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?

We the People... Must Lead.

As the 77th session of the Nevada Legislature comes to a close, the mad dash to send a budget to Governor Brian Sandoval (R) continues. This morning, the Senate rushed to pass school funding and the long awaited "Sunset Tax" extension. And now, #NVLeg is poised to go out with a bust bang as Governor Sandoval's budget is nearing complete final approval.

Both legislators and the governor got what they wanted in the $2.5 billion schools budget: more money for Nevada’s schoolchildren.

But Democrats won’t reach the funding level they thought was appropriate. Last month, Senate Democrats publicly spiked their payroll tax hike in a contentious Senate floor debate. That tax plan would’ve added money to the budget for more education programs.

“We had a debate earlier this session about where we stood and what we’re doing for our kids, and we should be proud,” said Sen. Ben Kieckhefer, R-Reno.

While Democrats had earlier argued that education programs deserved more money than Sandoval had included in his budget, they now said that it’s good that the governor agreed where the state should spend the money it does have as it comes out of a lengthy economic recession.

“I’m glad that the governor funded our priorities,” said Senate Majority Leader Mo Denis, D-Las Vegas. “We’re not going to have to cut (the budget) this time.”

Now legislators, some begrudgingly, are on track to pass a payroll tax cut for businesses.

Sen. Debbie Smith, D-Sparks, wore a resigned expression as she headed toward the Senate floor late Sunday night to pass various budget-related bills.

“We’ve done some really great things, but we’re also lacking in some areas,” she said.

The public education budget is already on the Governor's desk, and the rest will soon follow. So game over? Everyone can go home happy? Not so fast, say Nevada teachers. They're getting ready to rumble... At the ballot box next year.

[Outgoing President of the Nevada State Education Association Lynn] Warne said that "incremental" increase in k-12 funding won’t do much. It won’t be enough to really solve any problems. Class sizes will continue to be too large in the early grades, Nevada’s English language learners will still struggle. Nevada’s dropout rate will continue to be a national leader.

“They (governor and legislature) all recognize we don’t fund public education properly in this state, but what they are proposing to put into it, what we are coming out with, is not going to move the needle anywhere.”

The margins-tax plan calls for 2 percent tax on a business’ “margin,” the money left after the business either deducts its overall cost of goods or the its overall compensation paid to employees.

Warne said she was not surprised that state lawmakers sat on their hands when considering the margins tax.

“Looking at the characters in this building, the personalities, the make-up of both houses, the number of Ds and Rs, the governor rhetoric on no new taxes – we didn’t necessarily think it would move," Warne said. "And again, that is why we chose the strategy we did in the first place – the initiative process.”

The initiative process is the only viable way to raise taxes for education in Nevada’s hamstrung poltical process, Warne said.

“The two-thirds (vote requirement in both houses to raise taxes) has done nothing but hamstring the Legislature,” Warne said. “There are some legislators in this building who really want to see k-12 funded properly in the state. But unfortunately, they haven’t and their constituents they represent have not been able to see any improvement in education funding.”

Who will ever forget the hearing The Education Initiative received before its quiet death? Well, it turned out that IP 1 (The Education Initiative) didn't actually die. Rather, the corporate margins tax proposal will be landing on our Fall 2014 ballots.

Today, the 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.

Only Just Beginning

This spring has certainly been a memorable one in Carson City. Yet during this 77th session of the Nevada Legislature, I couldn't help but think of what went down at the end of the 76th session. Remember the suprise Nevada Supreme Court decision that ultimately led to an unsurprising continuation of the status quo?

Remember the definition of insanity? We can't keep doing the same thing while expecting different results! We can't keep robbing Peter to pay Paul. We can't keep playing the same "accounting tricks" that ultimately got Enron into trouble. We can't keep avoiding reality.

The Nevada Supreme Court's ruling was a brutal reality check. And even if Brian Sandoval and most legislators continue to ignore the overarching message of that ruling to play more games and hobble together some sort of "Frankenstein budget", Nevadans are getting fed up with this nonsense. People out here are hurting, and they are wondering when they will see more job openings and how their kids will be able to get into college. Meanwhile in Carson, the debate is all about how [many] workers need to be attacked before schools can be allowed to stay open.

Wonderful. (snark)

But what if we don't want to keep going down this same road?

And that led us to think aloud about a different path forward.

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.

In many ways, it's started to feel like deja vu yet again. "Big talk" on tax reform has been replaced with tinkering around the edges (of a very broken system). And despite growing trouble arising from chronic underfunding of our social safety net, the chronic underfunding looks quite set to continue (albeit at a slightly less severe level).

Yet with this being said, something is different this time. This time, We the People will have the final say. 2014 may seem like a long hike away, but it truly isn't. And with The Education Initiative and SJR 15 going to the ballot box next year, this is only just beginning.

While we may yet see another politically convenient state budget full of ridiculously bad policy, something is different this time. It may not last too long. Voters will have the opportunity to finally put an end to the status quo next year. This is only just beginning.

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.

The Rude Awakening for #NVLeg

Last Monday, we were warning everyone not to get too caught up in all the pomp & circumstance of the latest rumors of sweeping tax reform to hit Carson City. After all, the bulk of the tax plans floating around the Nevada Legislature don't even come close to fixing the major holes in our public infrastructure and social safety net. Nevada now faces potential law suits for mental health patient dumping.

Just yesterday, The Sacramento Bee released interviews with former Rawson-Neal who opened up on the origins of "Greyhound Therapy".

Though the employees offered different perspectives on the wisdom of sending psychiatric patients alone on bus trips across state lines, most described increased pressure in recent years to move patients out. And budget cuts, they said, were a driving factor.

