Nevada Seniors Coalition
Becoming a Member
Calendar of Events
NSC Contributing Authors
President Vernon Perry
Vice-President Knight Allen
Past-President Ken Mahal
Senior Citizen Links
Federal Senior Citizen Site
Senior Net (Computer Instruction)
The Seniors Citizen's League
Center for Medicare Services
Official US Medicare Site
Medicare Rights Center
Social Security Administration
Citizens Against Government Waste
U.S. House of Representatives
Senator Dean Heller
Senator Catherine Cortez Masto
Representative Mark Amodei
Representative Ruben Kihuen
Representative Jacky Rosen
Representative Dina Titus
State of Nevada
Governor's Home Page
Lt. Governor's Homepage
Attorney General's Homepage
Secretary of State's Homepage
Department of Motor Vehicles
Department of Taxation
& Local Services)
North Las Vegas
Nevada League of Cities &
Citizen's Area Transit (CAT)
Regional Transportation Commission
McCarran International Airport
Metropolitan Police Department
Nellis Air Force Base
Vegas Ch 3
KVVU-Las Vegas Ch 5
KLAS-Las Vegas Ch 8
KTNV-Las Vegas Ch 13
KTVN-Reno Ch 2
KRNV-Reno Ch 4
KOLO-Reno Ch 8
Nevada News Sites
Hunt NV Newspapers
Las Vegas Review Journal
Las Vegas Sun
Reno Gazette Journal
Opinion Journal Online
from the WSJ
Alzheimer's Disease Education
American Diabetes Association
American Heart Association
Consumer Reports Best Buy Drugs
The Institute of Medicine
National Heart Lung &
National Institute of Health
National Kidney Foundation
Nevada Health District
National Academy of Elder Law
National Senior Citizen Law Center
Southern Nevada Senior Law
IS IT TIME TO GO FOR BROKE WITH TABOR “TAX-PAYER BILL of RIGHTS”,
PROP 13 “CAP OUR TAXES CALIFORNIA STYLE”, AND CFR “CAMPAIGN
FINANCE REFORM”? — I THINK SO.
by Ken Mahal, NSC President
Originally published on
June 9, 2005 - reprinted with permission
By now you should have heard about TABOR which is popular in Colorado where
monies proposed to be spent by the government are limited to prior years
spending plus population growth plus inflation. Anything beyond that would
be refunded to the tax payers, although government can ask voter for
permission to spend the surplus. Not a bad idea for Nevada and it should be
done now considering the way this 2005 session and the 2003 one went. In the
2003 session when the governor insisted on the $833 million tax increase and
the legislature approved it even after state advisors predicted there was
going to be a double digit increase of present taxes so new taxes weren’t
needed. That should have told people it was time to take charge of the
spendthrifts in Carson City but we didn’t do it and now look at what has
happened in 2005 with at least a $600 million surplus after a 45% spending
increase. It really should be obvious that we cannot trust them to themselves
once they confer in Carson City.
NEVADA PROP 13 is a California style real-estate tax cap, where existing
properties are capped at some agreed upon date and remain that way with a rate
set at 1% of market value and limited to a 2% increase per year. When the
property is sold it is reassessed to market value. At our June 9th meeting
Sharron Angle of the legislature will have explained all of that to us so that
we are thoroughly informed and prepared for the petition drive after the first
of September when it is OK to do so. This has proved to be a blessing in
California and the only way long term they have found a way for people to be
able to afford to stay in their homes.
It is unfortunate we are being forced to consider such a proposal all because
our Clark County Commissioners and city Council’s and Mayors of our four cities
have let ourselves be savaged by developers who are not paying their way so
growth is not paying for growth; a great thought of a few seconds some 15
ears back. Growth is killing us in spite of what the commissioners and a
certain mayor may have to say. Almost every year the worst spender, the SNWA,
comes out with another 2 or 3 billion more to spend and that is only one entity
of government. Then there are the roads, gas, electric, sewer, police, fire,
primary secondary schools, libraries, health care like UMC, UNLV and on and on.
