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.
Showing posts with label ballot initiative. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ballot initiative. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Sunday, September 21, 2014
Break the Cycle (of FAIL This Fall!)
(Today, we felt it necessary to take another trip back into the Nevada Progressive vault. This piece is from July 2013. While other media pundits use their Sunday columns ro speculate on political personalities and misleading "optics", we figured now's a good time to remind everyone of actual reality. Oh, and if you're still looking for a "reason to vote this year", you're officially on notice.)
[In 2012], the typical (corporate lobbyist) powers that be in Carson City were suing their darndest to kill The Education Initiative. Ultimately, they didn't succeed.
[Last] year, they then took Carson City by storm to kill it. Ultimately... They didn't succeed at that, either. Although the Nevada Legislature declined to pass IP 1, this only means We the People will have the last word on The Education Initiative next year.
We've known for some time that Nevada's tax system is broken. And we've known for some time that Nevada's constant underfunding of public education is hurting our economy. And while Governor Brian Sandoval (R) wants us to believe his status quo approach will let us "have it all" (while paying for none), even members of his own administration can no longer deny reality.
Perhaps the biggest disappointment for progressives this year was the Legislature's failure to break the fiscal status quo. Despite many past promises of change, and even a surprise announcement from another top Nevada Republican, we ended up with yet another biennium of the same old status quo. How can we ever break this cycle of FAIL?
We'll uncover the answer [on November 5]. That's the difference this time. And this may be the one chance Nevadans have to break the cycle of FAIL.
Sure, this may not be the ideal way to enact major change to the tax system. But as long as the (corporate lobbyist) powers that be in Carson City continue to refuse to even consider change, this may be the only way to begin saving our state. And no matter how much Governor Brian Sandoval and his inner circle (of corporate lobbyists) protest, they can't hide the fact that their demands for endless status quo led to this.
[This fall], Nevada will finally have the opportunity to break the cycle. Nevada will have the opportunity to better fund our schools and put in place the foundation for a better economic future. This opportunity will present itself on our ballot next year. Will we take it?
[In 2012], the typical (corporate lobbyist) powers that be in Carson City were suing their darndest to kill The Education Initiative. Ultimately, they didn't succeed.
[Last] year, they then took Carson City by storm to kill it. Ultimately... They didn't succeed at that, either. Although the Nevada Legislature declined to pass IP 1, this only means We the People will have the last word on The Education Initiative next year.
We've known for some time that Nevada's tax system is broken. And we've known for some time that Nevada's constant underfunding of public education is hurting our economy. And while Governor Brian Sandoval (R) wants us to believe his status quo approach will let us "have it all" (while paying for none), even members of his own administration can no longer deny reality.
Perhaps the biggest disappointment for progressives this year was the Legislature's failure to break the fiscal status quo. Despite many past promises of change, and even a surprise announcement from another top Nevada Republican, we ended up with yet another biennium of the same old status quo. How can we ever break this cycle of FAIL?
We'll uncover the answer [on November 5]. That's the difference this time. And this may be the one chance Nevadans have to break the cycle of FAIL.
Sure, this may not be the ideal way to enact major change to the tax system. But as long as the (corporate lobbyist) powers that be in Carson City continue to refuse to even consider change, this may be the only way to begin saving our state. And no matter how much Governor Brian Sandoval and his inner circle (of corporate lobbyists) protest, they can't hide the fact that their demands for endless status quo led to this.
[This fall], Nevada will finally have the opportunity to break the cycle. Nevada will have the opportunity to better fund our schools and put in place the foundation for a better economic future. This opportunity will present itself on our ballot next year. Will we take it?
Wednesday, August 20, 2014
"Doom"
It's doom! Doom, they tell you. We're all doomed! And that horrible, evil, no-good margin tax is to blame...
For nothing? Oh, yes. That's right. The Coalition to Defeat the Margin Tax Initiative (aka Nevada's corporate welfare kings) just released a report that was supposed to annihilate The Education Initiative (TEI) with visions of doom and gloom.
And the upshot? Nothing. No really, the best the anti-TEI coalition's commissioned UNLV tax study could produce was inconclusive garblety-goop.
Yet in the mean time, TEI proponents commissioned their own UNLV tax study. And the result of that? Surprise, better education funding means a better economy.
Now of course, this seems confusing. How can two studies from the same institution produce completely different results?
Actually, the results here aren't all that different. Even the anti-TEI study conceded that TEI will generate $800 million annually for Nevada public schools if passed. And it didn't offer any definitive findings on economic impact. So that doesn't really challenge the results offered by the pro-TEI study showing actual economic benefits to passing TEI.
Here's what we already know: The status quo is failing us. For all the talk of Nevada's "pro-business climate", our economy hasn't benefitted from it at all. In fact, we're consistently ranked as having one of the worst business climates in the nation.
And why's that? As Elaine Wynn once described Nevada's public education system, "We are grossly underfunded." And as long as we continue underfunding our public schools, we're missing out on economic opportunities. As long as we're shortchanging our schools, we're sabotaging ourselves.
This is why TEI opponents have resorted to silly spin and even sillier straw men. After decades of empty promises, they've failed to provide any real solutions for public education and longer term economic development. But now that TEI (aka Question 3) is on the ballot, they're going all in to kill it... Because they simply don't want to pay their fair share like all the rest of us must.
It's doom, all right. It's doom... For nothing but the status quo. Keep this in mind whenever you hear the usual (corporate lobbyist) suspects scream "DOOM!" over that horrible, evil, no-good margin tax that can actually end the gross underfunding of K-12 public education in this state.
For nothing? Oh, yes. That's right. The Coalition to Defeat the Margin Tax Initiative (aka Nevada's corporate welfare kings) just released a report that was supposed to annihilate The Education Initiative (TEI) with visions of doom and gloom.
And the upshot? Nothing. No really, the best the anti-TEI coalition's commissioned UNLV tax study could produce was inconclusive garblety-goop.
Yet in the mean time, TEI proponents commissioned their own UNLV tax study. And the result of that? Surprise, better education funding means a better economy.
►TEI actually will increase economic activity and create jobs, including as many as 13,000 in 2016 and 10,400 jobs in 2017.
►The positive impacts from new government spending more than offset the negative impacts from the tax.
►Overall, the study concludes: Nevada’s GDP would be boosted by $630 million to $1,020 million in 2016 and $480 million to $790 million in 2017.
Now of course, this seems confusing. How can two studies from the same institution produce completely different results?
Actually, the results here aren't all that different. Even the anti-TEI study conceded that TEI will generate $800 million annually for Nevada public schools if passed. And it didn't offer any definitive findings on economic impact. So that doesn't really challenge the results offered by the pro-TEI study showing actual economic benefits to passing TEI.
Here's what we already know: The status quo is failing us. For all the talk of Nevada's "pro-business climate", our economy hasn't benefitted from it at all. In fact, we're consistently ranked as having one of the worst business climates in the nation.
And why's that? As Elaine Wynn once described Nevada's public education system, "We are grossly underfunded." And as long as we continue underfunding our public schools, we're missing out on economic opportunities. As long as we're shortchanging our schools, we're sabotaging ourselves.
This is why TEI opponents have resorted to silly spin and even sillier straw men. After decades of empty promises, they've failed to provide any real solutions for public education and longer term economic development. But now that TEI (aka Question 3) is on the ballot, they're going all in to kill it... Because they simply don't want to pay their fair share like all the rest of us must.
It's doom, all right. It's doom... For nothing but the status quo. Keep this in mind whenever you hear the usual (corporate lobbyist) suspects scream "DOOM!" over that horrible, evil, no-good margin tax that can actually end the gross underfunding of K-12 public education in this state.
Wednesday, August 6, 2014
Daring to Act
Last year, a bill emerged that seemed to upend the traditional balance of power in Carson City. It also offered to close loopholes that allow criminals to obtain lethal firearms. That bill was SB 221. And State Senator Justin Jones (D-Enterprise) authored that bill.
SB 221 passed the Legislature, but Governor Brian Sandoval (R) vetoed the bill despite its broad public support. And now, Nevada Republicans are targeting Senator Justin Jones as he runs for reelection to a full term. (He was first elected in 2012 to fill the remainder of Elizabeth Halseth's [R-Enterprise] term after she resigned from office.)
Even though polls have shown very strong public support for expanding background checks for gun purchases made at gun shows and online, the NRA and gun industry are pouring money into the campaign to defeat background checks initiatives meant to do what Congress refused to do on the federal level last year. And even though Nevada's own background checks initiative has just been cleared by a Carson City district court to begin collecting signatures soon, the gun lobby and G-O-TEA political operatives still want to "make an example" of Senator Jones for daring to even propose SB 221 last year.
This may prove to be a turning point for both the politics and policy of gun violence. For decades, the NRA and the rest of the gun lobby have demanded complete fealty from state and federal legislators. And for decades, that's exactly what they've received from state and federal legislators.
But last year, something changed. The reality of gun violence hit home hard. And that was even enough to convince US Senator Harry Reid (D), someone who had sported a "B" rating from the NRA, to reevaluate federal gun safety policies. But when Nevada's other US Senator joined the G-O-TEA led filibuster against a mere background checks bill, Nevadans then looked to the state government to see if we could at least fix this problem at the state level.