"There is so much pressure now to get people out as soon as possible," said one longtime Rawson-Neal nurse, who requested anonymity for fear of losing her job.

"The administration has a meeting every week to talk about length of stay," she said. "Doctors are told, 'You need to get these patients out of the hospital.' " [...]

Nevada cut mental health spending 28 percent between 2009 and 2012, cuts that brought furlough days, staffing shortages and widespread reductions in outpatient services and housing for the mentally ill, according to employees and area social services workers. [...]

Bryan Peralta worked as a mental health technician at Rawson-Neal for eight months, ending in November of last year. One of the reasons he left the hospital was its discharge of patients "who were not ready" to be released, he said.

Peralta recalled one young woman who was sent to the Greyhound station while "she was still foaming" at the mouth and talking to herself. She had a ticket to California, but was sent back to Rawson-Neal by a bus driver before she crossed the state border, he said.

Yep, that's really been the state of mental health care here in Nevada. And no, sweeping this under the rug won't make it go away. And neither will dumping it onto a Greyhound bus.

But wait, there's more. Nevada is also facing potential law suits over K-12 public education. Here too, schools are being shortchanged. And the shortchanging is especially horrific in Clark County, where 72% of the population resides and the student body is far more diverse. For years, the Clark County School District (CCSD) has suffered overcrowded classroom and lack of programs students need. Now, CCSD and the Clark County Education Association (CCEA) have released a $1.2 billion plan to address overcrowding.

In total, the district and union's plan calls for hiring 4,115 new teachers, for a total of $271.7 million. The average teacher's salary with benefits is $66,000.

The additional teachers would be on top of an estimated 2,000 new educators being hired for next school year as a result of the School District's arbitration win against the Clark County Education Association in February. If all goes according to plan, the School District could have upward of 23,000 teachers by 2017.

That would lower average class sizes significantly in kindergarten, and fourth and fifth grades. Average class sizes in kindergarten would drop to 16 students. Fourth and fifth grades would see a drop to 26 students.

To accommodate the 6,000 new teachers and a growing student enrollment, the district also would have to build 37 new schools at a cost of $931.7 million. The average elementary school costs $25 million to construct.

In total, the new teachers and schools would cost the district $1.2 billion.

OK, that sounds nice. But wait, where will the funding come from? Right now, that's the key $1.2 billion question.

We know Governor Brian Sandoval's (R-Denial) oh so "sunny" budget fails to shine enough resources for public schools or mental health care. And while Senator Michael Roberson's (R-Lone Wolf) proposed IP 1 mining tax alternative initiative raises half of what CCSD is now requesting, it's still unclear whether "The Senate GOP Mod Squad" gambit is actually legally and/or politically viable.

So where does that leave us? Take it away, (Assembly) Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick (D-Seriously?).

Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick this morning informed folks that her long-awaited admissions tax is finally drafted, setting a rate of 8 percent for all major venues.

The current Live Entertainment Tax has a two-tiered rate, with some venues taxed at 10 percent and others at 5 percent, depending on capacity. I'm told the bill draft exempts only small venues under 50 seats, nonprofits and some government sites.

The Live Entertainment Tax would go away and be replaced by the Nevada Entertainment and Admissions Tax.

Well, I guess something is better than nothing. And this does look preferable to the revenue-neutral regressive sales tax clusterf**k she and Republican leaders were considering earlier this session. But ultimately, this only offers a few drops in the bucket when we need that bucket as full as possible to take care of our own people.

It often seems like many politicians and pundits in Carson City don't understand why We the People decided to take tax reform into our own hands with The Education Initiative. Well, this is why! Nevadans are looking for solutions. And if the Governor and Legislature can't agree on a real solution by June, then We the People will have to provide it for them next year.

We can't take any more of the status quo. It's already costing us dearly. Something must change. And if we don't see that change coming out of Carson City soon, then it will be facing a very rude awakening come November 2014.

The Deep Hole in Carson City

We've seen this so many times before. Gun safety reform fell because of it. Comprehensive immigration reform is now on shaky ground due to it. And of course, austerity and manufactured crises are all the rage on Capitol Hill thanks to it. Thanks to "tea party" obstructionism, it's incredibly difficult to pass anything in Congress now.

Yet like our new state slogan, Nevada seems to be "A World Away, A State Apart". After all, several Republican legislators in Carson City have come forward and offered to break the logjam on tax policy. In fact, some "tea party" faithful there are frustrated.

[Assembly Member Jim] Wheeler [R-Gardnerville] admits he’s in the minority in Carson City. He laments what he sees as the leftward shift of the Republican Party in response to recent trouncing at the polls.

“Republicans seem to be trying to come to the middle,” Wheeler said. “But people won’t vote for that. People don’t vote for a party that changes its ways. People vote the person who sticks to what they say.

“Now, we have to cater to minorities? Cater to gay marriage? Because the world is changing? That’s true. But American values are not changing.”

No, American values are not changing. However, our understanding of those values clearly has. And funny enough, a Republican has stepped forward to confirm this.

“I try to do what is best for the state of Nevada,” Kieckhefer said on Nevada Newsmakers Thursday morning. “I don’t try to pander to a party of a part or edge of a party.”

Kieckhefer defended his marriage equality vote as a vote “of my conscience.” [...]

“I have a strongly Republican district but there are a lot of families in the district and it may not be as conservative as you are painting it to be,” Kieckhefer said. “It is a strong Republican district but with the bandwidth of conservatism. I’m not sure that it’s the most conservative district in the state.”

State Senator Ben Kieckhefer (R-Reno) has been making news lately for staking positions (like support for marriage equality) that challenge contemporary G-O-TEA orthodoxy. But then again, that's just it. G-O-TEA orthodoxy is still quite powerful. (And Richard Ziser is threatening to primary Senator Kieckhefer.)

