Director of Research Geoffrey Lawrence and Policy Analyst Anahit Baghshetsyan op-ed in the Reno Gazette Journal about short term rental regulations.
Director of Research Geoffrey Lawrence and Policy Analyst Anahit Baghshetsyan op-ed in the Reno Gazette Journal about short term rental regulations.
Nevada Policy’s Anahit Baghshetsyan’s informative commentary in the Las Vegas Review-Journal
The Las Vegas Review-Journal published an op-ed letter by Nevada Policy’s Policy Analyst, Anahit Baghshetsyan, about the future of film tax credits in Nevada.
Policy Analyst Anahit Baghshetsyan’s op-ed for the Las Vegas Review Journal about the New York City Mayor’s race and what it could mean for Nevada.
Read the op-ed here.
The Las Vegas Review-Journal wrote an article based on Policy Fellow Cameron Belt’s piece about a need for changing regulations in Nevada. Read the article here.
The Reno Gazette interviewed Policy Analyst Anahit Baghshetsyan about the changes to Nevada’s home insurance law. Read the full story here.
The Las Vegas Review Journal cited Nevada Policy’s research in its article about Governor Lombardo’s vetoes this legislative session.
The Review-Journal’s editorial quotes Research Analyst Anahit Baghshetsyan.
Article written based on Nevada Policy’s 200 Boards report
Please put “Media” in the subject line and include your questions, deadline, and contact information, and we will respond as soon as possible.
Email: pr@nevadapolicy.org
For Immediate Release
Contact Ashley Johnson, 702-222-0642
LAS VEGAS — Just 20 lawmakers achieved voting records generally favorable to taxpayers during the 2015 Legislative Session, a new report from the Nevada Policy Research Institute finds.
NPRI’s 2015 edition of its biennial Nevada Legislative Session Review & Report Card, released today, scores lawmakers on over 80 floor votes and includes a detailed, insider narrative of the session by NPRI executive vice president Victor Joecks.
Although Republicans had unexpectedly gained control of both Legislative chambers, Gov. Brian Sandoval and Sen. Majority Leader Michael Roberson used their influence to push successfully for the largest tax increase in state history, while working behind the scenes to stop or weaken various pension and labor reforms.
The report-card rankings are calculated by the same system that the National Taxpayers Union uses to rate members of Congress. Based on a scale of zero through 100, the rankings at the high end of the scale indicate a greater commitment to low taxes, limited, accountable government and implementation of needed reforms. Legislators who score 50 or above are generally considered allies of economic liberty.
Only 20 of the 63 members of the Legislature earned scores at or above 50 percent. A quartet of Republican Assemblywomen, however, earned scores above 90 percent — better than any lawmaker scored during the 2013 Session.
Assemblywoman Robin Titus topped all lawmakers with score of 93.17 percent and earned the distinction of the “taxpayer’s best friend.” Assemblywomen Shelly Shelton, 92.86 percent, Michele Fiore, 92.78 percent, and Jill Dickman, 90.68 percent, also represented taxpayers extremely well. Men scoring highest in the Assembly included Brent Jones, 89.75 percent, and John Ellison, 89.42 percent. In the Senate, Don Gustavson, at 86.2 percent, had the highest score.
At the other end, Assemblywomen Maggie Carlton earned just a 11.8 percent — the lowest score of any politician.
Based on his decision to sign the largest tax increase in state history and bloated spending bills, Gov. Sandoval earned a score of just 43.48 percent. Sandoval and other lawmakers did receive credit for important reform bills like SB302, creating Education Savings Accounts, and AB125, reforming Nevada’s construction defects law.
“These grades make clear who voted on behalf of taxpayers and who decided to please the special-interest lobbyists that swarmed Carson City,” said Joecks. “When talking with voters, Republican candidates pledged their support for lower taxes and less government. Unfortunately, many of those same politicians went back on their commitments and voted for the largest tax increase in Nevada history.
“Because most Nevadans don’t have time to track over 80 floor votes, NPRI’s scorecard provides a consolidated measurement of how a lawmaker’s votes advanced or hindered economic liberty.”
Elected Republican legislative leaders had some of the lowest scores in their caucuses. Speaker John Hambrick and Assembly Majority Leader Paul Anderson, who the report notes was the individual widely considered the driving force in Assembly leadership, had identical scores of 43.79 percent. The average for the Assembly caucus, however, was 65.37 percent.