State Senator Jones and gun safety advocates rounded up enough votes for SB 221 to pass... Then Governor Sandoval vetoed it. Yet even as the background checks initiative goes to the people for consideration, the gun lobby still wants to "make an example" of Senator Jones for daring to act. The next few months will tell whether they can maintain a stranglehold over this state. The next few months will tell whether Nevadans may actually turn around and dare to act on gun violence despite the gun lobby's extensive and expensive political threats.
SB 221 passed the Legislature, but Governor Brian Sandoval (R) vetoed the bill despite its broad public support. And now, Nevada Republicans are targeting Senator Justin Jones as he runs for reelection to a full term. (He was first elected in 2012 to fill the remainder of Elizabeth Halseth's [R-Enterprise] term after she resigned from office.)
Even though polls have shown very strong public support for expanding background checks for gun purchases made at gun shows and online, the NRA and gun industry are pouring money into the campaign to defeat background checks initiatives meant to do what Congress refused to do on the federal level last year. And even though Nevada's own background checks initiative has just been cleared by a Carson City district court to begin collecting signatures soon, the gun lobby and G-O-TEA political operatives still want to "make an example" of Senator Jones for daring to even propose SB 221 last year.
This may prove to be a turning point for both the politics and policy of gun violence. For decades, the NRA and the rest of the gun lobby have demanded complete fealty from state and federal legislators. And for decades, that's exactly what they've received from state and federal legislators.
But last year, something changed. The reality of gun violence hit home hard. And that was even enough to convince US Senator Harry Reid (D), someone who had sported a "B" rating from the NRA, to reevaluate federal gun safety policies. But when Nevada's other US Senator joined the G-O-TEA led filibuster against a mere background checks bill, Nevadans then looked to the state government to see if we could at least fix this problem at the state level.
State Senator Jones and gun safety advocates rounded up enough votes for SB 221 to pass... Then Governor Sandoval vetoed it. Yet even as the background checks initiative goes to the people for consideration, the gun lobby still wants to "make an example" of Senator Jones for daring to act. The next few months will tell whether they can maintain a stranglehold over this state. The next few months will tell whether Nevadans may actually turn around and dare to act on gun violence despite the gun lobby's extensive and expensive political threats.
Thursday, July 24, 2014
Here's the Solution.
Yesterday, it offered its latest "solution" for "security". And yes, that "solution" involves more guns. The NRA wouldn't have it any other way, even if that means more guns in schools.
Yet while the NRA is busy "rebranding", gun safety advocates seem to be busy preparing to win some elections.
Last night, we dropped by an OFA phone bank. And this wasn't just any phone bank. Southern Nevada volunteers were calling into Washington State for I-594.
Why? Initiative 594 (I-594) is the background checks initiative on this fall's ballot there. Just like Nevada, a handful of politicians in Olympia (Washington's State Capital) blocked a background checks bill that had strong public support. So after the bill died in the State Capitol, gun safety advocates gathered more than enough signatures to place I-594 on the 2014 general election ballot.
Last night, OFA volunteers in Henderson were calling voters in Washington State to explain I-594 and ask them to vote for this background checks initiative. The NRA & gun industry have been hoping that lower midterm turnout and snazzy "media strategy" would be enough to kill I-594. But last night, volunteers were calling voters the NRA wasn't counting on to vote. And they were sharing with these voters the message the NRA doesn't want them to hear.
While the NRA wants to continue debating the "philosophy" of "well regulated militia" and trying to redefine the English language, the rest of America wants an end to the bloody reign of #gunfail. The rest of America is looking to end the armed madness that senselessly threatens so many lives.
#GunSense will be on the ballot in Washington State this year... And may then be on the ballot in Nevada in 2016. And perhaps in more states, voters will finally have the opportunity to do what the NRA has forbidden so many politicians from even considering. Here may finally be the solution concerned citizens have been looking for.
Yet while the NRA is busy "rebranding", gun safety advocates seem to be busy preparing to win some elections.
Last night, we dropped by an OFA phone bank. And this wasn't just any phone bank. Southern Nevada volunteers were calling into Washington State for I-594.
Why? Initiative 594 (I-594) is the background checks initiative on this fall's ballot there. Just like Nevada, a handful of politicians in Olympia (Washington's State Capital) blocked a background checks bill that had strong public support. So after the bill died in the State Capitol, gun safety advocates gathered more than enough signatures to place I-594 on the 2014 general election ballot.
Last night, OFA volunteers in Henderson were calling voters in Washington State to explain I-594 and ask them to vote for this background checks initiative. The NRA & gun industry have been hoping that lower midterm turnout and snazzy "media strategy" would be enough to kill I-594. But last night, volunteers were calling voters the NRA wasn't counting on to vote. And they were sharing with these voters the message the NRA doesn't want them to hear.
While the NRA wants to continue debating the "philosophy" of "well regulated militia" and trying to redefine the English language, the rest of America wants an end to the bloody reign of #gunfail. The rest of America is looking to end the armed madness that senselessly threatens so many lives.
#GunSense will be on the ballot in Washington State this year... And may then be on the ballot in Nevada in 2016. And perhaps in more states, voters will finally have the opportunity to do what the NRA has forbidden so many politicians from even considering. Here may finally be the solution concerned citizens have been looking for.
Monday, June 23, 2014
From #gunfail to #GunSense
Just over a year ago, the unthinkable happened. Governor Brian Sandoval (R-NRA) vetoed SB 221. In doing so, Governor Sandoval denied Nevada the chance to close the back doors that dangerous criminals utilize to obtain dangerous weapons.
Since Governor Sandoval's veto of SB 221, we've experienced the consequences of that. We witnessed the embarrassing Reno Police back alley gun sale. We noticed the shocking near miss at Thunder Down Under on the Las Vegas Strip. We experienced the horrific slaughter of Las Vegas Metro Police Officers Alyn Beck & Igor Soldo and civilian Joseph Robert Wilcox. And these are just a few high profile examples of what happens when we allow so many lethal weapons to fall into all the wrong hands.
For years, we've been accustomed to the NRA calling the shots in Carson City. But now, there's a chance that may soon change.
And why's that? While we were in Reno last Friday, gun safety advocates filed a petition with the Secretary of State's Las Vegas office for a background checks initiative with language very similar to that of SB 221.
Last year, the NRA & its G-O-TEA allies pulled every political stunt imaginable to smother SB 221 to death. And when none of that worked, Governor Sandoval vetoed it. They won't be able to try any of that this time.
This time, especially should gun safety advocates collect enough signatures to submit this to the Legislature next year, they won't be able to do that. This time, they will have to address the actual policy at hand instead of hiding behind straw men. And this time, they will need to answer to the long trail of #gunfail that they've enabled by doing nothing as so many Nevadans were losing their lives to senseless gun violence.
There's a good chance that at least 101,667 Nevadans have had it with the rampant #gunfail. And there's a good chance even more are ready to do what Governor Sandoval refused to do, which is to allow for some #GunSense to start saving lives.
Since Governor Sandoval's veto of SB 221, we've experienced the consequences of that. We witnessed the embarrassing Reno Police back alley gun sale. We noticed the shocking near miss at Thunder Down Under on the Las Vegas Strip. We experienced the horrific slaughter of Las Vegas Metro Police Officers Alyn Beck & Igor Soldo and civilian Joseph Robert Wilcox. And these are just a few high profile examples of what happens when we allow so many lethal weapons to fall into all the wrong hands.
For years, we've been accustomed to the NRA calling the shots in Carson City. But now, there's a chance that may soon change.
And why's that? While we were in Reno last Friday, gun safety advocates filed a petition with the Secretary of State's Las Vegas office for a background checks initiative with language very similar to that of SB 221.
Last year, the NRA & its G-O-TEA allies pulled every political stunt imaginable to smother SB 221 to death. And when none of that worked, Governor Sandoval vetoed it. They won't be able to try any of that this time.
This time, especially should gun safety advocates collect enough signatures to submit this to the Legislature next year, they won't be able to do that. This time, they will have to address the actual policy at hand instead of hiding behind straw men. And this time, they will need to answer to the long trail of #gunfail that they've enabled by doing nothing as so many Nevadans were losing their lives to senseless gun violence.
There's a good chance that at least 101,667 Nevadans have had it with the rampant #gunfail. And there's a good chance even more are ready to do what Governor Sandoval refused to do, which is to allow for some #GunSense to start saving lives.
One More Step
In 2011, a constitutional amendment was introduced in the Nevada Legislature. And somehow, it managed to pass that year despite the acrimony and frustration that came to define the 76th session.
Fast forward to 2013. Even though SJR 15 had managed to pass Round 1, Round 2 was suddenly in doubt. The mining industry had doubled up its lobbying campaign, and it looked like that was about to reap mining conglomerates a huge payday. But then, another strange twist occurred.
As soon as it became a rather eye-popping attempt at "Republican rebranding" and a "no brainer" tax reform plan with actual bipartisan support, Legislature leaders had no choice but to stand back and let SJR 15 sail its way onto the 2014 general election ballot.
Today, the Interim Legislative Commission approved the final ballot language for SJR 15. Despite some last minute mining industry shenanigans and an awkward argument over the physical impact of mining, the Commission ultimately approved the SJR 15 ballot language 11-1.
So now, there's just one more step left for SJR 15. "We the People" must vote on it this fall.
