The Disappointment... & The Solution

Let's dig a little deeper today. Last week, we discussed the deadly consequences of ignoring our tattered and torn social safety net. But now, we must recap why it's become so tattered and torn. Here's a hint: We've forgotten the basics of civilization for far too long.

Why is it that we always hear that "we can't afford" proper mental health care, decent schools, and repaired roads, yet our Governor and Legislature always seem to be able to afford corporate welfare to shower upon multinational corporations like Apple that neither need the help nor deserve it? Think about that as well. How on earth does this lead to a stable economy for our state? And how on earth does neglecting the most vulnerable in our society lead to a healthy economy? 

It doesn't. That's precisely the problem. Our "leaders" in Carson City keep chasing after mythical economic unicorns while failing to provide the most fundamental building blocks of a sound economy. 

Sure, luring Hollywood to Las Vegas sounds sexy. But ultimately, that won't mean shit for economic development if our schools keep bursting at the seams, our hospitals keep stuffing patients onto Greyhound buses heading out of state, and our roads are clogged with commuters while paved with just as many potholes. We seriously need to pay attention to the rude awakening we're now receiving. We must get back to basics, and we must do so before it's too late.

This past Spring, Carson City was buzzing over visions of Hollywood glamour, Wall Street power, and Silicon Valley splendor. Yet while Governor Magic Man (R-Denial) and certain legislators were falling over each other to bask in the glory of the "razzle dazzle" of it all, they were also agreeing to yet another round of status quo.

[... T]he Legislature finally succumbed to Governor Sandoval's request for underfunded schools and inadequate public infrastructure. They may not be quite as underfunded as they were in previous sessions. Yet even Governor Sandoval's own President of the State Board of Education, Ms. Elaine Wynn herself, has described Nevada public schools as "grossly underfunded". This poorly kept secret is becoming increasingly difficult to deny.

So now, someone has to deal with it. Someone has to start fixing this structural problem. And since we saw no solutions from "leaders" in Carson City this spring, We the People must provide leadership and get it done in the fall of next year.

Wait, so what's the deal with that last sentence? What must We the People do? Here's a hint: T. E. I.

As usual, Ralston mourns the policy failures that have grown out of the dysfunctional politics of this state. And in quite a few aspects, he's right on the money. But now, we have a chance to move beyond mourning over what can't be done. We finally have a chance to seize what can be done.

So what can be done? Remember these three letters: T. E. I. 

We've had it with the overcrowded schools, overburdened teachers, and underfunded public infrastructure. And yes, we've had it with the usual hand-wringing and empty rhetoric. We now have The Education Initiative on next year's general election ballot, and we know it can (and must!) be done. 

If we want Nevada to succeed in building a better economy and a brighter future, we have to look beyond what hasn't been done and realize what must be done. Then, we have to recognize that it can be done. And of course, we then have to just do it already.

Some things just don't change. In his column on his 10 biggest Nevada political stories of 2013, Jon Ralston lamented the Nevada Legislature's failure to pass tax reform. Of course, he also screamed over "disastrous leadership" and took one more pot shot at The Education Initiative. But this time, not even he could muster enough outrage to scream all that much about the ills of "ballot box budgeting".

Sure, "ballot box budgeting" isn't ideal. But really, are underfunded schools, busted health care infrastructure, and broken transportation systems acceptable at all? Something must change. And yes, We the People must provide that change next year.

When it came to economic justice in Nevada, 2013 offered plenty of disappointment. However, there was a twist this year. 2013 also offered a chance to start changing that disappointment into solutions.

How many times have we grumbled over Carson City's failure to reach meaningful, thoughtful, and truly helpful solutions for "The T Word"? Yet in 2014, all it will take is passage of three letters (hint: T. E. I.) to move past the disappointment and finally start reaching solutions.

Reality Check

Over the weekend, something interesting happened. Jon Ralston announced his campaign for Governor. Wait... What??!!

Calm down. Ralston is not actually running for Governor next year. Rather, he was just fantasizing his ideal Gubernatorial Campaign. And he imagined a kick-off speech starting like this.

It’s time to believe in a new Nevada – a place where education is valued, where fair share really is fair and where silly tax pledges are replaced with thoughtful public policy.

We have been a state of half-measures – nay, quarter- or eighth-measures – for too long. When I hear the governor’s administration say it is pleased with this national education report card, I am shocked. And, yes, I am ashamed.

As we all should be. So far, so good.

Ralston's imaginary campaign kickoff speech also touched on the trap that the Governor and Legislature have always been falling into with each passing biennium. It's the same trap that manifested itself yet again during the 77th session of the Nevada Legislature earlier this year. And it's the same trap that only leads to even more trouble for this state.

So now, we're back at Square One. We're back at "Gov Rec" and everyone's favorite silly Sunset Taxes. And we're back to our regularly scheduled chronic underfunding of our public infrastructure.

Of course, Governor "Magic Man" is hailing this as a huge victory. And yes, it's a major political victory for him. But for the people of this state, it's another in a very long string of policy FAILs. The most "juiced up" corporate special interests will continue paying just above nothing while We the People continue to suffer overcrowded & dilapidated schools, severely strained health care, transportation in disrepair, and more.

But at least this time, we can still hold onto the promise of a better tomorrow. Sure, it won't actually come tomorrow. But with The Education Initiative on next year's general election ballot, We the People will finally have the opportunity to do what the Governor and many legislators simply refuse to do. We the People will finally have the chance to begin fixing our anachronous, broken tax system while also mending our tattered social safety net. And frankly, it's long past time for We the People to carpe diem.

Oh, yes. That's right. We went there... In May.

And frankly, that's the truth. The only way we will accomplish meaningful tax reform in the immediate future is by passing The Education Initiative (TEI) next year.

But of course, here's where Ralston & I part ways.

The margin tax, which the governor makes sound like the apocalypse, is not the answer. But who can blame anyone for supporting it because of the governor no-tax pledge, which has as many asterisks as the baseball record book, the Legislature’s serial inaction, compounded by buck-passing "enabling" tax measures.

I have thought long and hard about this, and I will not vote for the margin tax. Setting tax policy at the ballot box is a terrible last resort, and I’m here to tell you I have another plan.

This is perhaps the wildest fantasy in Ralston's fantasy campaign speech. Frankly, there is no other realistic plan for actual tax reform. Governor Brian Sandoval (R-Denial) isn't offering one, and we've yet to see a Democratic challenger emerge with one.

So where does that leaves us. It leaves us with three letters... And a certain 2014 ballot initiative.

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. [...]

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.

I wrote those words in March. I stick by those words now. And I'll likely be repeating these same words throughout 2014.

Sure, Ralston has a point about this not being an ideal situation. Honestly, it's not. We elect legislators and a Governor to enact budgets and determine state funding.

