Steve Wynn’s application of verbal pressure on state Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio seems to be having an effect. According to an extract from the Nevada Legislature Senate Daily Journal, on short notice Raggio had AB 248 (into which AB 357 has been reincarnated) pulled from the Judiciary Committee and relegated to the Committee on Commerce & Labor. State Sen. Terry Care spoke in opposition. His remarks, as forwarded to me, read as follows …

This bill falls under the purview of chapter 463, which is gaming. It was introduced on April 25 and now it is May 1. It is scheduled for a hearing this Friday. I am not going to talk about the merits of the bill, but it is highly unusual to see a bill like this rereferred from committee where it has been resting for six days and is already scheduled for a hearing. This is the reason for my opposition. I am talking about procedure.

The first time I concentrated on this bill was last Friday when a lobbyist came to see me. I asked this person a number of questions. I took the opportunity to review the labor commissioner’s written opinion, Judge Herndon’s written order, denying and granting motions in summary judgment on both sides, and I read the relevant case law. This bill has big problems. In light of existing case law, I have doubts about the viability of this bill.

But, I would like to talk about process. Like you, I have received hundreds of e-mails from constituents for and against, in industry and out of the industry, on this bill.

I was prepared for this hearing. I have a number of questions I want to ask. I think it is part of the process, part of the deliberations that elected representatives are supposed to go through.

I know that this motion will be approved. The bill will go to Commerce and Labor, but I have been telling my constituents since Friday that since I sit on the committee where the bill was assigned I will take testimony and I will listen and I will be in touch with them. It does not look as if I will have the opportunity to do so. What I would like to do at this point is to be able to tell my constituents that there will be a hearing on this bill in Commerce and Labor and that they will have the opportunity to testify on it whether they are for it or against it. I am not going to testify on the bill. I have not given it any thought, but I am wondering if I can give my constituents the commitment that this bill will have a hearing in Commerce and Labor.

If this is an accurate report of Sen. Care’s remarks, I applaud his refusal to pander to either side in this debate and to shine a light on the game of keep-away that opponents of this bill are playing to avoid actually having to — Gasp! – vote for or against it. Why are they afraid to have an open debate on the issue? (Don’t stay up late waiting for a candid answer.)