AB 119, the PLAN anti-growth water bill, passed out of the Senate Government Affairs Committee today.
Both Washoe County legislators on the panel, Randolph Townsend and Bill Raggio, voted against the measure. The rest of the committee voted for it.
It now moves to the floor.
AB 162, the autism mandate bill, was passed out of the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee today as well.
SB 201, the RTC-5 implementation bill is due to have its final vote on the Assembly floor on Friday, then it moves to the Governor.
There is rumor of a workers comp compromise and it sounds like all of the most egregious issues that the business community has been worried about have gone away.
Until something is on paper, we can't commit to anything.
The Governor's sunset commission bill, AB 519, is finally getting a hearing on Friday morning. This bill comes directly from the SAGE Commission recommendation.
Finally, there may be hearings next week on the grand tax proposal, if the core group of legislators can cut a deal this weekend.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
A Good Day
It was a good day at the Legislative Building.
SB 201, the RTC-5 bill, was heard in the Assembly Transportation Committee today. The Chamber joined the RTC, Sparks Mayor Geno Martini, Chamber Member Norm Dianda of Q&D Construction, and Skip Daily from the Laborers union at the table in support of the bill.
Better yet, the committee voted to pass the bill with a unanimous vote just moments after the testimony concluded! It is pretty rare for a committee to hold a vote the same day that they initially hear a bill, so this issue is showing great momentum.
It is being widely reported that AB 495, the med-mal bill, will not even receive a hearing in the Senate! It was due to be heard tomorrow in the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow and was abruptly pulled from the agenda this afternoon.
Rumor has it that since Assembly Judiciary Chair Bernie Anderson is refusing to hold a hearing on the construction defect bills that came out of the Senate, Senate Judiciary Chair Terry Care is returning the favor on med-mal.
While this issue can always appear in another bill in the waning hours of the session, this is certainly good news for every individual in this state, as it will be one less cause of rising health care costs.
While this is bad news for our members (and home buyers) who have to deal with the construction defect lawsuit mess, it is good news for our health care system.
You win some, you lose some.
SB 201, the RTC-5 bill, was heard in the Assembly Transportation Committee today. The Chamber joined the RTC, Sparks Mayor Geno Martini, Chamber Member Norm Dianda of Q&D Construction, and Skip Daily from the Laborers union at the table in support of the bill.
Better yet, the committee voted to pass the bill with a unanimous vote just moments after the testimony concluded! It is pretty rare for a committee to hold a vote the same day that they initially hear a bill, so this issue is showing great momentum.
It is being widely reported that AB 495, the med-mal bill, will not even receive a hearing in the Senate! It was due to be heard tomorrow in the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow and was abruptly pulled from the agenda this afternoon.
Rumor has it that since Assembly Judiciary Chair Bernie Anderson is refusing to hold a hearing on the construction defect bills that came out of the Senate, Senate Judiciary Chair Terry Care is returning the favor on med-mal.
While this issue can always appear in another bill in the waning hours of the session, this is certainly good news for every individual in this state, as it will be one less cause of rising health care costs.
While this is bad news for our members (and home buyers) who have to deal with the construction defect lawsuit mess, it is good news for our health care system.
You win some, you lose some.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Nevada has a Broad-Based Business Tax!
Just to set the record straight, there is currently a broad-based business tax in the State of Nevada.
There are several elected officials and lobbyists in the Legislative Building who continue to claim that there is no such thing or that we need to “broaden the tax base.”
The Modified Business Tax, the payroll or “Jobs Tax,” is assessed on any persons doing business in Nevada who are required to pay unemployment insurance. Who is required to pay that insurance? With very few exceptions, employers of one or more person with total wages paid of $225 or more during a calendar quarter pay the Jobs Tax.
That is about as broad-based as you can get!
While some use the “no broad-based tax” line to argue for gross receipts or corporate income taxes on large, out of state firms that “don’t pay their fair share,” the truth is that every business pays the Jobs Tax, sales tax, property tax, unemployment insurance, workers comp insurance, local fees, etc. In fact, large corporations pay A LOT of taxes in this state.
So, while an intelligent debate can be had on whether or not this broad-based tax is too high or too low, it is absolutely false to claim that Nevada does not have a broad-based business tax.
There are several elected officials and lobbyists in the Legislative Building who continue to claim that there is no such thing or that we need to “broaden the tax base.”