But really, is the status quo an ideal situation? Come on, we all know the honest answer to that. (Which is: Hell, no!)

In an ideal world, TEI would have never gone as far as it has. However, we don't live in an ideal world We live in 2014 Nevada with a tax code still stuck in 1864.

This is why TEI will be on our ballot next year. Our state's "political elite" are in sore need of a cold, hard reality check. And right now, the only way for that reality check to arrive in Carson City is if the voters deliver it directly to them in November 2014.

While Ralston's weekend column made for a nice fantasy, it's time for a reality check. And yes, it's time for TEI.

Finally, Sine Die.

Well, that was fast, This morning, we were shocked to see the 27th special session of the Nevada Legislature convene. But now, we have this from the Secretary of the Senate.

NVSecSenate: The Senate stands adjourned Sine Die. This time we mean it. #nvleg

So what happened during the just over two hours of special session? The Sun's Anjeanette Damon & Andrew Doughman have the details.

“The bill failed and public safety is extremely important in Clark County,” Sandoval said of his decision to call a special session. “The crime rate has gone up. This was an extremely important bill for the people of Clark County.” [...]

The measure, which authorizes the Clark County Commission to raise the sales tax by .15 percentage points to hire more police officers, wasn’t the only bill on the special session agenda.

Lawmakers also were asked to divert $2 million to the Millennium Scholarship from Sandoval’s failed effort to fund Teach for America, a nonprofit that recruits teachers for at-risk schools.

An economic development bill worth millions in tax incentives to draw new and expanding businesses to the state also was considered. And two education bills-- one to change the management of the state’s charter schools account and another on class-size reduction--rounded out the agenda. [...]


The Teach For America bill, however, would’ve failed in the Assembly and a charter school bill died in the Ways and Means committee, said chairwoman Maggie Carlton, D-Las Vegas.

“That bill did not have a hearing in Ways and Means,” she said. “We didn’t support it.”

The Assembly ended up throwing its support to the charter school bill in the special session and an agreement was brokered with Sandoval to divert the Teach for America money to the Millennium Scholarship.

In the end, #NVLeg finally passed the Clark County police surtax, the latest education grand bargain, and the economic development bills. So now, it's sine die... For real.

We'll have more on the #NVLeg #77 fallout later soon. But in the mean time, we finally reached sine die. And this time, it's sine die.

Unacceptable

Is this NEAT or what? Earlier this week, we caught a whiff of Assembly Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick's (D-North Las Vegas) latest tax bill. And now, we have NEAT... Which is also referred to as AB 498.

Last night, Speaker Kirkpatrick appeared on "Ralston Reports" to discuss her proposal for the Nevada Entertainment Admissions Tax (NEAT). It replaces the current Live Entertainment Tax that levies 5% on some venues, 10% on others, and 0% (no, really) on others, with an across-the-board 8% rate that applies for everything from Strip shows to movie theaters to golf courses. And it's rumored to bring in at least $50 million this session.



Apparently, this is the beginning of #NVLeg Democratic leadership's rollout of their official tax plan. Ralston wrote earlier today about the full tax package that's being cooked up as we speak. Apparently, it will raise roughly $350 million in the coming biennium (with AB 498 included).

Yet before it can raise any money, it has to pass. How can it pass? Ralston envisions a scenario where Democratic leaders enter into a pact with "The Senate GOP Mod Squad" and various corporate lobbyists to force the unions to give up The Education Initiative in exchange for yet another "Frankenstein Budget".

This is the dream scenario – and not just for Democrats. As the business community – or at least some – and the gaming folks – or at least some –realize that the the margins tax on the ballot could pass unless the teachers are willing to euthanize it, many here in the capital are starting to talk about such an endgame scenario.

But is this the stuff of Grimm, or a grim reminder that some sort of ugly mishmash of taxes, cobbled together to reach a number and without regard to policy, likely will pass this session, as so often happens? Or is this unlikely to become even a fractured fairy tale, with the denouement being that partisanship will trump cooperation and the teachers will whistle a merry tune on their way to the ballot in 2014, with gobs of money spent against the margins tax and a chance – a chance – it passes anyhow.

Perhaps this is just a reminder that we can no longer band-aid and "quick fix" our way out of a long brewing systemic disease. For far too long, Nevada "leaders" have patched together budgets that looked "reasonable" on the surface, but ultimately did little or nothing to truly fix our long-term problems. Case(s) in point: 2003... And 2009... And 2011.

As the 76th session of the Nevada Legislature came to a close in June 2011, I asked why We the People should not finally go to the ballot box to fix what couldn't be fixed in Carson City. And frankly, I'm still asking that today. Why not just do it already?

Let's face it: The two main tax plans being discussed up there now are shit sandwiches. One is likely illegal and definitely political(ly toxic). And while the other one has some decent elements, it's just another hodge-podge of patchwork that doesn't really fix the root problem or cure the systemic diseases of regressive taxation & chronic underfunding of our public infrastructure. Both may be better than what we have now, but neither offers a true cure.

Something must change. The status quo in Carson City is no longer just unpalatable. It's now simply unacceptable. And if the Governor and (many) legislators still can't see that, then it's time for We the People to change it.

Taxing Times

What a year this has been... And we're only in March! Just as the 77th session of the Nevada Legislature was about to begin, tax reform looked dead as a door nail. And then, Marilyn Kirkpatrick emerged with her "Revenue Neutral Sales Tax Extravaganza!" If that was to be the great tax reform plan of 2013, then we really would have been in for a rough session. Never mind that The Education Initiative (aka IP 1) has been sitting right there, ready for legislators to act upon.

Last month, even SJR 15 seemed to be in deep trouble. After their surprise setback in 2011, the mining industry has been juicing up to shut this down. Then on what was thought to be a mundane Tuesday, Michael Roberson unleashed what's become March Madness in Carson City with his proposed mining tax alternative to IP 1.

Now, all of a sudden, we're seeing a frenzy of talk and action on what was once "The Dirty T Word". Of course, the "tea party" radical right still sees it as a dirty word. And it's escalating what was already an ugly civil war in the Nevada Republican Party over it. Yet now, despite that, there's a growing desire to take some sort of action on tax reform in Carson City.

But funny enough, the initiative that sparked the new tax talk presents a curveball for #NVLeg. Nevada law is clear that the Legislature can approve the Governor's recommended alternative should they not approve the actual initiative. Yet as we've discussed before, Roberson doesn't have Brian Sandoval's support for his mining tax alternative. And now, Legislature leaders don't even want to vote on The Education Initiative. So what happens next?

Amicus Nevada didn't mince words earlier today in giving #NVLeg leaders a stern warning.

Whereas Ralston sees one problem with that part of Article 19, Section 2, (namely, what does “approved by the Governor” mean?), I see other problems: (1) may the Legislature propose an alternate measure after the 40-day consideration period on the petition has expired without expressly rejecting it; (2) must the Governor recommend an alternate before the Legislature may enact one; (3) would the Governor have an absolute (or even a qualified) veto over an alternate; and (4) what constitutes “a different measure on the same subject”?

