're trying desperately to stifle this, but their days of bullying Nevada into remaining a failed state (just so their corporate patrons can reap the rewards of our suffering) are numbered.
Tuesday, October 14, 2014
Back to the (DC) Beltway He Goes
Last week, they debated on Vegas PBS. They finally faced each other after weeks of attack ads and press release missives. But of course, all Adam Laxalt (R) had to offer were even more sorry "political issues".
During the Vegas PBS debate, Laxalt threw another temper tantrum over the atrocious evaluation he received from his own law firm. He even tried (again) to turn it into an attack on the character of Ross Miller (D), his opponent for Attorney General. Never mind that Laxalt himself has been loading up on Koch dark money, he's still trying to make this and "Gift-gate" trending topics.
Oh, and since he isn't satisfied by just the Koch funded ads, Laxalt's own campaign has been taking to the airwaves to lie about that "train wreck" evaluation.
He just doesn't know when to quit. Where's Kenny Rogers when we need him?
Look, we get it. Adam Laxalt doesn't want to explain why he still wants to fight against marriage equality and other LGBTQ civil rights. He doesn't want to revisit his "most flawed" take on the Affordable Care Act. He doesn't want to admit to not knowing where Yucca Mountain is. And still doesn't want to say how much (or little) he really knows about open meetings laws.
But ultimately, this is what we expect of someone aspiring to be our state's top law enforcement officer. He needs to answer critical policy questions. He needs to know the actual legal issues our state is facing. He can't just blithely dismiss everything he doesn't want to talk about as "political issues" beneath him.
Perhaps Laxalt should return to the cozy confines of Planet Neocon in the DC Beltway. He may have a "famous Nevada last name", but he clearly has no clue how to do the job for our state.
During the Vegas PBS debate, Laxalt threw another temper tantrum over the atrocious evaluation he received from his own law firm. He even tried (again) to turn it into an attack on the character of Ross Miller (D), his opponent for Attorney General. Never mind that Laxalt himself has been loading up on Koch dark money, he's still trying to make this and "Gift-gate" trending topics.
Oh, and since he isn't satisfied by just the Koch funded ads, Laxalt's own campaign has been taking to the airwaves to lie about that "train wreck" evaluation.
He just doesn't know when to quit. Where's Kenny Rogers when we need him?
Look, we get it. Adam Laxalt doesn't want to explain why he still wants to fight against marriage equality and other LGBTQ civil rights. He doesn't want to revisit his "most flawed" take on the Affordable Care Act. He doesn't want to admit to not knowing where Yucca Mountain is. And still doesn't want to say how much (or little) he really knows about open meetings laws.
But ultimately, this is what we expect of someone aspiring to be our state's top law enforcement officer. He needs to answer critical policy questions. He needs to know the actual legal issues our state is facing. He can't just blithely dismiss everything he doesn't want to talk about as "political issues" beneath him.
Perhaps Laxalt should return to the cozy confines of Planet Neocon in the DC Beltway. He may have a "famous Nevada last name", but he clearly has no clue how to do the job for our state.
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.
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.
Monday, October 13, 2014
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.
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?
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.
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.
Thursday, October 9, 2014
Happy Marriage Equality Day, Nevada!
It's here! It's finally here! It's finally happening.
Washoe and Clark Counties are now good to go. Carson City was actually first to the marriage equality party, as the County Clerk there decided not to wait for Judge Mahan's order. But once that injunction order hit the Twitter wires, everyone else quickly hopped on board the Equality Express.
Here's the official Freedom Nevada statement on today's joyous news.
And here's Lt. Governor candidate Lucy Flores (D) on tonight's most pleasant (not really a) surprise.
Here's what Rep. Dina Titus (D-Paradise) tweeted:
Oh, and according to KSNV/News 3's Reed Cowan, State Senator Kelvin Atkinson (D-North Las Vegas) is now married! Congrats to Kelvin & Woody!
Consider this an open thread. We may update later if more major news breaks. Otherwise, we'll have a clean summary of the big break tomorrow morning.
Happy Marriage Equality Day, Nevada!
Washoe and Clark Counties are now good to go. Carson City was actually first to the marriage equality party, as the County Clerk there decided not to wait for Judge Mahan's order. But once that injunction order hit the Twitter wires, everyone else quickly hopped on board the Equality Express.
