Posts Tagged ‘Brian Sandoval’

Amodei Wins Republican Nomination for Congressional Special Election

By Elizabeth Crum | 9:49 am June 19th, 2011

SPARKS — Former Republican Party of Nevada Chairman Mark Amodei yesterday blew out the competition and became his party’s nominee for the 2nd congressional district special election on Sept. 13.

Amodei needed 162 of 323 member votes to win. He pulled in 221 votes compared to state Sen. Greg Brower who earned 56 votes and retired U.S. Navy Cmdr. Kirk Lippold who received 46 votes.

It now remains to be seen whether the party’s nomination will stay in effect through the general election. The state Supreme Court could effectively invalidate the nomination if it rules in favor of a so-called free-for-all among the more than two dozen candidates who have so far filed with the Secretary of State.

The initial decision to hold an open ballot election was made by Secretary of State Ross Miller, who interpreted state statutes to say that no primary election should be held in a special election for Congress.

But Republicans argued that state statutes say it is up to the political parties to nominate candidates. District Court Judge James T. Russell ruled in their favor, however Miller and the Nevada Democratic Party quickly appealed to the state Supreme Court.

Amodei, who served in the state Legislature prior to his time as chairman of the state Republican party, touted his non-government work experience to the delegates gathered at the meeting.

“Twenty-four years in the private sector; that’s how I earned my living as I stand here before you today,” he said.

“I have fourteen years legislative experience, but I am not going to belabor that,” he added.

Amodei seemed relaxed and confident throughout the morning.

“I am comfortable with the fact that you folks have done your homework,” he said near the end of his speech.

Carol Howell, a delegate and northern Nevada conservative activist, asked the candidates if they would agree to honor the central committee vote and support the winner should the state Supreme Court rule in favor of a free-wheeling “ballot royale.”

Both Brower and Amodei said they would support the winner. Lippold said he would stay in the race regardless, and would also run for the seat in 2012.

Brower tried to win support by presenting strongly worded conservative policy positions, talking about his experience both as a former naval officer and U.S. Attorney, painting himself as a devoted father and husband and promising to quickly raise a large amount of campaign money if nominated.

“I will commit to you that in the first 30 days of this race, I can raise $500,000,” said Brower confidently.

In answer to a question about the current size of his campaign coffers, however, Brower acknowledged he had a big hill to climb.

“I got into this late because I was working in Carson city to balance the budget. I am really behind in the fundraising effort,” he said.

Brower was the only candidate to name his party’s potential opposition by name.

“If you like Obama and Reid and Pelosi, you’re going to love Kate Marshall,” he quipped to laughter and applause.

Brower was visibly shocked after the vote tallies were announced, but said he thought it was important for the party to get behind a single candidate. He was not specific about what kind of support he would personally offer to Amodei, though.

“We’ll see. Whatever… I’ll do whatever I can,” said Brower with a strained smile.

In contrast, Lippold was cheerful in the face of defeat and vowed to fight on, saying he was honored to be part of the process.

“To think that I was able to in six weeks come from zero to be able to stand on the stage with guys who have been here in the state for a decade working and to get the level and groundswell of support that I had today, I’m absolutely touched and honored and just grateful for the central committee and the hard work they did,” Lippold said.

Amodei spoke to the press informally for a few minutes after the results were announced. In answer to questions about his chances in the election, Amodei said he did not think a Republican win was a foregone conclusion.

“I think if you look at the district and you study the voting results, 72 months ago Jill Derby beat Dean Heller by 4,000 votes in Washoe County. If that’s not a wake-up call–” Amodei said, acknowledging that hard work will be necessary to pull off a win.

The state Supreme Court is expected to hear the special election case on June 28.

-

Post-election video interviews:

Mark Amodei

Greg Brower

Kirk Lippold

 

 

 

 

Budget Office Says Democratic Spending Plan Nearly $1 Billion Over Sandoval Budget

By Andrew Doughman | 3:56 pm May 23rd, 2011

CARSON CITY — Legislative Democrats intend to spend almost $1 billion more than Gov. Brian Sandoval requested in his $6.3 billion budget, according to a spreadsheet obtained from Gov. Brian Sandoval’s budget office today.

The majority of the $968 million in spending replaces budget cuts in K-12 education, higher education and social services, which Democrats have long argued will eviscerate the state’s social safety net and destroy the state’s education system.

Throughout the past few weeks, the Legislature’s money committees have closed various state budgets, sometimes at levels higher than the governor recommended in his general fund budget. They finished that process this past Thursday and staff reviewed the numbers this weekend.

The majority of the expenditures come from $626 million in the K-12 budget, $205 million in higher education and $121 million for health and human services.

Democrats plan to pay for their budget with a $1.2 billion combination of extending 2009 tax increases, a business “margin” tax and transaction tax on services.

Extending the 2009 taxes would secure $626 million in funding for the Democratic budget plan, $342 million less than legislators would like to spend.

Since extending the taxes appears to be the most likely to pass, legislators may have to whittle away at their additions to the governor’s budget. They have scheduled a meeting tomorrow during which they intend to “reconsider” some of their earlier budget add backs.

Republicans and Sandoval have so far opposed the plan, and Democrats need at least several Republicans to join them to create a two-thirds majority to override a Sandoval veto of any tax plan.

Republican legislators on the Senate and Assembly’s money committees have also largely voted against the additions to the budget.

“Between Thursday and Monday, they [Democrats] realized they closed a budget that is totally unrealistic,” said Sen. Ben Kieckhefer, R-Reno.

Kieckhefer had also requested the full expenditure list from the governor’s budget office. The $968 million number has not yet been finalized.

Representatives from the office of Assembly Speaker John Oceguera, D-Las Vegas, declined to comment since they have not had time to review the governor’s numbers.

 

 

Republican Congressional Candidates Speak Before Republican Women’s Group

By Andrew Doughman | 6:55 pm May 21st, 2011

CARSON CITY — It’s starting to look at lot like campaign season.

Three Republican candidates for Congressional District 2 tried to sell their candidacies to about 100 members of the Nevada Federation of Republican Women at an event at the Plaza Hotel today.

Many of the women in attendance are members of the state party’s central committee, which will nominate one candidate from a field that includes Nevada Republican Party Chairman Mark Amodei, state Sen. Greg Brower, former U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle and former commander of the U.S.S. Cole, Kirk Lippold.

Angle could not attend due to a scheduling conflict, but the other three spoke at the luncheon and touted conservative talking points — no new taxes, small government, fiscal responsibility — while also talking about who they are and what they can do for the congressional district.

Nevada State Republican Party chairman Mark Amodei speaks to the Nevada Federation of Republican Women, the members of which will help select the party's nominee for Congressional District 2.

Following a lower court ruling earlier this week, the Republican and Democratic parties must select a candidate for a September 13 special election. Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., vacated the seat after Gov. Brian Sandoval appointed him to replace outgoing Sen. John Ensign, who resigned following mounting pressure from investigations into an extramarital affair.