In my view, if the Legislature does not affirmatively reject the petition within 40 days of its submission, the Legislature loses power to propose an alternate measure. Remember, the Constitution requires that the petition “shall be enacted or rejected by the Legislature . . . within 40 days.” Nev. Const. art. 19, § 2(3). If the Legislature does not enact the petition, the Constitution instructs “If [the petition] is rejected by the Legislature, or if no action is taken thereon within 40 days, the Secretary of State shall submit the [petition]” to the voters at the next general election. Id. (emphasis added). Thus, there is an operational distinction between rejection and rejection by default. In both cases, the petition goes to the voters. But in the case of rejection by default (i.e. the Legislature failing to act within 40 days), the Legislature loses power to propose an alternate. [...]

The last issue I want to briefly (ha!) discuss is whether a mining tax measure could be an alternate to IP 1. Steve Sebelius is of the opinion that yes, a mining tax could be the legislative alternate to the margin tax in IP 1. The Senate Republicans who proposed a mining tax measure as an alternate seem to agree. I don’t think that’s correct, at least not without some creative drafting. Senate Joint Resolution 15 of the 75th Session proposes to repeal the constitutional limitations on mining taxation. That measure, should it pass this legislative session, will go on the ballot in 2014. It cannot be the alternate to IP 1 primarily because they are separate measures, one proposing a change to law, the other a change to the Constitution. Both could be enacted as they are not mutually exclusive options, unlike a true alternate under Article 19, Section 2. The only way I see a new mining tax (or a higher tax rate) being a proper alternate to IP 1 is it must be conditioned on S. J. Res. 15′s ratification by the voters, or it must propose changes to law that do not implicate S. J. Res. 15 or the underlying provisions in the Constitution.

Assuming the Legislature timely rejects IP 1 this session, it will preserve its power to propose an alternate measure. Should the Legislature propose an alternate relating to mining, I’d expect nothing less of a full on legal onslaught to prevent the alternate from appearing on the ballot, whether it be through a gubernatorial assist (with a veto) or through legal challenges, on constitutional and procedural grounds, should the Legislature find itself caught up in a dispute with the executive branch over the scope of the veto power in the case of initiative measures. And with most of these tax issues decided in the 11th hour of a session as part of the endgame, I agree with Ralston: 2013 could be 2003 all over again.

¡Dondé los yikes! Indeed, this is increasingly feeling deja vu. Just as it was in 2003, this 2013 tax fight may head to the courts very soon if Roberson's IP 1 alternative catches enough fire to pass. Yet despite this striking similarity, there may be one major difference now. We'll get to that in a moment.

There are certainly many challenges ahead in Carson City. There are definitely plenty of legal questions. And there are many political hurdles to overcome. But now, finally, "The T Word" has become THE WORD in the Nevada Legislature. Mining industry lobbyists are finally shaking in their boots... Along with other big "bid'ness" lobbyists. And progressive activists have an unprecedented opportunity to change the game in Carson City for good on the entire subject.

Just eight weeks ago, this all looked like the ultimate taboo in the Nevada Legislature. Why rock the boat, especially when "Captain Sandoval" won't accept any of the sort? But now, a unique combination of "budget cut fatigue", uncertainty in federal funding, pent up frustration over certain corporate special interests getting away with paying next to nothing, and the changing political landscape of Nevada has created this historic opening. Regardless of the fate of Roberson's IP 1 alternative, "The T Word" is no longer taboo.

The opening is here. So who will take it? And what will ultimately pass?

It just remains to be seen what can be taxed, what will be taxed, and what the courts will allow the people to decide to be taxed next year.

Deja Vu... No More

It hasn't even been two weeks since the Legislature began its 77th session, and already it feels like deja vu. During the first week, leaders in Carson City talked so much about "having a real conversation" on taxes. Yet despite having various real tax reform proposals on the table, they still look ready to ignore those proposals.

And not only that, but they're also talking about the very same hockey stick that has always been used to kick the puck of real tax reform down the road.

This legislative session, Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson, R-Henderson, has said he supports discussing a sales tax on services that would broaden the tax base and allow the Legislature to decrease the overall sales tax rate.

He’s reprising an idea that Nevada has discussed for more than 20 years.

“Broadening of a sales tax base, coupled with some reduction of the sales tax rate, is appropriate,” said the 1989 Governor’s Commission to Study the Fiscal Affairs of State and Local Governments in Nevada, which recommended broadening the tax base be the “paramount concern” of the Legislature.

Roberson has said many times that he supports broadening the tax base, but “any kind of tax reform needs to be revenue neutral.” He’s again channeling ghosts of 1989.

“Broaden, on a revenue neutral basis, the general sales tax base to fully include hotels and lodging, food for home consumption, drugs, household fuels and other utilities (including telephone service), service to persons (e.g., dry cleaning, beauty and barber shops) and newspapers,” said the 1988 Price Waterhouse fiscal affairs study.

And that's not all. There have also been endless promises of "real tax reform". Yet when push comes to shove, we get nothing... Except for that very same stick and puck.

So are we set for deja vu yet again?

Perhaps not. After all, there are two major differences this session: The Education Initiative and SJR 15. The latter was already passed for the first time in 2011, while the former already collected more than enough signatures to qualify for the 2014 ballot if the Legislature doesn't act on it. All SJR 15 needs is a second round of passage this year in order to go to the voters on the 2014 ballot.

What's so sad about this is that these two proposals address the most glaring problems in Nevada's budget. It's pretty much common knowledge now that the mining industry pays nearly nothing in taxes, the other largest corporations doing business here pay very little in taxes, and the budget is far too reliant on the fortunes one sector (gaming & tourism). The Education Initiative and SJR 15 can break the cycle of logjam and empty promises on real tax reform and provide much needed revenue to fund our public infrastructure.

All the Legislature needs to do is pass SJR 15 a second time. That's all. It's not even really a vote for "more taxes". It's just allowing voters to decide on doing away with mining tax loopholes so legislators actually have more oversight on mining taxation.

And if legislators are really too scared to pass The Education Initiative themselves, then they should just let "we the people" decide on it next year. As my favorite philosopher would say, "Don't f**k it up."

This time may finally be different. It's just a matter of whether legislators want to take part in making the difference.

Gone With the C-Tax

Remember the C-Tax? Wait, what?

Come on, you must remember the C-Tax. The City of Fernley sued over it last year. The Nevada Supreme Court has since dismissed part of the suit while sending the rest back to district court.