Ever since the founding of this state, the issue of mining taxation has been a rather contentious, irritating, and occasionally even nauseating one. In a way, it's quite fitting that the 150th anniversary of Nevada statehood will be remembered for the people's vote on fixing a long debated error in our state's Constitution. How better to celebrate 150 years of Nevada than to take one more step to on the path to a functioning state government and a more equitable tax system?
Fast forward to 2013. Even though SJR 15 had managed to pass Round 1, Round 2 was suddenly in doubt. The mining industry had doubled up its lobbying campaign, and it looked like that was about to reap mining conglomerates a huge payday. But then, another strange twist occurred.
As soon as it became a rather eye-popping attempt at "Republican rebranding" and a "no brainer" tax reform plan with actual bipartisan support, Legislature leaders had no choice but to stand back and let SJR 15 sail its way onto the 2014 general election ballot.
Today, the Interim Legislative Commission approved the final ballot language for SJR 15. Despite some last minute mining industry shenanigans and an awkward argument over the physical impact of mining, the Commission ultimately approved the SJR 15 ballot language 11-1.
So now, there's just one more step left for SJR 15. "We the People" must vote on it this fall.
Ever since the founding of this state, the issue of mining taxation has been a rather contentious, irritating, and occasionally even nauseating one. In a way, it's quite fitting that the 150th anniversary of Nevada statehood will be remembered for the people's vote on fixing a long debated error in our state's Constitution. How better to celebrate 150 years of Nevada than to take one more step to on the path to a functioning state government and a more equitable tax system?
Monday, July 8, 2013
Break the Cycle.
Last year, the typical (corporate lobbyist) powers that be in Carson City were suing their darndest to kill The Education Initiative. Ultimately, they didn't succeed.
Earlier this year, they then took Carson City by storm to kill it. Ultimately... They didn't succeed at that, either. Although the Nevada Legislature declined to pass IP 1, this only means We the People will have the last word on The Education Initiative next year.
We've known for some time that Nevada's tax system is broken. And we've known for some time that Nevada's constant underfunding of public education is hurting our economy. And while Governor Brian Sandoval (R) wants us to believe his status quo approach will let us "have it all" (while paying for none), even members of his own administration can no longer deny reality.
Perhaps the biggest disappointment for progressives this year was the Legislature's failure to break the fiscal status quo. Despite many past promises of change, and even a surprise announcement from another top Nevada Republican, we ended up with yet another biennium of the same old status quo. How can we ever break this cycle of FAIL?
We'll uncover the answer next year. That's the difference this time. And this may be the one chance Nevadans have to break the cycle of FAIL.
Sure, this may not be the ideal way to enact major change to the tax system. But as long as the (corporate lobbyist) powers that be in Carson City continue to refuse to even consider change, this may be the only way to begin saving our state. And no matter how much Governor Brian Sandoval and his inner circle (of corporate lobbyists) protest, they can't hide the fact that their demands for endless status quo led to this.
Next year, Nevada will finally have the opportunity to break the cycle. Nevada will have the opportunity to better fund our schools and put in place the foundation for a better economic future. This opportunity will present itself on our ballot next year. Will we take it?
Earlier this year, they then took Carson City by storm to kill it. Ultimately... They didn't succeed at that, either. Although the Nevada Legislature declined to pass IP 1, this only means We the People will have the last word on The Education Initiative next year.
We've known for some time that Nevada's tax system is broken. And we've known for some time that Nevada's constant underfunding of public education is hurting our economy. And while Governor Brian Sandoval (R) wants us to believe his status quo approach will let us "have it all" (while paying for none), even members of his own administration can no longer deny reality.
Perhaps the biggest disappointment for progressives this year was the Legislature's failure to break the fiscal status quo. Despite many past promises of change, and even a surprise announcement from another top Nevada Republican, we ended up with yet another biennium of the same old status quo. How can we ever break this cycle of FAIL?
We'll uncover the answer next year. That's the difference this time. And this may be the one chance Nevadans have to break the cycle of FAIL.
Sure, this may not be the ideal way to enact major change to the tax system. But as long as the (corporate lobbyist) powers that be in Carson City continue to refuse to even consider change, this may be the only way to begin saving our state. And no matter how much Governor Brian Sandoval and his inner circle (of corporate lobbyists) protest, they can't hide the fact that their demands for endless status quo led to this.
Next year, Nevada will finally have the opportunity to break the cycle. Nevada will have the opportunity to better fund our schools and put in place the foundation for a better economic future. This opportunity will present itself on our ballot next year. Will we take it?
Friday, March 15, 2013
To the Ballot Box We Go
So it's over. It's finally over. Today was the deadline, and The Education Initiative couldn't even get a vote.
So it's... Actually only just begun.
Remember what we discussed when the 76th session was coming to a close in June 2011? This was bound to happen. And now, it's finally happening.
Funny enough, a tax plan considered during that session is now manifest in The Education Initiative. Yet now, #NVLeg leadership on both sides agreed to punt because they didn't want the optics of turning down public education funding. Wow.
Oh, and whatever. If the Nevada Legislature can't do its job, then we the people must act. Since The Education Initiative couldn't even get a floor vote, it's time for this people's initiative petition to return to the people on next year's ballot. We can't afford to wait any longer to start solving our problems.
But wait, there's another twist. Yesterday, we discussed the fascinating turn of events regarding the emergence of Senate Republican Leader Michael Roberson's IP 1 alternative mining tax. Once Roberson and the rest of "The Dirty Half-dozen" saw the polling and shat their pants, they decided the only way to beat IP 1 is by creating competition. That's why they decided to ditch their own party's base and pick a fight with the mining industry.
But now, "The Dirty Half-dozen" IP 1 mining tax alternative is in deep legal jeopardy. Precisely because the Legislature failed to even vote on the actual IP 1, it's at best (for Roberson) unclear whether the Legislature can actually place an alternative to compete against it on next year's ballot. Local legal eagle Sean McDonald doesn't think an alternative can legally be presented as of now, and Jon Ralston is mourning over this.
This is where I can't help but roll my eyes. Yes, "ballot box budgeting" can be messy. I know from personal experience. Ralston seems to buy into Pete Ernaut's spin... Even though he's had to admit that what just happened was a complete clusterf**k!
For all the wailing and moaning and gnashing of teeth over the fears of California style direct democracy coming to Nevada, we must ask this: Is it really a bad thing? California now has a budget surplus and additional education funding thanks to Prop 30. And Prop 30 was pursued because an extreme obstructionist minority refused to cooperate on realistic budget solutions.
Well, look at where we are now here in Nevada. Because the Governor and certain legislators refuse to consider realistic budget solutions, we have this impasse. How can we break that? That's why The Education Initiative will be going to voters next year.
Sure, in an ideal world, this wouldn't have to happen. However, we're not in an ideal world. We're in Nevada. In order to make this state a better place, we must build a more stable and diversified economy. And in order to do that, we must better invest in our public infrastructure. And if the Governor and Legislature can't act to make that happen, then we the people must.
So it's off to the ballot box we go.
So it's... Actually only just begun.
The Nevada Legislature took no action within the 40-day limit it had to pass or reject the measure, meaning Nevada voters now get to play policymaker and vote the margins tax up or down.
“I don’t believe the votes are there,” said Assembly Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick, D-North Las Vegas, about the initiative measure.
Legislators of both parties never warmed to the tax on businesses that make $1 million or more per year in revenue. The Legislature gave the tax a show hearing in which its sponsor, the state teachers’ union, trotted out supporters who cheered for the tax. Business groups booed, and at least one legislator verbally ripped into a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce lobbyist who opposed the tax.
But the margins tax initiative petition never made it out of committee, and nobody brought any emergency measures to the Senate or Assembly floor to pass or reject it at the last minute because Democrats would not bring it to a vote.
“It’s going to the people either way,” said Sen. Debbie Smith, D-Sparks. “I’m focused on solving our problems so that we have education funding for the coming school year, not down the road.”
Remember what we discussed when the 76th session was coming to a close in June 2011? This was bound to happen. And now, it's finally happening.
Funny enough, a tax plan considered during that session is now manifest in The Education Initiative. Yet now, #NVLeg leadership on both sides agreed to punt because they didn't want the optics of turning down public education funding. Wow.
Oh, and whatever. If the Nevada Legislature can't do its job, then we the people must act. Since The Education Initiative couldn't even get a floor vote, it's time for this people's initiative petition to return to the people on next year's ballot. We can't afford to wait any longer to start solving our problems.
But wait, there's another twist. Yesterday, we discussed the fascinating turn of events regarding the emergence of Senate Republican Leader Michael Roberson's IP 1 alternative mining tax. Once Roberson and the rest of "The Dirty Half-dozen" saw the polling and shat their pants, they decided the only way to beat IP 1 is by creating competition. That's why they decided to ditch their own party's base and pick a fight with the mining industry.
But now, "The Dirty Half-dozen" IP 1 mining tax alternative is in deep legal jeopardy. Precisely because the Legislature failed to even vote on the actual IP 1, it's at best (for Roberson) unclear whether the Legislature can actually place an alternative to compete against it on next year's ballot. Local legal eagle Sean McDonald doesn't think an alternative can legally be presented as of now, and Jon Ralston is mourning over this.