Secretary of State Ross Miller, a Democrat, is appealing the court’s decision. Miller has argued that Nevada law calls for what he said is a  ”ballot royale,” an election allowing on the ballot numerous candidates from each political party.

In the meantime, candidates are operating under the assumption that their own parties will select one of them. Democrats have already thrown their weight behind Treasurer Kate Marshall.

But in the Republican field, four candidates are vying for the party’s nomination. The party’s central committee members plan to meet June 18 at John Ascuaga’s Nugget in Sparks to select the candidate.

“For these few weeks, those 351 central committee members will be more popular than they ever dreamed of,” Amodei said.

Amodei spoke earlier this morning at the Nevada Truck Driving Championship in Reno, where he spoke from the bed of a truck in blue jeans and an Army windbreaker.

Speaking to about 70 truck drivers, he stressed the trucking industry’s importance to Nevada.

“We get it,” he said.

Later, wearing a suit at the Republican women’s luncheon, he cast the race as a job interview. He said he would be the best person for the central committee to “hire” as their candidate because he has the most experience with the issues of the northern Nevada district.

Amodei served in the state Senate before leaving due to term limits.

“We need an advocate to lead us in CD2,” he said.

Brower spoke to the women’s group next, touting his extensive public service — he is a former Assemblyman and a former U.S. Attorney — and playing to the crowd.

“Women’s groups really are the backbone of this party,” he said.

State Sen. Greg Brower, R-Reno, said he is the best candidate for the job, saying he's "in the trenches down here" at the Legislature everyday.

Brower, who was appointed to replace retiring Sen. Bill Raggio earlier this year, said he has the strongest conservative record.

“If I feel I am the best candidate for the job, I feel compelled to volunteer,” he said.

Lippold spoke last.

He stuck to familiar Republican mantras of personal responsibility and fiscal restraint while also highlighting his record on defense.

Breaking from the views of some Republicans, he said legislators need to scrutinize how money is spent at the Department of Defense.

“The Department of Defense is not working with the same efficiency and effectiveness as they used to,” he said.

During the next month, the candidates will have to convince central committee members that their personal traits, political philosophy and professional style should earn them the nomination.

“I don’t think anybody is going to come to you and say Obamacare is just right,” Amodei said. “We know what’s going on here.”

 

 

Republicans Release Redistricting Data, Lay Out Terms For Two-Party Negotiations

By Andrew Doughman | 12:45 pm May 20th, 2011

CARSON CITY — Republicans today announced they have released to the public a set of complicated data about their redistricting proposal.

Democrats had said earlier the release of the data is a requirement before the two parties can begin to work toward a compromise.

The release of the data brightens an otherwise gloomy portrait of partisanship. Republicans and Democrats have so far elected not to negotiate terms in the redistricting battle.

When Democrats learned of the release, they issued a statement saying they will freeze their bill, now before the Senate, so that Republicans and Democrats can compare their plans and look for “common ground.”

“We welcome this opportunity to finally compare these two proposals and look forward to quickly investigating the potential for compromise with our friends on the other side of the aisle,” Democrats said in a statement.

Republicans seemed to have answered the call of Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, D-Las Vegas, who asked Republicans to release their data.

“We had constituents calling us, so we thought we’d be open and transparent,” said Senate Minority Leader Mike McGinness, R-Fallon. “The product wasn’t really ours. It was produced by folks who are working on redistricting for us and they wanted to make sure everything was correct [before releasing data].”

The data question had stalled any talk of compromise between Republicans and Democrats, who every 10 years must create revised boundaries for seats for Congress and the state Assembly and Senate according to the most recent U.S. Census data.

Republicans responded to the Democratic call for compromise, saying they are “willing to negotiate.” They did, however, lay out terms for negotiation.

Senate Republicans released a statement this afternoon in which they said they “insist” on pre-conditions for negotiation.

They want a fixed number of majority-minority Hispanics: one in  Congress, four in the state Senate and eight in the state Assembly. That quota is identical to what Republicans originally called for in their proposal.

They also called for eight competitive state Senate and eight competitive state Assembly districts.

“We believe the Voting Rights Act requires fair representation of Hispanics in the U.S. Congress, Nevada State Senate and Nevada Assembly,” said Sen. Barbara Cegavske, R-Las Vegas. “We also believe that no political party should have a monopoly on power.”

Democrats later rejected the premise for establishing terms of negotiation prior to meeting with Republicans.

“We stand ready, without preconditions, to meet and discuss a way forward,” legislative Democrats said in a statement released this afternoon.

Gov. Brian Sandoval has already vetoed the previous Democratic redistricting plan, saying it treated Nevada’s Hispanic population unfairly and did not comply with the federal Voting Rights Act.

The new plan is a second attempt for Nevada’s Democratic-controlled Legislature and Republican governor to reach a compromise over appropriate political boundaries. If they cannot agree, the political tug-o-war could be resolved by a judge.

The gridlock continued yesterday as Democrats elected to hear their second redistricting proposal but declined to hear the Republican proposal since the Republican data had yet to be released. Instead, Democrats voted on their own proposal.

Republicans had said they objected to the way Democrats were moving Democratic bills without hearing a Republican proposal.

But Democrats had said they wanted an “open and transparent” process from Republicans.

The data would allow Democrats and members of the public to examine the exact boundaries of districts proposed in the Republican bill.

Although Republicans provided a bill, the 194-page document contains arcane references to Census block tracts, which are nearly impossible for people to visualize.

The Legislature’s information-technology staff has had the complex data, but Republicans had not authorized them to release it until today.

 

Democrats Identify “Key” Republicans Who Might Vote For Taxes

By Andrew Doughman | 5:06 pm May 19th, 2011

CARSON CITY – The Nevada State Democratic Party today called for Nevadans to press nine GOP “key legislators” to vote for new taxes.

Democrats are urging Nevadans to email these nine Republican legislators, saying that “grassroots action will turn the tide, but it will only happen if you participate.”

The list included four Senators and five Assemblymen. To override a veto from Gov. Brian Sandoval, who has said numerous times he will veto any new tax, three Republican Senators and two Republican Assembly members would have to join all Democratic legislators in voting for a tax.

“We think it’s important that these folks hear from their constituents, not just fellow legislators and lobbyists,” said Speaker John Oceguera, D-Las Vegas.

Many Republicans on the list have already been identified by advocacy groups and political commentators.

Representatives from the governor’s office were quick to condemn the letter.

“This letter is nothing more than a letter of desperation,” said Dale Erquiaga, senior adviser to Sandoval. “It’s clear the Democratic majority do not have the votes to pass a tax increase.”

Republicans in the Assembly earlier released a list of reforms that they hope Democrats will pass. Only after the reforms pass will they consider voting for extending $626 million in taxes passed during 2009 that are due to expire June 30. Those sunsetting taxes are part of a $1.2 billion Democratic tax plan that includes a new tax on services and a new business “margin” tax.

