77th (2013) Session
Opinions
View all submitted comments for each bill by the most recent, by votes for, or by votes against.
| SJR8 | ||
| - | ||
| Against | Wages should be limited, so as to encourage new faces and new ideas. | May-22-2013 |
| Against | Sounds like a big pay raise for legislators! | May-21-2013 |
| Against | At a time when funds are tight, paying for other places to meet is not warrantec. | May-21-2013 |
| Against | May-20-2013 | |
| For | Haste makes waste. The current legislative processes are rushed far too much, based upon watching them on the internet. They cause great stress for legislators, I think, and end up discouraging, even disallowing, much citizen participation. Important lawmaking and addressing issues that negatively affect our society deserve full time Nevada legislature, but, yearly sessions that SJR8 proposes would at least be a giant step towards full time legislature. | May-18-2013 |
| For | May-16-2013 | |
| Against | I do not agree with model legislation.If everything is the same in every state, there will be nothing unique to seperate the states. This is the desire of men with money-not the people. I am angry that the legislators are not paid fully for their time & don't have the leisure to carefully go thru all bills. What scares me is that if the Nevada Legislature had more operational time they would conjure up many more bills & bring forth far too many more laws. All of these laws are destroying our quality of life in Nevada. We don't want our legislators to spend time on any bills pushed by the Koch Brothers through ALEC.If you stop working on all state model legislation, you'll be able to consider the bills of the people. Legislators should be loyal to Nevada citizens-not ALEC. | May-14-2013 |
| Against | May-14-2013 | |
| Against | I am against annual sessions of the legislature. I do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days. I feel these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. I oppose removing the Constitutional limit on legislators pay, allowing the legislators to increase their own pay placing no limit on what they can receive. (The fiscal note identifies the cost to be $9,451,995 including $7,167,406 for session costs and $2,284,589 for Legislator salary increases.) It is unnecessary for the State of Nevada to have annual sessions of the legislature. | May-14-2013 |
| Against | This is a bad bill, every other year is enough. We need a citizen government only not something like California. Look what shape that state is in with a bloated, unaccountable legislature makeing useless and asanine laws. | May-14-2013 |
| Against | For the record, given the fact that the issues I am most interested in seeing passed are often times pocketed by the committee chairperson and not brought forward for a vote makes me skeptical that meeting annually would provide better results; therefore I oppose this resolution. | May-14-2013 |
| Against | I am against annual sessions of the legislature. I do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days. I believe these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. I oppose removing the Constitutional limit on legislators pay, allowing the legislators to increase their own pay placing no limit on what they can receive. (The fiscal note identifies the cost to be $9,451,995 including $7,167,406 for session costs and $2,284,589 for Legislator salary increases.) | May-14-2013 |
| Against | I am against annual sessions of the legislature. I do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days. I feel these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. I oppose removing the Constitutional limit on legislators pay, allowing the legislators to increase their own pay placing no limit on what they can receive. | May-14-2013 |
| Against | May-13-2013 | |
| Against | If you were to limit the off year sessions to only removing or sunsetting bad legislation, of which there is more than enough to keep you busy, I would consider this. But the idea that you meet every two years and there are hundreds of "new" law proposals...can't you see how ridiculous this is. How did we ever survive without them? I want a law that forces you to remove a law for every law you pass. | May-13-2013 |
| Against | I do believe what is the best for the State of Nevada is to have them meet once every 5 years. Then maybe we could regroup and focus on the really important matters for our State like leaving everybody alone and letting us get on with our lives and adjust to being responsible for creating jobs and reducing crime because government is out to lunch. | May-13-2013 |
| Against | May-13-2013 | |
| Against | May-13-2013 | |
| Against | Please vote No on this Bill. I do not want this to be amended to our Constitution and/or to authorize a change where they or to hold their sessions and /or to authorize a change in compensation to Legislators. | May-13-2013 |
| Against | please vote against any and all changes to the regular or special sessions- Compensation may be a little high (due to the # of folks having lost better paying work) do not change compensation | May-13-2013 |
| Against | I am opposed to SJR 8 for the following reasons: 1. A Citizen Legislature as opposed to Professional Politicians will not be facilitated by legislators having to step away from their jobs for an extended period of time each year. 2. Removing the Constitutional limit in order to raise Legislators’ pay means that we will see regular increases as is the pattern in the US Congress. 3. This is hardly the time to increase our State Budget by $9 million in order to achieve the negative effects of points #1 and 2, above. | May-13-2013 |
