Reps. Walter Jones (R-NC) and Barbara Lee (D-CA) are asking colleagues to sign a letter to the President urging all troops to leave by the end of the year.

They write: “Leaving troops and military contractors in Iraq beyond the deadline is not in our nation’s security interests, it is not in our nation’s strategic interests, and it is not in our nation’s economic interests.”

I hope both Reps. Shelley Berkley and Joe Heck will sign-on to their letter. 

Maintaining U.S. troops in a hostile environment when an overwhelming majority of the population is adamantly opposed to their presence is not only foolhardy but also counter-productive, especially when there is an agreement with the host nation government to withdraw them by a date certain.

It is evident that U.S. troops are not welcome in Iraq. Should the Iraqi government reluctantly agree to allow U.S. forces to remain in country despite the provision of the Status of Forces agreement to the contrary, its delicate political balance is likely to crumble, and a small contingent of American combat troops will be sitting ducks, subject to attack.  As an American Army infantryman who was in VietNam during the final stages of our involvement in that conflict, I know that only too well.

The time has come for all American combat troops and military contractors to withdraw from Iraq in accordance with Status of Forces agreement.

   And just what tax structure wasn’t high enough?  Casino operators pay $50 million each in state license fees and a 33% tax on gross revenue – PLUS the casinos pay the state’s regular business activities tax based on gross receipts - before paying out winnings.  However, this still isn’t adequate for the state’s pro-business Governor. 

    Gov. John Kasich (former Congressman & former Fox News Commentator) made those comments about the companies that are now establishing casinos in Columbus, Toledo, Cleveland and Cincinnati, Ohio. 

   How does Nevada’s recently-elected conservative Republican Governor feel about whether gaming is taxed adequately with a maximum tax of 6.75% on gross gaming revenue and no business activity tax?

Kyle Gillis, new investigative reporter at the Nevada Policy Research Institute, published an excellent article this week “What happened to One Person, One Vote? Nevada’s legislative district lines are constitutionally dubious.”  He tells the ugly history of Reapportionment-Past and shows that thoughtful folks of various political persuasions agree that something more rational should be done.  However, no specific proposals for Reapportionment-Future were presented.  In, 7 Steps to Reinventing Nevada, though, I have offered what seems to me to be a practical solution.

During the next two years, the redrawing of the lines of all the election districts in Nevada will take place.  For decades, we have had to live with incredibly gerrymandered maps drawn with one basic, overriding consideration:  preserving the status quo – keeping incumbents in office and making the overwhelming number of seats “safe” for one party or the other.  This removes the slightest possibility that an uprising of Nevada voters might actually have the power to affect or influence the results of major elections.  This process has resulted in many very oddly shaped districts that split neighborhoods and cities and diminish the voting power of many communities with shared interests.  Additionally, it leads to unnecessary confusion among voters.

Unfortunately, most people are unaware of the vast effect which redistricting has upon the political process, so they leave it up to the politicians to do themselves.  That must change – districts must be drawn objectively using principles of compactness, contiguity, competitiveness, and preserving communities.

I propose creating an independent, five-person commission to perform redistricting – with the Legislature then only having the option of a “yea” or “nay” vote on adopting a plan – no self-serving amendments allowed.  The four legislative leaders would each appoint a member and the Governor would appoint the fifth.  There would be a condition that districts be compact and, when possible, utilize existing city, county and geographical boundaries.  And, they must not be drawn to favor or disfavor incumbents or political parties.

          Note: I’m confident Kyle Gillis will continue to offer thoughtful analysis of Nevada’s political environment. While I’m also sure I won’t always be in agreement, he’ll make us think.  And, for a Michigan native & Albion College grad, I would expect no less.

For more information: BoingBoing, Daring Fireball, Reddit, Salon.com, Huffington Post, Washington Post, PC World, FireDogLake.

 Beauty is truly in the eyes of the beholder.  I have been going through the Nevada papers which came the last few weeks while I was traveling, and was astounded to read of the Searchlight residents who showed up to protest the location of a wind power farm near their community.  Their greatest concern seemed to center around how these turbines would destroy the “scenic beauty” of Searchlight.

 My good son, Conor, and I visited rural Iowa a couple of weeks ago and were blown away (pun intended) by the hundreds of beautiful turbines that were scattered across their picturesque farmland.  The three curved blades rotating slowly in a summer breeze could easily be mistaken for pieces of art.

 These striking and graceful devices not only were helping make our country stronger and more energy independent, they added to – not detracted from - the scenery of that charming farm state.

 Iowa ranks second in the nation in wind energy capacity.  A recent report by the American Wind Energy Association shows about 7 percent of Iowa's power now comes from the wind. That's enough to power the equivalent of 900,000 homes.  Iowa also leads the country in attracting wind turbine companies, with three turbine manufacturers and one blade manufacturer having opened plants in the state.  They have created good, well-paying jobs in small, rural communities that otherwise had little hope.

If the fine conservative rural folks of Iowa get it – why don’t the residents of God-forsaken Searchlight understand this opportunity?