In the message today, Democrats say theirs is a “balanced approach” that restores harmful budget cuts to education and social services while also giving the state a more stable tax base.

For Republicans, the approach is more about reforms they can convince Democrats to pass.

“My attitude from the get go was: they give us substantial reforms, we give them sunsets,” said Assemblyman Ira Hansen, R-Sparks. “They’re not new taxes … That’s our negotiating point.”

Lobbyists in the legislative building also called the Democrats’ move “desperate,” speculating that if Democrats had the votes they needed, they would keep mum about who those legislators were.

Democrats, however, say budget negotiations about government reforms and taxes are proceeding.

“Conversations with legislative Republicans are productive and ongoing,” Oceguera said.

But Hansen and other Republicans have said the reforms proposed so far are not enough.

“I don’t think there’s any chance they’ll [the reforms] meet anyone’s price,” said Sen. Ben Kieckhefer, R-Reno, who earlier said on the political television program “Face To Face” that all lawmakers have a price for voting for raising taxes.

Both Hansen and Kieckhefer are on the Democrats’ list.

That did not surprise Kieckhefer.

“People have considered me a swing vote on taxes since the day I announced my candidacy for office,” Kieckhefer said.

Another Republican on the list, Sen. Joe Hardy, R-Boulder City, said he is already receiving emails about taxes and the budget.

“I don’t mind hearing from people,” he said. “That doesn’t bother me.”

The full list and letter are here.

 

Higher Education Budget Could Be Cut Further Under Legislative Proposal

By Andrew Doughman | 3:40 pm May 18th, 2011

CARSON CITY – The budget situation for Nevada’s universities and colleges may have worsened today as legislators voted to both cut and restore funding for higher education.

Democratic legislators first voted to restore $100 million to the higher education budget, but Democrats also continued to oppose a shift of Washoe and Clark County property tax money from county governments to the University of Nevada, Reno and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

That property tax shift represents $120 million that the universities were counting on in the governor’s recommended general fund budget.

Assemblywoman Debbie Smith, D-Sparks, said legislators fully intend to replace that money with general fund dollars.

But Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, D-Las Vegas, was not so sure.

“That decision has not been finalized,” he said.

Horsford said backfilling that $120 million hole is “one of the options” the Legislature may consider.

If the Legislature does nothing, Nevada’s higher education world may be worse off than it was under Gov. Brian Sandoval’s recommended general fund budget.

“If they don’t replace the property tax money they took out, we’re in very bad shape,” said Jim Richardson, a lobbyist for the Nevada Faculty Alliance.

Richardson said he had thought the Legislature would either apply the property tax shift to all 17 counties or use general fund dollars instead.

Legislature Votes To Reduce Tuition Increase By 13 Percent

Students, however, might feel a little better after legislators on two money committees voted today to support a 13 percent tuition increase spread over the next two years rather than a 26 percent increase, as was proposed earlier.

That would mean the universities would have to find more money because many colleges and universities assumed a 26 percent increase.

“That money has to be cut from somewhere and it would appear that means program cuts and layoffs,” said professor Gregory Brown of the UNLV Faculty Alliance.

The 13 percent tuition increase would bring Nevada’s colleges and universities about $42.4 million during the next two years.

The problem is, higher education administrators were counting on the $120 million worth of property tax diversions in addition to revenues collected through tuition.

The votes, however, all hinge on the Legislature passing new taxes or extending current ones, which are scheduled to sunset June 30. If that does not happen, legislators would have to re-examine these actions.

“We closed the budget, but the funding has not been identified so you can’t get too excited yet,” Smith said. “All you can count on is what we did today, and that’s contingent on us finding the revenue …It’s a budget in motion.”

Sandoval has recommended a two-year, higher-education budget that was $254 million less than the amount of money the Legislature approved during the 2010 special session.

That would be reduced to a $112 million cut if the Board of Regents approves the tuition increases and the Legislature finds $100 million to give to colleges and universities. The Legislature would also have to find $120 million to replace the funding that would have gone to higher education through the local property tax diversion.

Before today, legislators had anticipated following Klaich’s four-point plan, which would have called for $80 million in new revenue and a 26 percent tuition increase.

Students had testified before a legislative committee about keeping tuition low before legislators voted to recommend a 13 percent increase to the Board of Regents, which makes the final call on student fees.

Republicans largely objected to the $100 million in new revenue.

“I don’t know where we’re going to get the money to pay for this,” said Assemblyman Randy Kirner, R-Reno. “I just think we don’t have the money. At this point in the game, this is kind of where I have to stand.”

At this point in the legislative game, legislators are debating taxes.  Sandoval included spending $6.1 billion in his 2011-2013 general fund budget. Democrats want to spend about $7 billion, with $626 million coming from extending taxes set to expire June 30 and the rest from new taxes on business and services like haircuts, attorneys and brothels.

“Bottom line is: there are taxes being paid that if continued would cover this [$100 million],” said Horsford.

Legislative committees also earlier supported a 4.8 percent salary cut to university employees, adding between $7.5 and $10 million in extra spending because the governor recommended a 5 percent cut.

“The reality is, the work is not done because we still need to get folks to pay for it,” Horsford said.

Democrats Introduce Revised Congressional Maps

By Andrew Doughman | 3:23 pm May 17th, 2011

CARSON CITY — Since the governor did not like their last redistricting plan, Democrats are trying again with revisions to their redistricting maps.

Gov. Brian Sandoval earlier vetoed the Democratic plan for the boundaries of political districts, which must be redrawn every 10 years according to U.S. Census demographic data.

The new plan is a second attempt for Nevada’s Democratic-controlled Legislature and Republican governor to reach a compromise over appropriate political boundaries. If they cannot agree, the political tug-o-war could be resolved before a judge.

In a short afternoon hearing today, Democrats introduced and voted their second proposal, Assembly Bill 566, out of committee with Republicans again voting against it. Lawmakers could vote on the bill in the Assembly as early as tomorrow.

“One of the reasons we’re trying to move this stuff is because we want as much time as possible to consider them,” said Tick Segerblom, D-Las Vegas, who noted that the legislative session is scheduled to end soon.

Segerblom said that they did make changes based on what the governor had asked for.

The plan, however, provoked backlash from Republicans, who said their plan has never received a hearing, much less a vote.

Republicans also contended that the Democratic plans still are not fair.

“It doesn’t create enough competitive districts,” said Assemblyman Lynn Stewart, R-Henderson. “We want more competitive districts.”

Speaker John Oceguera, D-Las Vegas, noted that Republicans have not even put their data into the Legislature’s computer system.

“I’m not trying to start a fight here, but the Republican maps are not on the public GIS system,” he said. “I’m just perplexed whey we can’t get this information. I’d love to have this discussion.”