| Against | Vote NO on SJR8: We are against annual sessions of the legislature. We do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days. We feel these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. We oppose removing the Constitutional limit on legislators pay, allowing the legislators to increase their own pay placing no limit on what they can receive. (The fiscal note identifies the cost to be $9,451,995 including $7,167,406 for session costs and $2,284,589 for Legislator salary increases.) This will bring the state much closer to the fiscal disaster we call the federal government. | May-13-2013 |
| Against | May-13-2013 | |
| Against | I feel these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. I oppose removing the Constitutional limit on legislators pay, allowing the legislators to increase their own pay placing no limit on what they can receive | May-13-2013 |
| Against | May-13-2013 | |
| Against | May-08-2013 | |
| For | Nevada has so many problems the we should have continual sessions to get business done. | May-03-2013 |
| Against | May-02-2013 | |
| Against | Apr-27-2013 | |
| For | It's time for Nevada to grow up as a state and have annual sessions. There are to many problems in the state to wait every 2 years. I'm not surprised the Republicans oppose this. I've determined that as long as I live in Nevada, I will not be a Republican, to be both would be overdoing it for me. The Democrats are plenty conservative and libertarian in Nevada. Often the Republican politicians in this state are just out of this world. Look at "Governor" Gibbons or Sharon Angle, both were overly extreme and offered nothing that I would want for the state. Governor Sandoval is a conservative playing a moderate playing a conservative. I'm sure he'll oppose this bill and it will be hard to override his veto. Then if by some miracle it does and then passes his override again, (I regret to say due to his mysterious popularity, he'll probably win a second term), it would have to clear these hurdles again in 2014 and due to the strong libertarian bent of Nevada voters, not have a high chance of being passed in the 2016 election. I wish it didn't have to go to the voters at all. Anyway I give this bill a slim chance, but strongly believe in it and it should be proposed every session. | Apr-27-2013 |
| For | Apr-25-2013 | |
| Against | Apr-22-2013 | |
| Against | No! No! Absolutely No! To quote Mark Twain "No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session". We need less legislation, and less time in which to inflict it. No! No! Absolutely No! | Apr-16-2013 |
| Against | It is very disruptive to have the Sessions as it is and now you want to do it every year. It is okay to cut my pay as a state employee but okay to double your pay. I will be sure to register my dissatisfaction with my vote on anyone that votes for this. | Apr-12-2013 |
| Against | Apr-11-2013 | |
| Against | Save the peoples rights to a have a controled peoples legislature | Apr-11-2013 |
| Against | Apr-10-2013 | |
| Against | Apr-09-2013 | |
| Against | This bodes ill on many levels. | Apr-08-2013 |
| Against | Apr-07-2013 | |
| Against | Well, I can see the legislators didn't disappoint on this one! Making sure they benefit. The state of Nevada doesn't need annual regular legislative sessions. Leave the constitution as is. It is just a ploy to get more money from the taxpayers. Do something constructive like increase the gaming tax from 6.75% to 10%, and not raise property taxes or the sales tax. It's time the casino industry pays their fair share. Taxpayers are broke. Property taxes shouldn't be as high as they are with all the casinos in this town. I'm still looking for a job since 2009 when mine went to India. Some months I can't even afford to by food, and no government programs have benefitted me with getting my underwater house refinanced, even though I have never been late with my mortgage payments. Lenders always come up with some loop hole to their benefit, not mine. | Apr-05-2013 |
| Against | I second, the following statement "It would appear the state of Nevada has a new domestic enemy: Senator Tick Segerblom. Not only has he authored draconian California-style anti-gun legislation, now he has introduced this travesty. The government with governs best governs LEAST. Senator Segerblom, this is NOT California. We don't want your gun bans, we don't want a legislature that meets once a year, we don't want YOU." | Apr-05-2013 |
| Against | This is an attempt at an end run around citizens' known will to limit Legislature to every 2 years. NO! | Apr-04-2013 |
| Against | Apr-04-2013 | |
| Against | This is completely unnecessary. We need less government, not more. | Apr-03-2013 |
| Against | Mar-31-2013 | |
| Against | Legislators should be working on ways to cut expenses, not increase them. | Mar-30-2013 |
| Against | 120 days every two years is more than enough... after watching some of what is going on this year who would ask for more? MORE laws is not what this state needs! Vote no on AB362 | Mar-29-2013 |
| Against | Strongly against annual sessions. | Mar-28-2013 |
| For | Mar-26-2013 | |
