Court solves budget crisis, changes process

By Jon Ralston

Friday, May 27, 2011 | 2:01 a.m.

The serial thieves inhabiting the Legislative Building, who biennially plunder local sources because they don’t have the fortitude (or the votes) to enact thoughtful tax policy, have finally been called on their purloining by the only branch of government that could.

And instead of calling a news conference to sheepishly announce they see the error of their ways after the Supreme Court declared a $62 million brazen robbery illegal, legislative leaders are using the decision to … try to push through a $700 million infusion into the state budget. (Gov. Brian Sandoval, in a move that will break the budget logjam, is expected to announce today that he will use the $700 million from business and sales taxes that were supposed to expire to cover a burgeoning hole created by the high court ruling.)

Legislators — who have spent an entire session talking about how they are looking out for the children — have set quite the example for Nevada’s kids: If you behave badly and get caught, turn it to your advantage.

Thus does the Democrats’ last-gasp attempt to lift sunsets on expiring taxes gain life as Session ’11 winds down, with the $62 million hole the least of their problems as hundreds of millions in Sandoval’s budget are at risk. And it didn’t take long — perhaps a minute after the decision was released in a case involving the moribund Clean Water Coalition — for the Democratic legislators to say “I told you so” about administration gimmickry such as raiding school bond reserves. Because shame takes a 120-day holiday up here in odd-numbered years, none of the lawmakers seemed red-faced about criticizing budgetary legerdemain of the kind they are only too happy to use — and have, session after session.

The short-term effect of the court decision is a deus ex machina to resolve the budget impasse. But the long-term ramifications, as Sandoval put it, are “far-reaching implications for how Nevada governors and legislatures will do business from this date forward.”

Indeed, you can almost imagine the conversation by the judicial deities across the courtyard as they watched lawmakers squabble and the governor threaten: “We have enough problems probably having to resolve redistricting in a few weeks. We surely don’t want any of this budget nonsense on our docket. Remember what happened in 2003: That tax decision had to be withdrawn and it cost some justices their careers. But if we decided this case right now, it could start the dominoes falling and we can get them out of the capital on time.”

Or words to that effect.

The opinion, which can be found at tinyurl.com/3ozc45k, may finally put an end to the biennial practice of abdicating responsibility in the capital and stealing from the local governments. Why? Because they can — or thought they could.

This Gang of 63 Willie Suttons — sometimes abetted by governors — often abandons policy conversations and tough choices to cobble together patchwork budget and tax packages that make little sense but reach a consensus number. It is infuriating — using a calculator instead of debating policy choices.

The court decision should be greeted with pleasure by both sides of the political spectrum. It will force governors and lawmakers to actually make the difficult decisions of passing cuts or enacting new taxes, without the path of least resistance because the locals have been helpless to resist. The budget shenanigans that characterize every session will be greatly reduced by this court opinion, which reminds lawmakers their power is not absolute and is reined in by the Nevada Constitution.

Article 4 has two relevant provisions. One says lawmakers “shall not pass local or special laws” and laws “shall be general and of uniform operation throughout the state.”

That would, on its face, seem to preclude taking money from local governments or school districts. It would seem to say, as the court reaffirmed Thursday, that lawmakers should not do what they have always done.

Until some of those who paid into the Clean Water Coalition decided to sue — the locals have for years cowered after threats by lawmakers who have so much power over them — this unconstitutional practice has been accepted, even become de rigueur here. It makes it easier to “find” money to balance budgets instead of hashing out policy choices.

No more.

It seems the end of the 2011 Legislature may be less painful than first imagined. The governor will use the court decision as a reason to lift the sunsets and will be able to pry loose enough Republican votes to get the necessary two-thirds.

But the real effect of the decision will be felt first in 2013 and then sessions beyond as lawmakers and governors actually must do something the court decision now compels them to do: Their jobs.