Lawmakers, even those whispering a good game, have all but short-circuited the serious tax discussion for the next 80 days unless they propose some new package themselves and get two-thirds to back it (that would include a handful of Republicans, who would have to vote for it twice over a certain gubernatorial veto). That’s because a plain reading of Article 19, Section 2 indicates that unless the Legislature formally rejects a petition – not simply pretends it does not exist – it loses the ability to propose an alternative.
The language says “the statute or amendment to a statute proposed thereby shall be enacted or rejected by the Legislature without change or amendment within 40 days.” Pretty simple, right?
Put aside the argument that tax policy should not be made at the ballot, which of course it shouldn’t be. But the teachers were frustrated by the Legislature’s serial inaction, so they circumvented lawmakers and went to the ballot process, qualified the margins tax and forced lawmakers to take action within 40 days, as the article mandates. And now, because of lawmakers’ inert behavior once again, tax policy will be decided at the ballot next year, with no alternative to tax mining or business or anything else likely to survive a legal challenge if it were to happen.
This is where I can't help but roll my eyes. Yes, "ballot box budgeting" can be messy. I know from personal experience. Ralston seems to buy into Pete Ernaut's spin... Even though he's had to admit that what just happened was a complete clusterf**k!
For all the wailing and moaning and gnashing of teeth over the fears of California style direct democracy coming to Nevada, we must ask this: Is it really a bad thing? California now has a budget surplus and additional education funding thanks to Prop 30. And Prop 30 was pursued because an extreme obstructionist minority refused to cooperate on realistic budget solutions.
Well, look at where we are now here in Nevada. Because the Governor and certain legislators refuse to consider realistic budget solutions, we have this impasse. How can we break that? That's why The Education Initiative will be going to voters next year.
Sure, in an ideal world, this wouldn't have to happen. However, we're not in an ideal world. We're in Nevada. In order to make this state a better place, we must build a more stable and diversified economy. And in order to do that, we must better invest in our public infrastructure. And if the Governor and Legislature can't act to make that happen, then we the people must.
So it's off to the ballot box we go.
Monday, March 4, 2013
The Education Initiative Gets Its Day in Carson City.
It's happening. It's finally happening! The Education Initiative, which is now referred to as IP 1 in Carson City, will be receiving a joint committee hearing (Assembly & Senate) in the Legislature tomorrow.
Yet already, Republican legislators are gearing up to destroy it. Even though the Legislature probably won't actually pass IP 1 this session, Republicans are still gearing up for a fight tomorrow. Why? They saw the polling.
Remember, this is what The Education Initiative/IP 1 will do if passed.
All this does is ask the largest corporations doing business here in Nevada to pay something closer to their fair share. This, in turn, will allow better funding for Nevada's public schools. Sounds simple, doesn't it?
This is why IP 1 has been polling so well so far. And this is why "Tea Party, Inc." is running scared. This will bring us one step closer to a more sensible, more progressive, and fairer taxation system. And this will help restore badly needed funding for public education.
So tomorrow will be the big day. We'll finally get a first glimpse at both the screwy politics surrounding IP 1 and the real policy deficiencies that led to it. We'll see just how much legislators really want to "support education".
Yet already, Republican legislators are gearing up to destroy it. Even though the Legislature probably won't actually pass IP 1 this session, Republicans are still gearing up for a fight tomorrow. Why? They saw the polling.
Remember, this is what The Education Initiative/IP 1 will do if passed.
How does the Education Initiative raise money for our schools? The Education Initiative would impose a 2% margin tax on business revenue. Businesses that earn $1 million or less will be exempt. [...]
What is a Margin Tax? The Education Initiative would impose a 2% margin tax on business revenue. The margin is either: An entity's total revenue minus salaries or cost of goods, or simply, 70% of its total revenue, whichever is less, and an entity is only taxed on the percentage of the margin that represents its Nevada business. Businesses that earn $1 million or less will be exempt. The funds raised through the Education Initiative will go directly to the Distributive Schools Account-the education budget-in the state's general fund.
Why should Nevada's businesses pay for our schools? Education is everyone's responsibility. Businesses benefit from a qualified, educated workforce, yet they do not pay their fair share. At a critical time in Nevada's economy, it is imperative big businesses invest in K-12 education to ensure our economy turns around and improves.
What will the money be used for? Funds raised through the Education Initiative will go directly to the Distributive Schools Account-the education budget-in the state's general fund. This funding can be used to reduce class sizes, more tools and technology, early childhood education, a safe and supportive learning environment, and the ability to attract and retain quality educators.
All this does is ask the largest corporations doing business here in Nevada to pay something closer to their fair share. This, in turn, will allow better funding for Nevada's public schools. Sounds simple, doesn't it?
This is why IP 1 has been polling so well so far. And this is why "Tea Party, Inc." is running scared. This will bring us one step closer to a more sensible, more progressive, and fairer taxation system. And this will help restore badly needed funding for public education.
So tomorrow will be the big day. We'll finally get a first glimpse at both the screwy politics surrounding IP 1 and the real policy deficiencies that led to it. We'll see just how much legislators really want to "support education".
Sunday, February 3, 2013
Stuck in the Middle With Who?
So tomorrow's the big day. It's that time of the biennium again. Who's excited?
Ummm...
[crickets]
In other words, expect more of the failed status quo. Hardly any one wants to rock the boat. Instead, Governor Brian Sandoval (R-Ambitious?) would rather enjoy some smooth sailing and enjoying of the "sunset" (2009/11 tax deal). So far, even a few Democrats in Carson City would rather bask in the radioactive glow of the "bipartisan consensus" (of no real solutions for the state) than stick their necks out in favor of actual tax reform. And of course, many Republican legislators (especially the ones from the "tea party" collection) would rather just pretend that we don't need no stinkin' guv'mint or "TAXUS!!!!" for nuthin'.
However, there is something emerging on the horizon that will nonetheless shake up the status quo. Whether Brian Sandoval and most legislators like it or not, The Education Initiative will be on their agenda. The Nevada Supreme Court just made sure of that. And with Nevada's public schools so woefully underfunded, legislators will face pressure to do something.
But then again, do we really want them to do something? While some Democratic legislators are sticking their necks out for tax reform, leaders are already facing immense pressure from "the gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex" not to rock thesinking ship boat. That's why we're now hearing talk of "revenue-neutral tax reform", something that defeats the purpose of reform, which is to raise enough revenue to properly fund our public infrastructure. So may progressives and public schools be better off with the Legislature simply punting The Education Initiative to voters next year, even though that means they must wait an additional 18 months for more revenue?
Perhaps we will be proven wrong. Perhaps 28+ Assembly Members and 14+ Senators will have the courage to actually tackle real tax reform, real support for public education, and real economic diversification. But what if there still aren't that many come June?
As of now, it looks like we're in for another status quo kind of session... Except for The Education Initiative. But will legislators act? And do we actually want them to act?
Last year, key Sandoval adviser Pete Ernaut sounded the alarms on possible ballot initiatives, warning that Nevada may soon become like California if we embark on that path. As of now, California has a balanced budget, a higher public education budget, and even a higher credit rating thanks to Prop 30, the progressive tax reform initiative that passed last November. So will "ballot box budgeting" really be all that bad next year? And where does that leave legislators this year?
Ummm...
[crickets]
Gov. Brian Sandoval, who has been a cautious head of state, is facing re-election and might have higher political aspirations, making him loath to propose any sweeping, controversial changes. Democratic leadership is afraid to admit they want to raise taxes, and they don’t have the two-thirds majority to raise money by themselves. Republicans don’t control either house — for the third consecutive session — and seem content to follow Sandoval’s careful lead.
On top of that, a fifth of the state’s 63 lawmakers are freshmen — these are folks who are still figuring out where the bathrooms are in the Legislative Building and are leading important policy committees.
Against that backdrop, the 2013 Legislature looks for now to be defined not by big policy pushes or pitched battles over taxes and spending, as have past legislative sessions. Instead, it could be ancillary policy issues and the personalities of untested leadership that dominate the stage.
In other words, expect more of the failed status quo. Hardly any one wants to rock the boat. Instead, Governor Brian Sandoval (R-Ambitious?) would rather enjoy some smooth sailing and enjoying of the "sunset" (2009/11 tax deal). So far, even a few Democrats in Carson City would rather bask in the radioactive glow of the "bipartisan consensus" (of no real solutions for the state) than stick their necks out in favor of actual tax reform. And of course, many Republican legislators (especially the ones from the "tea party" collection) would rather just pretend that we don't need no stinkin' guv'mint or "TAXUS!!!!" for nuthin'.
However, there is something emerging on the horizon that will nonetheless shake up the status quo. Whether Brian Sandoval and most legislators like it or not, The Education Initiative will be on their agenda. The Nevada Supreme Court just made sure of that. And with Nevada's public schools so woefully underfunded, legislators will face pressure to do something.
But then again, do we really want them to do something? While some Democratic legislators are sticking their necks out for tax reform, leaders are already facing immense pressure from "the gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex" not to rock the
Perhaps we will be proven wrong. Perhaps 28+ Assembly Members and 14+ Senators will have the courage to actually tackle real tax reform, real support for public education, and real economic diversification. But what if there still aren't that many come June?
As of now, it looks like we're in for another status quo kind of session... Except for The Education Initiative. But will legislators act? And do we actually want them to act?
