Apr 052021
 

Did you know that Washington D.C. is not financially viable on it’s own? Even the way the democrats are trying to carve it up will not work fiscally.

Washington DC was never created to become a state in any way shape or form. Were Washington DC to become a State, they would lose a ton of money. The cost would be staggering:

In fact, the most strident opposition to D.C. statehood is likely to come from D.C. residents themselves – once they calculate the real and substantial costs to statehood. D.C. statehood would devastate the District of Columbia’s local budget, eliminate hundreds of millions of dollars in federal aid and wipe out social services, health care, transportation, and social welfare programs.

“Like most things, life in Washington involves tradeoffs: D.C. residents are closer to the levers of federal power than anyone else, they have free access to many of the nation’s foremost cultural treasures, and they have some of the highest average household and individual incomes in the country,” contends Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby (Jacoby, The Constitution says no to DC statehood, 2020).

Even the Left-Leaning Urban Institute confrims: D.C. #1 in Federal Support

On a per capita basis, D.C. residents enjoy federal payments that are orders of magnitude greater than residents of other states. Even the left-leaning Urban Institute is forced to acknowledge that “the District of Columbia’s per capita spending exceeded all states” (Urban Institute, 2020).

• Number #1 in Welfare at $265 per DC resident.
• Number #1 in K-12 spending per capita at $3,466 per DC resident.
• Number #1 in Medicaid spending per capita at $3,669 per DC resident.
• Number #1 in Housing spending per capita at $814 per DC resident.
• Number #1 in Parks spending per capita at $285 per DC resident.
• Number #1 in Public Transit per capita at $2,145 per DC resident. (Urban Institute, January 2017)

There is simply not enough of a tax base in Washington DC to run an effective State Government.

Look at just how much DC depends on the Federal Government:

Net Federal Expenditures Per Capita: D.C. $37,457 vs. -$1,181 for Ohio

For decades, Washington, D.C. has experienced incredible net federal expenditures compared to other states. According to federal budget data for the Fiscal Year 2004, net federal expenditures per capita, after subtracting taxes paid, showed D.C. on top at $37,457. That was nearly 5x greater than second place Alaska at $8,005. Meanwhile, residents of Ohio lost -$1,181 on a per capita basis, with Delaware at a shocking -$7,010 (MacEwan, October 11, 2016).

By 2010, the gap had expanded even further. D.C. residents were receiving $72,292 on a per capita basis, a figure nearly 7x greater than second place Alaska at $11,123. Meanwhile, residents of Ohio remained in the negative on a per capita basis, with Delaware at -$8,019 (MacEwan, October 11, 2016).

2017 Council of State Governments Report: DC Funding at $82,508 Per Capita

A 2017 Council of State Governments report, which analyzed $3.4 trillion in federal spending in five categories: retirement benefits; nonretirement benefits; salaries and wages; grants; and contracts, concluded that D.C. residents received $82,508 per capita, compared to $17,052 for second place Virginia. Residents of Utah, meanwhile, received a meager $7,327 on a per capita basis (Hopkins, 2017).

And for a specific example of the impending fiscal disaster of statehood – look at just the courts:

$274 Million Federal Subsidy of D.C. Courts
D.C.’s courts would be unable to function without federal assistance. “In fiscal year 2016, the federal government paid for the costs of running D.C.’s court system, a total of $274 million” (Lefrak, 2016).

Then – look at this, Washington DC’s bonds are Junk Bonds! Ouch.

Because the District lacks a state-level economic system, it has resorted to junk bonds and accounting gimmicks. In 1995, President Bill Clinton authorized the financial control board, officially called the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority, to rescue D.C. form its $518 million structural deficit (Delgadillo, Kurzius, & Sadon, 2019).

I can only guess that the democrat leadership are fixated on the Two extra Senators and nothing else. One would hope that responsible members of Congress will stand up and look at the totality of the situation and realize what they would be doing to the residents of Washington D.C. should this hare-brained scheme pass.

Call Susie Lee and encourage her to stay away from this.

Apr 122021
 

Democrats Dismiss Alternative Proposals

Democrats’ cynical power grab is exposed by the far left’s unwillingness to consider or even debate less cumbersome alternative proposals. Indeed, numerous proposals that do not require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution could address the perceived problems of the status quo arrangement.