But that's just the start of it. Last April, we examined how North Las Vegas also got the short end of the C-Tax stick. Long story short, Henderson received double the C-Tax revenue of North Las Vegas despite having only about 50,000 more residents (North Las Vegas has 217,482 residents compared to Henderson's 267,270 residents). And on top of that indignity, North Las Vegas must fund its own libraries while the state directly funds Las Vegas-Clark County and Henderson Libraries. Because Henderson and Las Vegas have higher property values than North Las Vegas, they receive far more state funding.

Apparently, North Las Vegas has finally had enough. During the interim, some legislators were contemplating changes to the C-Tax. Now, Assembly Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick (D-North Las Vegas) is championing AB 68. However, North Las Vegas officials don't think it goes far enough. So they proposed an amendment... An amendment that may blow up the entire AB 68 accord.

Attached is our proposed amendment to AB68 and an additional sheet that outlines the reasoning behind the amount of base adjustment listed in the amendment. I will tell you that we have not gotten any sign-off from the City of Henderson either on this language, the amount requested, or even if they support the amendment.

Our reasoning for including them is that all of the modeling done by the CTax Interim Committee working group reflected that both Henderson and North Las Vegas are deserving of a base adjustment. To not include them would defeat the purpose of having this one time base adjustment truly make all the cities in Clark County have an equitable starting point for the new formula reflected in AB68. It is very important to realize that by using the excess distribution this year as the source of this base adjustment - no entity in Clark County will receive less money than they received the previous year. Because AB68 will roll excess into the base going forward, if a base adjustment is determined to be prudent in a later year - entities may in fact receive less. That would not be the intent of North Las Vegas.

We simply ask for the opportunity to present our information, facts and reasoning behind this proposed amendment and that the committee give it due consideration. We in no way intend for our actions to do anything to jeopardize the passage of AB68. This amendment will start everyone on a fair and equitable base going forward under AB68.

Respectfully submitted,
Dan Musgrove
On Behalf of the City of North Las Vegas

Apparently, Nor'town thought inclusion of Henderson could help secure the amendment requesting more C-Tax funding. But instead, Henderson officials are keeping their distance from this amendment. After all, Henderson is already getting a pretty good deal from the current setup. And city officials don't want to upset Speaker Kirkpatrick, the one who seems to be calling the shots on C-Tax reform in Carson City.

What we have here is a strange mix of terrible tax policy, a possibly sincere attempt to fix it, a clash of personalities, and perhaps some brutal electoral politics as well. As we've discussed before, the current C-Tax structure may very well be a civil rights violation. Poor minority heavy communities in North Las Vegas have been chronically underfunded as wealthier and whiter communities in the state have enjoyed more state funding. There's something inherently wrong in this.

And North Las Vegas is now feeling the pressure to change this. It just so happens that municipal elections happen this spring, and Mayor Shari Buck (R) is running for reelection. Yet Henderson Mayor Andy Hafen (D) is also running for reelection in his city. And I doubt Henderson City Hall has any kind of appetite for ruining its relationship with #NVLeg leadership as both AB 68 and the broader budget are being negotiated.

So we now have another hot mess. And yet again, it revolves around Nor'town. And state legislators are reminded again of how faulty Nevada's tax structure truly is. Such is the story of our fine state.

Let's Get Real.

Yep, that didn't last long. In the first moments of the new session of the Nevada Legislature, there was hope. There was talk of reform. There seemed to be opportunity.

But now, there's just the same old pile of nothing. Oh yes, that's right. "Revenue-neutral" is the new talk of the town in Carson City. And it has education advocates and other progressives wondering what's the point.

[Assembly Speaker Marilyn] Kirkpatrick [D-North Las Vegas], who so far has shied away from detailing what she wants to do on taxes this session, said she would favor eliminating the payroll tax and ending the “sunsets” on what was supposed to be a temporary tax increase.

“I want to get rid of the sunsets altogether,” she said of the 2009 tax increase that was originally supposed to expire in 2011. The Legislature extended those taxes two years ago and Gov. Brian Sandoval has proposed another two-year extension.

“We can’t be on a seesaw,” she said. “I want the sunsets off.”

Kirkpatrick did not detail a specific proposal for broadening the tax base. But she said expanding the sales tax to include services — such as hairdressing, accounting and legal advice —would be a realistic approach. To make it “revenue-neutral,” the sales tax rate would be lowered.

So that's the big idea? Charge sales tax at the hair stylist and the lawyer's office? Seriously? And Legislature leaders wonder why both some individual legislators and many grassroots activists are so underwhelmed by this "reform"?

Sorry, but charging sales tax at the accountant's office doesn't address the core of Nevada's chronic revenue shortage. There are far deeper problems in Nevada's tax and budget structure that must be addressed. Taxes here are incredibly regressive, hitting the working poor & middle class the hardest. And as long as schools and other parts of Nevada's public infrastructure are chronically underfunded, we'll never attract the businesses we need for a stable and healthy economy.

Solutions are available. And in fact, the solutions are likely right on top of legislators' desks. SJR 15 addresses the serious shortfall that is the enshrinement of mining industry tax loopholes in the Nevada Constitution. (It's a key reason why multinational mining conglomerates pay almost no taxes in this state.) And of course, The Education Initiative offers a corporate margin tax modeled after the system in that socialist utopia that is TEXAS. (No, really.) At least these policies will actually provide real progress on tax reform if passed.

And it's not just hardened lefties saying this. Jim Rogers also chimed in (very) early this morning.

Nevada will never free itself from the influence of the horse and buggy structure and capabilities of its governance system unless it totally restructures and redefines government’s role to support the vast interests of the many faceted Nevada population.

We must face the facts. The Nevada of today is far different from the Nevada of the late 19th century. We're mostly an urban state now. We require public schools, freeways, and hospitals. And it makes no sense to continue legalized corporate tax evasion while tinkering with incredibly regressive and narrow tax policies that hit the middle class, the working poor, and small businesses the hardest.

So why continue this ridiculous "revenue-neutral" kabuki theater? OK, so Brian Sandoval and Republican legislators refuse to acknowledge Nevada's 21st century reality. Just solve the problem by sending SJR 15 and The Education Initiative to the voters. If the Legislature can't or won't fix Nevada's serious fiscal problems, then "We the People" must. The time for rearranging deck chairs on this Titanic in Carson City is over.

This Time Will Be Different?

So it's here. Yesterday was the first day of the 77th session of the Nevada Legislature. And at least for a moment yesterday, Jon Ralston put aside his cynicism to praise the opening speech by new Assembly Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick (D-North Las Vegas).

Kirkpatrick asked her colleagues if they will “apply nickel-sized solutions to dollar-sized problems.” That phrase resonates because of its metaphorical and near-literal meanings – the penurious funding of most services and the small-minded thinking when large solutions are imperative.

Nickel-sized solutions for dollar-sized problems: Thus has been the story of every session I have covered, so Kirkpatrick is asking me to believe the Gang of 63 will actually put its money where its leaders’ (or at least the Democratic ones) mouths have been on Day One of nearly every Legislature.