Democrats voted to have the Republican plan hosted on the Legislature’s information system.

The new Democratic proposal includes two solid Democratic-leaning districts, one solid Republican district and one district with a 7 percent Democratic edge.

In a statement released this past Saturday, Sandoval said he did not believe Democrats complied with the federal Voting Rights Act, which guides how states should treat ethnic minorities when drawing political boundaries.

So Democrats created a congressional district three with a 36.72 percent Hispanic population.

This district is represented by Republican Representative Joe Heck, who won by a slim margin over Democratic incumbent Dina Titus during 2010.

Sen. John Lee, D-North Las Vegas, who saw the new proposals this morning, said that Heck’s winning margin was “inch deep” in the 2010 election, therefore making it difficult to keep his district Republican.

Compared to their vetoed plan, the Democratic proposal also moves Heck’s district solidly into Clark County, whereas before it had spread north into rural Nevada.

Heck is the only incumbent that Democrats and Republicans are considering as they draw new districts. Former Rep. Dean Heller became Sen. Heller after Sandoval appointed him to replace Sen. John Ensign, who resigned last month. Rep. Shelley Berkley has said she will face Heller in an 2012 election for that Senate seat.

Nevada’s explosive population growth between 2001 and 2010 earned also Nevada one more Congressional District, giving Nevada four Congressional Districts.

In a Republican plan released earlier, Republicans had drawn one congressional district with a majority Hispanic population. They had also created two districts favoring Democratic candidates and two favoring Republican candidates.

New Democratic Proposed Congressional Districts

District Population Deviation GOP% DEM% HVAP% BVAP% Total Hispanic%
CD01 675,138 0 31.12 47.33 22.29 13.03 26.28
CD02 675138 0 42.81 35.27 16.6 2.19 20.43
CD03 675137 -1 30.28 47.33 31.33 9.91 36.72
CD04 675138 0 35.27 42.28 19.3 8.99 22.7

Vetoed Democratic Proposed Congressional Districts

District Population Deviation GOP% DEM% HVAP% BVAP% Total Hispanic%
CD 01 675,138 0 31.9% 47.9% na na 33.6%
CD 02 675,138 0 42.8% 36.0% na na 20.5%
CD 03 675,138 0 34.4% 44.1% na na 29.2%
CD 04 675,137 -1 35.0% 43.1% na na 22.9%
*former CD04 in last proposal **CD03 in last proposal

Democrats also offered minor amendments to their vetoed proposals for state Assembly and Senate districts. The governor had said in his veto statement that he thought the Democratic proposals were too skewed toward Democrats.

“At its core, this bill creates districts that were drawn exclusively for political gain,” Sandoval said in his statement.

Segerblom said he still believes there is time to compromise.

“It’s still early … lots of time to talk and negotiate,” he said.

If Sandoval vetoes this plan, Democrats may still have time to introduce a third proposal. So far, that plan is not yet in the works.

“There is no plan C,” Segerblom said.

 

Governor Sandoval Vetoes Democratic Redistricting Plan

By Andrew Doughman | 2:20 pm May 14th, 2011

CARSON CITY – Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval has vetoed the Democratic redistricting plan for new Congressional, state Senate and Assembly districts.

Sandoval, in a veto statement issued today, said that the Democratic plan violated the federal Voting Rights Act, which governs how ethnic minorities should be treated when the boundaries of political districts are drawn, and was created for the partisan gain of Democrats.

The veto represents the first rejection of proposed maps, drawn according to 2010 Census data, in what could be a long path toward compromise.

If the Democratic-controlled Legislature and the Republican governor cannot reach common ground, the drawing of political districts may become a matter for the courts to decide. Anticipating the veto, Democrats have another redistricting bill that they can amend and send back to the governor.

At stake is the political representation of Nevada’s Hispanic community. Sandoval charged that the Democratic plan would dilute the Latino vote.

“Of the four Congressional seats it establishes, not one contains a Hispanic majority—though such a district can clearly and simply be drawn, consistent with traditional redistricting principles,” Sandoval’s statement read.

A Republican plan that did not receive a vote created a congressional district with a  50.7 percent total Hispanic population.

The governor also said the Democratic plan would not “afford Hispanics an equal opportunity to elect representatives of their choosing.”

In an earlier speech on the Assembly floor, Assemblywoman Lucy Flores, D-Las Vegas, asked whether this logic implied that only a Hispanic majority could elect a Hispanic candidate.

“Nevada has proven that Hispanic and other minority candidates can and have been elected in minority influence districts,” she said.

Sandoval, Nevada’s first Hispanic governor, was himself elected with a majority of the white vote while losing the Hispanic vote.

In a Republican redistricting plan, Republicans created eight Hispanic-majority seats in the Assembly, four in the Senate and one in Congress.

Democrats spread Hispanic voters throughout more districts, creating two Senate, three Assembly and no congressional districts with a majority Hispanic population

Democrats responded to the veto and called the assertions that their party violated the Voting Rights Act “legally absurd.”

“It is nothing but a smokescreen in an attempt to obscure the partisan ambitions of a party that has a pathetic record on issues of minority rights,” the Democrats said in a statement released following the veto.

Some have said that partisan politics are behind the rhetoric.

During the 2010 election, Hispanics overwhelming voted for Democratic candidate Rory Reid in the gubernatorial race and incumbent Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in the Senate race.

A Hispanic population diffused over many districts should then create more Democratic-leaning districts while a Hispanic population concentrated in one district should create more Republican-leaning districts.

Hispanics now comprise 26 percent of Nevada’s population and are a voter bloc that both parties cannot ignore.

One in seven eligible voters in Nevada are Latinos, the sixth-largest Hispanic eligible voter population share nationally, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.

Sandoval also said the Democratic plan seemed to benefit Democratic candidates politically.

“At its core, this bill creates districts that were drawn exclusively for political gain,” he said.

In earlier statements, Republicans had contended that Democrats had not drawn enough competitive districts and had created too many Democratic-leaning districts.

Democrats would have a voter registration advantage in three of Nevada’s four congressional districts in their proposal.Republicans would create a 2-2 split.

Republican incumbent Rep. Joe Heck would also lose a Republican majority in his congressional district under the Democratic proposal.

The Democratic proposal promises a 30 – 12 Democratic split in the Assembly and a 14 – 7 advantage in the Senate, according to voters registered Democratic and Republican in each proposed district.

The Republican proposal reflects a 26 – 16 Democratic advantage in the Assembly, which is the current ratio in the Assembly. The Republican plan for the state Senate would create 14 seats with more voters registered as Democrats and seven seats with a Republican voter advantage.

The Legislature is required to redraw the boundaries of political districts every 10 years based on changes in population released through the U.S. Census.

 

Democrats Vote To Restore $90 Million To Medicaid Budget

By Andrew Doughman | 12:21 pm May 14th, 2011

CARSON CITY – Democrats today voted to reject Gov. Brian Sandoval’s proposed budget cuts to Medicaid programs this morning.