Roberson and five other Republican Senators, Greg Brower, Patricia Farley, Joe Hardy, Becky Harris and Ben Kieckhefer, all had identical scores, earning grades of just 38.72 percent. The Senate Republican caucus average was 49.77 percent.
“The scores from the Report Card also show just how important leadership is in the Legislative process. With left-leaning Republicans at the helm, lawmakers considered the largest tax increase in state history, instead of pushing through substantive and needed labor and pension reforms,” said Joecks.
The narrative also explains how Assembly leaders undercut conservatives in the GOP caucus who were open to compromise, in order to pass even more liberal measures, such as SB207, a $4-plus billion property tax increase that was imposed with no popular vote.
The 2015 Nevada Legislative Session Review & Report Card also identifies the behind-the-scenes maneuvering that led to the passage of SB302. Among other factors, the capitol building buzzed with reports that Assemblyman Pat Hickey told Sandoval that Hickey wouldn’t support Sandoval’s tax increases without the passage of SB302. In the week preceding the tax vote, SB302 passed Senate Finance, the Senate, Assembly Education and the Assembly in the course of four days.
“The grades in NPRI’s Report Card simply reflect a lawmaker’s record. These scores reveal lawmaker’s votes, not often-hollow promises made to constituents,” noted Joecks.
“These Report Card scores give voters the ability to cut through political rhetoric and identify whether their legislators are actually committed to advancing conservative goals or are just campaigning as conservatives to get elected.”
Read more:
###
For immediate release
Contact Victor Joecks, 702-222-0642
LAS VEGAS — NV Energy’s proposal to build a new 706 MW natural gas plant would cost ratepayers $115 million in 2020 and over $600 million from 2020-2025. That’s the findings of an economic analysis of the plan released today by the Nevada Policy Research Institute.
Entitled “Power plant proposal would increase power prices in Nevada,” the study finds the higher electricity rates would reduce employment by 1,614 jobs in 2020 by increasing power rates by 3.2 percent. Those rate increases would cost the average consumer an additional $31 a year and the average industrial rate payer $9,970 a year.
Authored by David G. Tuerck and Paul Bachman, economists with the Beacon Hill Institute, the study also examines the impact of 2013’s SB123, including how it was modified by AB498 during the last legislative session.
“NV Energy’s current proposal to build a new power plant should not be considered in a vacuum,” said Bachman. “Without SB123’s order to shut down cheap and reliable coal power plants, no new natural gas plant would even be under consideration.
“This economic analysis examines the cost to consumers of building a new natural-gas power plant by first examining the impact of SB123 and AB498 on electricity prices and Nevada’s economy.”
With a new power plant, Tuerck and Bachman find that SB123, as modified by AB498, will cost consumers $206 million in 2020, destroying 2,925 jobs in Nevada.
Without building the new power plant, SB123, as modified by AB498, will cost consumers $91 million in 2020, eliminating 1,311 jobs.
“Unfortunately, the PUC can’t undo all the damage caused by Carson City politicians,” said Bachman. “The decision to build or not build a new 706 MW gas-fired power, however, does give the commission the ability to mitigate some of the expensive mandates forced on consumers by SB123 and AB498.”
Read more:
###
LAS VEGAS — Membership in Nevada’s two largest teachers unions experienced a dramatic drop over the summer, the Nevada Policy Research Institute announced today.
Including new teachers not joining the union, Clark County Education Association membership fell by 1,338 and Washoe Education Association membership fell by 163. The information was provided by the Clark and Washoe County School Districts, which use automatic payroll deduction to collect dues on behalf of the union.
As of Sept. 10, 2015, only 9,526 of the CCSD’s 18,275 teachers had union dues — which total nearly $800 per year — deducted. That means CCEA membership has fallen to 52 percent of licensed personnel. In April 2015, the union represented 10,731 of the CCSD’s 18,142 teachers or 59 percent of teachers. The membership drop means that teachers will keep over $1 million more of their own money, instead of sending it to CCEA officials.
As of Sept. 16, 2015, just 2,289 of WCSD’s 4,068 teachers had union dues — which cost around $720 a year — deducted. WEA membership has dropped to 56 percent. In April 2015, the union represented 2,402 of WCSD’s 4,018 licensed personnel or 60 percent of teachers. The membership decline means that teachers will keep over $117,000 more of their own money, instead of sending it to WEA officials.
