A few thoughts on the often overlooked Nevada ballot questions…followed by some candidate endorsements.
Back in the “old days,” the powers not explicitly delegated to the federal government were reserved to the states. And the people of the state of Nevada, when adopting our Constitution in 1864, decided that someone should live here for at least six months to get to know the issues and the candidates before being allowed to vote in our elections. Quite reasonable.
However, the U.S. Supreme Court nullified this provision in 1972. Proponents of Question 1 want to amend the Nevada Constitution to eliminate this six-month residency requirement. However, just because an activist Supreme Court tread on Nevada’s power to establish its own rules in elections doesn’t mean a future court won’t reverse the decision. As the Nevada six-month requirement isn’t unreasonable and could be re-instated in the future, I’m voting for state sovereignty by voting “NO” on Question 1.
Question 2 is over the issue of “eminent domain” - the power of the government to confiscate your land for a public use.
In the past it was understood that public uses included things such as schools and roads. However, the U.S. Supreme Court decided a couple years ago that eminent domain could be used to take one person’s property and give it to someone else who would use it in such a way as to generate more tax revenue for the government. If passed, Question 2 would amend the Nevada Constitution and make it more difficult for the government to take your land for such nefarious purposes.
Supporters say Question 2 is no longer needed since the Legislature passed an eminent domain law last year which fixed this problem. But that which the Legislature giveth, the Legislature may taketh away. This initiative only came about because government abused its power; therefore, I’m voting for the strongest possible protection of private property rights by voting “YES” on Question 2.
Question 3 amends the Nevada Constitution to prohibit the Legislature from providing tax breaks without issuing a “finding” which outlines the “social or economic” purpose of the tax break. It also includes a “sunset clause” which requires that any future tax breaks automatically expire on a specific date. Interestingly, this question does NOT include a requirement for such a “finding” or “sunset clause” for government SPENDING, only tax breaks. So this one is a no-brainer. Vote “NO” on Question 3.
Question 4 seeks to amend the Nevada Constitution “to authorize the Legislature to amend or repeal any provision” of the Sales and Use Tax Act of 1955 “without an additional direct vote of the people whenever necessary to carry out any federal law or interstate agreement for the administration, collection or enforcement of sales and use taxes.” This measure clearly eliminates the power of the people themselves to decide for themselves how to tax themselves. It also clearly opens the door for taxing the Internet. Therefore, I clearly urge a “NO” vote on Question 4.
On Carson City Advisory Question 1, which would raise the sales tax for the V&T “white elephant” railroad project, not only am I voting “No,” I’m voting “Hell, NO!”
Carson City Advisory Question 2 calls for a property tax increase for “public safety” - primarily cops and firefighters. But before I comment on this question, allow me to disclose that I’m the proud son of a 20-year veteran Baltimore City firefighter, so I don’t want to hear any guff about “not appreciating” what public safety workers go through.
That said, this tax increase wasn’t requested by the people in the form of a citizen-led petition; it’s being proposed by the Board of Supervisors. In my opinion, efforts to raise taxes should go through the exact same signature-gathering process that efforts to restrain taxes have had to go through – such as the Gibbons Tax Restraint Initiative.
In addition, if you surf on over to www.TransparentNevada.com – developed by the highly-respected Nevada Policy Research Institute - and click on “Salaries” and then “Carson City,” you’ll find an awful lot of local “public employees” making six-figure salaries.
Sorry, Charlie, but when a firefighter/paramedic is pulling down $153,808.86 annually, including benefits and overtime, I’m thinking we need to rethink the thinking on how the money we’re already contributing to public safety is spent before raising taxes. I’m voting “NO.”
A few candidate recommendations…
Supreme Court – Seat B: Kris Pickering
Supreme Court – Seat D: Thomas Christensen
Congress – 2nd District: Dean Heller
Congress – 3rd District: Joseph Silvestri
State Senate – District 3 (Washoe): Bill Raggio*
State Senate – District 4: Stan Vaughn
State Senate – District 5: Joe Heck*
State Senate – District 6: Bob Beers
State Senate – District 11: Joe Locatelli
Assembly District 2: Jon Kamerath
Assembly District 4: Richard McArthur
Assembly District 6: Lisamarie Johnson
Assembly District 7: Geraldine Lewis
Assembly District 8: Barbara Buckley (Only because I want to see how many Republicans have the stones to join Ty Cobb in voting against her for Speaker next session!)