The governor would have saved about $90 million in his budget through the reductions. Republicans on the Legislature’s money committees voted to cut the Medicaid budget in line with Sandoval’s recommendations.

The Medicaid funding would help reimburse hospitals and their staff for caring for Medicaid patients.

The money also would help fund adult day care, eyeglasses for poor adults, dental and ambulance services, as well as reimbursement rates for skilled nursing homes.

Democrats called the cuts unacceptable and argued that all Nevadans end up paying higher insurance premiums when hospitals are not reimbursed for patients on Medicaid.

“We are at the tipping point,” said Sen. Sheila Leslie, D-Reno. “We are going to see services close that affect the entire population … This isn’t just about poor people anymore … we are jeopardizing the health care system for everybody.”

The cuts were personal for Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, D-Las Vegas. In an emotional speech before legislative money committees this morning, he said his grandmother had lived in a nursing home for 25 years. He said he has personally seen the effects of inadequate funding at some nursing homes.

“There’s a reason these rates have to be maintained at a certain level because if they drop below, the adequacy of care gets compromised,” Horsford said.

Sandoval had originally proposed reducing skilled nursing home hourly rates by $20 and later reduced that cut from $20 to $15. Some have questioned whether the cuts would be in violation of federal law.

The Nevada Health Care Association, which represents the skilled nursing industry, has also objected to the reductions and suggested that some facilities could close with the Medicaid reimbursement cuts.

“We have repeatedly voiced our concern that physicians (and other providers) simply will not be able to afford the costs associated with providing care at the reduced rates and Medicaid patients face growing accessibility problems,” said Brian Callister, president of the Nevada State Medical Association, in an earlier statement.

Representatives from the state’s Department of Health and Human Services have said that the budget reductions would not violate federal law.

Some questioned whether eliminating the reductions was possible with the money that state currently has.

“If we completely reject this, we’re just continuing to add to a deficit that, at this point in time, we don’t have the revenue to support,” said Assemblyman Randy Kirner, R-Reno.

Although the Democrats’ decisions created a hole in the governor’s budget, they have introduced a tax plan that would pay for these services.

The plan includes extending taxes passed during 2009 and scheduled to end July 1 of this year. Such an extension could net the state $626 million during the next two years.

An additional proposed 1 percent sales tax on services and 0.8 percent business “margin tax” would get the Democrats to about a $7 billion budget, which is $920 million more than the governor recommends the state spend.

Democrats have argued the tax increases represent the best way to avoid harmful budget cuts to education and social services.

Sandoval has repeatedly said he will not support a tax increase. To pass the tax increase, Democrats would need to vote as a group as well convince five Republicans to vote with them to override a likely veto from Sandoval.

The votes taken today to avoid the cuts are not binding. The Legislature can still alter which programs are funded and which are not.

 

 

 

In Redistricting Battle, Political Parties Argue Over “Who Loves Hispanics More”

By Andrew Doughman | 7:00 pm May 11th, 2011

CARSON CITY — A Republican Hispanic governor will soon decide the fate of a Democratic redistricting plan that has both political parties embroiled in a debate over fairness to Nevada’s Hispanic population.

Legislative Republicans, who voted against the plan, and Democrats are each claiming they truly have the best interests of Nevada’s largest minority population in mind as they consider the boundaries of new political districts.

As political columnist Jon Ralston asked on Twitter: “who loves Hispanics more?”

But some people in the Hispanic community object to the odes both parties are singing about fair political representation for the Latino community.

Is the Hispanic community being used?

“It’s quite obvious,” said Fernando Romero, president of the nonpartisan Nevada group Hispanics in Politics.

He said he does not like the Republican plan for Congressional districts because it lumps all Hispanics together in one big group. But he also does not like the Democratic plan, which he said fractures key Latino communities into different districts.

“We are throwing the Democratic plan out of the window,” he said.

Romero said that he and other Hispanic advocacy groups will introduce their own plan for Congressional and state Senate and Assembly districts by the end of this week.

At stake is the power of a new voter bloc comprising 26 percent of Nevada’s population and one of every seven voters in Nevada, a number that could be higher if historically low levels of voter registration in the Hispanic community improve.

The Latino factor also makes Nevada a “key state” during the 2012 presidential elections.

“When you consider we’re about to enter a presidential election year, the Hispanic community is a community everybody is eyeing,” said Javier Trujillo of the Latin Chamber of Commerce.

Political parties could spend millions in attempts to sway Hispanic voters to the left or right, but every 10 years politicians are free — in fact, mandated — to choose the voters themselves. That is their business this year as the Nevada Legislature embarks on the decadal ritual of redrawing political boundaries in accordance with U.S. Census demographic data.

So far, both parties have accused each other of violating the federal Voting Rights Act, which addresses redistricting rules for ethnic minorities, in favor of partisan gain.

“They’ve clearly put their partisan interests ahead of what is morally right for the Hispanic community, and they’ve violated federal law in the process,” said Sen. Barbara Cegavske, R-Las Vegas.

Democrats said nearly the same thing in a press release:

“Republicans opposed these maps on a party line vote while trying to mislead Nevadans on the purpose the Voting Right Act to mask their own partisan agenda.”

The Democratic plan passed out of the Senate and Assembly on Tuesday and now awaits Gov. Brian Sandoval’s signature or veto. It creates Congressional districts with Hispanic populations ranging between 20.5 and 33.6 percent of districts’ total populations.

A Republican proposal that did not receive a vote has Hispanics comprising between 14.4 percent and 50.7 percent of Congressional districts’ populations.

Republican Proposed Congressional Districts

District Population Deviation GOP% DEM% HVAP% BVAP% Total Hispanic%
CD 01 675,138 0 32.0% 45.5% 17.7% 9.9% 20.6%
CD 02 675,138 0 42.8% 35.7% 16.6% 1.9% 20.4%
CD 03 675,138 0 40.8% 37.5% 12.2% 5.5% 14.4%
CD 04 675,137 -1 20.8% 57.8% 44.3% 14.2% 50.7%

Democratic Proposed Congressional Districts

District Population Deviation GOP% DEM% HVAP% BVAP% Total Hispanic%
CD 01 675,138 0 31.9% 47.9% na na 33.6%
CD 02 675,138 0 42.8% 36.0% na na 20.5%
CD 03 675,138 0 34.4% 44.1% na na 29.2%
CD 04 675,137 -1 35.0% 43.1% na na 22.9%


Nevada’s explosive population growth between 2001 and 2010 earned Nevada one more congressional district, giving Nevada four seats.

UNR political scientist Eric Herzik said during an interview today that behind the squabbling about numbers lies the political reality of the Hispanic vote.

“The issue is not whether the districts are in compliance with federal law,” he said. “This is politics, partisan politics. …They’re both about trying to maximize party influence in districts.”

