LETTER: Many good reasons for keeping Nevada on biennial legislative sessions
In response to Steve Sebelius’s July 12 column on the legislative special session:
We are fortunate that, due to the structure of our country, we have 49 other states and a federal government to use to evaluate the benefits or harm of a full-time legislature. In fact we need to look no further that our neighbor, California.
With a full-time legislature, California considers well more than 3,000 bills in each legislative session. Does any state, let alone Nevada, need 3,000 new pieces of legislation?
Nevada’s two-year structure causes our governing body to prioritize what needs to get done. No. 1 is a two-year budget. Then the remaining time is taken up by only the most important of issues. The short time period forces both sides of the isle to work together against a timeline.
Then there is cost. A full-time legislator is paid between $66,000 in Michigan and $110,000 in California, plus generous per diem. Nevada currently pays $160 a day plus $150 a day per diem for the regular session of 120 days every other year.
Our Founding Fathers did not want professional legislators. Nevada truly has regular citizens who serve the state and then return to their localities. We constantly hear of the droves of people leaving California for a better life in Nevada. Don’t begin the destruction of our wonderful state by creating too much government.