After all, look at the "TEA" fueled revolt against Senator Michael Roberson's (R-Henderson) IP 1 alternative mining tax. And remember, he proposed it to try to fend off IP 1/The Education Initiative! But now, he can't even get the Governor and Assembly Caucus from his own party to consider his plan.

And then, there's Governor Brian Sandoval (R). He offered another serving of "The Sunset Taxes" to fend off any and all kind of serious tax reform (even Senator Roberson's). Yet even with that, the "tea party" balks.

And then, there's the scope of Nevada's tattered public infrastructure. We're facing law suits over chronic underfunding of K-12 public education and mental health care. And that's only just the beginning of the consequences we're starting to feel for not setting up a proper social safety net so we can truly care for our own. Sandoval's "Sunset Solution" only essentially drops a few extra pennies in that deep bucket. And while Roberson's proposal offers more, it's legally questionable and mired in troublesome "triangulation" politics.

So may we finally seeing some Republicans break free from "G-O-TEA" orthodoxy? Perhaps so. That's why the state may be able to pass a workable budget in June while Congress is still stuck in a stalemate. Yet with that being said, Nevada's fiscal and social problems run far deeper than a few extra million dollars that Governor Sandoval wants to toss into the state budget. We still have a very deep hole to crawl out of. The hole in Carson City may not seem as scary as the one in Washington, yet it nonetheless causes us trouble.

All That Truly Matters

Over the course of this month, we've seen even more tossing & turning in Carson City over matters of tax reform. Some proposals have died gruesome deaths up there, while others received a sudden and unexpected burst of new life. So far this session, we've seen plenty of fascinating twists & turns.

And now, another one is coming... Or maybe not. We just know Senate Democrats will be releasing their own tax reform plan later this week.

Senate Majority Leader Mo Denis says Democrats are putting the final touches on their plan to tweak Nevada’s tax structure to bring in more money for education and other services.

But the Las Vegas lawmaker says they will await final revenues projections due Wednesday from the Economic Forum before introducing their plan in bill form.

The Economic Forum is an independent panel charged with forecasting Nevada revenues for the next two years.

Democrats also have not closed in on how much additional revenue they want to generate. Among things being considered are revamping the state’s live entertainment tax.

Well, at least we can say the Senate Democrats are moving away from Assembly Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick's (D-North Las Vegas) revenue-neutral sales tax clusterfuck proposal. I guess that's a start. So what's actually in their plan? We'll have to wait & see, but I wouldn't suggest getting your hopes too high (for this).

And you know what? It's OK. Regardless of what Democratic leaders settle for in Carson City this session, We the People will ultimately decide next year. And that's what has some Republicans in Carson City nervous.

So far, The Education Initiative (IP 1) has strong support among voters despite the "Tea Party, Inc." smear campaign against this initiative aimed at making the largest corporations doing business in Nevada pay something closer to their fair share. (They currently pay a rate just barely above nothing.) Perhaps this is why Senator Michael Roberson (R-Henderson) decided that the best way to beat IP 1 is to join it on the ballot box. At first, it seemed like Roberson hatched up the perfect strategy to triangulate Nevada Republicans into the political sweet spot while tearing Democrats & progressives apart. There's just been one problem with his plan: his fellow Nevada Republicans!



Oh, and there's another problem with this: the law! Despite the constant spin from certain Republican Senators and their media pundit cheerleaders, the fact remains that Governor Brian Sandoval (R), Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D), Secretary of State Ross Miller (D), and several more lawyers who have studied this issue have all determined that Senator Roberson's IP 1 mining tax alternative is unconstitutional. They really can't blame Democrats or their fellow Republicans if/when the courts strike down any further attempts to pursue this.

Yet despite the political and legal controversies surrounding Senator Roberson's IP 1 mining tax alternative, SJR 15 remains. And there are no political hijinks here. It just removes mining industry bailouts from the Nevada Constitution. And all legislators have to do is approve it a second time this year so We the People can vote on it next year. And once voters approve SJR 15 next year, the Legislature will finally have the power to change mining tax rates.

Really, that's all the Legislature needs to do this spring to make real change possible. The Senate has already passed SJR 15 overwhelmingly this session. Now, it's the Assembly's turn.

There will be plenty of gossip in the next few weeks over supposedly grand tax reform plans. But really, it all comes down to just two initiatives. One is already guaranteed a spot on next year's (general election) ballot, while the other just needs one more vote of approval from the Assembly. And regardless of what certain media pundits hyperventilate about any further political positioning in Carson City this year, all that truly matters now is what We the People will be voting on next year.

Unspinning the Coming "Mod Squad" Mining Tax FAIL

This morning, we examined why evolving is so hard to do for Nevada Republicans. On one hand, their base wants more ideological "purity". But on the other hand, the rest of the voters have been consistently rejecting what their base demands. So what are Nevada Republicans to do?

Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson (R-Henderson) seems to be eyeing change regardless of what the "tea party" naysayers say. He may have backslid on marriage equality earlier this week, but Senator Roberson is back on "The Mod Squad Express" as he keeps pushing his troubled IP 1 mining tax alternative. And it's driving Chuck Muth even crazier (than he's already been whenever "Roberson" falls out of anyone's mouth).



Of course, this has Jon Ralston worked into a frenzy. He had Senator Roberson on his show last night, and he was waxing poetic yesterday on the doomed tax initiative. Oh why, oh why, won't anyone else give "The Senate GOP Mod Squad Mining Tax Alternative" a chance?!

Maybe Roberson could have been more inclusive when he first spring the mining tax plan. But the “if Roberson says black, we’ll say white” attitude from Democrats is pure petulance, imputing his announcement only to killing the margins tax the business community abhors (he has been open about that) and giving him no credit for going after mining (as some of them and many of their allies have long wanted to do).