He said minority groups, including Latinos, tend to vote Democratic.

During the 2010 election, Hispanics overwhelming voted for Democratic candidate Rory Reid in the gubernatorial race and incumbent Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in the Senate race.

“If you diffuse the Latino vote, you can create more Democratic-leaning votes,” he said.

Likewise, he said the Republican proposal to create a district with more than 50 percent Hispanic population is a “shield” and the Republican party’s public concern is not the “root of their complaint” with the Democratic proposal.

“It works better for them if they can give up one overwhelmingly Democratic district,” Herzik said.

The historical data, however, only goes so far.

Romero contended that Latinos are independent-minded and value fair representation over agreement with Democrats.

“If we did follow party lines we would support the plan the Democrats issued,” Romero said. “We don’t.”

 

 

Legislature Votes To Cut Pay To State And University Workers

By Andrew Doughman | 3:54 pm May 10th, 2011

CARSON CITY – Legislators on money committees today approved on a party-line vote a 4.8 percent salary cut to state and higher education employees.

The proposal would include a 2.3 percent cut through furloughs – about six days per year – and a 2.5 percent salary reduction.

Gov. Brian Sandoval had proposed in his budget a 5 percent salary cut to state and higher education workers.

Speaker John Oceguera, D-Las Vegas, advanced the 4.8 percent “compromise” cut. Legislative staff said it would create a shortfall between $7.5 and $10 million in the governor’s budget.

The vote passed with all Democrats voting for the idea and all Republicans voting against it. In an earlier vote, Republicans voted to follow the governor’s recommendation while Democrats voted against it.

Republicans characterized the salary reductions and cuts to benefits as similar to reductions in the private sector.

“What we are seeing here is a continuation of that downsizing,” said Assemblyman Pat Hickey, R-Reno.

Democrats contended that government does not operate like private businesses; rather than seeing less business during a recession, more people depend on state services in a recession.

“If we are going to apply true business principles to government, we should be hiring right now … our demand is way up,” said Assemblyman Marcus Conklin, D-Las Vegas.

Union representatives and higher education faculty testified against the cuts, saying that they much preferred furloughs to salary cuts.

Danny Thompson of the AFL-CIO also said that reductions in the governor’s budget have provoked a grassroots movement that could punish Republicans during next year’s elections.

“I would caution you that if you don’t solve this problem, that organic uprising that has already happened is going to spread and the people are going to solve this problem,” Thompson said.

Legislators also voted to continue suspending merit and longevity pay as well as eliminating holiday premium pay for higher education and state workers. Legislative staff said that these decisions should save the state $71.5 million.

Yesterday, legislators voted to curtail health care benefits for public sector employees.

Public sector employee union representatives said they have already endured these reductions in pay and benefits for several years as Nevada has struggled through the recession.

“It is so totally unfair what we are doing to our state government,” said Jan Gilbert of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada.

The governor has earlier argued that furlough days resulted in less productivity from employees, causing longer lines at places such as the DMV.

None of the votes are binding, and the Legislature may decide to alter the proposals as they finalize the budget.

Legislative committees last week voted not to reduce pay for school district employees nor did they choose to suspend merit pay for school district employees.

Those decisions could cost the state $402 million during the next two years.

Democrats last week proposed a revenue package totaling about $1.2 billion comprising a continuation of taxes approved by the 2009 Legislature and scheduled to end this year as well as a tax on businesses’ gross revenue and a sales tax on some services.

If passed, these tax increases could pay for that $402 million cost.

Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, D-Las Vegas, also noted a potential budget consequence in cutting salaries. He said that the sustained compensation cuts could lead some state workers to favor retirement over working for less.

Dana Bilyeu of the Public Employees’ Retirement System estimated that 2,000 current state employees are eligible to collect full retirement benefits.

Should they choose to retire, the state would have an unfunded obligation to cash out those retiring employees for accrued sick leave, she said.

Bilyeu and others in the committee room could not estimate a cost, but she said about 1,000 more teachers than usual retired due to changes in benefits following the 2007 legislative session, causing the state to lose millions of dollars.

 

 

 

Governor Sandoval Calls For Patience, Optimism In Televised Speech

By Andrew Doughman | 6:50 pm May 3rd, 2011

CARSON CITY — Gov. Brian Sandoval tonight highlighted an improved economic output as reason to stay the course with his proposed general fund budget.

During a televised address from the governor’s mansion,the governor highlighted a lower unemployment rate and an aggregate $440 million reduction in budget cuts that comes from revised revenue projections and federal government changes.

He used his speech as a platform for patience and optimism, refuting claims from Democrats that Nevada needs more revenue.

“We can’t tax our way out. We can’t cut our way out. But we can, and will, grow our way out,” Sandoval said.

As Nevada’s economic recovery continues, he called on the Legislature to establish “priority triggers” to make sure any new revenue goes to Nevada’s K-12 or higher-education system.

“It’s pretty simple: we will agree now that as revenues increase we will direct that money straight to education,” Sandoval said. “Just as the most recent economic projections came in higher than many expected, there will be continued growth, and we should therefore trigger new revenue directly into the classroom.”

He also challenged claims from Democrats that his budget still eviscerates the states social services and education system, even after the revised economic projections.

“Some will say this is not enough. Yet they offer no plan for how to find additional money without harming the fragile economic recovery we now know Nevada is experiencing,” Sandoval said.

Legislative Democrats, however, today said the governor’s budget is still unacceptable.

“I could not support the governor’s proposed budget because it absolutely destroys our kids’ education,” said Assemblywoman Debbie Smith, D-Sparks.

Democrats today voted to close the K-12 budget with $700 million more in spending than the governor recommends. They have not yet, however, described a funding plan to find that money.

““I did not get into public service to rob the children of Nevada of the opportunity to succeed,” said Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, D-Las Vegas. “Today, we closed the (public education budget) at an acceptable level. Our young students deserve no less.”

Democrats also declined to respond to the governor with a televised rebuttal.

“Tomorrow is a new day and we hope we can all come together and solve this budget,” said Democratic spokesperson Charles Blumenthal.

Republicans, however, appeared on television with Las Vegas Sun columnist Jon Ralston following the governor’s address.

“We can do without a tax increase because we are basically going to grow the economy,” said Sen. Joe Hardy.

Democrats could be close to presenting a tax plan.
They have paraded representatives from some of the state’s most influential businesses through legislative hearings during which groups like the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce and the Nevada Resort Association have hinted about conditional support for taxes.
Republicans, however, dismissed these efforts.
“Frankly, they’re not doing a good job of it,” said Sen. Ben Kieckhefer, R-Reno.

In his speech, Sandoval also highlighted education reforms he touted on the campaign trail and spoke of during his State of the State address. He also announced that a major new business will be coming to Northern Nevada, creating 650 jobs.