Here's the official Freedom Nevada statement on today's joyous news.
“Today is a day for the history books. The freedom to marry has come to Nevada, and soon across our great state, loving same-sex couples will at long last share in the respect and dignity only marriage can provide,” said [State Director Ward] Curtin.
“From this day forward, marriage equality will strengthen our families, strengthen our communities and make Nevada a better place to live and work.”
“We are forever grateful for the incredible legal team at Lambda Legal and the brave plaintiff couples who put their families front and center in this historic fight. Without their heroic efforts, today’s victory would not have been possible.”
And here's Lt. Governor candidate Lucy Flores (D) on tonight's most pleasant (not really a) surprise.
“My sincere congratulations to my good friends Kelvin and Woody,” Assemblywoman Flores said in her official statement. “This is a great day for the LGBTQ community in Nevada. Allowing people to marry who they love is fundamentally the right thing to do. Very soon all Nevadans will be able to experience the legal rights that come with full marriage.”
“It is unfortunate that my opponent does not support equal rights,” she continued – referring to Sen. Mark Hutchison, the Republican nominee for Lieutenant Governor.
Here's what Rep. Dina Titus (D-Paradise) tweeted:
#MarriageEquality finally! Congratulations to the couples getting married! #Nevada is on the right side of history! #NVproud #LGBT
Oh, and according to KSNV/News 3's Reed Cowan, State Senator Kelvin Atkinson (D-North Las Vegas) is now married! Congrats to Kelvin & Woody!
Consider this an open thread. We may update later if more major news breaks. Otherwise, we'll have a clean summary of the big break tomorrow morning.
Happy Marriage Equality Day, Nevada!
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Suppression v. Participation
In April 2012, then Assembly Member Mark Sherwood (R-Henderson) threw a fit. For some reason, he felt compelled to troll Twitter during the Clark County Democratic Party Convention. And he decided one of his final acts as a state legislator would be to demand more voter suppression.
And he wasn't alone. In 2011, a slew of G-O-TEA legislators were firmly behind Sherwood's voter suppression agenda. One of them was State Senator Barbara Cegavske (R-Spring Valley).
And she didn't stop after Sherwood left the Legislature Building (as a legislator, only to reeenter later as a lobbyist). Rather, Barbara Cegavske decided to sabotage Secretary of State (and current Attorney General candidate) Ross Miller's (D) election reform agenda by demanding voter suppression in lieu of SB 63, Miller's electronic verification bill that would have guaranteed secure elections without disenfranchising lawful Nevada voters. But for Cegavske, she didn't see the point of passing any kind of election related bills that didn't disenfranchise lawful Nevada voters (especially the ones least likely to vote for Republicans).
Now, Barbara Cegavske is running to succeed Ross Miller as Secretary of State. And of course, she's running on a platform of dismantling all the progress Miller and his predecessors made in protecting Nevadans' right to vote. (Start at 14:15 below for the good stuff.)
Basically, Barbara Cegavske wants to import the national G-O-TEA voter suppression agenda into Nevada. And if she wins next month, we can expect more of this here in The Silver State.
At the very least, Barbara Cegavske offers a stark contrast from her opponent, Kate Marshall (D).
Ultimately, this race comes down to this: How strongly do we value our right to vote? Do we think it's OK for well heeled out-of-state G-O-TEA aligned special interests to come in and install someone with a stated goal of preventing people from voting? Or do we want to ensure all legal Nevada voters have the chance to participate in the "small d" democratic process?
And he wasn't alone. In 2011, a slew of G-O-TEA legislators were firmly behind Sherwood's voter suppression agenda. One of them was State Senator Barbara Cegavske (R-Spring Valley).
And she didn't stop after Sherwood left the Legislature Building (as a legislator, only to reeenter later as a lobbyist). Rather, Barbara Cegavske decided to sabotage Secretary of State (and current Attorney General candidate) Ross Miller's (D) election reform agenda by demanding voter suppression in lieu of SB 63, Miller's electronic verification bill that would have guaranteed secure elections without disenfranchising lawful Nevada voters. But for Cegavske, she didn't see the point of passing any kind of election related bills that didn't disenfranchise lawful Nevada voters (especially the ones least likely to vote for Republicans).