Even if they think Roberson is a shameless grandstander, why not embrace his effort if they really want more money for education? Are they really going to say they are opposed to a mining tax? Are they going to claim they prefer a broad-based solution, which they have yet to provide and, my guess is, will not offer? [...]

I have mentioned before that many people in the building – Democrats, Republicans, lobbyists – don’t trust Roberson. That is his biggest hurdle – and it may be insurmountable. He is a bull in the legislative zoo, and the other political animals are not amused.

Why folks don’t think he is trying to rebrand the GOP while also killing the margins tax, helping fund education and perhaps taking the majority is beyond me. It’s a triple bank shot, but that is what he is up to. It’s the only thing that makes sense.

“I want people to start looking at the Republican Party differently,” Roberson said Wednesday. “We can’t be the party of no, no, no.”

I can't believe this is actually necessary. But since Ralston keeps beating this dead horse, I guess we'll have to do it. So here we go.

First off, the law doesn't seem to favor Roberson. Sure, he got the LCB to write him favorable opinions. But at this point, it's three against one in Carson City as Governor Brian Sandoval (R), Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D), and Secretary of State Ross Miller (D) all declaring his initiative unconstitutional. Why? As we've discussed here before and Amicus Nevada has continued to explain, the Legislature's failure to actually vote on IP 1 (aka The Education Initiative) and propose an alternative by March 15 has created a steep legal hurdle. The LCB opinions have had to find some rather creative ways to stretch Article 19 of the Nevada Constitution to justify continued pursuit of "The Mod Squad Mining Tax".

Yet while Senator Roberson and his allies find new legal arguments for their mining tax alternative, they haven't been able to find any new votes. And while he keeps trying to blame Democrats for this, the fact remains that he can't even get the rest of his Republican Party to back his initiative. He may be a titular Republican leader, but the heart of the party still very much looks to be with Sharron Angle. Nevada's own "Tea Party Queen" appeared in Elko earlier this week to promote her new book, but she also didn't hesitate to talk about her new plan to grow more "tea party" candidates for higher office.



Sharron Angle clearly refuses to go away. And really, why should she? The G-O-TEA base still sides with her on the issues. And on top of that, she may soon find new and previously unlikely allies, as the mining industry has been preparing to declare political war on "The Mod Squad". Oh, and as mentioned earlier, Governor Sandoval has no interest in backing up Senator Roberson on his mining tax alternative.

Perhaps this is why Senator Roberson prefers to deflect blame onto Democrats. It's easier for him to blame Democrats than to admit that the law and the bulk of his party don't seem to agree with him.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying all Democrats have been angels when it comes to preparing a proper state budget. Far from it, I have not hesitated to criticize Democrats when they were wrong. But come on, one can't blame Democratic leaders for keeping their distance from a tax initiative that's legally questionable at best and creating even more chaos within Republican ranks.

So just keep this in mind next time some media pundit for Republican Senator tries to deflect blame for the failure of the tax initiative that was never to be.

Senator Roberson's $600 Million Question

Last night, we got word of Senator Michael Roberson (R-Henderson) finally unveiling his IP 1 alternative mining tax initiative. Today, it's finally been revealed. Here's Ralston with his take.

On the day marking the two-thirds point of Session '13, state Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson and five of his GOP colleagues plan to unveil a $600 million a biennium net proceeds tax on mines, sources confirmed.

The so-called Education Priority Initiative from the folks I have affectionately dubbed the Dirty Half-Dozen would be promoted as a way to reduce class sizes by hiring teachers, fund English Language Learner programs and set up a stabilization fund dedicated to education. The mining tax would be earmarked only for education funding.

The tax would take effect in November 2014 and assumes passage of SJR 15 (taking mining taxation out of the Constitution where net proceeds is capped at 5 percent). I also understand that the tax would apply to operations with net proceeds exceeding $4 million a year, and the operations would still be obligated to pay above that to local entities mandated under the current law. That's clearlly designed to remove any argument this would harm local governments and school districts.

Clearly, Ralston is excited by this. However, there are two major problems. And Ralston himself knows what they are.

One is the law. At best (for Roberson, that is), the Nevada Constitution is unclear as to how legislators can propose an alternative to a citizen's initiative, especially when the Governor would rather not. At worst, Governor Brian Sandoval (R), Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D), and Secretary of State Ross Miller (D) are all correct in finding Roberson's proposal unconstitutional.

The other problem is the politics. As we've discussed before, Roberson's proposal has led to yet another major division among Nevada Republicans. While Roberson assembled a Senate GOP "Mod Squad" of six to support it, Governor Sandoval, the other Republican Senators, the bulk of Republican Assembly Members, and the "tea party" activist base of the party have all aligned against it. Roberson desperately needs Democrats for this to have any chance of passage, but Democrats so far look to be keeping their distance from any proposal to ratfuck harm The Education Initiative that's already legally qualified for next year's general election ballot.

So where are Senator Roberson and his tax initiative supposed to go from here? Right now, that's the $600 million question.

Finally, Status Quo May Be No More.

This week looks to be another hectic one in Carson City. History is already being made everywhere we look in the Nevada Legislature. So it's understandable that some matters are being overlooked during such a busy time.

However, this is also important. After all, we're about to talk about the state's budget. And we're about to talk about "The T Word".

Back in February, we heard plenty of banter on "revenue-neutral reform". But today, that doesn't look to be going anywhere. Why not? Basically, people just didn't like it.

But with just 41 days left, Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick, D-North Las Vegas, said any effort to pass a services tax is dead and sounded less than optimistic about the chances of any kind of broad-based business tax making it to a vote.