Alternative #1: Retrocession to Maryland

The Capital District area could be reduced and the current land area of D.C. “would become part of the state of Maryland — the state to which it initially belonged” (Fredman, 2014). Under such a proposal, D.C. would gain representation “without increasing the number of senators, as Maryland’s senators would represent former D.C. citizens” (Fredman, 2014).

Alternative #2: Apportion D.C. Residents to Maryland for Congressional Voting

A simple solution to claims of D.C. disenfranchisement has been proposed by Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby.

“Let the city’s residents be counted, for federal voting purposes, as citizens of Maryland (the state from which D.C. was carved out in 1791). What could be simpler? While Congress would continue to exercise exclusive rule in Washington, voters living there would be considered Marylanders in House, Senate, and White House elections. Presto! No more disenfranchisement, no more taxation without representation, and no more cynical talk of turning a medium-sized city into the 51st state.” (Jacoby, 2019)

Alternative #3: Exempt D.C. Residents from Federal Income Tax

Cato Institute scholar Roger Pilon has offered a federal income tax exemption as a libertarian solution to the D.C. statehood question. Such an exemption would address claims that D.C. residents face “taxation without representation” (Hughes, 2014).

“As everyone knows, what they really crave are the three additional Democratic seats in Congress that would come with a new state.”
– Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe

Call Susie Lee and tell her that there are alternatives to address the primary arguments that will not cause a fiscal disaster in Washington DC!

Apr 052021
 
EXPLANATION OF AB376 has the deceptive name of “Keep Nevada Working Act”. It has nothing to do with Nevadans working, but is all about prohibiting law enforcement from enforcing immigration laws creating Nevada as a Sanctuary State. A state or local law enforcement agency SHALL NOT inquire into or collect information relating to the immigration or citizenship status of a person or the place of birth of the person…and SHALL NOT provide federal immigration authorities with…information. State or local law enforcement, before making an inquiry, “warn the person that any statement made about his or her immigration or citizenship status or place of birth may be shared with federal immigration authorities and possibly used in federal proceeding for deportation or removal of the person,” etc.
         State or local law enforcement shall not detain a person solely for determining immigration status unless accompanied by a warrant which is based upon probable cause issued by a federal judge or magistrate because the person has committed a crime. State and local law enforcement SHALL NOT permit a federal immigration authority to interview a person about a noncriminal matter while the person is in custody.
Prohibits any agency to use funds, facilities, property, equipment or personnel to investigate, enforce, cooperate with or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal registration or program or any other law, rule or policy that targets people based on ..immigration status or citizenship.
        AB376 sets up the “Keep Nevada Working Task Force” within the Office for New Americans (created last session to help illegal immigrants). The Task Force will be made up of illegal alien friendlies including: Immigrant advocacy groups, labor organizations, a legal interest of immigrants, faith based non-profit, an advocacy group which focuses on immigration and criminal justice, and others. The Task Force is to develop strategies with private sector business, labor organizations and immigrant advocacy groups to strengthen industries across the state, strengthening career pathways for illegals, improve the ability of this sate to attract and retain immigrant business owners. Your tax dollars at work.
        The Preamble of the bill claims that “immigrants” make up 19 percent of the population accounting for one in every four workers. AB376 is in recognition of the significant contributions of immigrants (illegals) to the overall prosperity and strength of this State, creating a compelling interest in ensuring that this State remains a place where the rights and dignity of all residents (including illegal immigrants) are protected.
It says school & campus police “shall not inquire into or collect information concerning the immigration or citizenship status of a person; or place of birth of a person or provide information.
According to the Center for Immigration Studies 62% of households headed by illegal immigrants used one or more welfare programs…and there is a child present in 86% of illegal immigrant households using welfare, and this is the primary way that these household access programs.” http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Legal-Illegal-Immigrant-Households
“FAIR estimates that the annual fiscal burden on Nevada taxpayers associated with illegal immigration to be about $630 million (in 2008). This equates to an annual average cost of about $763 per native-born headed household in the state. In addition, there is a cost to the state’s economy resulting from remittances sent abroad that amounted to $618 million in 2006. From 2004 to 2006 remittance flow increased 38%. Estimated taxes collected from the illegal alien population are about $216 million.”
Apr 052021
 
