Friday, Jan. 28, 2005 | 5:51 a.m.
Jon Ralston hosts the news discussion program Face to Face on Las Vegas ONE and publishes the Ralston Report. He can be reached at (702) 870-7997 or at [email protected].
WEEKEND EDITION
January 29 - 30, 2005
After 50 minutes of meandering through a disconnected, expensive and expansive laundry list in his State of the State speech last week, Gov. Kenny Guinn nevertheless insisted his dull recitation was "not a series of programs but a road map for the future."
But by the time he left a sepulchral Assembly chambers, the governor had arrived at the place where roads often lead that are paved with good intentions -- and did he ever have good intentions, nearly $2 billion worth, if you add in his DMV rebate ploy.
Hell is the place where you try to please Republicans and Democrats and please neither, where you metamorphose from tax-and-spend to collect-and-spend and still are treated like Rodney Dangerfield, and where you can offer the public a $300 million rebate and not engender a droplet of goodwill.
All of this was presented in a pedestrian and scattergun manner as the governor forsook vision for volume. And in striving for what he believes is farsightedness, his myopia in looking past the real elephant in the room -- no, not state Sen. Bob Beers, but property taxes -- was emblematic of a speech that was stuffed with points and yet somehow missed the point.
Some of this is history repeating itself. Rare is the State of the State that ascends to ethereal rhetorical heights with even a memorable phrase; it's not Gettysburg, it's Carson City. Governors usually strive for more transitions and an overall theme, but the speech generally showcases how the administration plans to spend the state's money and not much more.
Thus begins the biennial cycle: The governor speaks at the commencement and the rest of the session is characterized by 63 mini-governors sniping about what he should have said and then, by the end, not doing much about it.
But, in some ways, 2005 may be different, mostly because of an apolitical governor giving a political speech, state coffers overflowing with cash and a Democratic Party yearning for relevance (with its two legislative leaders also yearning to be governor).
This will be The Session of Need -- and how The Gang of 63 defines that need will be the overarching debate of Legislature '05. That colloquy will take place against a backdrop of a property tax crisis, real or imagined, that the governor inexplicably spent three paragraphs of a 62-paragraph speech talking about.
Guinn's relative silence stunned lawmakers, but was part of the political nature of a speech that essentially declared: "The state has nearly $2 billion in revenue to spend. I am setting the rebate bar at $300 million and I dare you to lower it. And as for property taxes, I'll let you folks decide how to handle that and incur the wrath of the populace for not going far enough. See you in May."
Last year the Gang of 63 was furious at the patronizing tone Guinn took in his approach; this year this always-prickly group is apoplectic that the man who handed them the largest tax increase in history two years ago now is the Cassandra warning them of a taxpayer revolt if they don't give more than a third of it back.
During a taping of "Face to Face" last week, the four legislative leaders each expressed skepticism about the planned $300 million rebate through auto vehicle fees. The Republican doyens were even stronger than the Democrats.
Assembly Minority Leader Lynn Hettrick said nine of 10 e-mails he has received say "don't give the money back" and suggest other ways to spend it, such as funding the Millennium Scholarships.
And Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio neatly framed the session's debate when he said: "It is an uncertain process. It is a system that has never been used -- using registration rebate on motor vehicles. It doesn't affect all citizens and the amount has been in question. There has been some suggestion a lesser amount might be appropriate. Obviously we all believe in returning money that is not needed. So the big issue is what is the need?"
Exactly. What should the $1.7 billion in projected additional revenue be spent on and how much should be returned to taxpayers? What are the "essential services" Speaker Richard Perkins referred to last week? Is full-day kindergarten essential? Is it essential to put $100 million into so-called failing schools or should it be spread more equitably? Is it essential to give state employees raises and is 2 percent enough? And so on.
The governor was testy when I asked him about the criticism of his rebate plan, including from Hettrick. "Lynn Hettrick doesn't know enough about it to say anything," Guinn fumed.
It comes down to this: Last session, the governor said lawmakers who didn't go along with his tax package were irrelevant. This session, with lawmakers still smarting from a governor whom they remember as hanging a tax albatross on them and then taking a powder, the feeling is mutual.
The Democrats claim to have an agenda this time -- a lottery to fund education, getting cheaper prescription drugs and full-day kindergarten. But that is less a product of thoughtful deliberation than of a poll-tested buzz phrase -- helping Nevada families -- designed to catalyze a political realignment. If they can scare seniors at the federal level to try to win back Congress, they can scare families at home to reclaim Carson City. It's the Democratic way.
But will that put the state on any better road than the one Guinn has chosen? Substituting a laundry list for vision, surrendering to politics rather than striving for substance, the best Guinn and the Gang of 63 can hope for as they try different ways to walk down the middle of the road is the hellish path to mediocrity.
archive
