It’s time for more government in Nevada!
Little Nevada is all grown up.
That’s the message state Sen. Tick Segerblom and Assemblywoman Lucy Flores sent Tuesday to argue for Senate Joint Resolution 8, which would amend the state constitution to allow annual legislative sessions, higher pay for lawmakers and give the state Senate the power to confirm the governor’s appointees.
The resolution also would allow the Legislature to conduct business outside Carson City, but Segerblom says he’s not trying to move the capital to Las Vegas.
Only four states still have biennial sessions, the largest of which is Texas. (But in Texas, unlike Nevada, the state supplies a generous budget for lawmakers’ work when the Legislature isn’t in session.)
“Of all the bills that are going to be heard this session, this is one of the most important in terms of the future of the state of Nevada,” Segerblom said.
“It’s not 1889 anymore,” Flores added. “We’re a grown-up state and we need to have a grown-up government.”
The proposed constitutional amendment would:
• Allow the Legislature to meet for 90 “legislative days” in odd-numbered years, and 30 “legislative days” in even-numbered years. Legislative days are those in which lawmakers are working, not counting weekends or days they don’t meet. The odd-year sessions would probably stretch to four calendar months, and to 45 days during even-year sessions.
• Pay lawmakers $2,000 per month, whether they’re in session or not. Even when the Legislature is out of session, most elected officials are going to interim meetings, talking with constituents and spending time conducting elected duties. This would, however, increase the cost of the Legislature.
• Allow for the Legislature to hold meetings and take votes outside the capital. This would let lawmakers meet in Las Vegas to conduct business and allow the public in the most populous part of the state to attend sessions. But several lawmakers said they would not supporting moving the official seat of government from Carson City.
• Allow the state Senate to confirm the governor’s appointments to various jobs in the executive branch, similar to the U.S. Senate approving Cabinet appointments, ambassadors and military officers. Gubernatorial appointments would be temporary until Senate confirmation.
Each idea is a good one, and long overdue. And the counter-arguments are weak.
Jim DeGraffenreid of the Nevada Republican Party complained at a hearing Tuesday about expanding government, which Republicans are against unless they’re trying to prevent women from seeking abortions or gay people from marrying.
Janine Hansen of Nevada Families for Freedom complained about the large number of unnecessary bills introduced. Ironically, that’s probably a consequence of the limited session, and the fact that issues left unaddressed linger for 18 months until the next session.
Lynn Chapman of the Independent American Party objected to moving the entire Legislature to other parts of the state. And Mary Porter of the Nevada Legislative Affairs Committee says the bill contains too many changes for voters to absorb at once.
Persuasive these points are not.
Mark Twain allegedly said “no one’s life, liberty or property is safe when the Legislature is in session,” and to have remarked that rather than meeting for 60 days every two years, the Nevada Legislature should meet for two days every 60 years. Ah, the hilarity.
But the fact is, more time to draft and debate bills and more frequent meetings to deal with developing issues would make Nevada’s government better. Or, as Flores said, “this isn’t about an expanded government. This is about an efficient government that’s able to respond to the needs of the people.”
So let’s join such bastions of big government as Wyoming, Mississippi, South Dakota and Idaho and let the Legislature meet annually. It’s not 1889 anymore.
Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist and author of the blog SlashPolitics.com. Follow him on Twitter (@SteveSebelius) or reach him at (702) 387-5276 or ssebelius@reviewjournal.com.