Kill AB99: The Committee Vote is Tuesday at 9pm
AB99 has been hijacked by the Democrats. Instead of stopping the Taxpayer Rip-off of Prevailing Wage, AB99 has lowered the threshold from $100,000 to $2,000 and now requires the Nevada System of Higher Education (colleges & universities) to pay prevailing wages (exorbitant union wages) on essentially all jobs. This is a payoff to unions for Democrat votes.
EXPLANATION OF AB99:
This bill originally would have increased the threshold to $250,000 now with a proposed amendment will lower it to $2,000 and will require prevailing wages to be paid on essentially all jobs. The only reason for prevailing wages is for Dems to reward the unions. Prevailing wage is a huge rip-off of the taxpayers. The median prevailing wage for a union worker is on average 64% higher than their average wage. For instance for the category “painters, construction and maintenance” the regular pay is $29 an hour plus benefits. Under prevailing wage it goes up to $61 an hour. There may be an amendment to include rural county governments in this bill as well as NSHE. See the information from Nevada Policy Research Institute: Prevailing Wage Rates, 2019 | Nevada Policy Research Institute (npri.org)
Mar 292021
 

When Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak Vetoed the National Popular Vote Compact – his words were quite clear:

“Once effective, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact could diminish the role of smaller states like Nevada in national electoral contests and force Nevada’s electors to side with whoever wins the nationwide popular vote, rather than the candidate Nevadans choose.”

One of the primary arguments against Washington DC Statehood is that it will disenfranchise Small States – by diluting their representation in the US Senate.

Here is another and it is devastating. Washington D.C.’s entire economy is the care and feeding of Government:

Supporters of D.C. statehood argue that the District’s population exceeds two states, Vermont and Wyoming (Paunescu, 2019). However, John S. Baker, Jr., a visiting professor at Georgetown Law School, establishes the important distinction between cities and states. “The District of Columbia lacks the status of statehood … because it is a city. The United States, unlike medieval Europe, does not have city-states” (Baker J. S., 2020)

Through a larger geographic footprint, states represent a multiplicity of interests. Historian John Steele Gordon says: “Every large state has a multiplicity of interests that must be balanced: agricultural, mining, fishing, banking, insurance, etc. But the District of Columbia has only one interest: the care and feeding of the federal government. It is the ultimate company town.” (Jacoby, 2019)

A city-state basically violates the constitution.

Then the scheme of making Washington DC a City-State further shreds the voice of small states like Nevada by creating supervoters. The scheme would effectively shrink Washington DC to a tiny area with a few thousand voters that still have their 3 electoral votes.

Democrats’ plan for D.C. statehood would create severe inequities in electoral representation with the creation of “super voters.” In order to bypass the U.S. Constitution, H.R. 51 preserves a capital district of just two miles (Lefrak, 2016). However, this district – under the 23rd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution— would retain its 3 electoral votes (Hewitt, 1993).

“As long as the 23rd Amendment is in force, the District of Columbia is guaranteed at least three votes in the Electoral College,” points out columnist Jeff Jacoby. “Under the House bill, those votes would be controlled by the microscopic population of the drastically shrunken district, making them far and away the most influential voters in the nation. Such an outcome would obviously be absurd, yet it would be unavoidable unless the 23rd Amendment were repealed” (Jacoby, The Constitution says no to DC statehood, 2020).

Constitutional amendments are a lengthy and cumbersome process requiring BOTH a two-thirds approval of both houses of Congress AND ratification by three-fourths of the states (Erickson, 2017). Therefore, if or until such an amendment was approved, voters within this two square mile area would hold tremendous control over the selection of the U.S. President.

IT seems amazing that a Congresswoman from an R-Leaning District is considering gutting the voice of her own state. But this is the state of politics in 2021. Please contact Susie Lee and ask her to stay away from the DC Statehood.

Mar 252021
 

Since its founding on July 16, 1790, Washington, D.C. has served as the independent capital of the United States of America. The District of Columbia holds a unique and prestigious place in American history as the central seat of the U.S. federal government.