The Modified Business Tax, the payroll or “Jobs Tax,” is assessed on any persons doing business in Nevada who are required to pay unemployment insurance. Who is required to pay that insurance? With very few exceptions, employers of one or more person with total wages paid of $225 or more during a calendar quarter pay the Jobs Tax.
That is about as broad-based as you can get!
While some use the “no broad-based tax” line to argue for gross receipts or corporate income taxes on large, out of state firms that “don’t pay their fair share,” the truth is that every business pays the Jobs Tax, sales tax, property tax, unemployment insurance, workers comp insurance, local fees, etc. In fact, large corporations pay A LOT of taxes in this state.
So, while an intelligent debate can be had on whether or not this broad-based tax is too high or too low, it is absolutely false to claim that Nevada does not have a broad-based business tax.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
RTC-5 Passes Senate 20-1
SB 201, which would implement the RTC-5 ballot initiative, passed the Senate today by a vote of 20-1! The only no vote was Senator Barbara Cegavske, who expressed concerns about the lack of a sunset clause and the timing of a tax increase in this economy.
The problem with a sunset is that the revenue received from this bill has to be bonded out over several years. In order to bond those revenues, you have to have a steady revenue stream. There is a mechanism in place to allow the Washoe County Commission to review the increased rates every year.
The bill is supposed to receive a hearing in the Assembly Transportation Committee next week.
The problem with a sunset is that the revenue received from this bill has to be bonded out over several years. In order to bond those revenues, you have to have a steady revenue stream. There is a mechanism in place to allow the Washoe County Commission to review the increased rates every year.
The bill is supposed to receive a hearing in the Assembly Transportation Committee next week.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Special Sessions and Lawsuits
I was fortunate enough to not be around during the 2003 legislative session, as I am told it was ugly.
There were two or three special sessions that lasted into July.
The governor filed a lawsuit against the legislature because of their failure to pass a budget on time.
The Nevada Supreme Court ignored the constitutional requirement that 2/3 of the Legislature must vote for any tax or fee increase (a decision they later reversed).
And the largest tax increase in state history was approved, which was somewhere in the neighborhood of $833 million.
It is that number that should be watched carefully. One line of thought has it that legislators will be loathe to pass a tax increase over that amount, because the campaign mailers in 2010 and beyond will read that they supported the (new) largest tax increase in Nevada history.
Some legislators have stated they want a new "broad-based" business tax.
Others, like Senator Raggio, seem to only support increasing existing taxes and would opppose creating new ones. Assembylman Pete Goicoechea has stated his public support for a sales tax increase, because it hits everybody. Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford has stated that he is willing to go above and beyond the 2003 magic number and has hinted at some sort of "broadening" of the tax structure.
As the Governor has repeatedly stated that he will veto any and all tax increases, 2/3 of both houses will have to support the final tax package.
That means at least two Senate Republicans need to go along with the Democratic majorities in both houses. Bill Raggio has more power now than he ever had as Majority Leader. The Democrats need him to pass any tax package.
After the Governor receives a bill on his desk, he has five days to sign it, veto it, or let it become law without his signature. That means the Legislature has to send him a tax bill at least 6 days before June 1, the constitutional deadline for the end of session. If they do not get the budget/tax bill over to the Governor before Memorial Day, the Governor will have to call a Special Session in order to fund state services for the next two years.
The key is, the Governor determines what issues the Legislature may take up in a special session. If a special session necessity comes to pass, it will be the Governor's position that he can order the Legislature to consider the budget, but prohibit them from considering any tax increases.
The Legislature would argue, however, that while the Governor can limit the discussion to the budget, he can't limit the details (tax increases) of what the budget includes.
This is a situation ripe for lawsuits and court decisions, a la 2003.
The Speaker seemed to preclude all of this by saying that she is not willing to get into a legal fight and would just accede to the Governor's budget and adjourn on June 1.
This should get very interesting.
There were two or three special sessions that lasted into July.
The governor filed a lawsuit against the legislature because of their failure to pass a budget on time.
The Nevada Supreme Court ignored the constitutional requirement that 2/3 of the Legislature must vote for any tax or fee increase (a decision they later reversed).
And the largest tax increase in state history was approved, which was somewhere in the neighborhood of $833 million.
It is that number that should be watched carefully. One line of thought has it that legislators will be loathe to pass a tax increase over that amount, because the campaign mailers in 2010 and beyond will read that they supported the (new) largest tax increase in Nevada history.
Some legislators have stated they want a new "broad-based" business tax.