Kirkpatrick blamed a flurry of press reports on the services tax for its demise.

“You killed it,” Kirkpatrick told a Sun reporter last week. “You got all the Democrats against me on it before I even had a chance to explore it, so I didn’t even explore it.”

The idea of expanding Nevada’s sales tax to services such as legal advice, accounting and hair dressers was originally introduced in Nevada by a Democrat last session. But in the past two years, Republicans around the country have launched an effort to move away from income taxes and toward consumption taxes such as a services tax.

Actually, Speaker Kirkpatrick, the media themselves didn't kill it. Lack of public support killed it. And perhaps the fact that it was just plain bad policy had a hand in killing it as well.

And then, there's this. Last month, Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson (R-Henderson) leaped ahead of Kirkpatrick, and even seemed to lurch to the left of her at first (??!!), with his wild & crazy IP 1 alternative mining tax proposal. In the wake of that, whatever momentum was left for "revenue-neutral" sales tax extension dissipated quite quickly. Of course, it didn't take long for this to run into serious legal & political roadblocks. Yet despite that, Roberson at least succeeded in completely reshaping the contours of the Nevada Legislature's tax debate.

And that, in turn, revived political fortunes for SJR 15 and mining tax reform. In February, SJR 15 looked to be near death. But now, there's tremendous pressure for the Assembly to act soon following the Senate's resounding 17-4 passage of the bill to take the mining industry's tax policy bailouts out of the Nevada Constitution.

And then, there's The Education Initiative. Funny enough, Roberson constructed his mining tax alternative for the expressed purpose of defeating the actual IP 1. But instead, his and other Republicans' case for restoring social safety net funding can now benefit The Education Initiative since it's the one tax reform initiative left standing. Who could have guessed defeat would soon open the path to victory?

It's been a wild and crazy ride so far for tax reform during the 77th session of the Nevada Legislature. And it still has another six weeks to go. Perhaps there may be more surprises. Or perhaps the Legislature will settle for the status quo again. Yet even if the latter occurs, it may ultimately be temporary. Whatever comes out of the Legislature by June, we'll finally have the chance to vote on real reform next year. And that's real progress.

Finally, Shortchange No More?

Back in January, we looked at the burgeoning campaign by powerful Southern Nevada interests to redo the state budget in a way that redirects money south. So far, there's been some success as the higher education finding formula will likely be changed. And with the threat of SB 322 clearly being felt, Clark County is already receiving 80% of state transportation project funding this year.

So there's already progress underway in redirecting state funds. Yet even with this, the Nevada Legislature's Southern leadership still seek more.

“If Southern Nevada gets a cough, the whole state gets a cold, and if you think about that analogy, when things don’t go well in Southern Nevada, everybody else feels the repercussions, as well,” Assembly Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick, D-North Las Vegas, said.

“Fair” can work like this: Behold, northern counties, as legislators shift money to Clark County, the most economically important county in the state.

“We want to be fair to everyone, but part of being fair to everyone is being fair to the south,” Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson, R-Henderson, said.

And we know the facts & figures behind their rhetoric. Clark County has over 70% of the state's population. And Clark County funds over 80% of the state's budget. Yet despite this, Clark County is "lucky" to muster just over 50% of state investment.

Again, some changes are now underway. And there will certainly be even more in the works by the time sine die approaches. Yet with this being said, there are even more areas where Southern legislators see inequities that must be fixed.

One such area is K-12 education. In Clark County, many can't even access full-day Kindergarten. Clark County schools have also been struggling to properly provide required English Language Learner (ELL) programs. This is why Senate Majority Leader Mo Denis (D-North Las Vegas) has pretty much threatened to do whatever it takes to secure more funding for Clark County schools. It's now just a matter of how much backup he will get from Kirkpatrick & Roberson.

Southern leaders also caution that more needs to be done, even on higher education & transportation funding. Just a couple sessions worth of more money can't make up for historic funding inequities and continuing drawbacks in current funding formulae. So what can be done? And how does that happen?

This is why many education activists have called for not just funding formulae fixes, but also more revenue to actually make it work. And this is why The Education Initiative will be going to voters next year.

Yet this year, legislators have not been ignoring the demand for restoring revenue. And in particular, Southern legislators have been noticing how Clark County funds over 80% of the state's budget, only to get about 50% back. This is why we've been hearing more calls for mining tax reform, even from some previously unlikely sources. After all, why should Las Vegas Strip casinos do nearly all the heavy lifting (as in tax collecting) while rural Northern Nevada mines pay mere pennies on the dollar for all the gold they strike?

We're just over halfway through the 77th session, so there's not much time left for legislators to agree to some dramatic overall of "GovRec" (Governor Brian Sandoval's proposed budget). Is there enough time to secure more funding equity now? Or is there at least time to lay more of a foundation for future major reforms?

There's not much time left, but there's also not much patience left.

Supreme Tax Melee

Just a month ago, we were all blown away when State Senator Michael Roberson (R-Metamorphosis) and his merry "Mod Squad" decided to not just change the tax debate in Carson City, but radically upend it with their mining tax alternative to IP 1/The Education Initiative (corporate margins tax). All of a sudden, some Republicans decided that the best way to kill a tax proposal... Is by offering another tax proposal. And on top of that, they decided to target the very industry that's had its sweetheart tax deals written into the Nevada Constitution.

I know, I know. That's a whole lot to process. Yet so is the trouble "The Mod Squad Mining Tax" is now running into.