Last year, key Sandoval adviser Pete Ernaut sounded the alarms on possible ballot initiatives, warning that Nevada may soon become like California if we embark on that path. As of now, California has a balanced budget, a higher public education budget, and even a higher credit rating thanks to Prop 30, the progressive tax reform initiative that passed last November. So will "ballot box budgeting" really be all that bad next year? And where does that leave legislators this year?
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
The Education Initiative Goes to Court
There's certainly been plenty of speculation regarding "the t word" and just how seriously it will be considered in Carson City next spring. But while we wait for that, the Nevada Supreme Court will decide the fate of The Education Initiative. Earlier today, the court heard oral arguments. And believe it or not, progressives wanting real tax reform may (again) have reason to hope.
I've always found the anti's argument as a silly Catch 22. So by obeying the law and abiding by the single subject rule, The Education Initiative is deceptive and violates the law? Seriously, is this their entire case? I'm glad I'm not the only one finding this ludicrous.
The latest credible estimates have shown the initiative capable of raising an additional $800 million if passed. It may ultimately raise as much as $1 billion for Nevada schools. And since it's asking the largest corporations doing business here in Nevada to pay something closer to their fair share, it's polled quite well. As I've suggested before, this may be the real reason why it's being challenged in court.
But at least now, the Nevada Supreme Court has actually heard both sides of this case. And a ruling will likely be issued well before the Legislature wraps up next year. And if the Court decides to overturn Judge James Wilson's ruling that invalidated the initiative, then the Legislature will have to consider it in the 77th session. And if the Legislature fails to approve the proposal within 40 days, the initiative will go directly to voters in 2014.
So now, the ball is really in their Court.
Justice James Hardesty, however, showed little patience for the game of hypotheticals, questioning how many possible scenarios need to be included in the 200-word description of what the initiative petition would do if enacted.
He questioned whether [anti-Education Initiative lawyer Josh] Hicks’ argument relied on “a hypothetical that the Legislature will or won’t do something with that extra billion bucks.”
“Where does this end,” Hardesty said. “I think these hypotheticals just go on forever.”
The lawyer for the education initiative, Frank Flaherty, also argued Hicks was relying on simple “speculation.”
I've always found the anti's argument as a silly Catch 22. So by obeying the law and abiding by the single subject rule, The Education Initiative is deceptive and violates the law? Seriously, is this their entire case? I'm glad I'm not the only one finding this ludicrous.
The latest credible estimates have shown the initiative capable of raising an additional $800 million if passed. It may ultimately raise as much as $1 billion for Nevada schools. And since it's asking the largest corporations doing business here in Nevada to pay something closer to their fair share, it's polled quite well. As I've suggested before, this may be the real reason why it's being challenged in court.
But at least now, the Nevada Supreme Court has actually heard both sides of this case. And a ruling will likely be issued well before the Legislature wraps up next year. And if the Court decides to overturn Judge James Wilson's ruling that invalidated the initiative, then the Legislature will have to consider it in the 77th session. And if the Legislature fails to approve the proposal within 40 days, the initiative will go directly to voters in 2014.
So now, the ball is really in their Court.
Monday, June 18, 2012
No Wonder Why "Tea Party, Inc." Is So Scared.
NSEA recently paid for a poll testing the corporate margin tax it's backing alongside Nevada AFL-CIO. They must have been smiling after seeing this. So far, respondents are answering favorably. In fact, the initiative is leading 59-32 among voters!
And funny enough, the only two demographic groups it's losing are Republicans and conservatives. Among everyone else, it's leading solidly. It's leading 59-30 in the Vegas media market, and it's even leading 59-36 in the Reno media market!
However you want to look at it, it's a blowout in the making. And it explains why Brian Sandoval has been so afraid of our state having an honest conversation on "The T Word".
It looks like most Nevadans are finally reaching their breaking point. They're getting sick and tired of seeing our kids suffer under third world conditions at our public schools while out of state multinational corporations enjoy first class tax evasion. Something's got to give.
And perhaps, it finally will. After all, can our state afford to take more of the same?
And funny enough, the only two demographic groups it's losing are Republicans and conservatives. Among everyone else, it's leading solidly. It's leading 59-30 in the Vegas media market, and it's even leading 59-36 in the Reno media market!
However you want to look at it, it's a blowout in the making. And it explains why Brian Sandoval has been so afraid of our state having an honest conversation on "The T Word".
It looks like most Nevadans are finally reaching their breaking point. They're getting sick and tired of seeing our kids suffer under third world conditions at our public schools while out of state multinational corporations enjoy first class tax evasion. Something's got to give.
And perhaps, it finally will. After all, can our state afford to take more of the same?
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Sando's Revenge?
This morning, we talked about national "Tea Party, Inc." King Grover Norquist balking at all the Beltway chatter about Mitt Romney possibly adding Nevada's own Governor Brian Sandoval to his VP short list. Just after BuzzFeed broke the story and Ralston raised some hell on Twitter, Sandoval dropped a bomb on Carson City that is set to explode expectations for next year's legislative session.
While The Sun's Anjeanette Damon noted Sandoval's grumbling about the Affordable Care Act and necessary infrastructure projects to do, I just have to say that it's quite a funny coincidence that he made this announcement today. It's also funny that this happened on the very same day that Nevada's own Harry Reid shot back at Norquist's star Capitol Hill pupils that are threatening yet another budget melee.
Now contrast this with how REPUBLICAN state legislators here in Nevada are responding to Sandoval's surprise announcement.
I find it quite interesting that Roberson, who was once quite the "tea party darling" himself last year, is directly refuting Grover Norquist's assertion that Sandoval passed "new taxes" by merely agreeing to extend the 2009 tax deal. And I find it quite interesting that both Sandoval and Legislature Republican leaders are running away from the tactics used constantly by their counterparts in DC by settling the matter of the 2009 tax deal and making an easy 2013 budget deal more likely.
However, I suspect Brian Sandoval isn't just rebuking the radical "tea party" right in his own party in making this move. Both progressive populist Kermitt Waters and conservative "business establishment" powerhouse Monte Miller have been pushing to put tax reform on the ballot, and the Nevada AFL-CIO may soon enter the playing field with the corporate margin tax that everyone's been expecting them to put into a ballot initiative. As Sandoval's team has become more concerned about what may happen if any (or a combination) of these initiatives makes it on our ballots some time soon, as well as what may happen if Republican chances of retaking the (state) Senate continue to dwindle, this may also be Sandoval's attempt to thwart the drive by both progressive Democratic legislators and tax initiative supporters to force major tax reform next year.
So far, it sounds like Democratic Senators aren't ready to settle for the status quo.
And we'll have to see if Sandoval's big move will be enough to stop Monte Miller, Kermitt Waters, and the Nevada AFL-CIO from gathering signatures for their respective initiatives later this year.
“On Thursday, the Budget Office will be releasing budget instructions for the next biennium as we prepare for the 2013 Legislature. In order to avoid cuts to education and other essential services, revenues from the sunset taxes will need to be continued. While taking into account mandatory caseload growth, primarily in Health and Human Services, federal mandates such as the Affordable Care Act, and critical infrastructure needs, my budget instructions will call for “flat” budgets which will rely on some or all of the revenue from the sun setting taxes.
“Let me be clear, as I’ve said before, the economy is improving, but I believe we must begin this budgeting process with all the information available. In addition to avoiding further cuts to education, this decision means there will be no need for tax increases in the next session. Nevadans will pay no more than they are in the current biennium.
“The budget building process remains ongoing, but we must begin today.”
While The Sun's Anjeanette Damon noted Sandoval's grumbling about the Affordable Care Act and necessary infrastructure projects to do, I just have to say that it's quite a funny coincidence that he made this announcement today. It's also funny that this happened on the very same day that Nevada's own Harry Reid shot back at Norquist's star Capitol Hill pupils that are threatening yet another budget melee.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is warning House Republicans they’ll be setting themselves up for another Tea Party-inspired government shutdown fight, unless GOP leaders buck their conservative rank and file and hew to the terms of last summer’s hard-fought debt-limit deal.
House Republicans are prepared to introduce their budget resolution next Tuesday, and some signs suggest they’ll call for cutting federal programs below the levels both parties agreed to in last August’s debt-limit fight. On Tuesday Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid laid down the Democrats’ marker in no uncertain terms: Dream on, we’ll never let you buck the deal.
“This wasn’t a handshake, it was a law we passed,” Reid told reporters on Tuesday at a weekly Capitol briefing. “And now, the Republican right wing in the House is trying to change the agreement we made as a matter of law. I guess they love government shutdowns, or at least the threat of them … If they renege on the law, the agreement, they’ll be forcing yet another government shutdown and a fight with the American people. That’s ridiculous.”
Now contrast this with how REPUBLICAN state legislators here in Nevada are responding to Sandoval's surprise announcement.
“I support Gov. Sandoval and his budget instructions that will not impose new taxes on the people of Nevada,” [Senator Michael] Roberson [R-Henderson] said. “I will continue to lead the fight against new tax increases while working with Gov. Sandoval to improve public education. I will not support additional cuts to public education.”
Roberson opposed extending the sunsetting taxes in the 2011 session, arguing that the Nevada Supreme Court ruling did not create the huge financial hole in the budget that others had suggested.
“Gov. Sandoval has outlined a prudent and fiscally responsible preliminary budget framework,” Roberson said. “I am grateful for his tremendous leadership. I will stand with him and support him.”