The answer my friend, is blowin’ in the wind –

The answer is blowin’ in the wind.

The assumption has been that Harry Reid’s style has worn thin over the years – even among registered Democrats.  When asked in statewide poll last fall: “Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Harry Reid?” Only 55% of Democrats said “Favorable;” while 34% replied “Unfavorable;” (11% had no opinion).

On the other hand, son Rory has been perceived to be the more modern, thoughtful, decent Reid.  While no one would describe Rory as universally beloved in Nevada, he has never been tainted with a scandal and his net favorability has always been thought to be significantly better than his father’s.  In fact, the conventional wisdom was that his father’s high negative rating was the major obstacle that might jeopardize his election as Governor.

So, what happened when real voters went to the polls Tuesday?

75% of Democratic primary voters cast their ballots for Sen. Harry – with his 3 unknown opponents gathering a total of 14% and Nevada’s unique “NONE OF THESE CANDIDATES” getting 11%.  Not great numbers – but not all that bad in a strong anti-incumbent year.

Surprisingly, his totals were considerably better than Rory’s who received just 70% of the state-wide Democratic vote -with his unknown opponent gathering 15% and “NONE OF THESE CANDIDATES” getting 15%.

In terms of raw vote totals, Sen Harry pulled-in 87,374 votes while Rory received 80,164.  So, for some reason, almost 10% of registered Democrats who voted for Harry – didn’t vote for Rory. 

This was consistent across the state in every county but two small, rural traditionally anti-Harry bastions (Esmeralda and White Pine).  In Clark County, Sen. Harry received 78% of the Dem vote while Rory – chairperson of the County Commission – got 74% - not a huge difference – but enough to swing many state-wide elections.

It’s hard to say just what this means except it definitely wasn’t expected – and isn’t a good omen for Rory’s campaign.

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 26

Gloria Sturman has 26 years experience practicing civil law and has also been a short trial judge in District Court and a judge pro tem in Justice Courts.  She has served as president of both the Nevada State Bar and Clark County Bar. Not only has Gloria earned a distinguished reputation for her professionalism, but she is also widely known and respected for her honesty, fairness, compassion and hard work.  She should be elected.  Kurt Harris, a founding partner of Harris Merritt Chapman, is a solid attorney who speaks Spanish fluently and has served as an interpreter for Churchill County Municipal Court - but the depth of his experience does not compare to Gloria’s.  Bruce Gale has attended numerous community political meetings since 2006 and seems truly impressed with himself.

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 27

The easiest single decision for me to make in this election is to unequivocally support NANCY ALLF. This isn’t merely a matter of loyally supporting a good friend – it is a rare opportunity to endorse someone I have full confidence in.  I’ve known Nancy for more than a dozen years and have seen her continually make thoughtful, knowledgeable judgments.  I am certain that as a District Court Judge, she will come to conclusions that are logical, fair, and compassionate in an even-handed manner without showing favoritism or bias for or against the parties or attorneys that appear in front of her.

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPARTMENT 30

Voters can choose from four excellent candidates for District Court Department 30. While in terms of public policy, it's nice to have a difficult choice – personally, it is not easy.  I believe Patricia Palm is the candidate most likely to become an outstanding judge from the day she is sworn in.  Trish currently works as a Clark County deputy public defender and deputy special public defender.  Previously she worked in the County district attorney’s office and a staff attorney for the state Supreme Court.  She will work hard; come to court prepared and treat people fairly and respectfully.  I consider Mike Davidson a friend.  He had served North Las Vegas’well as city attorney for the past five years. He also did an excellent job for years as the number two person in the Clark County District Attorney’s office.  He was the Democratic nominee for the top job in the DA’s office in 2001, but, unfortunately, lost to David Roger.  Craig Freidberg is a hard worker who would definitely bring some creative approaches to court administration.

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, Department 31

Again in this race, you can choose from four solid candidates.  Personally, I am voting for Phil Dabney.  I think he has the experience in complex civil litigation and the understanding of the hardship people are facing to expeditiously and fairly resolve these types of cases, causing the least amount of harm to the parties. Marc Risman has 31 years of civil law experience; a broad range of supporters; and was named one of 16 Nevada “Super Lawyers” by the Nevada Business Journal.  Joanna Kishner and Joshua Kunis are both certainly qualified.

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT C 

I am troubled by Judge Steve Jones’ lapses in good judgment in his personal relationships -- nevertheless, he is absolutely one of the best judges on the Family Court bench. Very fair and intelligent.  He should be re-elected.  I like both Maria Maskall who has practiced law for 20 years, the past 13 in family law in Clark County – and Denise Pifer who is a solid family-law attorney.  Both could be a Family Judge at some point in the future.  I am totally put-off by those who have tried to smear Denise’s reputation by talking about her family bankruptcy.  It was the result of huge medical bills related to a botched gallbladder surgery.  If anything, this experience makes her better qualified to understand the types of pressure many coming into Family court are going through.

