Newspaper column: Free speech issues ‘on the ballot’ in Nevada

The right to free speech includes the right to not be compelled to speak.

That includes not being required to pay dues to a union whose political views might be different from yours, not being required to advertise abortion availability at your faith-based pregnancy counseling service, not being required to use your cake baking talent to create a special cake or your flower arranging expertise for a gay wedding.

All of these have come down from a closely divided U.S. Supreme Court in the closing days of this year’s court calendar.

This past week, the court ruled that public employees could not to be forced to pay dues to unions with which they might not agree.

“The First Amendment, made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, forbids abridgment of the freedom of speech,” wrote Justice Samuel Alito in the 5-4 opinion. “We have held time and again that freedom of speech ‘includes both the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all.’”

Public employee unions that advocate higher wages that require higher taxes are intrinsically political.

Just the day before the court ruled, again 5-4, that a California law that required pro-life, religious-oriented unlicensed pregnancy centers to place extensive disclaimers in their ads and on billboards telling people about abortion services was an unconstitutional impingement on free speech.

“Here, for example, licensed clinics must provide a government-drafted script about the availability of state-sponsored services, as well as contact information for how to obtain them” wrote Justice Clarence Thomas in the majority opinion. “One of those services is abortion — the very practice that petitioners are devoted to opposing. By requiring petitioners to inform women how they can obtain state-subsidized abortions — at the same time petitioners try to dissuade women from choosing that option — the licensed notice plainly ‘alters the content’ of petitioners’ speech.”

A little more than a week earlier in a 7-2 ruling the court held Colorado could not force cake shop owner to make a special cake for a gay wedding.

Shortly thereafter. the court remanded a Washington case involving a florist who declined to arrange flowers for a gay wedding, citing the Colorado ruling.

The state of Nevada, under the direction of Attorney General Adam Laxalt, had joined in both the public employee union case and the California abortion law case on the winning side.

Laxalt’s office put out a press release about the California law ruling stating: “The ruling, which rests exclusively on free speech grounds, does not affect abortion providers; it neither requires them to change their practices nor infringes on their ability to provide abortions. The Supreme Court correctly held that compelling private organizations to promote the government’s preferred message under those circumstances is inconsistent with the First Amendment. This is an important holding ensuring that the government cannot simply force private speakers with whom it disagrees to also promote the government’s preferred message, especially when there are other ways for the government to promote its own message without interfering with private speech.”

Republican Laxalt’s Democratic opponent for governor in November, Steve Sisolak, put out a statement reported by The Nevada Independent saying, “I believe that women deserve access to all of their options when it comes to their reproductive health care. I still have concerns over the lack of information given by these crisis pregnancy centers and the harm it can cause.”

Sisolak continued, “As governor, I will fight to protect a woman’s constitutional reproductive rights and her consistent access to comprehensive care. Adam Laxalt has shown repeatedly that he will pursue an anti-choice agenda that will roll back the clock on women’s rights and bring Nevada down a dangerous path.”

This has nothing to do with abortion rights and only to do with speech rights.

This point was lost on Democratic Rep. Jacky Rosen who is running for Republican Dean Heller’s Senate seat. She sent out an email saying, “Deceiving women about their health care options is an attack on women’s fundamental reproductive freedom, and I will continue to stand against this Administration’s attacks on women’s rights and access to health care. Nevadans support a woman’s right to make these personal decisions.”

A version of this column appeared this week in many of the Battle Born Media newspapers — The Ely Times, the Mesquite Local News, the Mineral County Independent-News, the Eureka Sentinel and the Lincoln County Record — and the Elko Daily Free Press.

Supreme Court hears free speech case

Advertisements

Free speech includes the right to be silent

The right to free speech includes the right to not be compelled to speak.

That includes not being required to pay dues to a union whose political view might be different from yours, not being required to advertise abortion availability at your faith-based pregnancy counseling service, not being required to use your cake baking talent to create a special cake or your flowing arranging expertise for a gay wedding.

All of these have come down from a closely divided U.S. Supreme Court in a matter of days.

Today the court ruled that public employees could not to be forced to pay dues to unions with which they might not agree. Justice Samuel Alito writes in the 5-4 opinion:

The First Amendment, made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, forbids abridgment of the freedom of speech. We have held time and again that freedom of speech “includes both the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all.” … The right to eschew association for expressive purposes is likewise protected. … (“Freedom of association … plainly presupposes a free­dom not to associate”) … (“[F]orced associations that burden protected speech are impermissible”). As Justice Jackson memorably put it: “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constella­tion, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.”