Assembly District 10: Mitch Hostmeyer
Assembly District 12: Dallas Augustine
Assembly District 13: Chad Christensen
Assembly District 17: David Isbell
Assembly District 19: Nicholas Daka
Assembly District 21: Jon Ozark
Assembly District 24: John Gwaltney*
Assembly District 25: Heidi Gansert*
Assembly District 26: Ty Cobb
Assembly District 28: Tino Mendoza
Assembly District 29: Sean Fellows*
Assembly District 31: Ron Longtin
Assembly District 32: Don Gustavson
Assembly District 34: Richard Deeds
Assembly District 36: Ed Goedhardt
Assembly District 39: James Settelmeyer
Assembly District 40: Cheryl Lau
Assembly District 41: Tim Rowland
Assembly District 42: Carole Donald
University Regent: District 10: William Cobb
State Board of Education – District 1: Sharon Frederick
State Board of Education – District 3: Doris Wallace Fletcher
State Board of Education – District 7: Val Olsen
State Board of Education – District 8: Ken McKenna
State Board of Education – District 9: Dave Cook
Clark County Commission – District A: Brian Scroggins
Nye County Commission – District 2: Joni Eastley
Carson City District Court – Department 2: Noel Waters
Clark County District Court – Department 10: William Kephardt
Clark County District Court – Department 17: Michael Villani
Clark County District Court – Department 22: Susan Johnson
Clark County District Court – Department 23: Stefany Miley
Clark County Family Court – Department G: Dianne Steele
Reno City Council – Ward 3: Jessica Sferrazza
Carson City Mayor: Bob Crowell(* With reservations, since the candidate hasn’t signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge)
If a race isn’t included on the list above, that probably means I just don’t feel strongly enough about any of the candidates running to recommend them – often because they’ve refused to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, not that there isn’t “a lesser of two evils.”
Finally, a couple of additional ballot question recommendations…
Clark County #5 (tax hike): Hell, NO!
Washoe County #1 (tax hike): Hell, NO!
Washoe County #2 (tax hike): Hell, NO!
Washoe County #5 (tax hike): Hell, NO!
Washoe County #6 (tax hike): Hell, NO!
Happy voting!
Posted on October 29th, 2008 by Chuck Muth
Filed under: National
Chuck, more than a third of Nevada has already voted. This post is a little bit late.
It was nice of you to go all the trouble to “explain your thoughts”, but you could have simply done this:
Vote against any tax or funding increase, including firefighters and choo-choo trains.
Vote for all Republicans.
You could save yourself a lot of trouble.
( How can you vote against the choo-choo train? Are you sure you’re really an American?)
Visit me at
Zeke Says So Blog
and TWITTER
I wholeheartedly agree with your assesment of the Carson City ballot questions, I also argued a NO vote on both questions during the primary campaign. During that campaign I tried repeatedly to get you to at least acknowledge my fincancially conservative platform. You absolutely ignored me. You finally blasted me a new one and posted it on BOB CROWELL’s website! You have been instrumental in Crowell’s campaign, yet Crowell is the ONLY local candidate that adamantly supports both tax increases! Your reasoning is that Bob has the “experience” to get the job done. With that reasoning, you should be endorsing Parnell, Aldean and Staub. You have also recommended Bob without him signing the “taxpayer protection pledge” that you claim is a must. I know that you and Crowell are buddies, for that matter I think Bob is a very likeable guy. However, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t tell us to vote “Hell No” on tax increases, and then support the only candidate that wants ALL of them. It’s called hypocrisy!
Sean, get back on your meds.
(1) Anyone can talk the talk. Indeed, you’re very good at it. (2) I never posted anything on Bob Crowell’s website. (3) I’ve had nothing to do with Bob Crowell’s campaign. (4) Parnell’s highest office is state assembly; I guess you’re too new to Nevada to know that her opponent, Cheryl Lau, is a former Secretary of State. And in case you didn’t know, Secretary of State is a higher office than state assembly. (5) Bob Crowell and I aren’t “buddies.” (6) Bob Crowell hasn’t signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, but neither has Ken Haskins and neither did you. And (7), yes, I can vote “no” on the ballot questions and “yes” for the most qualified candidate running for mayor. You call it hypocrisy. I call it reality. Try it sometime.
I’m well aware that Cheryl Lau was Secretary of State. The office we’re talking about here is State Assembly. Parnell has been an assemblywoman, Lau hasn’t. I guess that means that Parnell is more “qualified” for this position. And you would certainly have to admit that Aldean and Staub are more “qualified” for Supervisor than Walt and Johnson, but you haven’t been stumping for either of them. Chuck, you ran the website “What about Bob?” to encourage Bob Crowell to run for mayor. How can you say you’ve had “nothing to do” with his campaign? At some point in time, you have to admit that backing a tax raising Democrat is against the values you profess. And, no, I’m not taking any meds…just prescribing them.
what is it that you see in Noel that you don’t in Jim wilson
I noticed your recommendation on State Senate - District 4. You should Google: Stan Vaughan court
and
Stan Vaughan aca
Thanks Mr. Muth
–Nick
Mr. Muth -
Being a conflicted voter getting ready to go cast my vote, I was looking for some extra guidance and support. So I did a google search for the ballot of my county and went to your website. I started reading, thinking I’ve found my extra resources when it hit me: I’d better read up about this guy and see that he is someone whose information I can rely on. Impressed by your credentials, I read on. We only thought differently on one issue on my ballot, you gave me more reasoning to understanding my thoughts, and I appreciate the extra information in the recommendations. I will now go to vote feeling more confident of my decisions. Thanks!