| Against | I am against annual sessions of the legislature. I do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days. I feel both these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. I oppose increasing the pay of legislators and placing no limit on what they can receive. | Mar-25-2013 |
| Against | NO NO NO. This would cost way too much. Our current system is just fine. | Mar-25-2013 |
| Against | Vote NO on SJR8: We are against annual sessions of the legislature. We do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days. We feel both these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. We oppose increasing the pay of legislators and placing no limit on what they can receive. | Mar-25-2013 |
| Against | Mar-25-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-24-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-24-2013 | |
| Against | I oppose this legislation. | Mar-24-2013 |
| Against | Seems like the bill wants to do away with the citizen legislature. | Mar-23-2013 |
| Against | Mar-22-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-21-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-21-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-21-2013 | |
| Against | please no, less government, not more. | Mar-21-2013 |
| Against | Mar-21-2013 | |
| Against | I am opposed to this resolution. Our legislatures have plenty of time meeting every other year. If they would do more work, introduce more bills, work longer hours and actually spend more time in their committee meetings they could accomplish so much more in the beginning two months of the session instead of wiating until the last 30 days! They should be putting in at least 40 hour weeks every week from week one til week 16! They are being paid to do full-time work at a minimum! | Mar-20-2013 |
| Against | Mar-20-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-20-2013 | |
| Against | This additional time will undermine our citizen legislature by creating a hardship on Legislators who are average citizens and must leave their current employment or businesses to serve as legislators. It will also lay the foundation for future expansion of the Legislative Sessions. | Mar-20-2013 |
| Against | Vote NO on SJR8: We are against annual sessions of the legislature. We do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days. We feel both these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. We oppose increasing the pay of legislators and placing no limit on what they can receive. | Mar-20-2013 |
| Against | We are doing just fine with a biennial legislature. If we give some of our legislators free rein you will see a lot more inane bills. | Mar-20-2013 |
| Against | Mar-20-2013 | |
| Against | The proposed legislation would be a cancer and stain on this great state. Also from a population stand point most residents in the State of Nevada reside in Clark County and Las Vegas in general, which has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Though it is interesting that these residents reside in .005% of the states total area. This bill should be tossed and all those who supported such an atrocity ridiculed. | Mar-20-2013 |
| Against | How about no Charlie... | Mar-20-2013 |
| Against | Mar-20-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | It would appear the state of Nevada has a new domestic enemy: Senator Tick Segerblom. Not only has he authored draconian California-style anti-gun legislation, now he has introduced this travesty. The government with governs best governs LEAST. Senator Segerblom, this is NOT California. We don't want your gun bans, we don't want a legislature that meets once a year, we don't want YOU. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | Not acceptable. I completely oppose this bill. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | No. The people of the Great State of Nevada are 100% against holding annual sessions of the legislature. We do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days, we do not want them extended a single day. We feel both of these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | There is nop reason to extend the legislative sessin except to figur out more ways to rais taxes. Furthermore, the $2000 per month while THEY ARE IN OFFICE IS OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | A thousands times no! This starts out as innocuous as annual sessions, then it turns into full time sessions. This is what happened to California and look at the sorry shape they are in now. Nevada does not need a new class of professional politicians. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | This bill simply leads our Nevada State Legislature down the road of the California Legislature. We DO NOT desire to live in California or would not be residents of Nevada. Please realize that this bill would change the State of Nevada in many negative ways. Especially encouraging more California legislators to "hang their hats" in Nevada. Thank you for your service to Nevada. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | I am 72 years old and one thing I have learned in life is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it. This is a BS bill, creating a monster for no apparent reason, while costing the citizens of Nevada a huge cost with little or no benefir. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | You don't need ANNUAL sessions. You should work harder with the time your currently provided. No other job can ask their boss for more time in the work week or year to do their job. Teachers don't even get to ask for more school days to teach kids more. Why do our State representatives need more time? | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | we should be moving towards less days in session, less regulation, lower taxes, and lower pay for politicians. this bill proposes just the opposite. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | Since the vast majority of bills introduced only seek to heap greater burdens and restrictions on the citizens of Nevada, I say lets limit the damage you may do to us by keeping the current limitations in place. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | The answer is never more government. The establishment of a professional political class does not favor Nevada's citizenry and runs counter to the idea of a citizen legislature. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | This bill is just inching toward annual sessions. The legislature does enough damage every 2 years; God forbid they should meet every year. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | No! | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | What part of less and smaller goverment do you people not understand? | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | Vote NO on SJR8: We are against annual sessions of the legislature. We do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days. We feel both these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. We oppose increasing the pay of legislators and placing no limit on what they can receive. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | Mar-19-2013 | |
| Against | There is absolutely no justifiable reason the Nevada legislature needs to meet yearly or for longer than 120 days. It would be an economic burden on the state and would create a class of full time politicians that this state neither needs nor deserves. I strongly oppose this amendment to the Nevada Constitution. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | If anything, I think it would be better if the legislature convened less often. I think it is necessary that the law stays the same for a little while in order to maintain a sense of sanity. Society does not change so rapidly as to require that the law changes every year. And I think a two year gap will give better time to evaluate the changes from the previous session than a one year gap. Further, if the legislature is always in session it will be liable to often pass poorly thought through legislation right at the moment when the emotional desires for such legislation is the highest, whereas after a year or more of thought the result might be a much more logical and responsible piece of legislation. Further, having a citizen legislature I think is preferable to a full time legislature. I think in states where legislators are full time without other occupations, it potentially distances them from the people they represent. | Mar-19-2013 |
| Against | NO! A thousand times NO on SJR8! I am sick of this coming up again EVERY session! I cannot attend the hearing, wish I could so that I could tell every senator NO in person! Even CA was not so bad until they went to annual sessions, then full time. Look at them now and realize how many people came to Nevada to escape the result of annual sessions there. If they get away with this our citizen input will not matter to the new professional political class that will be created. Longer sessions only provides more time to twist arms in support of the feculent bills, if anything the sessions should be SHORTER. The longer the session the more time to pass absolute garbage, like a state income tax, "margin tax", gun & mag bans, new types of vehicle fees, unending and unendurable! Oh, and another fat pay raise for legislators too, where is OUR pay raise?. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Mar-18-2013 | |
| Against | I am strongly opposed to this resolution, instead, shorten the 120 days to 90 days. Legislators should be motivated to accomplish their responsiblities in a timely & efficient manner. Nevadans neither want nor need hundreds of new laws and taxes each legislative session. The Peoples' business is to be conducted openly in The Capitol, and that happens to be in Carson City. Do you people go out of your way to waste money? Yeah, I know....purely rhetorical. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | I am 100% in favor of a Citizen Legislature and 100% opposed to any move toward a full time legislature such as this. We have a Capital, it is in Carson City, and that is where the legislators should meet. 120 days every second year is more than sufficient. The LCB should be tasked with the responsibility for reviewing the NRS between legislative sessions, finding duplications and inefficiencies and proposing corrections. If I were to propose an amendment to the Nevada Constitution, it would be that, for the next 20 years, for every new law enacted, two old laws must be repealed. Our state is becoming too much like California! We need to stay free, and that means to limit our State government to doing ONLY THOSE THINGS that the Local Governments cannot do. Thank you for your attention to my views. Respectfully, John W. Vettel Jr., LtCol, USAF (Ret) | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | We don't need more legislative time. And there is no money to pay for it. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | This is certainly not the time to raise our apparently greedy legislators salaries. These are bad economic times. The legislators need to save the taxpayers money not s pend it on totally unneeded salary increases. It is our money. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! Taxpayers are only safe when the legislature is NOT in session!!!!! | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Look at all the bill drafts already in front of you. We don't need so many new laws and such expansion of state government. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Mar-18-2013 | |