Others, like Senator Raggio, seem to only support increasing existing taxes and would opppose creating new ones. Assembylman Pete Goicoechea has stated his public support for a sales tax increase, because it hits everybody. Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford has stated that he is willing to go above and beyond the 2003 magic number and has hinted at some sort of "broadening" of the tax structure.
As the Governor has repeatedly stated that he will veto any and all tax increases, 2/3 of both houses will have to support the final tax package.
That means at least two Senate Republicans need to go along with the Democratic majorities in both houses. Bill Raggio has more power now than he ever had as Majority Leader. The Democrats need him to pass any tax package.
After the Governor receives a bill on his desk, he has five days to sign it, veto it, or let it become law without his signature. That means the Legislature has to send him a tax bill at least 6 days before June 1, the constitutional deadline for the end of session. If they do not get the budget/tax bill over to the Governor before Memorial Day, the Governor will have to call a Special Session in order to fund state services for the next two years.
The key is, the Governor determines what issues the Legislature may take up in a special session. If a special session necessity comes to pass, it will be the Governor's position that he can order the Legislature to consider the budget, but prohibit them from considering any tax increases.
The Legislature would argue, however, that while the Governor can limit the discussion to the budget, he can't limit the details (tax increases) of what the budget includes.
This is a situation ripe for lawsuits and court decisions, a la 2003.
The Speaker seemed to preclude all of this by saying that she is not willing to get into a legal fight and would just accede to the Governor's budget and adjourn on June 1.
This should get very interesting.
And the Number is...
The Economic Forum just approved a final number of around $5.3 billion in general fund revenues for the next biennium. That is over $900 million below the Governor's budget that was submitted to the Legislature in January.
Jon Ralston has reported that Nevada's application for federal stimulus dollars for education has been approved, but there is no word yet on how much of the hole that fills.
And now the final act begins...
Jon Ralston has reported that Nevada's application for federal stimulus dollars for education has been approved, but there is no word yet on how much of the hole that fills.
And now the final act begins...
The Hole Gets Bigger
The Economic Forum meeting is underway in Carson City, and, as expected, the numbers look pretty dismal.
The Forum's job is to receive forecasts from the Legislature's Fiscal Division and the Governor's Budget office of the major general fund revenue sources and then make their best educated guess as to what those revenues will be for the next two fiscal years.
The Legislature is then required to use this forecast as the baseline for their budget. Given that there is a constitutional requirement for a balanced budget, the final budget must either spend up to the Economic Forum amount, or if there is a desire to spend more, taxes must be raised.
Political guru Jon Ralston with the Las Vegas Sun summed up the competing numbers in an e-mail this morning. In its December meeting, the Forum predicted that Nevada's general fund would receive $5.65 billion over the next biennium. The Governor, required to build his budget based on that amount, submitted a budget of $6.2 billion (the extra amount comes from the new room tax increase that has since been signed into law).
Today, the legislative folks are estimating $5.57 billion and the Governor's people come in lower at $5.35 billion.
In other words, if you include the drop in local property and sales tax rates (some of which the state government has to make up to the school districts), we could very well be below the Governor's recommended budget by a billion dollars.
So far, the legislative money committees have added over $70 million back into the Governor's budget, making the hole that much bigger.
Stay tuned, as this meeting will be going on for quite a while.
The Forum's job is to receive forecasts from the Legislature's Fiscal Division and the Governor's Budget office of the major general fund revenue sources and then make their best educated guess as to what those revenues will be for the next two fiscal years.
The Legislature is then required to use this forecast as the baseline for their budget. Given that there is a constitutional requirement for a balanced budget, the final budget must either spend up to the Economic Forum amount, or if there is a desire to spend more, taxes must be raised.
Political guru Jon Ralston with the Las Vegas Sun summed up the competing numbers in an e-mail this morning. In its December meeting, the Forum predicted that Nevada's general fund would receive $5.65 billion over the next biennium. The Governor, required to build his budget based on that amount, submitted a budget of $6.2 billion (the extra amount comes from the new room tax increase that has since been signed into law).
Today, the legislative folks are estimating $5.57 billion and the Governor's people come in lower at $5.35 billion.
In other words, if you include the drop in local property and sales tax rates (some of which the state government has to make up to the school districts), we could very well be below the Governor's recommended budget by a billion dollars.
So far, the legislative money committees have added over $70 million back into the Governor's budget, making the hole that much bigger.
Stay tuned, as this meeting will be going on for quite a while.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