Now, Barbara Cegavske is running to succeed Ross Miller as Secretary of State. And of course, she's running on a platform of dismantling all the progress Miller and his predecessors made in protecting Nevadans' right to vote. (Start at 14:15 below for the good stuff.)
Basically, Barbara Cegavske wants to import the national G-O-TEA voter suppression agenda into Nevada. And if she wins next month, we can expect more of this here in The Silver State.
At the very least, Barbara Cegavske offers a stark contrast from her opponent, Kate Marshall (D).
Ultimately, this race comes down to this: How strongly do we value our right to vote? Do we think it's OK for well heeled out-of-state G-O-TEA aligned special interests to come in and install someone with a stated goal of preventing people from voting? Or do we want to ensure all legal Nevada voters have the chance to participate in the "small d" democratic process?
The "Issue(s)" With Adam Laxalt
Wait, so "Gift-gate" is no longer a trending meme? Well, you heard it here first (as you, our faithful readers, usually do).
All of a sudden, Adam Laxalt (R) is searching for a new "political issue" to run on. So now, he's actually taking to the airwaves to outright lie about Ross Miller (D), his oppoent in the Attorney General race.
Believe it or not, Adam Laxalt is now claiming Ross Miller leaked the scathing legal evaluations from Laxalt's law firm. The trouble with Laxalt's claim is that there's no truth to it. Jon Ralston actually made the documents public, someone at Lewis & Roca leaked the documents to him, and Ross Miller's campaign had nothing to do with that.
It's funny that Laxalt wants to talk about those documents again. After all, those documents revealed to everyone exactly why Adam Laxalt (R) is woefully unprepared to serve as Nevada's top "legal eagle". So why does he want to remind us of the (lack of) qualifications he has for the office he's running for?
And why again is Adam Laxalt (again) refusing to run on his own "political issues"? Considering what's making headlines today, why won't Laxalt talk about his ongoing crusade against marriage equality and the overall Constitutional rights of LGBTQ Nevadans?
Doesn't he want to further explain his "most flawed case against Obamacare? And why wouldn't he want to impress us with his depth of knowledge on the state's open meeting laws?
Poor (little rich guy) Adam Laxalt. He just can't get over his many "political issues". But sadly for him, a whole lot of Nevadans are so over his campaign.
All of a sudden, Adam Laxalt (R) is searching for a new "political issue" to run on. So now, he's actually taking to the airwaves to outright lie about Ross Miller (D), his oppoent in the Attorney General race.
Believe it or not, Adam Laxalt is now claiming Ross Miller leaked the scathing legal evaluations from Laxalt's law firm. The trouble with Laxalt's claim is that there's no truth to it. Jon Ralston actually made the documents public, someone at Lewis & Roca leaked the documents to him, and Ross Miller's campaign had nothing to do with that.
It's funny that Laxalt wants to talk about those documents again. After all, those documents revealed to everyone exactly why Adam Laxalt (R) is woefully unprepared to serve as Nevada's top "legal eagle". So why does he want to remind us of the (lack of) qualifications he has for the office he's running for?
And why again is Adam Laxalt (again) refusing to run on his own "political issues"? Considering what's making headlines today, why won't Laxalt talk about his ongoing crusade against marriage equality and the overall Constitutional rights of LGBTQ Nevadans?
Doesn't he want to further explain his "most flawed case against Obamacare? And why wouldn't he want to impress us with his depth of knowledge on the state's open meeting laws?
Poor (little rich guy) Adam Laxalt. He just can't get over his many "political issues". But sadly for him, a whole lot of Nevadans are so over his campaign.
What We Have... & What We Will No Longer Be Denied
(So we're still waiting for the federal district court to issue an injunction barring any further enforcement of the Question 2 marriage ban. Once that happens, marriage equality will finally be a reality here in Nevada. However that day may come sooner than originally thought, as Ninth Circuit Judge Steven Reinhardt ordered a prompt issuance demanding the lower court issue that injunction ASAP. And Clark County will begin issuing marriage licenses at 2:00 PM today!
Here at Nevada Progressive, we've been waiting just over 5 years for this joyous occasion. To celebrate, we took to our archives and pulled out this gem from 2009. Oh, yes. That's right. We're going all the way back to the beginning of SB 283, and of this blog.