Sen. Ben Kieckhefer, R-Reno, announced his support for Sandoval’s proposal via Twitter.
“I applaud the decision by Gov. Sandoval to do what is necessary to protect education from cuts,” he said, adding that what that means in the 2013 session is yet to be determined.
I find it quite interesting that Roberson, who was once quite the "tea party darling" himself last year, is directly refuting Grover Norquist's assertion that Sandoval passed "new taxes" by merely agreeing to extend the 2009 tax deal. And I find it quite interesting that both Sandoval and Legislature Republican leaders are running away from the tactics used constantly by their counterparts in DC by settling the matter of the 2009 tax deal and making an easy 2013 budget deal more likely.
However, I suspect Brian Sandoval isn't just rebuking the radical "tea party" right in his own party in making this move. Both progressive populist Kermitt Waters and conservative "business establishment" powerhouse Monte Miller have been pushing to put tax reform on the ballot, and the Nevada AFL-CIO may soon enter the playing field with the corporate margin tax that everyone's been expecting them to put into a ballot initiative. As Sandoval's team has become more concerned about what may happen if any (or a combination) of these initiatives makes it on our ballots some time soon, as well as what may happen if Republican chances of retaking the (state) Senate continue to dwindle, this may also be Sandoval's attempt to thwart the drive by both progressive Democratic legislators and tax initiative supporters to force major tax reform next year.
So far, it sounds like Democratic Senators aren't ready to settle for the status quo.
While we applaud Republican State Senators and the Governor’s change of position to prioritize education in Nevada, we don’t believe it does enough to address the challenges that Nevada faces. These are challenging financial times and it is critical that we rise above partisanship and find solutions that place the needs of our children and families first.
Last year, Senate Democrats fought to protect education funding, believing that providing opportunity to our children must be the cornerstone of any plan to revitalize Nevada’s economy. Nevada deserves leadership that will fully fund education, while also taking on the challenge of solving our budget shortfall. Only together, can we facilitate solutions to help Nevada families and businesses succeed.
Unfortunately, by not addressing the long-term problem and clinging to stagnant levels of education funding, the Governor is only postponing the inevitable crisis that our schools and our state face.
“What we need are long term solutions to resolving our budget problems, not postponing them for another 2 years” said Senator Mo Denis. ”We must address tax fairness for middle class families, cut wasteful spending in our government, and provide Nevada business with an educated workforce that can help compete in the national and global marketplace.”
Dennis also added “In order to diversify our economy and attract new businesses and industry to Nevada, we must show them we are serious about investing in a well educated workforce. We can’t do that if education funding remains stagnant.”
And we'll have to see if Sandoval's big move will be enough to stop Monte Miller, Kermitt Waters, and the Nevada AFL-CIO from gathering signatures for their respective initiatives later this year.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Fears of Californication?
Yesterday, prominent Nevada GOP power player, R&R big wig, (and confirmed Sandoval inner circle member) Pete Ernaut complained about the new push to bring tax initiatives to the ballot so Nevada voters can finally do what our Legislature apparently can not do. You tell me if you notice something familiar here.
Now before I explain why I suspect Ernaut said this, I actually want to give him some props for pointing out what I've been saying here for several months. California, here we are!
As we were discussing on Sunday, California currently has three tax initiatives competing for voters' attention and support this year: one by civil rights attorney Molly Munger that seeks to raise income taxes on nearly everyone, one by Governor Jerry Brown (D) that mostly raises income taxes on the wealthy but also keeps in place a sales tax hike affecting everyone, and one by Courage Campaign and the California Federation of Teachers that only raises taxes on the ultra-wealthy earning more than $1,000,000 a year. All three promise to restore investment in public education that's been slashed to death, but all three also face challenges in the duration of the new revenue stream, as well as how much each of them can really pull in.
And of course, we can't forget how California got into this mess in the first place. Starting with the Prop 13 tax restructuring of 1978, followed by the education spending mandates in Prop 98 in 1988, followed by a whole series of special tax policies and spending formulae approved by the voters all through the 1990s and 2000s, California's budget has become an unmanageable fiscal hot mess. And especially because we as people like to "have it all" without ever paying for any of it, California faces chronic budget woes. (It turns out that passing spending mandates without finding the appropriate revenue to fund them causes huge budgetary problems. Surprise?)
However, not all of California's or Nevada's problems can be blamed on "we the people". The reason why Jerry Brown, Courage Campaign, and Molly Munger want to take their respective tax initiatives to the voters is because an intransigent and obstructive G-O-TEA minority in their Legislature refuses to consider any kind of sensible tax reform. And now that sensible Republicans like the late Bill Raggio and Kenny Guinn are distant memories for Republican leadership in our Legislature today, we're now facing the same problems. While I understand, and even sympathize with, Pete Ernaut's concern about "direct democracy run amok", what else are we the people supposed to do when our Legislature can't do its job and pass a workable budget?
And this brings me to the reason I suspect Pete Ernaut is really worried about the proposed tax initiatives: They're aimed at his clients. Ernaut seems to worry about the Legislature losing its authority on the budget now, but he didn't seem to mind Republican legislators giving a big, fat "Gov Wreck" rubber stamp to Brian Sandoval's original slashing of public education before the Nevada Supreme Court forced him to agree to extend the 2009 tax deal. But now that Monte Miller, the Nevada AFL-CIO, and Kermitt Waters are all aiming at Ernaut's top R&R clients, he all of a sudden wants the Legislature to set tax policy. Is that just because he thinks we the people will do what the Legislature hasn't done?
Republican pollster Glen Bolger, who does polling for the Retail Association of Nevada, revealed in his newest survey that Nevadans want the mining industry to pay its fair share.
Now this explains why the mining industry is suing to block Monte Miller's mining tax initiative. Ernaut has probably seen similar private polls showing similar results. The more Nevadans learn about how multinational mining corporations have abused our tax code to pay virtually nothing for profitting off our natural resources, the angrier we get. And if the decision on how much to tax them moves from the Legislature to "we the people", the mining industry will probably have to kiss its sweetheart deal goodbye.
This probably also explains why "big bid'ness" power brokers (like Monte Miller?) fear the AFL-CIO's margin tax on big business. In addition to the mining industry, other big multinational corporations like to set up "on shore tax shelters" here in Nevada to avoid paying taxes. But really, what do we get out of it? After seeing them profit while Nevada families suffer from decaying schools and inadequate transportation infrastructure, Nevada voters may also be ready to finally make the big guys pay their fair share.
So in the end, Pete Ernaut may have a valid point in stating the problems with "ballot box budgeting" and waging electoral campaigns on tax policy. However when the Legislature won't tackle this, someone has to. And when Nevada is in real need of real reform that finally moves our tax code into the 21st century, we can't blame citizen activists for wanting to take matters into their own hands. And since Ernaut's own BFF in the Governor's Mansion encouraged obstruction on tax reform in Carson City last year, he should have realized that he helped bring "Californication" of Nevada policy making here.
“It should be warning to everybody because this is something that could very rapidly turn into the next iteration of the California ballot, where we have 10, 12, 13 ballot measures on a number of issues and you wake up one day and really you’ve taken the power away from the Legislature or the governor to make any decisions,” he said.
“And that’s really what they’re struggling with in California more than anything else is you have this entire apparatus in the California state Legislature that essentially has the ability to make decisions on about 5 percent or 6 percent of the entire California budget,” Ernaut said in an interview on the Nevada NewsMakers television show. “If we’re not careful, that’s the way that it will go.”
Now before I explain why I suspect Ernaut said this, I actually want to give him some props for pointing out what I've been saying here for several months. California, here we are!
As we were discussing on Sunday, California currently has three tax initiatives competing for voters' attention and support this year: one by civil rights attorney Molly Munger that seeks to raise income taxes on nearly everyone, one by Governor Jerry Brown (D) that mostly raises income taxes on the wealthy but also keeps in place a sales tax hike affecting everyone, and one by Courage Campaign and the California Federation of Teachers that only raises taxes on the ultra-wealthy earning more than $1,000,000 a year. All three promise to restore investment in public education that's been slashed to death, but all three also face challenges in the duration of the new revenue stream, as well as how much each of them can really pull in.
And of course, we can't forget how California got into this mess in the first place. Starting with the Prop 13 tax restructuring of 1978, followed by the education spending mandates in Prop 98 in 1988, followed by a whole series of special tax policies and spending formulae approved by the voters all through the 1990s and 2000s, California's budget has become an unmanageable fiscal hot mess. And especially because we as people like to "have it all" without ever paying for any of it, California faces chronic budget woes. (It turns out that passing spending mandates without finding the appropriate revenue to fund them causes huge budgetary problems. Surprise?)
However, not all of California's or Nevada's problems can be blamed on "we the people". The reason why Jerry Brown, Courage Campaign, and Molly Munger want to take their respective tax initiatives to the voters is because an intransigent and obstructive G-O-TEA minority in their Legislature refuses to consider any kind of sensible tax reform. And now that sensible Republicans like the late Bill Raggio and Kenny Guinn are distant memories for Republican leadership in our Legislature today, we're now facing the same problems. While I understand, and even sympathize with, Pete Ernaut's concern about "direct democracy run amok", what else are we the people supposed to do when our Legislature can't do its job and pass a workable budget?