In addition to substantial benefits for its 705,749 residents (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020), D.C. independence has remained a vital national interest to protect against extreme states’ rights power grabs that could imperil the operations of American government.

As of right now, Susie Lee who is in an R-Leaning Congressional District NV-03 is not a co-sponsor of HR51 to make Washington DC a state. The Right on Daily Nevada Blog is encouraging everyone to contact her and her office to tell her not to make this mistake.

We are going to walk Susie Lee through several aspects of the DC Statehood drive and how it actually hurts the residents there!

H.R. 51: D.C. Statehood Bill in 116th United States Congress (The current bill in the 117th Congress has the same number)

In June 2020, the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives approved H.R. 51, a simple-majority vote bill that would make Washington, D.C. the nation’s 51st state (Jones, 2020). Sponsored by Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D.C.’s elected Democrat Member of Congress, the bill passed on a 232 to 180 vote, with only Democrat support (Roll Call 122, 2020). In fact, one Democrat, Rep. Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota, broke ranks with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and opposed the bill, demonstrating bipartisan opposition to the measure (Tumulty, 2020).

The ban on D.C. statehood has been enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. Constitutional scholars point out that “Maryland could object to the establishment of a New Columbia, arguing that it ‘did not cede the land for the purpose of creating a new state on its border’” (DeBonis, 2014).

Similar to the National Popular Vote effort which has been rigged and factored to circumvent the constitution, the DC Statehood effort is the same.

U.S. Constitution: Article 1, Section 8

As Time Magazine notes: “… the lack of statehood for the capital is enshrined in the Constitution. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the document reads, “The Congress shall have Power To …exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States” (Berenson, 2016).

“Congress cannot change the status of the capital district simply by redefining it.”

Democrats Flout Prima Facia Constitutional Barriers

Curiously, Democrats openly celebrate the unconstitutional nature of H.R. 51 (Wolf, 2020). Rather than amend the U.S. Constitution, the bill would reduce the size of the federal district to just two square miles and then admit the remaining territory of D.C. as a new state, the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth (MacFarlane, Bensen, & Staff, 2020). The federal-controlled district would include the White House, the Capitol, the Supreme Court and the principal federal monuments, while the state would consist of 66 of the 68 square miles of the present-day District of Columbia (Norton, 2020).

Let this sink in, the cynical nature of this effort should be alarming to any reasonable person.

As we continue, we are going to start laying out the disasterous consequences for the people of Washington DC if they become a state.

BTW – here is a poll in 3-2021 showing 55% of Americans opposing DC Statehood versus a paltry 29% in favor.

Mar 012021
 
Nevada Families for Freedom
State Affiliate of Eagle Forum, 46th Anniversary
186 Ryndon Unit 12, Elko, Nevada 89801, 775-397-6859, Sparks 775-356-0105
February 27, 2021 In the Year of Our Lord, U.S. Constitution Art. VII
SJR8* ERA Changes Everything!
Watch the short video:
Republican Senators Plan to Vote
For the Most Radical State ERA anywhere in the Country
If you are from Clark County make sure to contact New Senator Carrie Buck. She is not sure it’s worth it to vote NO.
Senator from Clark: Carrie Buck Please ask her to vote no on SJR8* the State ERA: 775-684-1457, [email protected],
The following Republican Senators voted Yes on SJR8, the State ERA, in 2019 and are planning to vote Yes in 2021. Their excuse was that they didn’t want to be perceived as anti-woman and be vulnerable in their campaigns. They were not worried about the future of our children, especially our girls, tax funded abortions or the devastating effects of the State ERA. They must hear from you!
MESSAGE: SJR8*, the State ERA, is not pro woman. It is anti-family, anti-woman and especially anti-girl. We want you to vote NO on SJR8*. Girls will have to compete with biological males in sports which will ruin their chances for success and scholarships. Girls’ safety and privacy will be at risk in school bathrooms, locker rooms, showers and in motel rooms on trips when transgender biological boys use those facilities. Taxpayers will also be harmed because they will have to pay for abortions. Our religious liberty will be in jeopardy if we believe in traditional marriage. We are concerned that age of consent laws that protect children from sexual predators could be overturned in the name of equality. Please Vote NO on SJR8*. (Or better yet share your own message.)
Republicans who voted YES on SJR8* ERA in 2019
CALL them.
From Churchill, Douglas, Lyon, Storey: (Senate Minority Leader)  James Settelmeyer, 775-684-1470 Cell: 775-450-6114 (send a text)
From Washoe County: Heidi Gansert, 775-684-1419
From Washoe and Carson: Ben Kieckhefer, 775-684-1450
From Clark County: Scott Hammond, 775-684-1442
From Clark County: Keith Pickard, 775-684-1481
From Boulder City: Joe Hardy, 775-684-1462
Please THANK these 2 Senators for Voting NO on SJR8 the State ERA in 2019 and ask them to vote No again.
From Esmeralda, Humboldt, Lander, Mineral, Nye, Pershing, Washoe: Ira Hansen, 775-684-1480
From Rural Clark, Elko, Eureka, Lincoln, Nye, White Pine: Pete Goicoechea, 775-684-1447
It is nice to know the group-think is alive and well in the Nevada Legislature. This is not good politics, not even close.
Feb 272021
 