For one, it likely still doesn't have the votes for passage. (Instead, it's been worsening the civil war within the Nevada Republican Party.) And Governor Brian Sandoval (R-Nevada Mining Association) has threatened to veto it if it does pass. And even if it does pass and somehow overcome a Sandoval veto, a growing chorus of legal experts have been declaring it to be unconstitutional. Why? Since the Nevada Legislature never even voted on IP 1, how can it place an alternative on the ballot?

Amicus Nevada (aka Sean McDonald) first chimed in with his legal opinion suggesting Roberson's tax alternative isn't legal. And now, he's far from alone in thinking this. Yesterday, both the Secretary of State's office and the Attorney General's office reached the same conclusion.

The Secretary of State’s Office said this alternative or any other wouldn’t qualify for the ballot because the Legislature did not meet a deadline by which to introduce the alternative.

That keeps the Nevada State Education Association’s margins tax alone on the ballot. Voters will decide in 2014 if they should approve or disapprove of a 2 percent tax on business revenue that would raise an estimated $800 million for the state’s education system.

After consulting with the Attorney General’s Office, Deputy Secretary for Elections Scott Gilles wrote that the Legislature failed to take actions defined in the state’s constitution by March 15, the 40th day of the legislative session.

The constitution says that the Legislature needs to reject by the 40th day any initiative — in this case, the margins tax initiative — in order to preserve the right to introduce an alternative.

The legal question involved the definition of reject.

And obviously, the Governor's office also agrees with this. However, Roberson still doesn't. Instead, he's doubling down on his mining tax alternative. And he even has a brand new (Legislative Counsel Bureau) LCB opinion to back him up!

["You can do what you want, and the executive branch can't interfere," is] the gist of a new legislative legal opinion that mining taxman Michael Roberson obtained shortly after news broke of executive branch analysis that could block an alternative to the margins tax from the ballot.

It's all about the power of the Legislature to do what it wants.

There is a real separation of powers battle brewing this session, unlike any we have seen before.

Ralston is correct on the last point. We are now seeing an unprecedented conflict over separation of powers, and over who ultimately sets the rules on what makes the cut for the ballot. Roberson & the LCB are arguing that the Legislature can essentially reject citizen initiatives and place alternatives to compete against them on the ballot, the Legislature can do so however it wants, and everyone else must essentially accept this as legal.

Amicus Nevada, Governor Sandoval, and both the Secretary of State's office & the Attorney General's office disagree. They're saying that Article 19 of the Nevada Constitution stipulates that any alternative to a citizen initiative petition must be rejected in an actual vote of the Legislature. They've also hinted that it's unclear as to whether the Governor's approval is also required to move an alternative initiative forward. And on top of that, is this mining tax also violating the single subject rule (since it proposes a completely different tax than that of IP 1 itself)?

At the very least, the legal waters here are very murky. This nonetheless doesn't seem to be stopping Senator Roberson's "Mod Squad" from pursuing their mining tax alternative. It's now just a matter of how much further it can go in the Nevada Legislature... And how long before The Nevada Supreme Court is asked to intervene.

Mining for Reality

I know we keep talking about this. But hey, we're talking about it because this is important. And we're talking about it now because we need to cut through the spin and find some reality.

So let's briefly talk about what went down on KNPR just moments ago. Of course, Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson (R-Metamorphosis?) jousted with Nevada Mining Association President Tim Crowley on SJR 15 and Roberson's controversial IP 1 mining tax alternative. Crowley kept trying to deny reality, while Roberson was tooting his own horn as he was ripping into Crowley's attacks on his mining tax proposal.

Today's "State of Nevada" was fiery... But what if it was ultimately just Sturm und Drang? As we discussed last Thursday, there's a strong possibility that the clock has simply run out on Roberson's IP 1 alternative because the Legislature did not actually vote on IP 1. As Nevada's hottest new legal blogger Sean McDonald/Amicus Nevada explained, legislators must actually reject a people's initiative in an actual floor vote before they can propose an alternative initiative. While the Legislative Counsel Bureau (LCB) and Steve Sebelius disagree, it's increasingly looking like the consensus view is that Roberson is standing on the legal equivalent of quicksand with his IP 1 alternative.



So where does that leave the debate on mining taxation? Actually, that brings us back to SJR 15. It already passed #NVLeg once. And there's no legal fight surrounding it. Yes, all SJR 15 does is remove the mining industry's tax rate (and exemptions) from the Nevada Constitution. Yet that alone can make a world of difference.



Tim Crowley claims SJR 15 will do away with any mining tax. That's only possible if the mining industry goes to court and wins a law suit. Is that what the mining industry wants to do?



What's more likely is that multinational mining corporations will be forced to pay something closer to their fair share because their tax rate & exemptions are no longer written into the Nevada Constitution. That's why the mining industry is fighting SJR 15 tooth and nail.



The real reason the current mining tax structure was instituted in 1989 was because the mining industry refused to pay a severance tax. Imagine if #NVLeg was considering a gold severance tax similar to the oil severance tax proposals being considered in California and Ohio. But alas, that's not happening. Instead, certain legislators are discussing placing an increase in the net proceeds tax onto next year's ballot to compete against The Education Initiative. And at this point, it will likely soon prove to be fool's gold (as it may no longer be legally feasible).



But you know what's still here? SJR 15. It's just waiting for a second round of approval so it can go to voters in 2014. It won't compete against The Education Initiative, so no worries there. And if passed by voters next year, SJR 15 will finally give legislators the flexibility they need to properly set mining taxes. If Michael Roberson still feels strongly about raising the net proceeds tax, he can introduce one then.



Remember that former State Senators Sheila Leslie (D-Reno) & Steven Horsford (D-North Las Vegas) introduced SJR 15 back in 2011. It wasn't until this month that Michael Roberson suddenly embraced mining tax reform as "his cause". And the mining industry has enjoyed the current lax system of nearly no taxation since 1989. Keep all of this in mind as we keep digging past the kabuki theater to uncover reality.