Just the day before the court ruled, again 5-4, that a California law that required pro-life, religious-oriented unlicensed pregnancy centers to place extensive disclaimers in large fonts and in as many as 13 languages in their ads and on billboards telling people about abortion services was an unconstitutional impingement on free speech. The ruling overturned a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the majority opinion:

Here, for example, licensed clinics must provide a government-drafted script about the availability of state-sponsored services, as well as contact information for how to obtain them. One of those services is abortion — the very practice that petitioners are devoted to opposing. By requiring petitioners to inform women how they can obtain state-subsidized abortions — at the same time petitioners try to dissuade women from choosing that option — the licensed notice plainly “alters the content” of petitioners’ speech.

A little more than a week ago in a 7-2 ruling the court held the Colorado Civil Rights Commission was inconsistent in its rulings relating to issues of the First Amendment’s guarantee of free exercise of religion and free speech.

Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy noted that on at least three occasions the state Civil Rights Commission held that bakers who refused to create cakes with images that conveyed disapproval of same-sex marriage did so lawfully.

“The treatment of the conscience-based objections at issue in these three cases contrasts with the Commission’s treatment of Phillips’ objection,” Kennedy wrote. “The Commission ruled against (Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack) Phillips in part on the theory that any message the requested wedding cake would carry would be attributed to the customer, not to the baker. Yet the Division did not address this point in any of the other cases with respect to the cakes depicting anti-gay marriage symbolism.”
Shortly thereafter the court remanded a Washington case involving a florist who declined to arrange flowers for a gay wedding, citing the Colorado ruling.
The state of Nevada, under the direction of Attorney Adam Laxalt, had joined in both the public employee union case and the California abortion law case on the winning side.
Laxalt’s office put out a press release about the California law ruling stating: “The ruling, which rests exclusively on free speech grounds, does not affect abortion providers; it neither requires them to change their practices nor infringes on their ability to provide abortions. The Supreme Court correctly held that compelling private organizations to promote the government’s preferred message under those circumstances is inconsistent with the First Amendment. This is an important holding ensuring that the government cannot simply force private speakers with whom it disagrees to also promote the government’s preferred message, especially when there are other ways for the government to promote its own message without interfering with private speech.”

Republican Laxalt’s Democratic opponent for governor in November, Steve Sisolak, put out a statement reported by The Nevada Independent saying, “I believe that women deserve access to all of their options when it comes to their reproductive health care. I still have concerns over the lack of information given by these crisis pregnancy centers and the harm it can cause.”Sisolak continued, “As governor, I will fight to protect a woman’s constitutional reproductive rights and her consistent access to comprehensive care. Adam Laxalt has shown repeatedly that he will pursue an anti-choice agenda that will roll back the clock on women’s rights and bring Nevada down a dangerous path.”

This has nothing to do with abortion rights and only to do with speech rights.

This point was lost on Democratic Rep. Jacky Rosen who is running for Republican Dean Heller’s Senate seat. She sent out an email saying, “Deceiving women about their health care options is an attack on women’s fundamental reproductive freedom, and I will continue to stand against this Administration’s attacks on women’s rights and access to health care. Nevadans support a woman’s right to make these personal decisions.”

Lame-duck Democratic Rep. Ruben Kihuen sent an email saying, “It is disappointing that today’s Supreme Court decision will allow unlicensed facilities to continue misleading women about the health care services they provide. No woman seeking accurate information about her health care options should be lied to, shamed, or denied access to basic medical care. This ruling is a huge setback in our nation’s fight to protect and advance women’s rights and will make it harder for women to access the health care services they need. We must continue fighting to ensure that every woman has the right to make her own health choices and has access to the full range of options.”

Laxalt’s political campaign sent out an email crowing about the two most recent court ruling and rubbing Sisolak’s nose in it:

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that the government cannot force Nevadans to advocate political positions against their beliefs. We know Steve Sisolak disagrees. Steve said it was “shameful” when Adam visited a Nevada pregnancy care center, and he favors zero restrictions on abortion — a position to the left of most Nevada Democrats. He is benefiting from the government union in this case, AFSCME, that is running over a million dollars in attack ads against Adam right now — attack ads that PolitiFact has called “false.”