Having been involved in California Politics for years, I saw what happened when Prop 14 passed. Prop 14 is the jungle primary.

Just last year – 25 districts had no Republican File and about 45 California Districts had no Republican in the runoff. Loser RINO’s like Keickhefer are making the same arguments I heard over 15 years ago for Prop 14 (California’s Version).

In California – there have been almost no Republicans make the runoff for any Statewide office Since Prop 14 passed. When now Vice President Kamala Harris got elected to the senate, she was in the runoff with another democrat.

Ben Keichhefer is indeed a malignant cancer within the Nevada GOP and appears to want to get revenge on every conservative that has ever criticized him. Unfortunately for Keickhefer, Prop 14 has not moderated California Politics – it has moved it dramatically leftward. This shreds his fantasy regarding how he could get more squishes like himself elected.

Having looked at Nevada Politics for a bit over the last few years, I am making a list of people that appear to believe that being like democrats is an effective way to govern as a Republican. Heidi Gansert – who I voted for – is one example. Jill Tolles is another – despite living in a safe R seat (like Ben).

Ben’s jungle primary bill is called SB121. Let him and the others know how you feel about it. While I am at it, I included a few more “Republican” Senators for you to contact as well.

From Churchill, Douglas, Lyon, Storey: (Senate Minority Leader)
 James Settelmeyer, 775-684-1470 Cell: 775-450-6114 (send a text)
From Washoe County: Heidi Gansert, 775-684-1419
From Washoe and Carson: Ben Kieckhefer, 775-684-1450
From Clark County: Scott Hammond, 775-684-1442
From Clark County: Keith Pickard, 775-684-1481
From Boulder City: Joe Hardy, 775-684-1462
Keickhefer is not done just hiding in his safe seat destroying Republicans:
SB111 would remove 4 of the 7 failed Clark and Washoe County School District Board Members from the ballot. I gues Keickhefer is having some sort of Mid-Life crisis and feels the need to shred the election code.
Keickhefer would ensure that the Clark County School Board would never face accountability again for their insane lockdown. He’d have his fellow democrats on the Clark County Board of Commissioners appoint 4 of the 7!
In Washoe – one would be appointed by the Governor, One by the County Commissioners and one each by the City of Reno and the City of Sparks. Keickhefer should be recalled even though he is term limited in 2022, as it appears he has way too much time on his hands.
Can you tell the Nevada Legislature is in session? What a trainwreck. Will Stettlemeyer put a leash on this guy or will he join Keickhefer in voting for a ton of tax increases?
Jul 172020
 

James Stettlemeyer? Ben Kieckhefer? What is your problem? Do you think Steve Sisolak deserves a bailout for his disastrous bungling of COVID? Do you think you can just hammer industry and then ask Donald Trump to print a couple billion to cover it all?

It looks like the Nevada GOP Caucus needs Right On Daily Nevada. With the Ralston report being owned by their never-trumper donors, it appears there is a vacuum in Nevada.

