You'll have to work to find two Nevada legislators with less in common than Assembly members Bob Beers and Chris Giunchigliani.
Beers is a conservative Republican who looks at the state's troubled budget and sees buffet-busting consumption and the need for a crash diet. Giunchigliani is a liberal Democrat who studies the same figures and sees fiscal malnutrition and the need for a Red Cross airlift.
Given their differences, you'd think they'd never be able to agree on anything as volatile as a sweeping tax package. But you might be wrong about that.
The Legislature's zoo-monkey machinations tend to make fools of political prognosticators, but it's obvious Beers, Giunchigliani and dozens of other legislators are taking their jobs quite seriously.
Beers and fellow Republican Assemblyman Ron Knecht, for example, are drafting a resolution they only half-jokingly refer to as a "Governor governor."
"It's a great phrase," Beers says. "But it's also a `Legislature governor.'"
Briefly defined, it's a proposal to change Nevada's constitution, through citizen initiative, to generally reflect Colorado's pay-as-you-grow budget process. Beers would like to see the state's budget growth be based on inflation, population growth, and per capita economic growth.
While there's no realistic chance it will fly, the resolution is a jumping off point for re-examining the budget process and sending a message about limiting state spending.
"There is a fundamental philosophical question here that Nevadans should ask themselves and come up with an answer to," Beers says. "Should state government grow as the percentage of the people that it serves? Should it stay the same? Or should it decrease as the same percentage of the population decreases?"
Giunchigliani agrees there's a philosophical question being asked, but couldn't disagree more with Beers' theme. The longtime public school teacher sees Nevada's 46th national ranking in per-pupil K-12 spending, along with a long list of other sorry stats, and believes that at some point only more money will address the complex issues. Constitutional budget caps be damned.
Given these vast differences, will the Legislature be able to come together on anything approaching a broad-based list of new taxes?
As painfully naive as it might sound, I think the answer is yes.
But they're not necessarily the taxes touted by the Guinn administration and the Governor's Task Force on Tax Policy. The endlessly promoted gross receipts tax on business is foundering. And the amusement tax, with its lame greens fees and country club membership exemptions, is starting to smell like a pair of old sweat socks.
But, as Giunchigliani points out, there are 26 potential taxes in the hopper. Some are smarter and more politically palatable than others, and 10 may eventually find common ground.
Although downplayed by Gov. Kenny Guinn, the Care-Amodei bill's provision for the creation of a tax on professional services appears to appeal across party lines. A real estate transfer tax is alive and kicking, as are the much-discussed increases in cigarette and booze taxes along with the prospect of substantially higher state licensing fees. State Sen. Joe Neal's call to end most state sales tax exemptions also appears to have some legs.
Giunchigliani was on the ground floor of the debate which last session led to the creation of the tax task force. "The whole idea is to broaden the base and stabilize the structure," she says. "If we don't have that in the mix, then there's no point in doing any of this."
Of course, there is a point to all this. The point is, the process is moving forward. Numbers are being crunched. Philosophies are being tested. And the issue is larger than the spin doctors who make a living coddling and bullying part-time politicians. Perhaps that's why you're seeing so many individual legislators weigh in with so many ideas.
"Everything's on the table," Giunchigliani says. "You're seeing a lot of independence of judgment. It says the process still works, and that's a good thing."
John L. Smith's column appears Wednesdays in the Nevada Appeal. E-mail him at Smith@reviewjournal.com or call (702) 383-0295.