These were great victories for free speech. Adam protected pregnancy care centers from a radical California law that would have forced these pro-life centers that offer care for pregnant women to advocate for policies they disagree with. Adam protected workers from being forced to give up their wages to a government union that pays for political lobbying and advertising that they may disagree with.

Steve Sisolak’s fringe agenda is being exposed. This is a great week for freedom of speech in Nevada, and a terrible week for Steve Sisolak’s radical political machine.

Anti-abortion activists celebrated outside the Supreme Court on Tuesday. (Reuters pix via NYTimes)

 

Newspaper column: Why education spending should be cut

Teachers are walking out of classrooms in Colorado and Arizona, demanding higher salaries and more education funding. Lawmakers are rushing to meet their demands.

Here in Nevada all the candidates for governor are kowtowing to the demand for more education funding.

Republican Attorney General Adam Laxalt has declared, “We must continue to move forward, not backward, in the areas where we’ve made great strides. In particular, Nevada policymakers have implemented a series of programs designed to address a critical area — improving early literacy. I’ll continue to champion these promising new programs. I pledge that under my leadership, these programs and our entire public education system will be properly funded — we will never go backwards from our current levels of education spending. I repeat: I will not scale back public education funding.”

His Republican opponent Treasurer Dan Schwartz has said he wants to find a way to wrest the $750 million in tax money earmarked for a Raiders football stadium and redirect it to fund education.

Democratic candidates and currently Clark County Commissioners Steve Sisolak and Chris Giunchigliani have both called for more education spending.

“Every child in Nevada deserves the opportunity to succeed and that starts with strong public schools,” Sisolak states on his campaign website. “Steve supports investing in Nevada schools so they have the resources to provide a safe and effective learning environment for all of our kids. He believes that in order to strengthen our schools we need to raise teacher salaries and lower classroom sizes.”

On her website Giunchigliani declares, “Every Nevada child deserves an opportunity to get a quality public education, regardless of their zip code, parents’ salary or ethnicity. As a public school special education teacher for 30 years, I know the difference a quality public education can make in a child’s life. But too many of our kids are in underperforming schools and we’ve failed to bring urgency to this issue. One of my top priorities as governor will be to fix the school funding formula. We need to increase educators’ salaries and reduce class sizes.”

Recently Clark County School Board members held a press conference calling on the governor to call a special session of the Legislature in order to raise taxes to increase education spending. Board member Carolyn Edwards was quoted by the press as saying, “We need to be able to pay our teachers and our employees the raises they deserve.”

Juxtapose that quote against the fact that in January Education Week magazine’s annual “Quality Counts” survey of state-by-state K-12 education ranked Nevada 51st among the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Only 31 percent of Nevada fourth graders are proficient in math and reading. The raises they deserve?

Pardon us for allowing a heretic to sound a sour note in the choir, but George Mason University economics professor Bryan Caplan has just published a book that — gasp! — says education funding should be cut, because the vast majority of it is wasted. The book is called “The Case Against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money.”

Caplan estimates that our government agencies alone spend $1.1 trillion in tax money a year on education. That is $3,600 for every person in the country, not every student, every person. He estimates that half of the money doesn’t buy our students any enhanced skills, but merely something he calls “signaling.”

Caplan contends that a high school or college diploma does not mean someone has learned much of anything worthwhile — other than rudimentary literacy and numeracy — but instead signals to potential employers that one is capable of spending long hours doing stultifying menial tasks and conforming to expectations.

To buoy his claims about the inadequacy of the American education system, Caplan cites the General Social Survey of adults that asked 12 elementary true-false science questions. Only 60 percent could answer correctly, when 50 percent should be possible by merely guessing.

“Accounting for guessing, the public’s scientific illiteracy is astonishing,” Caplan writes. “Barely half of American adults known the Earth goes around the sun. Only 32% know atoms are bigger than electrons. Just 14% know that antibiotics don’t kill viruses. Knowledge of evolution barely exceeds zero; respondents would have done better flipping a coin.”

Perhaps there are better things on which we could spend a half a trillion dollars a year.

A version of this column appeared this week in many of the Battle Born Media newspapers — The Ely Times, the Mesquite Local News, the Mineral County Independent-News, the Eureka Sentinel and the Lincoln County Record — and the Elko Daily Free Press.