Nevada Families for Freedom 
State Affiliate national Eagle Forum, 46th Anniversary
186 Ryndon Unit 12, Elko, Nevada 89801, 775-397-6859, Sparks 775-356-0105
Facebook link: https://www.facebook.com/nevadafamilies @nevadafamilies
July 13, 2020, In the Year of Our Lord, U.S. Constitution Art. VII, 10:00pm
When you forward please delete bottom portion which says unsubscribe or someone will unsubscribe for you. Thank you for Acknowledgement.
Tonight, Senator Ira Hansen made a powerful statement on the floor of the Nevada State Senate about the Governor’s One-Size Fits All Dictatorial Policies on Covid-19 that are destroying the economy of the State.
You can listen to his short statement at the Legislature’s site: Video’s of Archived Meetings. https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Video/   At 6:10:18, near the very end of the July 13th archived meeting video you can hear Senator Ira Hansen’s remarks.
He made these points:
  • The Governors one-size-fits-all dictatorial mandates does not allow local governments and individual businesses to determine their local policies which are appropriate.
  • The Governor or his staff are now calling mayors and county commissioners telling them that the Governor will cut their funding if they do not comply with his edicts.
  • The Governor has now created an OSHA hotline for people to spy on their neighbors and businesses to see if they are complying or face forced closure or huge fines.
  • The Governor has targeted bars and churches inordinately.
  • He said he had driven by the Nugget and GSR resort in Reno and Sparks and the parking lots were full. People are anxious to participate in the economy.
  • Make no mistake the economy has everything to do with the special session and the taxes that are collected.
  • We need to have a discussion of this issue of the Governor’s policies on Covid-19 during this Legislature.
  • We need to eliminate this one-size fits all dictatorial attitude in Nevada.
We need to support Senator Ira Hansen’s opposition to the current Dictator Governor Sisolak’s policies.
Thank Senator Ira Hansen for his courage: [email protected]
MESSAGE to all other Senators: (especially the Republicans) No Republicans stood to back Senator Hansen’s comments. Two Democrats stood to oppose him.
Message: We agree with Senator Hansen’s remarks on the floor of the Senate. Please consider as Legislators the extreme damage to our state’s economy that Governor Sisolak’s one-size-fits-all dictatorial policies on Covid-19 are causing. Local elected officials are capable of responsible action and are closer to the people. It is because businesses are closed that we have this extreme economic devastation to our state, as well as to the citizens and businesses of Nevada. You can’t collect taxes if businesses are closed or out of business and 25% of Nevadans are unemployed. Open up our state. (or write your own message) See article on economic devastation below.
All Senate Republicans except Senator Hansen:
Senate Democrats:
Nevada hardship index: 35.29.
Rank 1.
Unemployment: 25.3%
Mortgage delinquency: 9.99%
Please go the link to see the state by state rankings.
www.zerohedge.com
Apparently, every Republican not named Ira Hansen missed the memo from Minneapolis. You can’t screw up by the numbers and expect the federal government to fix your mess. If you enable riots, destroy your economy and abuse power causing widespread economic hardship you made your own bed. The cowardice and lack of foward thinking that I am seeing as I am plugging in to Nevada politics from the GOP is a very familiar pattern.
It is also clear to me that most of the Republicans are OK with Ratt lines and Sisolak threatening Counties to force compliance. These people need to be Primary Challenged and unseated.
I do understand why the Dems have a Super-majority in the Assembly. There is no compelling reason to vote Republican given what the Republican are doing in Carson City.
Jul 162020
 

Well – it looks like a bunch of “Republicans” in the legislature are in need of loving, the kind of loving that only the Right On Daily Blog can give RINO’s.

Nevada Families for Freedom 
State Affiliate national Eagle Forum, 46th Anniversary
186 Ryndon Unit 12, Elko, Nevada 89801, 775-397-6859, Sparks 775-356-0105
Facebook link: https://www.facebook.com/nevadafamilies @nevadafamilies
July 16, 2020, In the Year of Our Lord, U.S. Constitution Art. VII, 10:07pm
When you forward please delete bottom portion which says unsubscribe or someone will unsubscribe for you. Thank you for Acknowledgement.
Why Elect Republicans When They Vote Like Democrats?
After you read my explanation of SB3 below and what happened yesterday, my question is this. Why vote for Republicans when they vote like Democrats? Contact the Republican Senators and Assemblymen who voted for SB3 and ask them that question.
Yesterday during the Special Session of the Nevada Legislature, the Senate voted 19-2 for SB3 with only 2 Republicans Senators Hansen and Hardy, voting No. SB3 passed the Assembly 32 to 10 with only 6 of 13 Republicans, Assemblymen Chris Edwards, John Ellison, John Hambrick, Alexis Hansen, Lisa Krasner, and Jim Wheeler, voting No. Democrats Richard Carillo, Skip Daly, Ozzie Fumo, and Greg Smith also voted No.
 