This not only explains what we've had for the past 5 years, but also why a few brave people decided to sue for full equality. And now, we're here. Hallelujah, the wait is finally over!)
Probably one of the biggest Nevada stories of 2009 was SB 283 becoming law. Sure, it's not marriage... But it's something so new for Nevada. For once, we've become somewhat of a leader on LGBTQ equality. On May 31, 2009, "Luv-Guv" Gibbons' veto was overrode and Nevada became the first Mountain West state to recognize LGBTQ relationships and offer "marriage-like rights".
OK, so those "marriage-like rights" still don't ensure health care benefits for everyone and they still do nothing at the federal level. That's the problem, but hopefully one day this will change and these "marriage-like rights" will actually become full civil marriage equality. But in the mean time, let's reflect on SB 283 with this piece I wrote here back in August.
.... As we've been talking about for some time, SB 283 will officially become law on October 1. This will bring about some major changes in the law, mostly helping us. However, there are some things that we need to remember. Secretary of State Ross Miller hasn't yet updated the Nevada SoS site to include a domestic partnership page (as California's SoS does).
First off, David Parks wasn't joking when he said that this is NOT marriage. While SB 283 provides for domestic partnerships (DPs) that are supposed to treat "domestic partnered" couples just like married spouses, let's remember that this theory doesn't always work out in practice. So while we celebrate the first major advance in civil rights in Nevada in decades, let's keep working toward the final goal of true civil marriage equality. Probably the most significant reminder of the challenges LGBT families face in this state is the section of SB 283 considering workplace health care benefits. Simply put, employers are NOT required under Nevada law to provide health care benefits to domestic partners of employees as they do to other employees' married spouses.
Fortunately it is at least optional, so you'll continue to receive DP benefits at work if your employer already provides them. And if your employer doesn't yet provide DP benefits, you can still try to convince them to do so. Just don't expect the State of Nevada to make them do so... At least until we can improve the DP law.
Nonetheless, SB 283 will change Nevada law for the better for our families. One major example of this will be in family law. Specifically, child custody laws will be improved to make it easier for gay & lesbian couples looking to have children to do so. And considering the current headaches LGBT families with children have, this is quite a welcome development. And in many other matters, our families will receive more legal protections. Hospital visitation (should the partner become ill) will be easier. Community property laws will apply to domestic partners. State tax benefits currently afforded to married spouses will also be extended to domestic partners.
But again, we must stress that DPs under SB 283 are not marriage and will not be treated by the federal government as such. Even if you and your partner file for a DP this fall, you will still not be able to file a joint federal tax return. You won't be able to receive any spousal benefits from the military or the VA. You won't be able to sponsor your partner for US citizenship or permanent residency if he/she is a foreign national. Unfortunately, DOMA still applies here as it does across the nation. This is why it's crucial that not only Nevada law change to give our families full equality, but that federal law change as well.
I hope this helps answer some of the questions you may have about SB 283 and its imminent implementation. I'll keep the Stonewall site updated with any new information from the Secretary of State, as well as new legal opinions on what will and will not be covered by SB 283.
Here at Nevada Progressive, we've been waiting just over 5 years for this joyous occasion. To celebrate, we took to our archives and pulled out this gem from 2009. Oh, yes. That's right. We're going all the way back to the beginning of SB 283, and of this blog.
This not only explains what we've had for the past 5 years, but also why a few brave people decided to sue for full equality. And now, we're here. Hallelujah, the wait is finally over!)
Probably one of the biggest Nevada stories of 2009 was SB 283 becoming law. Sure, it's not marriage... But it's something so new for Nevada. For once, we've become somewhat of a leader on LGBTQ equality. On May 31, 2009, "Luv-Guv" Gibbons' veto was overrode and Nevada became the first Mountain West state to recognize LGBTQ relationships and offer "marriage-like rights".
OK, so those "marriage-like rights" still don't ensure health care benefits for everyone and they still do nothing at the federal level. That's the problem, but hopefully one day this will change and these "marriage-like rights" will actually become full civil marriage equality. But in the mean time, let's reflect on SB 283 with this piece I wrote here back in August.