Mining for #Winning

Ah, so now we know. Senator Michael Roberson (R-Henderson) has risked dividing his own party (even further than it has already been) with his IP 1 mining tax alternative. So why has he been willing to escalate Nevada Republicans' civil war?

This helps explain why. Remember when Monte Miller was pushing a mining tax initiative? Let's just say he didn't pull the plug on it due to lack of public support.

Before he abandoned his attempt to tax mining last year, businessman Monte Miller hired master voter contact man Billy Rogers to gauge support. So Rogers went door-to-door asking folks how they felt about raising the mining tax from 5 percent to 9 percent.

Out of 22,991 interviews completed before Miller decided not to proceed, Rogers identified 18,634 mining tax hike supporters. That's 81 percent.

So not only would a mining tax pass -- my guess is no matter what the industry did to try to block any ballot question -- it would pass overwhelmingly.

Highlights (and the full demographics are attached here):

· Overall, 81 percent supported increasing the mining tax

· 88 percent of Democrats supported increasing the mining tax

· 80 percent of non-partisan and third-party registrants supported increasing the mining tax

· 73.5 percent of Republicans supported increasing the mining tax

Apparently, Monte Miller has always taken a liking to Michael Roberson. Would anyone like to guess how and why these numbers are now public? And does anyone doubt Roberson hadn't already taken a look at these numbers?

And to think, less than a month ago even SJR 15 was in a shaky position. Why? One of the dirtiest secrets in Carson City is just how much juice the mining industry has in that town. Could it possibly be due to all the lobbyists and all the campaign contributions?

Yet this month, Roberson and the rest of his "Senate GOP Mod Squad" decided to break away from their former mining industry BFFs. Why? Look above. No, look further above. When even over 70% of rank-and-file Republicans (!!!) support mining tax reform, perhaps knee-jerk opposition to it should be reconsidered... And ultimately dropped.

Of course, Roberson's IP 1 mining tax alternative still faces great hurdles. For one, those mining lobbyists won't be going away any time soon. In addition, it's at best (for him) legally unclear as to whether he can even propose one now. Let's just say that if "The Mod Squad Mining Tax" goes down in flames either in the Nevada Legislature itself or the Nevada Supreme Court, it won't be due to lack of public support.

(But of course, SJR 15 still isn't going away any time soon, either!)

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.

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.

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.

On Sharron Angle, Nevada Republicans, & Mining Tax

She's back! Really, how long can we go without a Sharron Angle sighting? She was spotted at the Nevada Legislature today. Here's what she told Ralston.

Caught up w/@SharronAngle. Said just visiting, not here for any bill. Might she be on the ballot in 2014? "Anything's possible." #lickschops

We've discussed before how Sharron Angle continues to influence the Nevada Republican Party. And we're seeing that on display again now.

Last week, State Senator Michael Roberson (R-New RINO?) announced his poison pill intended to kill The Education Initiative. OK, that sounds conservative enough. But there was a twist. Roberson decided to introduce an alternative to IP 1 in a new mining tax... And 5 of his Senate Republican colleagues joined him in support of the IP 1 alternative mining tax!

Of course, that led to the explosion of Chuck Muth's head. And not only that, but apparently other powerful "Tea Party, Inc." operatives are about to declare war on "The Dirty Half-dozen". As we discussed last week, Roberson is worsening Nevada Republicans' civil war with his pursuit of mining tax reform.

It's not as if prominent Nevada conservatives haven't complained about the mining industry's sweetheart deal before. Can you guess who said this?

"The mining industry has traditionally sort of been given a pass for some reason or another. I guess it goes back to the days when they were the bosses and they were the big business in the state. That was a long, long, long time ago." [...]

"The reason I am here and I have this sense of urgency in my voice, is because I have a fear, that like other things that have happened in the state of Nevada recently, this is an attempt for one sector of the economy to insulate itself against its fair share: and I know what happens when that happens up here because you fellows always look to us. And you cannot allow that to happen, if you take some time to study it. This sort of thing has got to come to a halt. You have to take an intelligent, close, careful look at how you are going to face the future."

"(What) we should have done last year and which should be done immediately, is that we should remove mining from its special consideration to be treated like the rest of the businesses, like the rest of us in the State of Nevada."

Believe it or not, that was "tea party" icon and Las Vegas Strip power player Steve Wynn back in 1989. And just last year, "Tea Party, Inc." kingmaker Monte Miller pushed a mining tax initiative! Roberson's new proposal was apparently inspired by Miller's initiative.

So it's not as if Nevada Republicans were completely opposed to mining tax reform before. But because the "tea party" demands ideological "purity", any realistic tax talk is no longer allowed. That's why Congress can't reach a budget deal. And that's why Michael Roberson and the rest of the Senate GOP "Dirty Half-dozen" are facing immense backlash from their own party.

She may have lost NV-Sen in 2010, but Sharron Angle seems to be winning the battle for the soul of the Nevada Republican Party today. We'll just have to wait and see what kind of carnage she and Muth want to see in Republican primaries next year. I have a feeling that won't be pretty (except in the eyes of certain Democratic operatives).

Still Rotten

Last June, Reno, Washoe County, and Nevada state officials gushed with pride in announcing Apple's new data storage facility and business center in Washoe County. Just weeks after The New York Times exposed Apple's shell company in Reno as part of its strategy to evade California and federal taxes, officials here essentially rewarded Apple's atrocious behavior by bestowing $89 million worth of corporate welfare tax breaks in exchange for the data storage facility and Downtown Reno business center.

But wait, Apple did announce the data storage facility and Downtown Reno business center. Sure, it sucks that California and the feds lost out on tax revenue. But hey, at least we get something for it! Well, maybe not.