 

Read The Full Text Of Governor Sandoval’s Speech Here

By Andrew Doughman | 6:01 pm May 3rd, 2011

BUDGET ADDRESS BY GOVERNOR SANDOVAL

My fellow Nevadans, good evening.

Three months ago, I delivered a State of the State Address against the backdrop of record unemployment and sharply reduced state revenue. I believed then, as I do now, that by controlling state spending and changing the way we do business, we could bring about a sustained economic recovery that would get Nevada working again. And so tonight, I’m pleased to come before you with a second and more positive report on the state of Nevada’s economy.

As a matter of both principle and necessity, Nevada’s government should function like Nevada’s families live. We must make responsible decisions, spend within our means, and leave something better for those who follow. We must be courageous, making the hard choices today that will avoid even harder choices tomorrow. We must prioritize what matters most.

The times demand we work together. Serve together. Sacrifice together. Only in this way will we succeed together. And so I have asked the collective Nevada family to gather again this evening to share my thoughts about our future, as well as what I believe must happen in the final weeks of this legislative session.

Tonight, I am able to report that the economy is improving. We are not out of the woods yet, but there are signs of recovery. Yesterday, we received the final revenue forecasts that will guide us to the adoption of a new state budget. As a result, we have approximately $270 millionin new state revenue — an early sign that the economic recovery is taking hold. I welcome this news with optimism and determination, as I’m sure all of you do as well.

But it is not the only good news we have.

In March, Nevada businesses created over 10,000 new jobs — the first signs of growth in over three years. Our unemployment rate has dropped from 14.9 to 13.2 percent. Let me be clear: I still find this rate unacceptably high. Even so, we are making progress that must continue.

Sales tax payroll tax, and other important economic indicators are on the rise. The Nevada Commission on Economic Development reports that new business prospects have more than doubled in the first quarter of 2011, when compared to the same time period last year. As one example, tomorrow morning I will take part in a press conference announcing a major new employer who will break ground on a facility in Northern Nevada. With the construction on this project and the permanent jobs being created by this company, more than 650 Nevadans will return to work.

In response to all these trends, we have been able to re-invest in our state. Six weeks ago, we added back over $120 million to our state budget. And just last week, another $50 million was reinvested in critical programs. Statewide, we have restored funding for autism, elder protective services, mental health, and community nursing.

As your governor, I have a fundamental belief: you have the right to know the truth about our economic situation. We must therefore acknowledge that we still have a long road ahead. Even with the new revenue I have announced tonight, overall spending reductions remain substantial. Our state simply cannot afford to deliver every program our people have come to expect. I struggle with that fact every day.

I want to deliver more for Nevadans, not less. And I know that the way to get there is to strengthen Nevada’s dynamic economy. I firmly believe that sacrifice today, will ultimately yield prolonged success, tomorrow.

And so tonight, I’m pledging that nearly $270 million in new revenue will go directly to public education. Our kids come first. On that, there can be no debate. I have asked the Legislature to restore funding for class size reduction, all-day kindergarten, classroom programs,and extracurricular activities like music, sports and theater. I have also allocated $20 million for our colleges and universities.

Some will say this is not enough. Yet they offer no plan for how to find additional money without harming the fragile economic recovery we now know Nevada is experiencing.

The bottom line? We can direct millions of dollars to restoring nearly 95 percent of the reductions to basic classroom support. Or we can over-reach, without changing the way we do business, and without regard to the long-term economic impact of short-term spending. Nevadans deserve better than that.

We all share a passion for delivering the best education for our children. My daughters attend public school in Washoe County. This is as personal for me as it is for you. I’m a proud graduate of the University of Nevada, Reno. I want our universities and colleges to remain sound. But I also know in my heart that education isn’t just about the money. What matters most is NOT how much we spend on education, but how well we spend it.

To me, education is not about “the system.” It’s about the students … the teachers and the learning environment they cultivate and share. It’s about opportunity and hope and confidence in their ability to compete.

Nevadans want — and indeed deserve — a better return on their investment. We owe it to our students and teachers to change the failing culture that has become all too pervasive in ourplaces of education, Nevada’s graduation rate remains the worst in the nation. Thousands of our students under-perform in virtually every academic subject on every possible test. The input does not match the output. Reforms must be part of the picture if we hope for the day when Nevada’s students out-perform the rest of our country.

I have asked the Legislature to consider a complete package of reasonable education reform measures — from performance bonuses, to ending the practice that forces lay-offs of some of our best teachers simply because of an outdated, and hopelessly out-of-touch rule, that requires “last in, first out.” Under this system, award-winning Teachers of the Year can lose their jobs, simply because they don’t have as many years in the system as someone else, who may not be as effective in the classroom. That’s unacceptable. We should pursue, keep, and reward the best teachers… not cast them aside because, well, “that’s just how the system works.”

The proposed budget and reform plan will also provide more local control by giving each school district the authority to set its own priorities, and eliminating rigid state mandates. Why would we continue to force a “one size fits all” policy on our students and our educators? Every school district is different; every student is different.

No matter where we stand on the question of more funding, we must stand together on the need for reform. We can debate the approach, but we cannot delay the objective.

Even with the addition of millions of dollars in new revenue for education, there are still tough decisions to be made. I am therefore asking the Nevada Legislature to establish benchmarks or “priority triggers” that will ensure future revenue gains are directed to schools, colleges, and universities over the next two years.

It’s pretty simple: we will agree now that as revenues increase we will direct that money straight to education. Just as the most recent economic projections came in higher than many expected, there will be continued growth, and we should therefore trigger new revenue directly into the classroom.

Imagine what we can achieve if the Legislature acts on my proposals: In just a few short weeks, we could invest almost $270 million in education, set triggers in place to spend future revenue on the education of our children, move decisions back to the classroom where they belong, bring common sense to our hiring practices, and begin to remove the obstacles to opportunity that confront too many of our students.

This is just the beginning. When the Legislature meets again in 2013, I’m confident we will be able to have a very different conversation about the funding of our schools — and for that matter, all of state government.

Why am I so optimistic about Nevada’s economic recovery?

As I said at my inauguration, optimism is the foundation of courage. I draw strength from the very real and positive economic indicators we have seen recently, because I know they are only the beginning. Building on these early signs of economic recovery, we can, and will, get Nevada working again.

With the cooperation of Democrats and Republicans alike, we have proposed a complete overhaul of Nevada’s economic development infrastructure. I’m hopeful that we can pass this legislation, because I know it will be an important part of the future roadmap for diversifying our economic base and fostering new industries to take root here.

But I also know that government alone can’t create the kind of job growth we need. Business, particularly small business, is the engine that will drive economic recovery. And yet, as I visit Nevada firms, I see row after row of empty desks where workers once sat. I see empty warehouses. And I see Nevadans doing their level best to adapt to our changed reality.