.... As we've been talking about for some time, SB 283 will officially become law on October 1. This will bring about some major changes in the law, mostly helping us. However, there are some things that we need to remember. Secretary of State Ross Miller hasn't yet updated the Nevada SoS site to include a domestic partnership page (as California's SoS does).
First off, David Parks wasn't joking when he said that this is NOT marriage. While SB 283 provides for domestic partnerships (DPs) that are supposed to treat "domestic partnered" couples just like married spouses, let's remember that this theory doesn't always work out in practice. So while we celebrate the first major advance in civil rights in Nevada in decades, let's keep working toward the final goal of true civil marriage equality. Probably the most significant reminder of the challenges LGBT families face in this state is the section of SB 283 considering workplace health care benefits. Simply put, employers are NOT required under Nevada law to provide health care benefits to domestic partners of employees as they do to other employees' married spouses.
Fortunately it is at least optional, so you'll continue to receive DP benefits at work if your employer already provides them. And if your employer doesn't yet provide DP benefits, you can still try to convince them to do so. Just don't expect the State of Nevada to make them do so... At least until we can improve the DP law.
Nonetheless, SB 283 will change Nevada law for the better for our families. One major example of this will be in family law. Specifically, child custody laws will be improved to make it easier for gay & lesbian couples looking to have children to do so. And considering the current headaches LGBT families with children have, this is quite a welcome development. And in many other matters, our families will receive more legal protections. Hospital visitation (should the partner become ill) will be easier. Community property laws will apply to domestic partners. State tax benefits currently afforded to married spouses will also be extended to domestic partners.
But again, we must stress that DPs under SB 283 are not marriage and will not be treated by the federal government as such. Even if you and your partner file for a DP this fall, you will still not be able to file a joint federal tax return. You won't be able to receive any spousal benefits from the military or the VA. You won't be able to sponsor your partner for US citizenship or permanent residency if he/she is a foreign national. Unfortunately, DOMA still applies here as it does across the nation. This is why it's crucial that not only Nevada law change to give our families full equality, but that federal law change as well.
I hope this helps answer some of the questions you may have about SB 283 and its imminent implementation. I'll keep the Stonewall site updated with any new information from the Secretary of State, as well as new legal opinions on what will and will not be covered by SB 283.
Monday, October 6, 2014
"People's Branch of Government"
We found them! They're here! They really do exist!
And here's what they have to say: Nothing. No, really. They're still saying nothing.
When spotted exiting a high dollar fundraiser, State Senate candidate Patricia Farley (R) replied with a mere "thank you" when asked her positions on important issues like gun safety and women's health care.
But hey, at least she politely refused to answer any public policy questions from the hoi polloi. When Becky Harris was asked, she just had her "paid muscle" shout "NO!" at the camera, then put his hand on the camera, then swiftly escort her away. Keep it klassy, Becky!
But hey, at least top secret Nevada Republican candidates Patricia Farley and Becky Harris finally appeared in front of any camera. We're still awaiting the return of State Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson (R) to the public view. We know he has time to accept fake awards. Why doesn't he have time to debate Teresa Lowry on his favorite media pundit's TV show?
No wonder why even one "newspaper" columnist called Roberson and his hand-picked running mates "spineless". They refuse to debate. They refuse to answer any questions in public. They won't even come clean on what they actually stand for.
So why are they even running for office? Have they even looked at the job description for the office they're seeking? Right on top of the Nevada Legislature's web site is this slogan: "The People's Branch of Government". Roberson, Harris, and Farley are all running to serve in this "People's Branch of Government". Each of them is running to serve roughly 129,000 people in Carson City.
So why aren't they acting like it? Why are they hiding? If they want to represent people in state government, they need to stop hiding from the very people they're asking for votes.
And here's what they have to say: Nothing. No, really. They're still saying nothing.
When spotted exiting a high dollar fundraiser, State Senate candidate Patricia Farley (R) replied with a mere "thank you" when asked her positions on important issues like gun safety and women's health care.
But hey, at least she politely refused to answer any public policy questions from the hoi polloi. When Becky Harris was asked, she just had her "paid muscle" shout "NO!" at the camera, then put his hand on the camera, then swiftly escort her away. Keep it klassy, Becky!