And this brings me to the reason I suspect Pete Ernaut is really worried about the proposed tax initiatives: They're aimed at his clients. Ernaut seems to worry about the Legislature losing its authority on the budget now, but he didn't seem to mind Republican legislators giving a big, fat "Gov Wreck" rubber stamp to Brian Sandoval's original slashing of public education before the Nevada Supreme Court forced him to agree to extend the 2009 tax deal. But now that Monte Miller, the Nevada AFL-CIO, and Kermitt Waters are all aiming at Ernaut's top R&R clients, he all of a sudden wants the Legislature to set tax policy. Is that just because he thinks we the people will do what the Legislature hasn't done?
Republican pollster Glen Bolger, who does polling for the Retail Association of Nevada, revealed in his newest survey that Nevadans want the mining industry to pay its fair share.
Mining tax:
As you may know, there is a proposal to increase the state mining tax. I would like to read you
two statements that people are saying about the proposal. After I read each statement, please tell me which one comes closest to your own opinion.
Some people say increasing the state mining tax is a good idea because with the increase in the price of gold and other minerals, the mining industry is undergoing a boom time and should pay a higher tax rate.
... while...
Other people say an increase in the mining tax is a bad idea because at some point the price of gold and other minerals will drop back down to normal levels and a higher tax rate will hurt the industry and cost jobs.
Which statement comes closest to your own opinion?
58% GOOD IDEA
38% BAD IDEA
Now this explains why the mining industry is suing to block Monte Miller's mining tax initiative. Ernaut has probably seen similar private polls showing similar results. The more Nevadans learn about how multinational mining corporations have abused our tax code to pay virtually nothing for profitting off our natural resources, the angrier we get. And if the decision on how much to tax them moves from the Legislature to "we the people", the mining industry will probably have to kiss its sweetheart deal goodbye.
This probably also explains why "big bid'ness" power brokers (like Monte Miller?) fear the AFL-CIO's margin tax on big business. In addition to the mining industry, other big multinational corporations like to set up "on shore tax shelters" here in Nevada to avoid paying taxes. But really, what do we get out of it? After seeing them profit while Nevada families suffer from decaying schools and inadequate transportation infrastructure, Nevada voters may also be ready to finally make the big guys pay their fair share.
So in the end, Pete Ernaut may have a valid point in stating the problems with "ballot box budgeting" and waging electoral campaigns on tax policy. However when the Legislature won't tackle this, someone has to. And when Nevada is in real need of real reform that finally moves our tax code into the 21st century, we can't blame citizen activists for wanting to take matters into their own hands. And since Ernaut's own BFF in the Governor's Mansion encouraged obstruction on tax reform in Carson City last year, he should have realized that he helped bring "Californication" of Nevada policy making here.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
10 of 11: Is It 2012 Yet?
Funny enough, one of the biggest stories of this past year has been about... NEXT YEAR??!! Yep, that's right. Since hardly anything could be accomplished in Congress as our own Legislature kept kicking the can further down the road, focus turned quickly to the big election year that will begin in just 5 days in the snowy fields of Iowa. And back here in Nevada, the G-O-TEA is in full panic mode after the last R-J/8 News/UNLV poll delivered plenty of holiday cheer for President Obama and Shelley Berkley. Meanwhile, news broke this morning about another big ballot battle coming to a polling place near you in 2012.
Apparently, we truly are coming around full circle and "Californication" has arrived in Nevada. After several disappointing sessions full of dashed hopes and so much kicking the can down the road, the can now looks to land in our laps. And perhaps 2012 will be the perfect year to do it. After all, these folks in Chicago are feeling increasingly confident about "The Map".
Remember when Jim Messina came here in August to discuss the restart of the Obama campaign? When he was explaining how OFA was about to lay the foundation for this campaign, even some on the left were asking how on earth Obama could expect to regain the trust of Americans when so much seemed to look so wrong.
Now we're getting a clearer picture... And Jim Messina doesn't sound so crazy, after all. While Mitt Romney brags about his plan to force commercials onto "Sesame Street" and Ron Paul embraces pro "death penalty for teh gayzzz!!!" Christ-o-fascists, OFA has quietly been building a strong operation from the grassroots upward. And when no one was noticing, the economy started to heal and now the President isn't looking so bad after all.
Just over a year ago, hardly anyone was expecting this. But sometimes, one just has to expect and accept the unexpected. Between the changing tide (yet again) of public opinion, the revival of the Obama campaign, the new awareness surrounding "The 99%", and the huge curveball that redistricting turned out to be, Nevada in 2012 may prove to be the ultimate opportunity for progressives to rescue this state... And perhaps take this state in a bold, new direction.
The initiative, which would change state law, will be based on the “margins tax” proposed by Democrats during the 2011 Legislature, according to a source. That tax proposal was modeled after Texas’ “franchise tax,” which was levied on business gross receipts.
Proponents will have to collect 72,000 signatures — 18,000 in each of the state’s four congressional districts. If successful, the proposal would go to the Legislature for consideration in 2013. If the lawmakers don’t pass it within 40 days, it will go to the ballot in 2014 for voters to decide.
Advocates for changing the state’s tax structure and increasing the funding for social services and education hope to build a coalition of support among business leaders, gaming, mining, teachers and labor. [...]
However, the state’s power brokers, including gaming, mining, the teachers union and AFL-CIO, have been talking about changing the state’s tax structure since the 2011 session ended in June. The challenge: to close the state’s budget deficit of more than $1 billion.
At the end of that session, the Legislature re-extended taxes passed in 2009, but did nothing to change the tax structure, which critics say is too dependent on gaming and sales tax.
That led to widespread frustration in the Nevada establishment and a consensus that no tax, even one that was revenue neutral, could pass the Legislature, where it takes a two-thirds majority to raise a tax or fee. (A ballot question only requires a simple majority of voters for it to pass.)
Apparently, we truly are coming around full circle and "Californication" has arrived in Nevada. After several disappointing sessions full of dashed hopes and so much kicking the can down the road, the can now looks to land in our laps. And perhaps 2012 will be the perfect year to do it. After all, these folks in Chicago are feeling increasingly confident about "The Map".
Remember when Jim Messina came here in August to discuss the restart of the Obama campaign? When he was explaining how OFA was about to lay the foundation for this campaign, even some on the left were asking how on earth Obama could expect to regain the trust of Americans when so much seemed to look so wrong.
Last night, Messina acknowledged that this may be their biggest challenge going forward. So much really has been accomplished by the Obama Administration, but will the American people really care? And why should they care when the unemployment rate is still over 9%, people are still losing their homes to foreclosure, and three wars are still being waged abroad while Congress breaks for recess after debating whether or not to end Social Security & Medicare as we know it?
Now we're getting a clearer picture... And Jim Messina doesn't sound so crazy, after all. While Mitt Romney brags about his plan to force commercials onto "Sesame Street" and Ron Paul embraces pro "death penalty for teh gayzzz!!!" Christ-o-fascists, OFA has quietly been building a strong operation from the grassroots upward. And when no one was noticing, the economy started to heal and now the President isn't looking so bad after all.
Just over a year ago, hardly anyone was expecting this. But sometimes, one just has to expect and accept the unexpected. Between the changing tide (yet again) of public opinion, the revival of the Obama campaign, the new awareness surrounding "The 99%", and the huge curveball that redistricting turned out to be, Nevada in 2012 may prove to be the ultimate opportunity for progressives to rescue this state... And perhaps take this state in a bold, new direction.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Off to the Ballot Box We Go?
SHOCK! Progressives aren't jumping for joy over the state budget deal.
Nevada's stunning budget agreement will continue to impose a much higher tax burden on the poor than on the rich while severely underfunding education and humane social services, thus inflicting immediate and long-term damage to Nevada's already hopelessly wrecked economy.
But judging from the sparkling headlines and gushing praise, perhaps the most wonderful thing about this "true leadership," this "triumph of leadership," is that lawmakers are cooperating to expedite Nevada's irreversible downward spiral politely and on time.
SHOCK! More progressives are thinking aloud about possible 2012 ballot initiatives.
There you have it. Sandoval saved our schools. He suddenly cares about class sizes. What a crock of public relations bullshit. Sandoval’s no new tax pledge was a mistake. He made it so the drooling far right wing of the Republican party would vote for him, and so they did, and now we’re all paying the price. How will Nevada students stack up to schools in states where funding per pupil is twice what it is in Nevada? Where will the best teachers look for jobs?
I wish God’s speed and best of luck to any coalition of citizens that wants to put tax questions to voters. The Democrats tried to broaden and update the state’s revenue base with a margin tax on large corporations and a sales tax on services, but the Republicans would have none of it. They sat on their hands with their fingers in their collective ears. The Governor and Republicans in the Legislature proposed no other solution than cuts to the state budget. They heard the testimony. School administrators and professors and teachers and students and parent across the state described the terrible effects of the Governor’s proposed budget on our already grossly underfunded school systems, yet Sandoval and his keen advisors decided schools could withstand the cuts. And what’s worse, our system of taxation is still broken. Our state budget will continue to yoyo, and next session we can balance the budget on the backs of schools and the poor to protect narrow corporate profits once again. Sandoval says we will grow our way out of revenue problems, but an unstable state budget and worst in the nation schools are not incentives for companies to move here. I have no faith in the governor’s promises. He works for the board room and not our state’s citizens.