These businesses cannot afford a tax increase, or further intrusion by government. They should not be asked to choose between paying Carson City’s bills, meeting their own payroll, or hiring that next unemployed Nevadan. These businesses, their employees, and the unemployed are the Nevadans I think about at night, just as much as I think about those in need of social services or those teachers who are working hard in our schools. We are one family — and we are on this journey together.

Nevada has a long tradition of resiliency — a history of innovation, adaptation, and recovery. When times are tough, we set aside our differences and come together as one state, one community, one people. I believe we are yet again at that stage, when unity of purpose will move us forward. Now is the time to reform our educational system, support job growth, and pass a realistic, fact-based state budget that invests when and where it can without harming our fragile economic recovery.

I know these last three years of economic recession have been difficult. Many still cannot see recovery on the horizon. But I also know Nevadans, and we will not give up. We will not allow our differences to triumph over our responsibilities. It is now, in the final weeks of this legislative session, that we will rise to meet the challenges of our time.

We can do this, but only if we do it together.

With the measures I have described tonight, a total of $440 million will have been reinvested in essential state services and programs since we last met at the State of the State. The proposed budget is reasonable, reflective of the times, and responsive to the sacrifices already made by so many in the private sector that must now be shared by those of us in government.

We can’t tax our way out. We can’t cut our way out. But we can, and will, grow our way out.

Tomorrow’s economy may be different, but it will also be filled with new opportunities. And these new opportunities are already beginning to appear. Family by family, business by business, neighborhood by neighborhood, Nevadans are getting back to work. Our economic engine, dormant for so long, is beginning to show signs of life. State revenues have increased, and they will continue to do so.

We must now establish priority triggers for more education spending. We must ensure that education reforms build a new system focused on student achievement. We must adopt a state budget that will fuel the fires of job creation and economic prosperity for all. And we must do it by June 6th –the Constitutionally-mandated time for this legislative session to end.

Most of all, we must do it, not because it’s popular, but because it is right.

If we do all these things, we will pass together through this time in our history, confident that Nevada’s best days are yet to come.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the great state of Nevada. Good evening.

Secretary Of State Ross Miller Declares Special Election Open For All

By Andrew Doughman | 12:59 pm May 2nd, 2011

CARSON CITY — Secretary of State Ross Miller today announced that a special election for Nevada’s Congressional District Two will be open to all candidates.

“You might as well call this a ballot royale,” he said.

Miller’s decision allows for any candidate to be on the ballot for the Sept. 13 election. The state Republican party has favored an interpretation of state law that would allow state parties to pick a single candidate of their choice.

Miller’s decision is widely believed to benefit Democrats in a special election since an open ballot with many Republican candidates could split the vote, allowing a Democratic candidate to win in a congressional district that leans Republican.

Miller announced his decision at a press conference at the Legislature, where he framed his decision with this question about candidates:

“Are they picked by the people of the state of Nevada or instead by a small group of powerful political party officials?”

Miller said a free-for-all election is about the voters, not his affiliation with the Democratic party.

“Our entire system is based on a concept of being inclusive, one that’s open to all citizens,” Miller said.”This interpretation allows open ballot access, freedom for all to run and ultimately it lets the people decide. That electoral structure is as American as apple pie.”

Republicans, however, contend that Miller made a decision based on what would best suit Democratic candidates in the special election.

“Secretary Miller seems to have allowed partisan politics to direct his decision concerning how to conduct the special election in U.S. Congressional District 2,” said Cory Adair of the state Republican party. “The Nevada Republican Party stands firm that state law ensures major party central committees should be the nominating body for their own candidates in a special election.”

A special election became necessary after Gov. Brian Sandoval appointed Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., to the U.S. Senate to replace outgoing Republican Sen. John Ensign, who announced his resignation last month. Ensign made his farewell remarks today, and his resignation is effective tomorrow.

Sandoval announced Sept. 13 as the date of the special election, but it was up to Miller to clarify the law as it concerns who is eligible to run for the seat.

Lawsuits from both major political parties are pending and could alter the rules for the election.

Miller said today that any court decision would have to be made by July 15. Otherwise elections officials may not have time to issue ballots to overseas and military voters.

“The bottom line is, we won’t have a lot of time for this to be resolved in the courts,” he said.

A timeline provided by the Secretary of State provides for candidate filings, ballot printings and voter registration deadlines.

 

AUDIO CLIPS:

Ross Miller asks whether political parties or voters should choose candidates:

050211 Miller :12 “How are those candidates …”

Ross Miller says the process is “as American as apple pie.”

050211 Miller :12 “This interpretation allows open ballot …”

Legislature Debates Cuts To Benefits, Overtime, Pay Increases For States Employees

By Andrew Doughman | 2:42 pm April 29th, 2011

CARSON CITY – State employees could face further pay increase suspensions as well as cuts to holiday pay under a bill proposed by Gov. Brian Sandoval.

State employees would again face a pay freeze for the time the years they have worked with the state, as well as any potential merit pay. This is in addition to a proposed 5 percent salary cut.

The bill would also make changes to the benefits package for new hires, eliminating a severance provision worth five years of retirement benefits if an employee was laid off because of budget cuts. Instead, the employee would get six months of health benefits.

Representatives from the governor’s office testified that the proposals would put Nevada better in line with neighboring states.

They said new state employees earn a maximum of 104 hours and a minimum of 80 hours per year in paid sick leave among the states neighboring Nevada. In Nevada, new employees earn 120 hours per year in sick leave.

The governor’s proposal would reduce sick time for all employees more toward the Western state average of 98 hours per year.

“If you look at that as the high and low, Nevada was two days beyond the high of any of our neighboring states,” said Julia Teska from the state budget office.

The 5 percent salary reduction saves the state $379.7 million. The suspension of pay increases saves $212 million.

The state does account for paying out employees for accrued vacation and sick leave, so the budget office did not offer a direct savings number.

State employee unions lined up to testify against the bill in a legislative hearing this morning.

“This is another bill that seems to be attacking state employees,” said Vishnu Subramaniam, representing the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

State employees would also earn reduced overtime pay for hours they work on holidays. Changing holiday overtime pay would save an estimated $2.7 million.

Now, all state employees get paid on holidays, and working on a holiday earns an employee pay at 1.5 times the normal hourly rate. Altogether, that means state employees now earn money at 2.5 times the normal rate for working on holidays.

This proposal would lop off 0.5 of that rate so that state employees would earn double time on holidays.

“The proposals that you’re making are not intended as a budget cut per se, but to equalize us with what the market says when you look at the marketplace,” said Randy Kirner, R-Reno.

Public sector union representatives said that the cuts disproportionately affect the working class. They said that the state continues to pay out six-figure salaries to contractors and high-level administrators while balancing the budget with reductions in benefits and pay for the rank and file.

“This is just something of greed,” said Kevin Ranft, also from the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

A legislative committee took no immediate action on the bill, but legislators are expected to address the proposal again as part of the governor’s budget.