Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Wednesday, March 6, 2013 | 2 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
The article “Politics may become legislators’ day job” states that state Sen. Tick Segerblom’s measure would have the legislature meet annually and would pay each legislator a salary of $24,000 a year. Since the present salary is $8,777 for two years, the difference is $39,223 for two years or $19,611.50 per year.
It just doesn’t make any sense to increase expenses when we are having problems balancing the budget as it is.
We should not have an annual session and we should not increase salaries.
As the old saying goes, “No man’s life, liberty or property is safe while the Legislature is in session.”
Since we have 63 legislators, the total increase per year is more than $1.2 million. This does not include the per diem that would also at least double.
Why do we need to increase the salary of our legislators? Do we have a shortage of candidates? No. In fact, people are willing to spend tens of thousands of dollars just for a chance of being elected.
The author is the chairman of the Clark County Independent American Party.
In reply to Tom Jones; you did an excellent job in your letter to the editor. I love it when my fellow Independents produce respectable letters to the editor of the Las Vegas Sun.
I know some Republicans are going to be quite stunned when I say this, but huge bloated government is the norm for both progressives and conservatives alike. Their thrusts for political power can't seem to undo their thirsting to cost the taxpayers of Nevada more and more of their money.
Aside all other politics, it is going to take at least two years to get over the Assemblyman Steven Brooks saga. Even when the legislature meets once every two years, this is too much for me.
Yes, there are independents, like myself, who although they side with progressives periodically, they are still committed for a small government and minimal taxes.
If the Founding Fathers could see the wealthy career politicians that Representative Democracy has produced, they would roll over in their graves. And that's hard for dust to do.
CarmineD
Yep! The 19th century model Mevada Legislature has worked so well for 150 years why even consider any change? They are still adept at solving 19th century problems.
"Yes, there are independents, like myself, who although they side with progressives periodically, they are still committed for a small government and minimal taxes."
I'd recommend that Mr. Chapline get a little more familiar with the IAP's platform of "stopping the North American Union," opposing the Equal Rights Amendment, abolishing abortion, mandating an official language, declaring the USA a 'Christian nation,' and discriminating against same-sex couples.
IAP is far to the right of the GOP.
While I think the biennial schedule is outdated and a little arcane, a full-time legislature is probably overkill.
In reply to Kevin Sandoval; thank you for your recommended readings that I immerse myself in the "IAP"; the "Independent American Party", is it?
Thanks, but no thanks. I'm about as interested in political party affiliation's as you are in being a political descendant of Governor Brian Sandoval.
You took what I wrote out of context. When I spoke of being an independent, I was referring to being an autonomous thinker who is not in any way governed or influenced by organized politics. I was looking at Mr. Jones letter to the editor in the same light.
You have clearly pointed out Mr. Sandoval that this was a mistake on my part. Thank you. The error on my part was not intentional.
I'm all for a full time legislature; at this late date it's democracy vs. globaloney. The change will keep the multinationals from running the state or at least less so.
The Legislature was just given the power to call itself into session if needed. Let's see how that works out. I think that might be a reasonable alternative to having annual sessions.
As for the pay raise, .... yeah, right.
Granted, having a citizen legislature as we do automatically means some issues will crop up that will present a conflict of interest. These can be identified and dealt with on a case by case basis.
Let's go the other way. Leave the Senate as is, but replace the legislature with citizen petitions & referendums. If the Senate passes a bill, it goes out for public referendum. If the Senate doesn't act, the public can petition, which would then force the senate to vote up or down on the petition; if it passes, then it goes to referendum. Anything passing referendum becomes law.
Can't be any worse than the circus in CC is now!