But hey, at least top secret Nevada Republican candidates Patricia Farley and Becky Harris finally appeared in front of any camera. We're still awaiting the return of State Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson (R) to the public view. We know he has time to accept fake awards. Why doesn't he have time to debate Teresa Lowry on his favorite media pundit's TV show?
No wonder why even one "newspaper" columnist called Roberson and his hand-picked running mates "spineless". They refuse to debate. They refuse to answer any questions in public. They won't even come clean on what they actually stand for.
So why are they even running for office? Have they even looked at the job description for the office they're seeking? Right on top of the Nevada Legislature's web site is this slogan: "The People's Branch of Government". Roberson, Harris, and Farley are all running to serve in this "People's Branch of Government". Each of them is running to serve roughly 129,000 people in Carson City.
So why aren't they acting like it? Why are they hiding? If they want to represent people in state government, they need to stop hiding from the very people they're asking for votes.
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?
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?
Pathetic
Here's what you need to remember about the most important race in this very important election: Something or nothing. That's the choice we have this month. We can do something, or we can continue to go along with nothing.
This is what you need to remember about Question 3. The Education Initiative (TEI) gives us the opportunity to finally do what our elected "leaders" have failed to do in Carson City for far too long. But if voters say no to Question 3/TEI this fall, there's no guarantee we'll see any of the changes TEI's opponents are now promising.
This is why we laughed yesterday. For some reason, Las Vegas Sun publisher Brian Greenspun wants us to believe LVGEA's horrifically pathetic Whitney Houston lip sync is somehow indicative of them "trying to craft a plan that will grow our public school system into what we need to be a 21st-century competitor". Huh? So now, we're supposed to believe the same people who've opposed every attempt at progressive tax reform and strengthening public education are now "finding common ground" with the very people they've been fighting tooth and nail all this time? While we're all for legal marijuana, perhaps Mr. Greenspun needs to put down the "magic brownies" before taking calls from anyone atWizard of Oz Global HQ LVGEA.
This is why we laughed yesterday. For some reason, the local "newspaper" (of ill repute) decided to do an in-house ad against TEI. No really, the "newspaper" went there... Again! Now, we're just wondering when the "newspaper" will start slut shaming TEI proponents and publishing teachers' home addresses.
It's a shame we have to rely on "news media" like these newspapers. One publishes the classic "bid'ness establishment" fantasy, while the other is so desperate to fill ad space that it has to publish its own ads. While both still employ numerous great reporters, the leadership of both continue to value access over enlightenment.
Today is one of those days when we wish CityLife was still around to read both of the newspapers to high filth. But since that paragon of true journalistic virtue is no longer with us, it's now up to us to state the obvious. And what's obvious to all thinking Nevadans today is that both Southern Nevada newspapers looked like pathetic imitations of their former selves with their craptastic editorials.
The only thing more pathetic than these newspaper editorials of questionable value is No on 3's campaign of half-@$$ed fearmongering and laughable distortions. In fact, this may ultimately prove to be valuable... To the Yes on 3 campaign. If this is truly all No on 3 has, this says everything about why TEI landed on our ballots in the first place.
This is what you need to remember about Question 3. The Education Initiative (TEI) gives us the opportunity to finally do what our elected "leaders" have failed to do in Carson City for far too long. But if voters say no to Question 3/TEI this fall, there's no guarantee we'll see any of the changes TEI's opponents are now promising.
This is why we laughed yesterday. For some reason, Las Vegas Sun publisher Brian Greenspun wants us to believe LVGEA's horrifically pathetic Whitney Houston lip sync is somehow indicative of them "trying to craft a plan that will grow our public school system into what we need to be a 21st-century competitor". Huh? So now, we're supposed to believe the same people who've opposed every attempt at progressive tax reform and strengthening public education are now "finding common ground" with the very people they've been fighting tooth and nail all this time? While we're all for legal marijuana, perhaps Mr. Greenspun needs to put down the "magic brownies" before taking calls from anyone at
This is why we laughed yesterday. For some reason, the local "newspaper" (of ill repute) decided to do an in-house ad against TEI. No really, the "newspaper" went there... Again! Now, we're just wondering when the "newspaper" will start slut shaming TEI proponents and publishing teachers' home addresses.
It's a shame we have to rely on "news media" like these newspapers. One publishes the classic "bid'ness establishment" fantasy, while the other is so desperate to fill ad space that it has to publish its own ads. While both still employ numerous great reporters, the leadership of both continue to value access over enlightenment.