The 1,500-plus teacher exodus comes after NPRI held its fourth annual summer union opt-out campaign to let school district employees know they can drop union membership from July 1 to July 15 and to inform new educators that they need not join at all. The Institute reached school district employees through billboards throughout Las Vegas, in emails sent to their taxpayer-funded addresses and through interviews in the media and its own publications and on social media.
The CCEA’s membership decline has been especially pronounced and is even more dramatic considering that CCSD has 1,100 more teachers in 2015 than in 2012.
In response to the news, NPRI’s Executive Vice President, Victor Joecks, issued the following remarks:
This summer, more than 1,500 Clark and Washoe County teachers exercised their right to drop union members or not join their respective education associations. Teachers, empowered by information from the Nevada Policy Research Institute on when and how to leave, have voted with their feet and will save more than $1.1 million this year alone.
Since NPRI began this campaign in 2012, more than 3,500 school district employees have left or not joined the Nevada State Education Association. The free choice of these individuals has allowed them to keep over $4 million of their own money, instead of sending it to union officials making six-figure salaries and providing lousy customer service.
Joecks mentioned that membership in the Washoe Education Support Association has fallen to just 526 of WCSD’s 2,711 support staff members or just 19 percent. The Education Support Employees Association has also fallen under 50 percent and is currently facing a vote with the Teamsters Union on which union will represent support staff employees in CCSD.
Joecks concluded:
With membership levels hovering just above 50 percent for Nevada’s two largest teachers unions, these results show that now is the time for union recertification.
With CCEA becoming the bargaining agent for CCSD teachers in 1969, only a handful of current CCSD teachers have ever had a chance to vote on if they want CCEA as their bargaining agent. Now teachers are voting with their feet and leaving CCEA in droves.
Lawmakers should use the rumored upcoming special session to pass a union recertification bill that would require unions to get a majority vote of those it represents in bargaining every two years to remain the bargaining agent.
The trend is clear. Nevada’s teachers unions don’t represent a near majority of teachers, and those teachers should not be forced into contracts by an organization they never voted for, have left and want no part of.
###
|
For Immediate Release |
Contact Chantal Lovell |
|
September 1, 2015 |
702- 222-0642, 951-295-4855 (cell) |
LAS VEGAS — Responding to the overwhelming interest in Nevada’s new Education Savings Accounts program, the Nevada Policy Research Institute unveiled a new website today, NevadaESA.com.
With an extensive list of frequently asked questions that are continually being updated, tuition and contact information for Nevada’s private schools, an events list and application tips, the new website will become the go-to resource for parents and schools looking for more information on ESAs.
In response to launch of the new site, NPRI’s President Sharon J. Rossie offered the following remarks:
Since Gov. Sandoval signed Senate Bill 302 in June, NPRI staff have spoken with thousands of Nevada parents who are eager to find out what Education Savings Accounts mean for their children and learn how to best utilize the grants. NevadaESA.com will serve as a great tool for everyone with an interest in ESAs, from parents who have heard about the program and need more information, to those looking for application assistance, to private schools wanting to learn more about what the law means for them.
In the coming weeks and months, we will reach even more parents — particularly those in traditionally disadvantaged communities — to let them know they now have options when it comes to their children’s education and we are excited to have a place to send them to learn more.
For many Nevada families, Education Savings Accounts mean their children can, for the first time ever, attend private school, be taught at home, or receive the individualized education needed for life-long success. Children who have been stuck in failing schools now have a path to attend a school that is exceptional, and we want to make sure all parents learn how they can direct their child’s education dollars.
Rossie added that NevadaESA.com will be continually updated as SB302 makes its way through the regulatory process so those interested have the most up-to-date information at their fingertips.
###
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact Victor Joecks, 702-222-0642
LAS VEGAS — Responding to news that the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a Constitutional challenge against Nevada’s groundbreaking Education Savings Account program, Nevada parent Glynis Gallegos offered the following comments. Because of ESAs, Gallegos has taken her son from a public school and put him in a private school.
“Education Savings Accounts provide a choice for my child’s education. The poor performing schools in my neighborhood don’t provide a positive choice for my son. Right now, my son is attending a private school, because of this new law.