 

Public safety project delayed over petty prevailing wage law dispute

Workers installing bollards along the Strip. (R-J pix)

Talk about the tail waging the dog.

The geniuses at the Clark County Commission postponed approving a $2.5 million contract to install 500 steel post barriers along the Strip to protect pedestrians from vehicles veering onto sidewalks, because three construction workers might have been shorted a couple of hundred dollars for work performed on a previous contract, according to the Las Vegas newspaper today.

It is all because of the state’s prevailing wage law that mandates public works projects pay workers what amounts to union scale, inflating the cost of such projects by millions of dollars and now delaying a public safety project by at least a few weeks over a petty dispute.

According the paper, the Nevada Foundation for Fair Contracting, whatever that is, complained that three, just three, concrete finishers performed jobs that under the law should have been paid at a higher scale — $6 to $7 an hour more. Of course, Tuesday was the first the company heard of the claim.

At $5,000 per post, called bollards, apparently the job is not as simple as digging a post hole and cementing in a steel pipe, but what government job ever is?

Local police would prefer there be no delay, but have no control over the situation, Metropolitan Police Department spokesman Larry Hadfield said.

“Although it would be optimal for these to be installed on time the LVMPD is not part of the construction of the bollards,” he said.

Commission Chairman Steve Sisolak was quoted as saying of the delayed contract, “That’s just the beginning, the next 500. We’ve got thousands coming after that, and I want to make sure the company is doing the right thing by paying their workers at the appropriate rates.”

Why should a dispute over a past contract delay a future one, especially over such a petty amount. In fact the head of the complaining organization was quoted as saying, “They basically got cheated who knows how many hundreds of dollars.”

Where are the liberals shouting: If it saves one life, it is worth it?

What is wrong with this picture?

So, the Clark County Commission, made up exclusively of seven Democrats, will be the arbiter of who gets appointed to fill the unexpired term of Republican state Sen. Mark Hutchison, who was elected lieutenant governor on Tuesday. Oh, they must name a Republican who lives in the district.

According to the Las Vegas newspaper account, Democratic Commission Chairman Steve Sisolak says he will seek input from Republican state Sen. Mike Roberson and Democratic Commissioner Larry Brown, whose commission district covers Hutchison’s state Senate District 6.

Rebplican Mark Hutchison’s senate seat must be filled by the all-Democrat county commission. (R-J photo by Sam Morris, formerly of the Sun)

Sisolak was quoted as saying that he would not choose an appointee based on how that person would vote, but on being a member of the community and life experience.

How quaint. I wonder how the rest of the commissioners will evaluate candidates.

The news story mentions two people as potential candidates for the post, Wes Duncan, a Republican who was just re-elected to a second term in the Assembly from District 37, and Chris Collins, executive director of the Las Vegas Police Protective Association.

To twist a phrase borrowed from Harry Reid, I don’t know how a union guy can be a Republican.

In fact, one of Gov. Brian Sandoval’s supposed priorities is collective bargaining reform. Might be harder to do with a fox in the hen house.

Just for a little perspective on the choices here, NPRI rated Duncan fourth most conservative member of the 2013 Legislature, while Hutchison was the least conservative Republican — although NPRI did not use the term “conservative,” that’s how it worked out.

Hutchison voted for the bill that forces NV Energy to close its coal-fired plants and replace the power with expensive new plants, including overpriced renewables. Duncan voted nay.

The commission is taking applications for the senate seat appointment.

Hmmmm, I have lived in Senate District 6 for 15 years, but just in case the commissioners were to promote Duncan from the Assembly to the Senate and would need to fill Duncan’s seat, I also live in Assembly District 37.  A member of the community and life experience?

Carson City in January? Brrrr.

 

County commissioners flunk math and approve windmill project east of Searchlight

Las Vegas was built on the premise that people are just too darned lazy to do the math and figure out that in the long run The House always, always wins.

And apparently that’s also the kind of people we elect to represent us on the Clark County Commission.

On Wednesday morning the commission unanimously agreed to extend for two years permits for Duke Energy to erect 87 wind turbines — each as tall as the Palms hotel at 425 feet — on 19,000 acres of Bureau of Land Management controlled land east of Searchlight. (Speaking of math, I’m still trying to figure out how the original 300-megawatt project with 165 windmills can be cut to 87 windmills that produce 230 megawatts.) It seems that after all these years the BLM has still not issued an environmental impact statement, according to company spokesman Dick Bryan, the former senator and governor.