Yes, some will translate that line to mean: Kirkpatrick wants to raise taxes. And while she might, that is the most simplistic interpretation of the line, which is more a call for real, substantive debate – the kind she has made her signature.

“Will we be a state that answers the wake-up call to the problems in our education system, or will we, once again, put off taking action and leave the toughest problems for future generations to solve?” Kirkpatrick asked. The tendency is to snarkily reply: “Well, of course you will.”

But Kirkpatrick’s fire ignites embers of hope that have been all but burned out by sessions of inaction and postponement. You could tell that these were not just words to Kirkpatrick, that she does not want them to fade into the expected hurly burly of the next 119 days.

For a moment, even I was tempted to believe. But then, reality intervened. And I started wondering just what we can expect this session.

Of course, I'd like to believe. It's just that I'm reminded of the 900 pound gorilla in Carson City. If the Legislature can truly handle tax reform and common-sense budgeting, then why is The Education Initiative likely heading to the ballot box instead of the negotiating table?

So what's actually possible in Carson City this session? And perhaps more importantly, what's probable?

We know what Governor Sandoval has said. And we know what Republican legislators have said. Does Speaker Kirkpatrick have some sort of magical "secret sauce" in her possession that can break the G-O-TEA logjam on meaningful tax reform?

I'd like to think so. I'd like to believe. And honestly, I'd like to think that there are future Kenny Guinn like figures waiting in the wings and ready to pursue meaningful changes to bring both Nevada's tax code & Nevada's economy into the 21st century.

It's just that all too often when legislators speak of "bipartisan consensus", they mean politicians in both parties giving into the whims & fancies of "the gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex". Why should we believe that this session will be different? Can legislators actually muster the courage necessary to stand up to well "juiced" corporate lobbyists and work out the kind of tax reform needed to fully fund our schools, our transportation, our health care, and the rest of our public infrastructure?

Trust me, I want to believe this session will be different. I just need to see the evidence proving such is possible. Until then, I'll probably keep looking ahead to efforts for organizing a "ballot royale" next year. At least we now know that if legislators don't act, "We the People" finally can.

Hey, do you think the thought of that might just scare the Legislature into action?

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]

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 sinking 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?

And It's Back!

Just minutes ago, the Nevada Supreme Court issued its ruling on The Education Initiative. And public education activists can now rejoice.

In a unanimous opinion issued Thursday, justices rejected arguments that the petition was flawed. It will now go to the 2013 Legislature, and more likely to voters in 2014.

The measure was pushed by the state teachers union and other labor groups. They argued it would raise $800 million a year for education and supporters gathered more than 150,000 signatures to send the proposal to state lawmakers.

But a pro-business organization challenged the measure, arguing a required 200-word description of what it would do was misleading because it doesn’t guarantee more money for education.

Justices, however, said the description need not articulate every possible ramification.

Frankly, I'm surprised. While I felt the district court ruling would be overturned, I wasn't expecting a unanimous decision. This definitely settles the legal issues for good. Education activists can now look forward to the next step, which starts next week.

We've discussed the legal case against The Education Initiative before. It was truly quite flimsy. Basically, "Tea Party, Inc." lawyers were hoping to trap it in a "legal Catch 22" where its efforts to abide by Nevada's "single subject rule" actually disqualified it. I guess Nevada's Supremes were having none of it.

But now comes a bigger hurdle. Next week, the 77th session of the Nevada Legislature begins. And legislators will have to decide what to do with this initiative. If they approve, then it becomes law this year. But if they don't approve the specific language of this initiative, it will go to "We the People" on next year's general election ballot.

Already, some legislators are sounding queasy about it. Too bad. "We the People" seem to same the kind of tax reform offered by this initiative (as opposed to the usual deform offered by the Legislature). And the facts on the ground dictate that we must do a better job of investing in our people.

So either legislators will need to think hard about what the Nevada Supreme Court is handing them... Or they will have to explain to voters next year why they are punting to us. Either way, we will finally see an opportunity to start fixing Nevada's broken public infrastructure and failed tax code. And that's something progressives can be thankful for today.

The Real State of the State

Last night, Governor Brian Sandoval celebrated a "return to normal" here in Nevada. This morning, The Sun's Patrick Coolican reminded us of why we should be troubled by this. So has PLAN.

"Governor Brian Sandoval's State of the State speech short-changed education, human services, state workers and the people of Nevada. He showed more fealty to corporations and the discredited idea that no/low taxes bring economic prosperity than he did to our kids. He talked about no longer falling back. How can we fall back any further when we're last in everything, including education, health care and per capita public workers? He's cutting taxes on businesses but will force ordinary Nevadans to continue paying nearly the highest sales taxes in nation. Nevada's vexing problems won't be solved until we fix our revenue structure, which will require real leadership."
-- Bob Fulkerson, executive director, Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada

That's a perfectly concise summary of what we heard last night. And ever since Sandoval's speech, we've seen even more "devils in the details". The Sun's Anjeanette Damon and David McGrath Schwartz started pointing out the chicanery in Sandoval's proposed budget.

Sandoval is extending tax increases that would otherwise expire. He is also diverting money from special funds — to the tune of $422 million — to support general state programs.

Democrats are being typically cagey about how they might seek to increase tax revenue, but they are hinting broadly that it’s an effort they will undertake. First, they will look at how existing taxes are both defined and collected. “How do you define who really pays those types of things?” Speaker Kirkpatrick said. “So we’ll be cleaning up those first, which will bring some revenue.”

Hidden in Sandoval's proposed budget are more raiding into the state "rainy day fund", diversions of money specifically meant for public education & transportation into the general fund, and using "roll-ups" to make a $47 million uptick in the education budget look like a $135 million increase. And on top of that, Sandoval wants to cut the modified business tax while extending the rest of the 2009/2011 "Sunset Taxes". And we're supposed to believe this is a "balanced budget" that properly funds what the state needs?

Democratic leaders questioned why he was cutting taxes for business when the state doesn’t adequately fund education, and why he was depleting the state’s rainy day fund.

“Why in the world would we cut the (payroll tax) when we can’t properly fund schools,” said Sen. Debbie Smith, D-Sparks, and incoming chair of the Senate Finance Committee. "Why would we eliminate the rainy day fund when we’re not in a crisis? That money is supposed to be for an emergency.”

Probably because he thinks this is the more politically appealing route. At least I'm not the only one seeing this. ProgressNow Nevada called out Governor Sandoval on taking the route of political convenience.

Tonight Governor Sandoval showed a lack of leadership. This was not the speech of someone looking to lead Nevada to a more prosperous future; it was one of a Governor pursuing an agenda that is best for his political future, not the people of Nevada.

We've heard Gov. Sandoval give his moderate song and dance before. But the action we've seen has been anything but - he's asked seniors, students, and the poor to sacrifice while not asking a single sacrifice from big corporations and out-of-state mining companies.