In January, we had a progress report on Apple's planned expansion into Nevada. Basically, there's been no expansion. There was still no ground broken on either the data storage facility or the Downtown Reno business center. Yet despite the clear lack of progress, Apple continued to cash in on the tax breaks and the relief of criticism deflected from Braeburn Capital, the Reno shell company set up by Apple to avoid paying taxes elsewhere.

So what's up with Apple now? Oh, there's just continuing lack of construction on both promised Northern Nevada projects. In fact, the building permit for Apple's business center has been sitting at Reno City Hall since October. Instead, another Apple project recently moved. Guess which one.

[Braeburn Capital is] still in Reno, on the corner of McCarran andLakeside, with a (small) sign out front, a locator sign in the lobby and a sign on the door. The firm moved about a year and half ago from its location at 72 0 Sandhill Road in south Reno.

Apleasant but guarded man answereda call at the firm's door this morning.He confirmedthat the third-floor office in the building at 6900 McCarran Boulevard is indeed the location of Apple Braeburn.He wouldn't identify himself, and referred all questions to Apple's Cupertino offices.

Meanwhile,the building permit for Apple’s proposed downtown business center has been sitting at RenoCity Hall since October.

That permit will expire next month,but the contractor behind the project, Reno-based UnitedConstruction,could ask the city for an extension.

Those extensions are usually approved by the city, said Fred Turnier, the community development director for Reno.

Oh, yes. That's right. There's been no action on either of the promised Apple projects for Northern Nevada. Governor Brian Sandoval and his budding reelection campaign PR team heralded these projects as breakthroughs in economic development. Instead, Apple is getting giggles at our expense.

Let's just admit it already. The gig's up. Using corporate welfare for "economic development" is not working. Instead, it's failing Nevada.

Last Tuesday, the usual crew of "business leaders" begged the Nevada Legislature to kill The Education Initiative. They blathered on about how "bad for business" a mere 2% margin tax on revenue over $1,000,000 is. Who needs better funded schools when the state has such a "great business climate"?

Yet how have we benefited from our supposedly "great business climate"? How has our commitment to low/no taxes helped economic development? Where are the jobs?

Apple is just one example of Nevada's failed policy of "promoting economic development" by way of corporate welfare. We promise no taxes, and we receive no benefit. There's something rotten in Reno... And in Carson City. And the only way Nevada can actually achieve true economic development is by getting rid of the rot.

Mining for Clarity

This has been one exciting week in Carson City. After a month of stalemate on tax reform, Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson (R-Henderson) came forward with his mining tax proposal. All of a sudden, a Republican offered a new tax plan, targeted perhaps the worst example of corporate welfare in Nevada, and revived something that many assumed (myself included) was dead in Carson City.

Yet even today, challenges remain. Remember that Roberson proposed his mining tax as an alternative to The Education Initiative. Yet while Republican legislators are united in opposition to that, they're divided on Roberson's alternative tax. This division was on display on KNPR this morning when Senator Pete Goicoechea (R-Eureka) proclaimed his opposition to both tax plans on "State of Nevada".

When confronted with the question of how to balance the budget and properly fund public education without either tax, Goicoechea had no real answer. That's the challenge for him, Sandoval, and other Republicans. That's probably a reason why Roberson and the rest of who Ralston calls "The Dirty Half-dozen" broke ranks with fellow Republicans. They realized this was a prime opportunity to take a more populist tack, show actual support for public education, and fight The Education Initiative in a more politically palatable way.

But again, this has managed to divide Republicans. And to complicate matters further, there's no clear path to Roberson's IP 1 alternative reaching the 2014 ballot. Ralston is still trying to wrap his head around that!

I'm no lawyer, but there doesn't seem to be any mention of a veto and an override, and this is a special case in the Constitution, unlike other bill passages. On the other hand, the word "approval" could be construed to mean "in the ordinary approval of a measure," which would mean to disapprove it Sandoval would have to veto it.

So I am, ahem, supremely confident it....could go either way. (I welcome legal opinions in the comments or via email.)

Roberson seems confident the alternative tax bill would be deemed vetoed and lawmakers could override. He has verbal confirmation from legislative attorneys.

That is, it is "the same language that is used for any bill," he told me. "The word 'veto' is not in the Constitution in connection with approval by the governor for any legislation."

And he's right. The word "veto" does not appear in the Constitution when it refers to the governor approving bills. But as strong a case as that may be, "approval" also has been construed in practice to mean the governor either signs it or he...vetoes it.

Article 19 of the Nevada Constitution only states that any alternative to an initiative petition must be approved by the Governor. Yet Governor Brian Sandoval opposes both IP 1 itself and Roberson's alternative. So what happens if/when Sandoval vetoes Roberson's mining tax? And that assumes Roberson's mining tax can achieve the 2/3 supermajority necessary for passage (and override of Sandoval's veto).

That's another major challenge. The mining industry has already been waging an expensive war just to derail SJR 15, the constitutional amendment to remove the 5% mining tax and all the loopholes (that make the effective tax rate far under 5%) from the Nevada Constitution. What will mining lobbyists do in the coming days to fight this new development? We all know that's coming.

And then, there's The Education Initiative itself. Will it have competition on next year's general election ballot? Will all the renewed focus on tax reform compel the Legislature to craft some sort of alternative? Will all the renewed tax reform talk actually help drive the message home for The Education Initiative?

Right now, the fiscal picture in Carson City is looking quite unclear. However, the renewed energy for progressive tax reform is looking crystal clear. What also is looking clear is the opening progressives now have for tax reform thanks to a divided Republican Party. So what will ultimately make it through that opening? We shall see.