MESSAGE:Why did you vote with the Democrats on SB3 against mining and the rural counties which are overwhelmingly Republican? We expect you to vote to uphold the two-thirds requirement in the Nevada Constitution for raising taxes even if you lose. Please stand for principle. (or write you own message).
Republican Senators voting YES on SB3 like the Democrats: [email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]
 
Republican Senators and Assemblyman voting NO on SB3: Thank them for voting NO on SB3 like Republicans should!
 
You can view the floor statements near the end of the sessions for both the Senate and the Assembly: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Video/
SB3 Requires the mines for the “net proceeds of minerals” tax to pay their taxes a year in advance before they ever make any money. How would other businesses do if they had to pay their taxes a year before they are operating for that year or making any money?   In his opposition on the Senate Floor Senator Ira Hansen said that in his opinion this was unconstitutional because the Nevada Constitution requires a fair and equitable tax system. If all businesses had to pay a year in advance then this would be fair and equitable, but the Legislature is singling out one industry as it is only being imposed on mining. Small mines may have to borrow the money to be able to pay their taxes and it could certainly make it impossible for them to operate putting them out of business. This acceleration of the mining tax will be for 2021, 22 and 23 and then revert to the former method of payment. The Legislative Counsel Bureau sided with the Democrats and against the 2/3rds voting requirement for raising taxes. More below under Settelmeyer.
SB3: Currently, the state highway fund gets 75% of the money from the government services tax when you register you vehicle and the state general fund gets 25%. This bill changes that so that the general fund gets 100% of the tax money and the highway fund nothing for one year. This will have a tremendous impact on construction jobs which will be lost because of the loss of funding for the highway fund. The bill also provides for the Nevada Dept. of Taxation to create an amnesty program for people who owe back taxes so that if they pay their taxes in full, they will not have to pay any interest or fees. They expect to get about 1/3 of people to pay, raising close to $30 million.
Republican minority leader Senator Settelmeyer stated that in 2010 almost the exact legislation was passed and needed a 2/3 votes. Why in 2020 does the bill not require a 2/3 vote? Was the Legislative Counsel Bureau wrong in 2010? Or is this another challenge to the 2/3 vote requirement in the Nevada Constitution to pass a tax or fee? He asked if it was designed to support the court case that was currently in the courts, which the Republicans brought from the last session when a bill came to the Senate Floor with a requirement for 2/3 vote did not pass and then was brought back within an hour without the 2/3rds requirement and passed. Senator Hardy made the same points. Although Senator Settelmeyer still voted for SB3 and Senator Hardy voted No on SB3. Kevin Powers of the Legislative Counsel Bureau sided with the Democrats and against the 2/3rds voting requirement for raising taxes.
On the Assembly Floor the public testimony by Leftist-Socialists paid lobbyists spent their time bashing the mining industry and saying they needed to pay more taxes and that acceleration was not enough. Assemblywoman Alexis Hansen gave a stirring defense of the mining industry. She reminded the body that mining also pays many other taxes and is the major industry in most of the rural counties. That mining creates well paying jobs averaging $90,000 a year. You can hear her at the link above. Assemblywoman Titus also defended mining but voted for SB3.
It is time to sue the legislature for this unconstitutional act. The RINO’s in Carson City just pulled an Arnold Schwarzenegger. They are ripping off future years because they lack the courage to tell public employee unions and welfare recipients no. We expect this kind of dishonesty from Democrats. But Republicans like Kieckhefer and Stettlemeyer that play conservative in their district and then bargain the future of the state away when they think no one is going to know need to be held accountable.
Right On Daily Nevada is building a target list and these guys are on it.
It is time to primary challenge these so-called “Republicans” that are screwing the second largest source of revenue for Nevada. Note, these cowards did not mess with the Casino Industry.