Today is one of those days when we wish CityLife was still around to read both of the newspapers to high filth. But since that paragon of true journalistic virtue is no longer with us, it's now up to us to state the obvious. And what's obvious to all thinking Nevadans today is that both Southern Nevada newspapers looked like pathetic imitations of their former selves with their craptastic editorials.
The only thing more pathetic than these newspaper editorials of questionable value is No on 3's campaign of half-@$$ed fearmongering and laughable distortions. In fact, this may ultimately prove to be valuable... To the Yes on 3 campaign. If this is truly all No on 3 has, this says everything about why TEI landed on our ballots in the first place.
Thursday, October 2, 2014
Justice Denied... No More?
Yesterday, legal observers across the nation were stunned. This was far from expected.
In a Florida courtroom, Michael Dunn was found guilty of the first degree murder of Jordan Davis. The jury had deadlocked on this charge during the original trial, though they ultimately agreed to convict Dunn of attempting to murder the other passengers in the car Dunn had shot into due to a dispute over "loud music". But this time, the jury only took 6 hours to reach a verdict.
Like George Zimmerman, Michael Dunn used Florida's "Stand Your Ground" statute as his legal defense. Ever since the NRA and ALEC began promoting "'Stand Your Ground' model legislation" across the nation, more of these cases have popped up in the states that have adopted this "model legislation". We even have a "Stand Your Ground" case right here in Nevada, as Wayne Burgarello is using AB 321 as his legal defense in his murder trial in Reno.
Wayne Burgarello's next court date is set for October 15. He's been released on $150,000 bail. And he's plead not guilty in the murder of Cody Devine and the attempted murder of another woman at Burgarello's abandoned duplex. Burgarello claims he "stood his ground against trespassers", but Devine's family members say Cody didn't even know the duplex he & his female friend were staying in was Burgarello's.
Many have been wondering how difficult it may be for the Washoe County District Attorney's Office to convict Burgarello, especially considering the "ace in the hole" he has in AB 321. But now that a Florida jury has convicted Michael Dunn for murdering Jordan Davis despite "Stand Your Ground", perhaps there's reason for Cody Devine's family to continue hoping for justice here in Nevada.
Still, it's concerning to realize how difficult it is to prosecute murder cases in Florida, in Nevada, and in other "Stand Your Ground" states. It's hard for us to understand how George Zimmerman, Michael Dunn, or Wayne Burgarello to claim "self defense" in any other capacity. Perhaps the outcome of the Burgarello trial will be more like Dunn's and less like Zimmerman's. Or perhaps, the reverse will be true.
Regardless, we will likely see more AB 321/"Stand Your Ground" cases as time marches on. And going forward, the question for Governor Brian Sandoval (R-NRA) and the Nevada Legislature will be: "Did you agree to 'model legislation' that just let someone get away with murder"?
In a Florida courtroom, Michael Dunn was found guilty of the first degree murder of Jordan Davis. The jury had deadlocked on this charge during the original trial, though they ultimately agreed to convict Dunn of attempting to murder the other passengers in the car Dunn had shot into due to a dispute over "loud music". But this time, the jury only took 6 hours to reach a verdict.
Like George Zimmerman, Michael Dunn used Florida's "Stand Your Ground" statute as his legal defense. Ever since the NRA and ALEC began promoting "'Stand Your Ground' model legislation" across the nation, more of these cases have popped up in the states that have adopted this "model legislation". We even have a "Stand Your Ground" case right here in Nevada, as Wayne Burgarello is using AB 321 as his legal defense in his murder trial in Reno.
Wayne Burgarello's next court date is set for October 15. He's been released on $150,000 bail. And he's plead not guilty in the murder of Cody Devine and the attempted murder of another woman at Burgarello's abandoned duplex. Burgarello claims he "stood his ground against trespassers", but Devine's family members say Cody didn't even know the duplex he & his female friend were staying in was Burgarello's.
Many have been wondering how difficult it may be for the Washoe County District Attorney's Office to convict Burgarello, especially considering the "ace in the hole" he has in AB 321. But now that a Florida jury has convicted Michael Dunn for murdering Jordan Davis despite "Stand Your Ground", perhaps there's reason for Cody Devine's family to continue hoping for justice here in Nevada.