| Against | We absolutely DO NOT need more government and the increases in cost that go with it. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | This has to be one of the dummest bill this session. We have enough problems MADE when you bozos are around. Now you want more time and money? Unbeleivable. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Mar-18-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-18-2013 | |
| Against | Stop thinking about how much money you can ROB from the citizens of NV. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Mar-18-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-18-2013 | |
| Against | I am firmly against SJR8 and the fact that our legislature wants to extend the time they are in session. The only thing I see come out of our current legislature is more and more taxes, regulation and spending. If we give them more time in session they will continue to do even more of this. I am sick of our legislature trying to copy our next door neighbors in California by destroying our state. Where are the laws and bills that will encourage new business, decrease un-employment and improve our business environment? They don't know!! Our legislature have a one track mind, to suck as much money out of our pockets as they can and increase the size of our state government. This law also has some very shady content that will allow them to move meeting places to any where in the state to circumvent the ability of the citizens to attend the hearings and meetings. There is only one reason for this and this is too hide meetings and hearings from the public. Also, this bill will provide that all appointments by the Governor are temporary until approved by the State Senate, is an constitutional infringement and will hold these appointments up. Lets see some worth while bills and laws come out of Carson City then we can talk about extending their time in session. I do not see any now. They don't need more time to tax and spend more money they need less!!! Regards, | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Less meetings are needed, not more. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | The current system is exceptional as is. We as a state do not need to increase spending and burden the tax payer any more than is already done. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Absolutely NO annual sessions! Cut all state employees' salaries 5% (ours went 50%) Also, this bill should have only one issue. Isn't that already in law? I don't think lesser appointments (i.e. Dir. of Wildlife) should have Senate confirmation. Question: How do you keep politics out of appointments? | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Increasing the time spent by Legislators in session is not the answer. The Legislators need to PRIORITIZE their time and funds. Instead of increasing spending and time spent and size of government they should be reducing them. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Please vote no on this bill. 1) We don't need any more spending increases at this time. 2) Carson City is our State Capital and it is where the Peoples business should be done. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Nevada does not need a longer legislative session. Pay raises should be up to the people the legislature represents, that means the voters. My husband doesn't get to decide his own pay raises at work and that is how it should be for the legislators as well. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Absolutely opposed to this bill. The provisions would change the legislature from citizen representation to a full time legislature and increase costs significantly. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Mar-18-2013 | |
| Against | I see no reason to raise the cost of government, especially at this time. Also, a huge pay boost such as JRS8 would allow, in my opinion, would no doubt people to seek office for the wrong purpose. jim falk, fallon | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Mar-18-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-18-2013 | |
| Against | Vote NO on SJR8. As Mark Twain said, "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session". | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | So, Senator Segerblom, once again you hope WE THE PEOPLE of Nevada have fallen asleep so you can pass this Constitutional amendment that keeps turnins up like a bad penny. NO, NO, NO, on SJR8. | Mar-18-2013 |
| Against | Mar-17-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-17-2013 | |
| Against | No mans Life, Liberty, or Property are safe while the legislature is in session. Famous Nevadan Mark Twain. Just as valid today as in 1866 | Mar-17-2013 |
| Against | Mar-17-2013 | |
