In today’s episode of Various Things & Stuff (brought to you by General Mills, makers of Quick Hits™ and other fine foods!), the Ghost of Budgets Past, the Ghost of Ethics Past and the Ghost of Court Rulings Past all get together and rock! Here we go!
• Poor Gov. Kenny Guinn. His term is winding down, and he can’t get anybody to visit him in his expansive capitol office for a hearty chat about his favorite subject, the state budget.
But we’re starting to worry that Guinn is turning into Nevada’s crazy uncle: He’s threatening to come to the 2007 Legislature and present his own budget if U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons doesn’t come by and give Guinn his due.
No, seriously. Check out what he said on Nevada Newsmakers, which is a TV show where newsmakers from Nevada are featured.
“I’d hate to go there and have to do it, but I will do it if I don’t get some kind of communications that would direct me. If someone doesn’t want to sit down and go over the budget, that’s fine with me. I’ll build a budget,” Guinn said. And by someone, we know he means you, Gibbons!
We can’t get the picture out of our minds of a disheveled, unshaven Guinn, wandering the halls of the Legislature in February 2007 (one month after the new governor is sworn in), waving copies of his handwritten spending plan, yelling something about “roll ups,” and “growth in caseloads” and “unfunded long-term liabilities” along with stuff like, “It’s cold outside! And there’s wolves!”
Look, Gibbons, we know you’re busy running a gubernatorial campaign, calling Dina Titus names like “Dina Taxes,” and voting or whatever in Washington, D.C., but could you go see Guinn before he cracks up? Hey, it might be good for you, since Guinn actually knows about the budget, taxes and the way state finance works. You might even get some campaign material out of the meeting!
According to Guinn, for example, the state budget is going to grow by $1.1 billion, to a total of $7 billion for the two-year period between 2007 and 2009. That’s a lot of dough.
But even if you just go to listen and nod politely, Gibbons, please go. Because the last thing you want is a fellow Republican governor, out of office with nothing to lose, reminding you that saying “no taxes!” and “small government!” doesn’t quite cut the mustard when you have teachers to pay, roads to build, prisons to maintain, Medicaid to run and Millennium Scholarships to fully fund.
Hell, you’d think Gibbons would want some advice about how to get things done, eh? Even if it is from an Establishment Republican like Guinn.
• The state Ethics Commission today released its opinion in that long-ago matter involving embattled Clark County Commissioner Lynette Boggs McDonald. The eight-page opinion found Boggs McDonald did not intervene with two state lawmakers in order to help her husband, Steven McDonald, keep his state job.
What a difference nine months makes, eh? Today, Boggs McDonald is divorcing Steven McDonald, and one cannot help but wonder whether his actions leading to her turn before the Ethics Commission in January had something to do with that.
In any case, while the opinion finds that Steven McDonald reached out to former Assemblyman Wendell Williams, asking him to grill Steven McDonald’s then-boss, state Treasurer Brian Krolicki, over a piece of legislation, Lynette Boggs McDonald did no such thing.
(The opinion also finds that Assemblyman Morse Arberry “…had a remarkably selective lack of memory of many events which made it difficult for the commission to find a preponderance of the evidence for a finding of a violation.” And for those who attended the hearing, that’s probably the nicest, most polite way of saying “committed perjury” we’ve ever heard.)
• Quotable: “We need to make sure the voters know my true record, my dedication to the community, my service to the community and my legal experience. Anyone can disagree with a decision. But my career has been based on upholding the constitution in all of its parts and in ruling on the law and the facts as they apply in a given case, not the views of special interest groups.” — State Supreme Court Justice Nancy Becker, in the Review-Journal
Simply put, Justice Becker is a liar.
A powerful charge. How can we back it up? Like this: In the Guinn v. Legislature decision, which she signed, she did not “uphold” the constitution. In fact, she ignored one very significant part of it, the requirement that new taxes be approved by a two-thirds vote.
The law didn’t allow her to do what she did in that case. The facts didn’t call for her to do what she did in that case. In short, she signed on to an extraordinary action without precedent, and imperiled the constitution in the process. The decision was so bad, the court reversed it, acting on its own motion in an unrelated case this year.
Why? To thwart the will of special interest groups? No! She ignored the express views of the people of the state of Nevada in Guinn v. Legislature. (Voters passed that two-thirds requirement in 1994 and 1996.) It was special interests (including casinos and labor unions) that wanted the tax plan passed in 2003. Her ruling sided with them.
We at Various Things & Stuff don’t call people liars routinely. We only do it when we believe: their statement is false; they knew the statement was false; they uttered it in order to induce people to a false conclusion. In this case, we think Becker’s remark fits our standard. That’s her true record.
And, not for nothing, but it’s probably not a good idea to have a liar on your Supreme Court, is it? We’re just saying.
Blogs
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. By publishing a comment here you agree to the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the Online staff.