Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Legislative Update: The Phantom Menace

Much like the Galactic Senate in Episode I, there is intrigue afoot in the Nevada legislature and one of our own is the midst of it. That person has the lobbyists and liberal media confounded by his actions, but it is not year clear whether he is more of a Jar Jar or a Palpatine--though recent developments lend credence to the latter.

Yesterday, the Las Vegas Sun ran a column that asked, "What's Michael Roberson's game?" We won't rehash that article here, but it questions Roberson's aggressive actions that appear to have some ulterior motive other than the best interest of constituents.

Then, last night, Roberson was responsible for slipping a duplicate construction defects reform bill past the snoozing sentries of the Democrats. According to another article from the Sun, late last night (on the last day to submit new bills), SB 411 was introduced and the Senate voted to send it to the Commerce and Labor committee. The subterfuge was that the construction defect portion of the bill is duplicative of another bill, SB 161, which is before the Senate Judiciary committee headed by Tick Segerblom.  Go back and look again at SB 411--you'll notice that it does not identify itself as a construction defect reform bill, but rather summarizes it as a bill making various changes related to real property and leading off with something about mortgage lending. Apparently no one read past the first page and voted to send the bill to committee, thereby accomplishing Roberson's (nefarious?) purpose of making sure the construction defect bill is heard. Very clever.

Who knows Roberson? Does he have greater political aspirations? Is he just up to no good in furtherance of the conservative principles of the Evil Empire? Do any of you care? Are you tracking the legislature? What other bills should we be watching?

Ed.- The Sun has another article called "Why the Construction Defect Fight Is Likely to Get Nasty this Session."

4 comments:

  1. Before you attribute evil motives to Roberson, consider that Tick Segerblom has actively said that the bill will be DOA when it hits the Senate Judiciary Committee. If Tick is going to make that committee his own little fiefdom, I don't see problem with Roberson trying to make sure that it gets a fair hearing in another committee.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Should pass. But won't.

    ReplyDelete
  3. NJA should be able to easily swat this away.

    ReplyDelete
  4. @8:21 Said "If Tick is going to make that committee his own little fiefdom..."

    That appears to be exactly what Segerblom is doing. Not only on CD legislation either. He recently held hearings on "should Nevada's firearms laws be changed" with all of the invited speakers being notably anti-gun. To each one he bumblingly tried to elicit confirmation that certain guns were "assault weapons," mostly without success, all the while neglecting to mention if any legislation was contemplated RE: firearms bans. He then introduced a California style firearms ban bill in the minutes leading up to the bell.

    I don't really care if he is for or against firearms so long as the process is fair and open. Much like announcing any CD bill will be DOA in his committee, he spent a bunch of money on sham hearings when he had obviously made up his mind to put up legislation banning the future sale or transfer of certain firearms and magazines.

    So "fiefdom" is certainly the most charitable thing that committee can be called while he is in charge of it.

    ReplyDelete