| Against | Vote NO - this is a self-serving piece of legislation that undermines NV's Constitution. | Mar-17-2013 |
| Against | We do not need to follow how other states do it. This will only lead to more Legislative sessions to further take away our freedoms. | Mar-17-2013 |
| Against | Every year the same bill comes up. By now you should know that the people overwhelmingly oppose this bill as it is defeated every time. | Mar-17-2013 |
| Against | As far as I'm concerned, the less time government has to enact new laws, the more freedoms I enjoy! Insofar as the pay increase: do what we all have had to do in this economy and get a second job. With less time spent in session, you have no excuse! | Mar-17-2013 |
| Against | The list of bills I just went through to get to this bill shows you why we do not need any more legislative time. Limiting the time for mischief keeps us more free. | Mar-17-2013 |
| Against | Vote NO on SJR8: We are against annual sessions of the legislature. We do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days. We feel both these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. We oppose increasing the pay of legislators and placing no limit on what they can receive. Why are you thinking about this when the rest of Nevadans are hurting this is not the time to pass this bill. | Mar-17-2013 |
| Against | I believe the the legislative Session should be kept as it is currently and do not believe the pay for legislators should be increased or changed in any way. | Mar-17-2013 |
| Against | In the interests of keeping gov't limited, how about reducing the size of our Nv bureaucracy, also no unionization of gov't workers, how about school choice not just gov't schools, and finally keep special interests/lobbiests out of legislative sessions, your supposed to be concerned about the "general welfare" not special interests. Too much gov't kills the economy, even on the State level. | Mar-16-2013 |
| Against | Mar-16-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-16-2013 | |
| Against | It is exhausting trying to keep track of you now. We don't want to have to do this year round. Also, if you are always in session people will lose interest after awhile. This should be a calling, not a job. | Mar-16-2013 |
| Against | Mar-16-2013 | |
| Against | The only time the citizenry is SAFE is when you are not in session. | Mar-16-2013 |
| Against | Mar-16-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-16-2013 | |
| Against | Vote NO on SJR8: We are against annual sessions of the legislature. We do not want the calendar days of the legislature expanded by 45 days. We feel both these proposals will undermine our citizen legislature. We oppose increasing the pay of legislators and placing no limit on what they can receive | Mar-16-2013 |
| Against | Just another power grab by government. What is exactly wrong or not working with the way Nevada has operated since its inception. As it is thousand of new pieces of law come out of bi-annual sessions...do we really need MORE laws? Give it a rest! | Mar-16-2013 |
| Against | No. We receive enough grief from Carson City as it is. The people of Nevada want a part time citizen legislature, not a gaggle of professional lawmakers working full time to screw-up an otherwise decent state. No increase in compensation is called for and the Senate has more power than they deserve already. We are happy with the separation of powers as they currently exist. | Mar-16-2013 |
| Against | Who will be testifying on behalf of this resolution for Sens. Segerblom et al, so far as is known on this date (3/15)? What is the justification for a salary to legislators in months they do not meet? The Legislative Counsel Bureau's fiscal note does not address costs of additional staffing and meeting at other locations. Won't this cost alot? Doesn't meeting for regular session as is now done permit a more diverse legislative constituency? Doesn't this resolution compel one to make a legislator's life his or her occupation? What other job could you hold? | Mar-15-2013 |
| For | Mar-13-2013 | |
| Against | Mar-12-2013 | |
| Against | Less government not more government Ladies and Gentlemen! Thank you. | Feb-28-2013 |
| Against | Feb-27-2013 | |
| Against | Feb-24-2013 | |
| Against | Feb-21-2013 | |
| Against | Vote NO! Not necessary. “No Man’s life liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session”. (Quote long attributed to Mark Twain) | Feb-21-2013 |
| Against | Feb-20-2013 | |
| For | The proposed legislation would be great for both lawmakers who have to commute for meetings currently to Carson City from other areas as well as the general public. Also from a population stand point most residents in the State of Nevada reside in Clark County and Las Vegas in general. This bill should be passed and signed. | Feb-19-2013 |
| Against | At least with every other year sessions the citizens are safe for a year; It's the economy! You raising your salaries in this economy? Tone deaf!!!! | Feb-19-2013 |
| Against | No way! | Feb-19-2013 |
| Against | Not enough money, don't run | Feb-19-2013 |
| Against | Feb-18-2013 | |
| For | Feb-18-2013 | |
 Session Info | NELIS | Interim Info | Law Library | General Info | Counsel Bureau | Research Library | Assembly | Senate | FAQs View Scheduled Meetings | Publications | Proposals | Career Opportunities | Gift Shop | Site Map | Contact Us © 2013 Nevada Legislative Counsel Bureau |
|