The reality is Gov. Sandoval is offering us nothing but more of the same – no serious investment in education or the social services that were already devastated by Gov. Sandoval’s previous budget.

This is the real state of the state. This is the ugly reality of what we will soon be seeing in Carson City. Brian Sandoval thinks he can cruise with another budget full of gimmicks and lacking real investment in the public infrastructure necessary for a brighter economic future. One can only hope the Legislature will consider smarter budgeting.

So About Tonight...

In case you were wondering, Brian Sandoval will be giving some speech in Carson City tonight. And it probably won't sound like what we heard in Las Vegas last week. Rather, expect more of the same (old shit).

-----About $6.5 billion budget, slight increase [...]

----$135 million in what he will call "new investment" in K-12: Expansion of all-day K, first into at-risk schools, maybe more later, but also will push school choice, kids reading by third grade, invest in Teach for America, another pilot program (Jobs for America's Graduates), ELL investment

---Appropriation to boost Millennium Scholarship

---Cut MBT for more businesses

---Medicaid co-pays and emphasize may opt-out of expansion in future

So he plans to throw in just enough numbers to sound "moderate". But in reality, he still doesn't get the point of Medicaid. And he still doesn't understand the depth of our underfunding of our schools along with other areas of public infrastructure.

Jon Ralston has joked about using the #sunnystate hashtag on Twitter tonight during the State of the State speech. I think I'll stick to #NVSoS. But certainly, we'll be seeing some "sunny side up" delusions on display on Carson City. No matter how much "Governor Sunny" tries to spin everyone, reality still awaits outside. And the rest of Nevada can't afford to ignore it.

(And yes, by the way, I will be live-blogging here and live-tweeting the speech tonight... Even though we already know over 90% of what's about to happen.)

The Right Way to Fix Education Funding Formulae

How many times have we heard the complaints about Nevada shortchanging our own kids? And how many times have we specifically heard the complaints about Nevada shortchanging its most populous county, the place where over 70% of our people live and where about 80% of the state's tax revenue is collected? All too often, we hear rumors of solutions brewing in Carson City. But this time, some there are actually determined to fix both problems.

But of course, there's a catch. Not everyone seems determine to solve both problems.

Democratic leaders have said achieving “funding equity” is their top priority. Technically, that means ditching the decades-old funding formula that favors sparsely populated counties in favor of a “weighted funding formula” that directs more funding to districts with large populations of students in poverty, learning English as a second language or in gifted and talented programs.

In reality, that means diverting state funding from Washoe and rural counties to Clark County — which has been historically underfunded on a per-pupil basis.

Senate Majority Leader Mo Denis, D-Las Vegas, said achieving funding equity is key to the rest of the Democrats’ education initiatives — including reduced class sizes, expanded full-day kindergarten and creating a pre-kindergarten program for at-risk students.

“Our kids are being disadvantaged in Clark County as opposed to everywhere else in the state,” Denis said. “We really need to look at that and do what is best for all of our kids, which includes Clark County.”

Nevada is one of just 14 states that doesn't consider poor students in its school funding formulae. And Nevada is one of only 3 states that doesn't consider English language learners in its school funding formulae. This obviously puts Clark County at a huge disadvantage. And that disadvantage is only worsened when taking into account the late Bill Raggio and his uncanny ability to find money for Northern Nevada schools... But often at Southern Nevada's expense.

There's often been talk of changing the funding formulae. But now that the balance of power in the Legislature has finally shifted to the south, it's now getting more attention.

But unless it's matched with progressive tax reform, it's likely doomed to fail. And here's why. The first consultant hired by the Legislature to examine funding formulae reform found that under an otherwise "status quo" budget, Clark County schools stand to receive 6% more funding if the formulae are changed... But Washoe County stands to loss 2%, and Eureka County loses almost half of its entire funding!

While Clark County schools desperately need their fair share of public funds, no one really benefits if that comes at the expense of the rest of the state. While Washoe County schools are better funded than Clark's, it's not as if Washoe schools are "rich". They can't afford to be cut.

Ultimately, Nevada needs more revenue to ensure that all our schools are properly funded. It's ridiculous to cause a "beggar thy neighbor" situation instead of taking a comprehensive approach to improve all Nevada schools. Instead, we can find the revenue to fund Southern Nevada schools without starving the North by simply cutting back on the corporate welfare in our tax code. But will enough folks in Carson City see what's obvious to us? That remains to be seen.

Progressives' View of the State of the State

And she's back! She may no longer serve in the Legislature, but Sheila Leslie's voice will still be heard in Carson City this spring. Now, she's making waves as an advocate for those who don't often have allies in Carson City. And she delivered a powerful message last night at PLAN's Las Vegas office.



Sheila Leslie delivered the keynote speech at PLAN's and ProgressNow Nevada's Progressive State of the State event. In her speech, Leslie highlighted an issue that's near and dear to our hearts here. Of course, we're talking about the need to properly invest in our people and collect the revenue that's necessary to do so.





Yet she also noted the challenges ahead in pursuing a stronger Nevada that values its own people. Chief among those challenges is overcoming the excessive stranglehold that "the gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex" has over Carson City. Legislators will ultimately need to look beyond their biggest campaign contributors to see the real State of Nevada.





What was really fascinating last night was the number of Nevada legislators present last night. Lucy Flores, David Parks, Justin Jones, Ruben Kihuen, James Healey, Pat Spearman, and even more legislators came by to see the presentation. When was the last time that many legislators were even interested in learning more about the progressive alternative to the status quo?





Hopefully, last night was only the start of a real conversation on building a better future for Nevada. (And this actually isn't all! Later, I'll post more on the civil rights issues discussed last night at the Progressive State of the State.)

The New (Old) Rule of the 113th Congress

Shortly after the "Fiscal Cliff" deal was announced, there was talk of how much "leverage" Republicans gained going into (the next round of) debt ceiling & budget talks. After all, Republicans made sure not to deal with the debt ceiling last week. Don't they now have the upper hand in the budget fight?

Not so fast. But before I explain this further, I must mention something else (that's actually related in a funny way).

Also last week, Harry Reid became the longest serving Nevadan in Congress. He's already been the most powerful Nevadan in Congress, but now he has another notch to add to his victory belt. Ralston didn't miss this as he paid tribute last week.



MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell followed suit, and he specifically added a little known fact (that is, little known to folks who don't read this blog ;-) ) about what Harry Reid accomplishes daily in the US Senate.

“Harry Reid, who every day does much more than most people in the news media realize, and definitely accomplishes much more than the news media ever reports, pushed through pages and pages of nominations for President Obama yesterday when everyone was focused on what the House would do on the fiscal cliff vote. And Harry Reid did that with the active but invisible help of Mitch McConnell who did his part to make sure that no Republicans would vote against any of those nominations. And what did the United States Senate do today, that dysfunctional United States Senate? According to the news media, absolutely nothing.”