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT F

William Gonzalez was appointed to the bench by Gov Jim Gibbons in March 2009.  Typical for this Governor, no attention was paid to the fact that Gonzalez had very limited Family court knowledge.  Just because Jim Gibbons likes him, does not mean he should be elected.  Some knowledgeable observers consider  Gonzales to be about the worst appointment Family Court has ever had. Either of the other choices would be a significant improvement.    I back John Eccles who has extensive knowledge and passion for Family Court issues.   He is very intelligent and fair. In addition, he has a lot of patience and can bring much-needed calm to an often volatile court setting.  He will be not just an improvement - but a great Family Court judge.  I respect Ellen Bezian and we supported her in ‘08 when she ran against Judge Del Vecchio.  She blends a solid background (more than a decade as a family law practitioner; former UNLV adjunct English professor; over 30 years in Las Vegas Community, 12 years in gaming industry) with a deep-rooted sense of fairness and objectivity with an outstanding court presence.

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT S 

There are seven candidates to consider for the new Department S seat.  You won’t go wrong with Vincent Ochoa, Rebecca Wallace or Ethan Kottler.

Ochoa is very personable and quite experienced.  A graduate of Notre Dame Law School, he has been impressive enough on the campaign trail to earn the support of my excellent son, Conor.  Wallace is supported enthusiastically by a number of the best lawyers I know.  She is committed to running an open and fair court – and one that is efficient and doesn’t drag cases out far longer than necessary.  She the no-nonsense, no-politics kind of judge that we need in Family Court.  Kottler has lots of good ideas like bringing Nevada into compliance with the Violence Against Women Act thus getting federal matching funds. Nevada currently does not enter protective orders into the National Crime Information Center. Kottler wants to change that. He also wants to add administrative fees to parents who receive free legal representation in reinstatement cases stemming from child neglect cases. This is his first time running for office – if he doesn’t make it; I do hope he’ll run again in the future.

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, FAMILY DIV DEPARTMENT T

John Jensen is not the type of judicial candidate I am usually drawn to, but given the selection in this race and his unique qualifications of having an inside perspective on what works and what doesn’t work in the court system, I will vote for him.  As a Family Court administrator Jensen deserves much credit for moving court files from paper to a searchable database.  As an alternate hearing master, he has presided on cases involving domestic violence and guardianship in a thoughtful, conscientious manner.  Terrance Marren is an appointed senior district court judge and has worked as a Juvenile Court Judge.  These experiences sound good on paper – but just sit in a courtroom sometime when he is presiding.  He comes off as an arrogant, narrow-minded blowhard who thinks he is the star of every trial and the family members and counsel are bit players.  Time for him to go back to Mesquite.

   Being a policy nerd, I actually had looked forward to reading Rory Reid’s 30-page vision for Nevada:  “Virtual Crossroads.”

   I regret to report that, after reviewing it in detail, I not only don’t see the beef – I don’t see the bun – all I hear is the sizzle.

   While it presents a sensible, generally-accepted diagnosis of the problems Nevada faces – it offers no substantive prescription for a cure.

   Sure, it points in a general direction, but that is about as useful as a doctor telling you to “eat well; get plenty of rest; and drink lots of fluids.” 

   The “specifics” he quotes from it are usually:

 ·    “we need a long-term plan for infrastructure rebuilding”  Sure. Yet, the fundamental problem isn’t that we need more plans drawn up - the Nevada Department of Transportation, as well as each county and city transportation department, have file cabinets full of plans.  We need the resources and the commitment to move forward now.  Enough of this planning, already.  Let’s salvage our infrastructure before it deteriorates any further – and let’s put people to work.  Now – not after another round of planning.

 ·    “perform performance review of state government to reduce wasteful spending”  That’s a rather obvious observation.  Every agency of state government has been repeatedly doing that.  It is not that more couldn’t be done.  But, the impression that we can fund adequate services in Nevada by just cutting out the “fat” in the state government is totally naive and unrealistic.  This is unproductive, cynical pandering for votes.  A real leader tells it like it is.

 ·    “provide tax credits to businesses who hire new workers”   Here the vision statement points to a recent Colorado initiative to give businesses that create at least 20 new jobs a 50% credit for the taxes paid on each new employee.  With their system, that equals a credit of about 3.8% - which is a reasonable savings.  However, in Nevada, our payroll tax is only 0.5% - cutting that 50% would give a typical per-job savings of $50 per year.  Show me any company that will hire a new person because of a fifty-dollar savings!  This is not how you transform our economy - this is fluff.

   I could go on-and-on critiquing each section.  Many simply draw the practical question:  “But where is the money for this going to come from?” to which you won’t find any answers.  At best, you hear the old refrain “Growth will pay for Growth.”  If we haven’t learned anything in this painful economic slowdown, haven’t we learned that is not true?  It’s a Ponzi scheme – a few did well - and the rest of us taxpayers are left on the hook.

   Ok, we are at a Virtual Crossroads (who doubts that?) -- but the question is: “how should we move forward?”  Sizzle is not an acceptable answer.