gonna give you just a quick update because the whole family and some of
the kids' friends drove up to Carson City yesterday and we're heading
out to the pumpkin patch at Lattin Farms in Fallon this morning...
1.) Despite Judge Jerry Wiese
of the 8th Judicial Court in Clark County hearing our initial challenge
to the single subject law three years ago, he changed his mind this
week and granted the tax-hikers' lawyers' change-of-venue request to
kick our current lawsuit up to the 1st Judicial Court in Carson City -
where citizen ballot initiatives go to die.
No idea why the
change of heart, but it might have had something to do with the fact
that the Nevada Supreme Court overturned part of his decision in the
first case and he just took the opportunity to toss this hot potato into
someone else's lap.
2.) As most of you know, while our team is focusing on efforts to repeal the entire $1.4 billion tax hike Gov. Brian Sandoval and the RINOs shoved down our throats a couple months ago, conservative State Controller Ron Knecht has filed a referendum to repeal jut the new "commerce tax" part of the largest tax hike in Nevada history.
the tax-hikers' lawyers have argued that our referendum on the entire
SB483 bill is a violation of the single subject law, Mr. Knecht's
referendum is just on the single subject of the "commerce tax."
So surely the lawyers wouldn't have a problem with THAT, right?
Yesterday they filed a lawsuit to block the Knecht referendum, too.
I'm sick of legal papers these days and haven't read this new lawsuit yet, but according to an article by Geoff Dornan
of the Nevada Appeal in today's paper, the Coalition for Nevada's
Future PAC claims Mr. Knecht's referendum does pretty much everything
bad except cause cancer and dandruff.
The lawsuit argues that the
people don't have "the authority to repeal a law that provides the
state with revenue if such a repeal would result in state expenditures
that exceed state revenue."
Um, then maybe the Legislature
shouldn't have passed a budget that exceeded existing state revenue in
the first place. Then this wouldn't be necessary.
cannot propose, by referenda, a measure that would create a budget
deficit," the lawyers claim in their brief, despite the right to
petition our government by referendum being right there in the Nevada
And again, the only reason there would be a budget
deficit is because the governor and Legislature passed a budget that
greatly exceeded the level of existing taxation that was in place before
the session started last February.
It was the governor and
Legislature that raised taxes; now the people are simply trying to vote
on them. Which, of course, the tax hikers hate because they know the
people will vote "no" if given the choice.
So the only way to
keep the tax hikes in place is to deny the people their right to vote on
them. Thus yesterday's lawsuit even though Mr. Knecht's referendum
only would affect about $121 million of the giganormous $1.4 billion tax
I expect to see Controller Knecht at tomorrow's
pancake breakfast at the Governor's Mansion and will let you all know
how he and his team plan to proceed after speaking with him.
Happy Nevada Day (tomorrow)!
Chuck Muth Nevada's #1 Irritator of Liberals and RINOs
to do everything we can to stop it from going to the voters.” – Mike
Willden, chief-of-staff to Gov. Brian Sandoval, on the tax repeal referendum