Yet here in the real world, Harry Reid has accomplished quite a lot. Lately, he, President Obama, and Vice President Biden forced a majority of Senate Republicans (including Dean Heller) and a significant chunk of House Republicans (including Joe Heck) to vote to raise taxes on the super-wealthy. Just last year, that was considered impossible. But now, it's happened.

And now, Congressional Republican leaders may already be starting to cry "Uncle!" on the next round of budget brawls.

It’s true that [House Speaker John] Boehner insists above that Republicans won’t back down from the demand that spending get cut by the same amount as the debt ceiling rises. But all that really means is that they will use the size of the debt ceiling hike as a metric to set the amount of their spending cut demand — not that the threat of default will be used to extract those cuts. Remember, GOP leaders well know that if they do that, the entire business community will join with Obama and Democrats to tell them to back off or take the blame for cratering the economy, leaving Republicans further isolated. So Boehner is letting it be known that Republicans don’t see the debt ceiling as their primary leverage point in the battle to come.

Boehner does this by threatening to only agree to “monthly” debt ceiling hikes. But this should be read, if anything, as a sign of weakness. It’s essentially a concession that the debt limit has to be raised; Boehner is merely threatening to drag his feet as he allows the inevitable to happen. But it’s just nonsense. The business community is not going to go for such a course of action, to put it mildly. And it risks dragging the country through monthly threats of default, a terrible thing to inflict on the American people.

Ultimately, what this highlights is the utter incoherence of the GOP position on the debt ceiling. Republican leaders know they have to raise the debt limit — they know the threat not to do this isn’t credible, and they need to signal to the business community that they don’t view this option seriously — yet they want to continue to use it as leverage to get what they want, anyway. Hence Boehner’s above dance. And Boehner isn’t the only one: On Face the Nation yesterday, when [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell was asked directly whether Republicans would really withhold support for a debt ceiling hike if it weren’t paid for by spending cuts of equivalent size, he repeatedly refused to answer.

Boehner’s and McConnell’s equivocations will only embolden the White House and Democrats to stick with their strategy of refusing to negotiate over the debt ceiling, and treating the Republicans’ refusal to commit to raising it up front as their problem, and their problem only.

No matter how much teabaggers whine and moan and shout and complain about the federal budget and the debt ceiling, the fact of the matter is that we have to pay for what we buy. And Wall Street knows this, which is why the Wall Street power players do NOT want another 2011 style melee in 2013... And they certainly do NOT want America to default on its debt. That would trigger a global financial panic at least as great as 2008's, and possibly as horrific as that in 1929.

President Obama and Harry Reid also know this. Do Republicans really want to trigger another Great Depression? And do they want Americans to unleash their wrath on the entire G-O-TEA? This is why Boehner and McConnell are starting to back-pedal on their demands for another debt ceiling showdown. Quite frankly, Republicans actually don't have the kind of "leverage" in the next round of budget talks that many Beltway pundits originally assumed they had.

One thing I had to learn after moving to Nevada is that Harry Reid is a much shrewder strategist than I had originally given him credit for. He's overcome the odds many times before in his political career. And now, on Capitol Hill, he's managed to pass legislation that many assumed was "dead". Just keep this in mind as we hear more about the upcoming debt ceiling/budget fight.

Rotten Apple

Any wonder why I'm mad?

Last June, Apple scored a sweet publicly funded bailout plan to build a new data storage facility in Northern Nevada. That plan was agreed to on certain conditions. One of them is the completion of a business and fabrication center in Downtown Reno. Yet so far, there's still no business center in Downtown Reno.

"The project is being proposed to be completed this year," said Craig Willcut, the president and CEO of United Construction during a Reno Planning Commission meeting in late September when the project was still in the approval phase. "The tenant is planning on occupying in December, so it's a fast-track project."

Today, the land where Apple is expected to build a 15,000 square foot building in downtown is still undeveloped. An approved building permit for the project has been sitting at Reno City Hall since late October waiting for a contractor to pick it up and pay $38,961 in permitting fees, according to Reno officials.

Willcut said he could not comment on the project and calls to developers working on the project did not return phone calls seeking comment.

So what does the delay mean? Who knows.

Regardless, Apple's plan for downtown Reno is to use the Tourism Improvement District known as the Tessera District the Reno City Council approved in 2009.

By setting up shop within the district, Apple would be able to purchase its computer servers for the data center while benefiting from a 75 percent sales tax break on purchases made within the district. Data centers require regular computer server replacements, a cost that adds up over time.

Apple promised to open this business center in Downtown Reno. And the construction firm hired by Apple promised to complete and open this business center by December 2012. Yet it's January 2013, and there's still no business and fabrication center in Downtown Reno.

Is this just an innocent SNAFU? Or is there something more sinister to this? I'm reminded of what we discussed back in August.

Remember, Apple is being given $89 million worth of tax breaks. The state discounted 85% of property taxes for up to 30 years. The state also discounted all but 2% of the state sales tax for at least 4 years and up to 12 years. And Washoe County reduced Apple's effective county sales tax to a mere 0.5%. Apple got quite the sweet deal... And there's still no official contract? [...]

So we're willing to shower all this corporate welfare on Apple, but we're not willing to invest in our own people? We're willing to give Apple all the tax evasion bailouts welfare "special deals" it wants, but we're not willing to look out for our own long term economic health? Nevada, we have a problem. And it's more serious than you think.

This is why progressives and other tax reformers are so frustrated by what's been happening in Carson City. Apple scored an $89 million sweetheart deal. And Brian Sandoval touted this as "economic development". Yet so far, there's been little progress on the actual construction of at least one of Apple's promised "job creating" facilities.

What does Nevada have so far to show from the Apple bailout? That is, what does Nevada have to show other than the fact that Nevada is willing to reward companies for (mis)using our state to evade taxes elsewhere? (This is when we look at California.)

Yet when it comes to investing in real, good policies to encourage long-term economic health, Nevada is still very far behind. While Nevada government continues to dole out corporate welfare, it still can't provide the public infrastructure that's actually necessary for companies to start and grow here.

This is the chronic dysfunction that's at the center of Nevada government. And that "Gang of 63" in Carson City will need to get serious about fixing this if we're to ever have a functioning economy.

Just Say "The T Word" Already.

Over the weekend, there's been plenty of discussion around the revelation that Nevada gave $600,000 of taxpayer funded "economic development aid" to Take-Two Interactive, the company behind "Grand Theft Auto". Legislators have been quick to jump and defend this decision. Sure, "Grand Theft Auto" may be extraordinarily violent, but who is the State of Nevada to make any kind of "moral values" based decision on where to invest economic development funds and which companies to beg & bribe ask to relocate here?

