Opinion:  Reform and the 2005 Legislature

The Good, The Bad And The Ugly

A Look At Some Of The Bills Proposed In The 2005 Legislature

__________

This review of proposed legislation in the 2005 session will be augmented and revised until the legislators adjourn and return to their homes.

The Good

SB6 Grants subpoena power to Attorney General to enforce Open Meeting Law.

Comment:  This long-needed reform should help maintain openness and public confidence in government.  

SB7 Makes certain opt-out provisions in contracts with consumers unenforceable under certain circumstances.

Comment:  This bill makes contracts, in which businesses can run up charges on credit cards unless the victim objects, a deceptive trade practice.

SB9 Increases amount by which certain hospitals are required to reduce or discount certain charges billed to certain uninsured patients and to patients who are eligible for Medicare.

Comment:  This bill helps people with limited financial resources cope with Nevada's high hospital bills.

SB29 Requires policies of health insurance to provide coverage for certain treatments for cancer.

Comment:  This bill requires insurance companies to cover payments for various treatments for cancer in its early stages.

AB2  Prohibits issuance of gift card or gift certificate that contains expiration date.

The Bad

SB2 Makes appropriation to State Distributive School Account to ensure that amount of money expended per pupil meets or exceeds national average.

Comment:  This "hole-in-the-bucket" bill ensures taxing and spending, but doesn't ensure that the money is well spent or produces any real result. It is about as sensible as a bill "to ensure that all pupils meet or exceed the national academic average."

SB10 Limiting to certain counties right of state residents to petition board of county commissioners concerning use of public roads.

Comment:  Why should the rights of state residents be limited to certain counties?

SB13 Revises provisions governing authority of peace officers to make arrests for certain offenses.

Comment:  This bill would allow a police officer to make a subjective determination of whether or not to arrest and jail a person who would only receive a traffic citation under the present law.  While most police officers are reasonable, not all of them are.  This proposed law has too much potential for "badge-heavy" abuse.    

SB28 Creates crimes of video voyeurism and distribution of product of video voyeurism.

Comment: Lawsuits for invasion of privacy and civil injunctions already address the objectionable aspects of this problem.  The resources of the police and criminal courts are limited, and the proposed wording of the "video voyeurism" law leaves people of ordinary intelligence guessing at what the statute would actually prohibit.    

AB6 Prohibits imposition of sentence of death upon person for crime committed while person was under age of 18 years.

Comment:  Nevada law prohibits the death penalty for persons under 16 years of age, and limits imposition of the death penalty to certain specific circumstances.  Where these circumstances are present, why spare a 17 year old when an 18 year old would be executed for committing the same crime?    

AB7 Prohibits civil compromise of certain misdemeanor offenses.

Comment:  Existing law allows a person who is accused of a misdemeanor offense to enter into a civil compromise (agreement) with the victim to drop the criminal charges.  This "clog-the-courts-and-jails" bill would eliminate the right of the people involved to make that choice for themselves.  In addition to being inflexible, the bill has an arrogant underlying assumption -- it presumes that in every instance the State knows better than the people who are directly involved what's good for them.  The limited resources of the police and criminal courts don't need this additional burden, and the public shouldn't have to pay for it.     

AB10 Prohibits civil compromise of battery that constitutes domestic violence.

Comment:  This bill has the same problems as AB7.

AB11 Repeals prohibition against certain use by governmental entity of photographic, video or digital equipment for gathering evidence for issuance of traffic citation.

Comment:  This "Big Brother" bill is a thinly-disguised revenue gathering device for local government.  If the proposed law went into effect, huge numbers of citizens could be cited for speeding, wide turns, improper lane changes, failures to come to a full stop, etc.  Our republic doesn't need police state measures like video road monitoring for minor traffic infractions, nor should people be expected to drive perfectly at all times.  Furthermore, citizens can't afford to pay the price which this "video justice" bill would exact.  You do the math --  multiply the number of your inadvertent traffic offenses by the dollar amounts of the standard fines and administrative assessments imposed in your home town.  Now think about the inadvertent traffic offenses of your neighbors and friends.  If AB11 passed, it would be a lucrative racket for local governments at the expense of everyone else.   

AB19  Prohibits issuance of gift certificate that contains expiration date and prohibits issuer of gift certificate from charging fee for inactivity to buyer or holder of gift certificate.

Comment:  This bill is a bad version of AB2.  AB19 does not regulate gift certificate rip-offs where the amount is under $50.

AB21 Prohibits civil compromise of certain misdemeanor offenses.

Comment:  This bill has the same problems as AB7 and AB10.

AB72 Increases penalty for subsequent convictions within 3-year period for use of drug paraphernalia or possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to use drug paraphernalia.

Comment:  This is another "clog-the-courts-and-jails" proposal, and since the defendant presumably would only have the paraphernalia and no drugs, there's not even a drug dealer to "snitch off."

The Ugly

SB11 Expands circumstances under which certain officers and employees in smaller counties may permissibly acquire interest in property within redevelopment area.

Comment:  This bill facilitates corrupt transactions by permitting public officers to profit from deals they're supposed to be supervising.

SB67 Authorizes general improvement district to file petition in bankruptcy pursuant to the Federal Bankruptcy Act and clarifies status of general improvement district as municipality.

Comment:  Why not enact a set of laws to ensure a sufficiently diligent and honest government so that a declaration of bankruptcy would never be necessary?

AB32 Makes certain information collected by State Department of Agriculture confidential.

Comment:  This overbroad bill imposes unneeded secrecy in government operations.

AB33 Revises provisions governing sale of state land.

Comment:  This bill further weakens checks on abuses in the disposition of state property, and provides for discretionary no-bid contracts to sell public land without public notice.  

AB39 Revises provisions relating to purchasing by local governments.

Comment:  This bill provides more exceptions to rules requiring competitive bidding.

AB64 Exempts elected supervisor of conservation district from requirement to file statement of financial disclosure.

Comment:  What's the problem with requiring financial disclosure statements from elected officials?

AB79 Authorizes award of reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, in certain contempt proceedings.

Comment: Existing law already provides for fines and even jail terms in contempt proceedings.  This bill is unnecessary, and proposes additional vindictive penalties with ample opportunity for abuse.

Lost, Abandoned, or Missing and Presumed Dead

Campaign Finance Reform -- In a 2003 survey of all of the states in the union, Nevada got a D- grade for campaign finance disclosure.  Grading State Disclosure (2003).  The Moncrief, Augustine and Christensen debacles, as well as the Clark County Commission federal corruption case, have amply confirmed that Nevada has a serious problem with both disclosure and punishment for those who violate the law.  The comprehensive flaws in the Nevada system of campaign finance reporting have been pointed out on numerous occasions in The Nevada Observer.  Legislative response so far:  nothing.