I am hopeful a group of concerned Nevadans will form and gather the necessary signatures to put similar tax reforms as proposed by Democrats this session to a vote of the people in November 2012. Through the Governor and Republican lawmakers, the entire state is held hostage by a radical minority of antigovernment nut cases in the Republican party, but if given the opportunity, the citizens of Nevada will make the right choices, even if their Republican representatives will not.
SHOCK! Nevada's most powerful and influential corporate citizens are also not overjoyed with this budget deal, and they may be willing to join labor unions and other progressive organizers to pass some sort of progressive tax reform next year. Wait... HUH??!! OK, this one actually IS a shocker!
Lobbyists representing major Nevada industries are talking with labor and education leaders about putting taxes in front of voters in 2012.
The target right now is a question or questions that will revive some of the taxes Democrats unsuccessfully proposed this session, sources said.
The conversations are built on a consensus among business leaders and labor representatives that major tax reform will never come out of the Legislature.
“I’ve lost all faith in the ability of the Legislature to fund government,” said Danny Thompson, executive secretary/treasurer of the AFL-CIO, the state’s largest labor group. “The only solution is to go to the people.” [...]
According to sources with knowledge of the discussions, the coalition could end up backing a number of separate questions, including on the “margin tax” and sales tax on services. If the teachers union is involved, as is likely, there would also be some sort of mechanism to ensure that a portion of funding goes to education, a lobbyist said.
Gaming and mining, the state’s two major industries, are the most obvious funders for a campaign. The thinking for them is this: If the public gets too upset at cuts and inadequate funding for education, they will target the state’s two prominent industries.
For years now, the state’s establishment has warned against going to the ballot to set tax policy.
But as the Nevada 2011 session comes to a close with another muddling solution of temporary taxes and spending cuts, the frustration is obvious.
“The environment is ripe for those conversations (with industry leaders) to happen after this session,” said one business lobbyist, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
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.
Now of course, everyone's favorite "lovable curmudgeon" pundit sounded the alarms yet again on what may happen if we keep kicking this budgetary can down the road. And though he doesn't utter "The C Word" himself, it's quite clear he's starting to see what I've been seeing for some time.
Republicans here always make scary comments about this state becoming some sort of "Little California", but their very obstruction on the budget and diabolical brinksmanship games with state government are turning us into California!
Sometimes, I really do wonder if Republican legislators are spending time that should be used working on a budget deal to instead study up on how California Republicans have turned Sacramento into an endless game of "Mortal Combat"... Where the folks who get killed off are kids in need of education, and seniors & disabled in need of health care. Read Calitics' budget diaries and notice the strange air of familiarity to them.
It seems like both at the federal level and in other states, Republicans are exporting the California model of obstructing their way to broken government to the rest of the country.
Either way, Nevada's governance will start to look a lot more like California's, and more like other Western states (such as Arizona) that have become accustomed to partisan turf wars, ballot box budgeting, and "direct democracy gone wild". It's now a question of whether Nevada will keep sputtering on its way to the bottom, or if progressives can turn this around and take advantage of this unique opportunity to inject more common sense into our state government. The days of Kenny Guinn and Barbara Buckley and Bill Raggio making "grand bargains" seem to be long gone. Term limits are taking away experienced legislators. Meanwhile, the power vacuum is being filled by corporate lobbyists, party central committees, and other outside forces.
So what can we do? In the long term, I still believe it's in our best interest that progressives work toward reforming state government to make it more responsive to the people and less beholden to special corporate interests. But in the mean time, we can't wait on the sidelines for the next two years while Nevada's people continue to suffer inadequate public education, health care, transportation, and other infrastructure necessary to make our state whole again.
So now, we have to ask ourselves not whether and when we will go to the ballot and ask the people to save our state, but how we will do so and who we will build coalitions with. Should we work with gaming and mining on a broad-based business tax? Should we work with other progressive activists on a corporate income tax? Should we push for some sort of mining tax reform? 2012 may seem like a long hike away, but it really isn't. We need to start planning now to take the first necessary steps to save our state and bring real progressive reform to Nevada government.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
"The T Word"... And Who Can Really Handle It
It's the word so many in Carson City fear. It's the word that dare not be said. It's the word that has haunted and vexed Nevada for decades. It's...
[Drumroll please...]
"THE T WORD"!!!
And believe it or not, someone in Carson City dared to utter it yesterday... In The Legislature!
Yes, that's right. Taxes.
So Sheila Leslie said it. Will The Legislature just do it? And if they don't do it, will we the people do it for them?
It's certainly an interesting suggestion... But can it really work? Or are we playing with a totally new set of dangerous flames?
California, here we come (again)?
Yes. I know. I did it. Again.
But you know what? I've seen it firsthand, so I can recognize it.
Ever since Proposition 13 first passed in 1978, California has endured an endless cycle of taxing (and tax cutting) and spending by way of ballot referendum. And look where it's gotten them. They're in constant crisis mode because voters love to pass all sorts of programs, but hate passing the revenues needed to fund them. So now California voters have a chance at a "do over", and it looks like they may just get it right this time.
However, can they really afford to continue governing by ballot box? And do we in Nevada want to risk total danger by essentially sidelining our own Legislature and taking its due powers into our own hands?
We know what's wrong with our system. We know that we can't keep avoiding "the t word". We need to have an honest conversation on raising the revenue we need to keep the state functioning for now, and get our state working toward a better future.
However, we need to be careful when we start talking about taking decisions that are supposed to be made by our elected legislators and making them at the ballot box. Perhaps it may ultimately be necessary to go to the ballot this time to get the revenue we need to save our state, but let's hope our legislators get the job done this session so that we the people don't have to. After all, that's why we the people voted them into office in the first place.
[Drumroll please...]
"THE T WORD"!!!
And believe it or not, someone in Carson City dared to utter it yesterday... In The Legislature!
By comparison, it was a doctorate-level discussion in the Senate, where committee Chairwoman Sheila Leslie, D-Reno, vowed to tackle the state’s wobbly tax structure.
“We want to really look at the tax system we have in the state,” she said. “It’s not news to anyone that our state is facing structural deficits, cyclical deficits. It’s time to take out the unpredictability in our system and establish a tax structure that really is ready for the 21st century.”
Cognizant of the eye-rolling over the committee’s new name, Leslie quickly dispelled the notion that they wouldn’t address by name the most pressing issue before the Legislature this session.
“We’re not afraid of the T-word,” she said. “I’ll say it: taxes.”
Yes, that's right. Taxes.
So Sheila Leslie said it. Will The Legislature just do it? And if they don't do it, will we the people do it for them?
Gov. Brian Sandoval has proposed significant cuts to social services, higher education and K-12 schools to balance the budget. Democrats and advocates for those services say the cuts would cause irreparable damage. But these pro-tax forces face an uncertain future in dealing with the state’s $2.2 billion deficit.
“If the Legislature doesn’t have the political will to address the situation, citizens will do it themselves,” said Lynn Warne, president of the Nevada State Education Association, which represents teachers. She said the union has been in talks with business leaders, labor and other groups about an initiative petition, but that it has yet to develop into a formal proposal.
Democrats, moderate Republicans and some business leaders face a high hurdle in gathering votes to pass a tax increase this year. It takes a two-thirds majority in the Assembly and Senate to pass a tax increase and override a veto from Gov. Brian Sandoval, who campaigned on a promise to balance the budget without raising taxes.
A vote of the people would take longer to implement than legislative action. But raising taxes through a ballot initiative would require approval from only 50 percent of voters rather than the two-thirds required in the Legislature.
It's certainly an interesting suggestion... But can it really work? Or are we playing with a totally new set of dangerous flames?
California, here we come (again)?
This is why we moved away from an Athenian-style direct democracy to a representative democracy. Our American founding fathers understood that not every voter had the capacity to take everything into context to make the decisions we expect of our legislators. You could argue that the information age has brought the knowledge necessary closer to the people, but in the end, uninformed voters are making decisions without all of the facts.
Even in a state of 1 million people the system would be impractical, here it's downright unworkable. [LA Times columnist George] Skelton takes [CA Governor Jerry] Brown to task for boxing himself into the corner, but really, it was something of an electoral practicality. He may have won without it, but it sure made it a lot easier. But, here we are, in a position where Brown is now forced to bring this to the voters instead of just doing his job and making the decisions for the state with the Legislature.
Yes. I know. I did it. Again.
But you know what? I've seen it firsthand, so I can recognize it.
Ever since Proposition 13 first passed in 1978, California has endured an endless cycle of taxing (and tax cutting) and spending by way of ballot referendum. And look where it's gotten them. They're in constant crisis mode because voters love to pass all sorts of programs, but hate passing the revenues needed to fund them. So now California voters have a chance at a "do over", and it looks like they may just get it right this time.
However, can they really afford to continue governing by ballot box? And do we in Nevada want to risk total danger by essentially sidelining our own Legislature and taking its due powers into our own hands?
We know what's wrong with our system. We know that we can't keep avoiding "the t word". We need to have an honest conversation on raising the revenue we need to keep the state functioning for now, and get our state working toward a better future.
However, we need to be careful when we start talking about taking decisions that are supposed to be made by our elected legislators and making them at the ballot box. Perhaps it may ultimately be necessary to go to the ballot this time to get the revenue we need to save our state, but let's hope our legislators get the job done this session so that we the people don't have to. After all, that's why we the people voted them into office in the first place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)