Joshua tree along Oregon Trails Road north of Searchlight.

Of course, neither has the company yet signed a buyer for any electricity it might someday produce, nor has Congress extended the production tax credit of 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour that makes such projects financially viable.

Despite the fact wind energy costs three times as much as fossil fuel-generated power and requires tax subsidies and tax breaks to pencil out, the majority of commissioners fawned over the prospect of a handful of construction jobs — 300 to 400, according to Bryan — and ignored the fact that draining money from the private sector via higher power bills and taxes kills jobs — on average two to four for every one created. And those construction jobs might last for a year or so, while permanent jobs might amount to a couple dozen.

Though the Searchlight town board has twice voted to reject the windmill project, the commissioners — including Steve Sisolak, whose district includes Searchlight — backed it unanimously, sounding like Neanderthals mouthing: “Green energy good.”  So, don’t try to confuse them with facts or math. Their eyes glaze over.

The commissioners were more concerned with the potential for a substation to be located near a road where people might actually glimpse a string of concertina wire atop a chain link fence than with 87 windmills with 161-foot blades spinning in the wind, when the wind blows.

“I just don’t want barbed wire …” Sisolak said after Bryan assured the commission the substation walls would be block walls or something that fits into the environment. Wouldn’t want any ugly barbed wire blocking the scenery. No, sir.

“The jobs and the renewable energy portion of this are very, very important to me,” Sisolak continued. “The jobs are local for Nevada residents. I want to reiterate that. … We all are very aware of getting three or four hundred local people back to work” — and utterly unaware or unconcerned about the jobs that will be squandered.

Under questioning by Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani, Bryan admitted the company has not found a buyer for its juice but has had some conversations with NV Energy, the local electric utility. Giunchigliani expressed hope that NV Energy would purchase the wind power, apparently without regard for what such a purchase would do to the power bills of her constituents. NV Energy has said it plans to buy only 250 megawatt-hours of renewable power in 2014 and 2015, and Duke will not be the only firm competing for those contracts — more than two dozen other projects are on the drawing board on BLM land in Southern Nevada alone.

Sisolak chimed in and said he has talked to NV Energy about buying more renewable energy even though he was told that would not be cost effective since the company has already met its legislated mandate for purchasing more expensive “green” energy.

Four people spoke out against the project at the commission meeting. At meetings in Searchlight dozens have opposed the wind farm.

“This is not an eco friendly project,” Searchlight resident Judy Bundorf testified as the commissioners deliberated — though it was less deliberation than pontification and pandering. “Pardon me to offer one more bit of math. When they say it’s a 200-megawatt project, that’s if the wind is blowing between 15 and 40 miles per hour, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Typical output from commercial wind farms ranges from 20 and 30 percent of the nameplate rating. In England during the last cold spell two years ago, they were getting 5 percent or less. …

“This is my first time at the rodeo, because I’ve never been involved in having my property value threatened at this extent.”

Earlier Bundorf compared the Searchlight project to the Sloan gravel pit project. Sen. Harry Reid, who has a home in Searchlight, fought the 640-acre gravel pit and managed to shut it down. Bundorf offered that she would rather have a hole in the ground than 87 huge windmills. She estimated the windmills, with 24-hour blinking strobe lights for aviation safety, will be visible from 20 miles away.

Lynn Davis of the National Parks Conservation Association pointed out that the project will sit astride two national recreation areas, Lake Mead National Recreational Area and Mojave National Preserve.

Donna Andress, who has lived in the area since 1927, suggested 100-year-old Joshua trees could be destroyed by the project.

Local real estate broker and kayak guide Ellen Ross also did some math and estimated the BLM land lease costs renewable energy companies about $118 per acre. “I’d like a deal like that,” she said. “By building these projects you are degradating not only the community, but tourism and land values, which mean you have less real estates taxes, less income in your municipality. You have less people. You are destroying the potential that Las Vegas was built for.”

Ross noted such scenery exists nowhere else in the world. She said the project is subsidizing industrialization in the pristine desert at the expense of a small community.

It’s simple math, but our commissioners can’t or won’t do the math.

Here is what one small area near a home near Searchlight looks like now:

Before

This is a simulation of the same scene with windmills, but it does not show the roads and power lines that will be necessary as well:

After

(Photos courtesy of Basin and Range Watch)