Ralston marvels at Democrats’ ability to revive Gibbons
Wednesday, Aug. 26, 2009 | 2:01 a.m.
Jim Gibbons, to his credit, had accomplished the impossible.
In a state with one of the strongest executive branches in the country, The Man Formerly Known as Governor had turned supreme power into Ø power. He submitted a budget that was so laughable that state lawmakers built one from scratch. He developed Ø relationships with lawmakers, even those of his own party. And thanks to his own breathtakingly consistent governing ineptitude and catastrophically flawed political sense, he essentially rendered the executive branch invisible in a state where lawmakers are normally in session only four months every 24.
Now that is talent.
And now, Democratic legislators, to their credit, have similarly accomplished the impossible. They have reinvigorated not just the power of the executive branch but given Gibbons his mojo back by trying to assert the supremacy of a legislative creation that may not even be legal — something called the Interim Finance Committee that most Nevadans don’t even know exists. By whining for all to hear that Gibbons needed IFC ratification to spend stimulus money, lawmakers have given Gibbons new life and inadvertently have raised questions that could make the executive branch even stronger. Now that is even greater talent.
Where did Gibbons have to go? What did they hope to accomplish? Ø from Ø leaves Ø. He had nowhere to go but up, and even if his polling numbers don’t yet show it, Gibbons, thanks to the Democrats and some new, aggressive senior staffers, suddenly seems almost — dare I even write it? — gubernatorial.
The Democrats have turned a bleeder into a leader, reanimating a political corpse who had so many self-inflicted wounds that he was the lamest of lame ducks. Now, if he can tune in the voices in his head, Gibbons probably is being told that he actually can win a GOP primary — and who knows what might happen in the general election?
How embarrassing, too, for the Democrats for the attorney general, Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto, to ratify what the governor had done with the stimulus money, putting out an opinion that left little room for interpretation: The executive branch has sole discretion under state law to declare an emergency and spend stimulus money as he sees fit. The only recourse for lawmakers: Pass a new law or sue him.
And by raising the specter of legal action, the squealing Democrats foolishly raised the possibility that everything they do at IFC is extra-constitutional. If Gibbons really believed in the principle — cue the laugh track — and turned the tables and sued lawmakers over the IFC being unconstitutional, it probably couldn’t survive.
Ripe for Scams
Viewing video requires the latest version of Adobe's Flash Player
When I asked Cortez Masto on “Face to Face” why she thought IFC’s legality had never been tested, she said: “I think we all know why it hasn’t been challenged. I think there are concerns that the Legislature thinks that what they have done with IFC is not constitutional. So, they are not willing to test it.”
Indeed they aren’t, even if, as Cortez Masto would add, their counsel believes it could be upheld because they technically are not taking new action but moving around existing funds. But that is the thinnest of reeds and they know it.
But what they didn’t know was that Gibbons, energized by new Chief of Staff Robin Reedy and her two deputies, Stacy Woodbury and Lynn Hettrick, would be willing to play smashmouth politics over the issue and reassert the existence of the executive branch of government.
We will soon see how far Gibbons is willing to take his rediscovered power and it could give us an inkling if he really intends to seek reelection. One other aspect of unfettered executive power is the governor’s ability to call special sessions. Even though lawmakers continue to say it’s premature to talk about returning to the capital for more cuts, my guess is in Gibbonsworld, it’s Topic Numero Uno.
And if Ø really wants to put lawmakers in a bad spot and elevate himself, he will call them back, whether or not there are alternatives, to force them to make cuts while he makes his “no new taxes” speeches.
If it’s clear-cut that the state must take action and Gibbons calls a special session, maybe no conclusions can be drawn. But if it’s murky and you hear lawmakers presenting administrative ways to fill budget gaps and Gibbons forces them to abandon their campaigns and return to Carson City, he is running for reelection.
The executive branch, invisible for a time in Nevada, has reappeared. The only silver lining for Democratic legislators and their allies: If anyone has the talent to squander even the most smashing victory, his name is Jim Gibbons.
Discussion: comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
No trusted comments have been posted.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- UNLV can move forward without the burden of losing streak to San Diego State
- A wife’s wisdom shows birth control issue needn’t be divisive
- Motorcycle accident claims life of man in northeast valley
- Surprise links, negotiated deals addressed by commissioners
- Hope and change and … what’s missing?
- We don’t need a CEO in charge
- New York mayor has the right idea
- Paying our own way
- Country has ‘given’ citizens a lot
- Jerry Tarkanian: Mike Moser impresses yet again on a day to remember former Rebel greats
Blogs
The Kats Report
Color from scene at Thomas & Mack: We have a wire job! Rebels win, and Louie Armstrong sings!
South Point owner Michael Gaughan's take on 'Vegas Stripped': 'I'll give it an 8' (4 Comments)
Author relishes writing the life story of ‘larger-than-life’ Oscar Goodman (3 Comments)
Elsewhere
Landowner: All roads could lead to Uxbridge casino
Revel reveals smoke-free casino opening
Cirque du Soleil show in Sands China casino to close this month
Meet the woman behind Sheldon Adelson
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.



The problem wasn't that is budget was laughably small, it wasn't, the problem was that the Governor handed the Democrats the political rhetoric for raising taxes on a silver platter. If your goal is to maintain the line and not raise taxes you don't let your budget director tack on a 17% increase in spending and then call the difference between that increase and the revenue a budget shortfall.
Patrick: In your ideal world what should the Biennial budget have been? What woud you have cut? I'll be up front with you, I would have raised taxes another $500M for the biennium with a business income tax (with high enough exemption to shelter most small businesses).
I'd actually enjoy s debate on Laffer/Supply Side vs good old Keynesian/Galbraith theories. It'll be fun making you justify the oversimplified data you'll try to get away with using.
Sorry, I'm not a supply sider. I really hate when the left tries to break this down to Keynes vs. Laffer its not that simple. Though I'd have to say Laffer would destroy both Keynes and Galbraith.
$5 to $5.2 for the general fund would have been more than enough to run state operations. Though the state could still propser (very much so) with far less expenditures. I don't have a figure for the total budget, but I can imagine spending a lot less than the $18 over the biennium.
Here is some of my simple data http://npri.org/publications/legislature...
How can you justify a $500 million increase on top of a 21% increase which was the nations largest tax increase which comes as a result of a budgetary shortfall that is the direct result of the nations largest growth (or one of the largest, I've seen data which shows government spending growth in Nevada almost double that of california) in government spending in the last decade?
One thing you should never do is understimate the stupidity of the Governor.
Should not be long before he does something really nuts.
probably try to save money with solyent green.
I would support the Governor taking a real hard look at our legislative branch and making changes to bring them in line with what their constitutional mandate is.
There is way too much power being given to the Chairs of the committees and because of that if there is any infighting among the legislators some bills get buried in the bottom drawer of some Chairperson's desk and not ever seen again.
This is not how our government is supposed to operate.
I'll admit that Jim Gibbons has not been my favorite person, but lately he seems to be stepping up to the plate. Now, if he could clean up the shenanigans going on at the legislature he'd have my vote for sure.