“Education Savings Accounts will improve education for inner city children. Low-income families don’t have a choice. This is allowing for an equal choice for all families, regardless of income levels.”
The ACLU’s challenge is based on Nevada’s “Blaine” Amendment, which passed in the late 1800s and reads, “No public funds of any kind or character whatever, State, County or Municipal, shall be used for sectarian purpose.” At the time sectarian meant “Catholic.” Nativists pushed Blaine Amendments throughout the country to prevent public dollars from going to Catholic schools. Public schools at the time had a “pervasively Protestant character.”
With Education Savings Accounts, however, government funds are put into a parent-controlled account, and parents decide how the monies — which are no longer public funds — are spent.
NPRI Executive Vice President Victor Joecks then shared the following thoughts on the lawsuit.
“In less than month, over 2,800 parents have already applied for an Education Savings Account and the chance to personalize the education of their children. Failed by unaccountable public schools that have nevertheless, for decades, received regular funding increases, parents around Nevada are eager to provide their children with the individually customized education now available from resources such as online schools, private schools, tutors and more.
“It is a shame that Nevada’s ACLU would attempt to prevent these parents from obtaining better educations for their children.
“It is important to emphasize that these funds go into a parentally controlled account. This is no longer government money, but money given to parents to find the best education for their children. This is why the Blaine Amendment challenge should fail.”
Joecks noted that last year, the Arizona Supreme Court deemed Education Savings Accounts constitutional despite Arizona having a Blaine Amendment that is more strict than Nevada’s.
“It’s ironic that the ACLU is seeking to stop the ability of parents, like Glynis Gallegos, to improve the education of their children under the Blaine Amendment. That’s because that section of the Nevada Constitution has explicitly anti-Catholic origins,” said Joecks.
“Regardless, it’s important to remember that the state funds are going to a parent-controlled account for the purpose of providing their student a better education. After the dollars reach the ESA, they are no longer public funds, and the parent then decides how the money is spent, including if it will be spent at a religious school or not.”
Joecks then described how Education Savings Accounts actually increase per-pupil spending. Nevada’s average per-pupil spending is $9,500, while an ESA is worth just 60 percent of that amount. Therefore, as more students use ESAs, the per-pupil funds for current public school students actually goes up.
“When it comes to increasing per-pupil spending, ESAs are the best thing that ever happened to Nevada education. That’s because although ESA do remove a portion of a former student’s funding, they also remove the public school’s entire responsibility to educate that child. The more students who use ESA, the higher per-pupil funding within public schools will go.
“We know through decades of experience that higher per-pupil education spending won’t increase student achievement, but the competitive pressure from Nevada’s ESA program will, as it has in states around the country.
“Given both the Arizona precedent and a clear understanding of how Nevada’s ESA program is structured, ESA are constitutional. The court should dismiss this case immediately.”
###
LAS VEGAS — Responding to the overwhelming interest in Nevada’s new Education Savings Accounts program, the Nevada Policy Research Institute unveiled a new website today, NevadaESA.com.
With an extensive list of frequently asked questions that are continually being updated, tuition and contact information for Nevada’s private schools, an events list and application tips, the new website will become the go-to resource for parents and schools looking for more information on ESAs.
In response to launch of the new site, NPRI’s President Sharon J. Rossie offered the following remarks:
Since Gov. Sandoval signed Senate Bill 302 in June, NPRI staff have spoken with thousands of Nevada parents eager to find out what Education Savings Accounts mean for their children and learn how to best utilize the grants. NevadaESA.com will serve as a great tool for everyone with an interest in ESAs, from parents who have heard about the program and need more information, to those looking for application assistance, to private schools wanting to learn more about what the law means for them.
In the coming weeks and months, we will reach even more parents — particularly those in traditionally disadvantaged communities — to let them know they now have options when it comes to their children’s education and we are excited to have a place to send them to learn more.
For many Nevada families, Education Savings Accounts mean their children can, for the first time ever, attend private school, be taught at home, or receive the individualized education needed for life-long success. Children who have been stuck in failing schools now have a path to attend a school that is exceptional, and we want to make sure all parents learn how they can direct their child’s education dollars.
Rossie added that NevadaESA.com will be continually updated as SB302 makes its way through the regulatory process so those interested have the most up-to-date information at their fingertips.
###
Sign up for Nevada Policy’s weekly emails to stay up to date on the most pressing issues facing Nevada today.