Funny enough, quite a few lawmakers have come out of the woodwork to share their $0.02 on throwing more money to beg & bribe another company to move here. Yet when it comes to raising the revenue needed to actually provide for the basic needs for all the rest of the Nevadans who can't afford high priced lobbyists, there's silence.

“My bottom-line goal on the revenue portion is to have a full discussion about it,” said Senate Majority Leader Mo Denis, D-Las Vegas.

“There’s not an easy answer,” said Assembly Speaker-elect Marilyn Kirkpatrick, D-North Las Vegas. “There’s not a yes-or-no answer to that question.”

“I can’t answer that,” said Sen. Debbie Smith, D-Sparks, the incoming chairwoman of the Senate Finance Committee. “I think we need to have a tax discussion. I think there’s common agreement we need to look at our tax structure.” [...]

“There’s no leadership of an effort to raise taxes this session,” said Mike Sloan, a gaming lobbyist and veteran of the 2003 tax fight with late former Gov. Kenny Guinn. “I do think there’s a recognition that we have unmet needs.”

But the left wing of the Democratic coalition is frustrated.

“They’re saying, ‘Why fall on our swords if it won’t go anywhere anyway?’” said Bob Fulkerson, executive director of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada. “The problem with that is you don’t move the ball further ahead. We have these dysfunctional discussions.”

This is the problem. Neither generous corporate welfare nor inadequate support for our public infrastructure is questioned enough. And when the issue of "The T Word" arises (yet again), all too often we hear deafening silence from most quarters.

Something must change. Lost amidst the discussion about the $600,000 taxpayer funded check to Take-Two Interactive is the fact that Take-Two was actually able to find help from the state. Yet when it comes to allowing working poor families to access the health care they need, some politicians are still talking about how difficult to make that. And while extending taxes and fees that hit the working poor, the middle class, and small businesses the most may no longer seem quite so "controversial", far too many in Carson City are afraid to take on the kind of tax reform that's necessary to properly fund state government by making the wealthiest individuals & corporations pay their fair share.

Something must change. We simply can't afford for "The T Word" to be "taboo" any more. And we can't afford this constant double standard when it comes to funding & providing public services. And yes, now is the time to start talking about it.

AD 29: Meeting Lesley Cohen

As 2013 begins, all eyes turn to the Legislature as the new session begins. And during this session, #NVLeg will be tackling everything from immigrant rights to LGBTQ equality to health care to environmental stewardship... And, of course, the budget.

That's why a decent crowd showed up at the Henderson Democratic Club last night. Late last month, attorney Lesley Cohen was appointed by the Clark County Commission to fill the 29th District (Henderson-Green Valley) Assembly seat that was vacated by April Mastroluca shortly after the election. So last night, Cohen came to the Henderson Democratic Club to meet some of her new constituents and answer some questions.

Here's Cohen introducing herself.



Shortly after, she did a Q&A session. And of course, folks had questions about the budget. Cohen handled the questions by saying she needs more time to listen to constituents.



State Senator Joyce Woodhouse (D-Henderson), whose district overlaps AD 29, was also there. And she spoke up to mention her plan to co-host local town halls with Cohen and Assembly Member Andy Eisen (D-Paradise), whose 21st Assembly District overlaps with the other half of SD 5.



Cohen has certainly jumped into a difficult position here. She now must fill a full term that someone else just recently won. Still, she will be the one filling that full term representing AD 29. And she will have some major decisions to make.

This probably won't be the last time we hear from Lesley Cohen. It's now just a matter of how long of a sojourn to Carson City she can handle.

"The T Word"... & The Tiny Box It's In

Even though some still don't want to talk about it in public, there's increasingly been more buzz behind the scenes and on center stage about "The T Word". And interestingly enough, public safety concerns have brought this issue back to the forefront. And Governor Brian Sandoval
is weighing in a somewhat surprising way.

Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval said Wednesday he will support a quarter-cent sales tax increase in Clark County to pay for more police officers.

Sandoval cited Clark County voters’ approval in 2004 of a half-cent sales tax increase — only a quarter-cent has been enacted so far — for police.

“Given the importance of public safety to Clark County’s economy and to the citizens of our state’s most populated county, I plan to support the decision of voters of Clark County and sign this measure if it passes the 2013 Legislature,” Sandoval said in a statement provided at the request of the Sun.

Of course, he then had to declare yet again his aversion to "new taxes"... While simultaneously beefing up his "moderate" bona fides by declaring yet again his intention to extend the "Never Really Sunsetting Taxes".

He has, though, rallied Republican support for extending up to $620 million worth of state taxes to prevent cuts to education and health and human services that would otherwise expire in 2013. He said he would cut some business taxes in the budget proposal he will present to the Legislature in January.

Sandoval said earlier this month that raising taxes would hurt businesses as the state’s economy recovers.

Here's what confuses me. Sandoval keeps mouthing the G-O-TEA talking point that "raising taxes hurts the economy". Yet when push comes to shove, he wants to continue indefinitely the flawed policies of the 2009/2011 "Sunset Tax" deal while avoiding talk of real tax reform that can actually provide relief for working families (instead of the usual coddling of the 1% while hitting working families and small businesses the hardest). Oh, and apparently now it's OK to allow for another sales tax bump in Clark County to better fund Metro.

We all know what this is really about. Just read between the lines in Ray Hagar's blog entry from last week.

Sandoval and his moderate stances are in position to dominate this 2013 Legislature for two reasons:

Popularity is the first. There is no GOP hard-liner or Democrat tough enough to take him out in 2014. Secondly, Sandoval raised around $800,000 for GOP State Senate candidates. In the tit-for-tat of politics, some state senators owe him. [...]

Republican state senators who ran on the no-new-taxes platform along with Sandoval in 2010 —like caucus leader Michael Roberson of Henderson —have also moved to the middle.

Roberson is now advocating no cuts to education after talking like a hard-liner in past years. Roberson, plus Reno GOP Sens. Greg Brower and Ben Kieckhefer (another who ran as a tough conservative in 2010) are marching in lockstep with Sandoval, too..

“There is really no denying Sandoval’s popularity and I think other Republicans are trying to ride his coattails,” [NPRI's Geoffrey] Lawrence [oh so woefully had to admit]. “And as a result, they are afraid to go against him on any policy measure.”

Or in other words, what we found 9 months ago still stands. Sandoval and his Republican #NVLeg confidants are embracing just enough taxes to look "moderate" and "reasonable". But in allowing for a little this, a little that, and a whole lot of the same regressive status quo, they're hoping to quash any chances of real, comprehensive, progressive tax reform that may offend too many in "the gaming-mining-lobbying industrial complex".

So this is the box that progressive activists want to pull legislators out of. Are there enough people in Carson City who can think big enough to notice the solutions available outside the box? Or will we have to endure more of the same nonsensical status quo?