Is it any wonder none of us can keep track of our cost of life. As a matter of
fact it might not be only our cost of food or prescription drugs but also
whether we can afford to live or die and the proper day to leave this heaven or
hell on earth we live in. What a way to feel about our existence. Well let’s not
dwell on it and just drive home with our eyes closed. Can’t be any worse than I
see all of the time when my eyes are open.
CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM (CFR)
We might as well throw every thing in the pot and see what comes to the top. After
this present session of the legislature it has convinced me more than ever we should
do the finance reform that I came up with several years back with the help of our
good friend Dr. Larry Paulson and a few comments by friend Knight Allen.
If you look at the way money flies into the pockets of most politicians it makes you
sick. I remember it is but a very few years when $17,000 was enough for a campaign
and now it seems to be so much more than that that no one can understand why it costs
more in any given election than most of us will save to retire on in a life time.
Disgusting isn’t it?
So what can we do in campaign finance reform that makes sense? Easy just make the money
for a district run come out of that district and keep the carpet baggers out.
A REVISED NEVADA CAMPAIGN LAW PROPOSAL THAT WILL BE GREAT.
Only A NATURAL PERSON WHO IS REGISTERED TO VOTE may make campaign contributions to all
political candidates in the state of Nevada.
To the Governor, Senate and Assembly:
For quite some time we have felt there is something wrong with who or what can make
campaign contributions in the state. Therefore we propose this very simple reform.
We propose that only "A NATURAL PERSON" may make campaign contributions (and as in
Alaska’s law, put a definite "prohibited" after all other possibilities). To further
narrow it to citizen persons we propose the following:
*1. Only NATURAL PERSONS WHO ARE REGISTERED TO VOTE may make
campaign contributions. Adding registered to vote to a natural person pretty well
eliminates for sure the wiggle room to include unwanted special interests including
*2. Only NATURAL PERSONS registered to vote in the candidate’s district may make
campaign contributions to that candidate. Your residence is where you live and
are registered to vote.
*3. Campaign contributions by a NATURAL PERSON shall be limited to $1,000 in the
primary and $1,000 in the general election. Webster's definition of NATURAL is: by birth
pertaining to nature.
Webster's definition of PERSON is: an individual human being, especially as distinguished
from a thing or lower animal; an individual man, woman or child. In conclusion we know only
you and I as, Natural Persons will understand this campaign finance law proposal so that
makes it a great law. No more packs or special interests.
By the way Nevada’s present law talks about a PERSON defined as a natural person, corporations,
government entities, unions, PACs etc... Pretty sneaky isn’t it?
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IF WE ARE GOING TO DO IT MAKE IT SENSIBLE.
More and more we are hearing the rumble that there needs to be more affordable housing. Where
have we heard that before? Well commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates went through a period in her
life drumming up the affordable thing. What I hear coming down the pike now is about as bad as
it could get. You know the idea that we should mix cheaper housing in the midst of market rate
housing and force the developers to do it. Not a great idea. Who in their right mind would want
to live in market rate housing in the midst of some kind of subsidized housing? Not many people
I can tell you that. So where do we go before it even gets started? With the rising cost of
housing maybe it is time to go to Uncle Sam to obtain about 1500 acres of land for a dollar.
Make it a master planned community of real quality manufactured housing and a complete community
with all of the amenities such as commercial, industrial, institutional, educational, health
care and the likes for two age groups; seniors and first time home owners. We suggest thinking
of it as a non profit cooperative community where the ownership of the property always reverts
back to the nonprofit cooperative which is responsible for keeping everything up to code and in
livable condition thereby making it a very desirable community to live next to with other market
rate housing in master plan developments. There are pages more we could write about but this is
merely a seed of an idea to make people think out of the box when it comes to affordable housing.
Would I live there? Let me work on the planning of it and no question I would love to live there.