Still, it's concerning to realize how difficult it is to prosecute murder cases in Florida, in Nevada, and in other "Stand Your Ground" states. It's hard for us to understand how George Zimmerman, Michael Dunn, or Wayne Burgarello to claim "self defense" in any other capacity. Perhaps the outcome of the Burgarello trial will be more like Dunn's and less like Zimmerman's. Or perhaps, the reverse will be true.
Regardless, we will likely see more AB 321/"Stand Your Ground" cases as time marches on. And going forward, the question for Governor Brian Sandoval (R-NRA) and the Nevada Legislature will be: "Did you agree to 'model legislation' that just let someone get away with murder"?
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Question 3: Something v. Nothing
We're really trying to be nice this week. We swear. Here, we'll show you how nice we're trying to be. Let's consider Jon Ralston's commentary last night on The Education Initiative (TEI).
First off, let's point out what he got right. Yes, this initiative is not perfect. In fact, some progressives were originally concerned about TEI because it's not comprehensive and far-reaching enough. In an ideal world, we could consider something like California's Prop 30... No, scratch that. In an ideal world, our Legislature could pass a comprehensive tax package like California's Prop 30 without having to resort to "ballot box budgeting".
But as we've been saying here for some time, we don't live in an ideal world. Even Mr. Ralston himself seems to understand that now. We've waited forever for the Governor & Legislature to agree to any sort of major tax reform, only to be rewarded with bupkes. And because of that darned single subject rule for ballot initiatives, We the People are expressly forbidden from considering any kind of comprehensive tax reform (like California's Prop 30) as a ballot initiative.
So that leaves us with the choice of TEI... Or nothing. And here's where Ralston's onto something. For all the "We Believe Our Children Are Our Future!" talk TEI's ("TEA" fueled) opponents have been ramping up in recent weeks, they've provided no real alternative. And that's because their true preferred alternative is nothing. That's why they've prevented any real "conversations" on tax reform in Carson City. And that's why the only "alternatives" they can present when asked are dead horses, straw men, and a whole lot of meaningless hot air.
This is why Question 3 may actually be the most important item on our ballot this fall. And without a doubt, it provides a very compelling case to vote this fall. We may very well hold our state's future in our hands.
So what will we do with it? Sure, we can play semantics games. We can parse over imaginary bills and theoretical scenarios. We can discuss the philosophy of tax policy. Or we can actually do something for a change. We can actually do what our elected "leaders" have failed to do. We can say yes to Question 3 and stop failing our children & our communities.
First off, let's point out what he got right. Yes, this initiative is not perfect. In fact, some progressives were originally concerned about TEI because it's not comprehensive and far-reaching enough. In an ideal world, we could consider something like California's Prop 30... No, scratch that. In an ideal world, our Legislature could pass a comprehensive tax package like California's Prop 30 without having to resort to "ballot box budgeting".
But as we've been saying here for some time, we don't live in an ideal world. Even Mr. Ralston himself seems to understand that now. We've waited forever for the Governor & Legislature to agree to any sort of major tax reform, only to be rewarded with bupkes. And because of that darned single subject rule for ballot initiatives, We the People are expressly forbidden from considering any kind of comprehensive tax reform (like California's Prop 30) as a ballot initiative.
So that leaves us with the choice of TEI... Or nothing. And here's where Ralston's onto something. For all the "We Believe Our Children Are Our Future!" talk TEI's ("TEA" fueled) opponents have been ramping up in recent weeks, they've provided no real alternative. And that's because their true preferred alternative is nothing. That's why they've prevented any real "conversations" on tax reform in Carson City. And that's why the only "alternatives" they can present when asked are dead horses, straw men, and a whole lot of meaningless hot air.
This is why Question 3 may actually be the most important item on our ballot this fall. And without a doubt, it provides a very compelling case to vote this fall. We may very well hold our state's future in our hands.
So what will we do with it? Sure, we can play semantics games. We can parse over imaginary bills and theoretical scenarios. We can discuss the philosophy of tax policy. Or we can actually do something for a change. We can actually do what our elected "leaders" have failed to do. We can say yes to Question 3 and stop failing our children & our communities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)