Las Vegas Review-Journal - Steve Sebelius Slash Politics

President Barack Obama will be coming to Nevada tonight, and speaking Thursday morning at the UPS facility near McCarran International Airport. And a presidential trip on the heels of a State of the Union speech can only mean one thing: The president means to expand upon his national remarks with some local application.

I counted several items in the president’s speech that might apply specifically to Nevada. The short list:

• Job-training partnerships between community colleges and local businesses. This is something the College of Southern Nevada would benefit from, as well as current and future local employers.
• Passage of the DREAM Act, or something similar to it. Nevada has a 26 percent Hispanic population, and this issue is key to them (and anathema to Republicans).
• Developing clean energy on public lands. We have plenty of public lands, and a bipartisan desire to see them put to use.
• Refinancing home mortgages at low rates, saving about $3,000 per year. This could help thousands of Nevadans underwater in their homes.
• An expanded investigation into abusive lending practices. Nevada has seen its share of these as well.

(Not for nothing, but I think the president would be foolish to use his visit to Nevada to talk about anything other than jobs and improving the economy. Clean energy development is nice and all — and it certainly has implication for jobs, too — but Nevada’s unemployment rate is still the highest in the nation. If the president doesn’t speak to that, he’s missing an opportunity in a key swing state.)

I’ve signed up to cover the president’s appearance, so watch for more on Twitter, here on the blog and in my Review-Journal column.

I’m sure we should read nothing into the fact that 1st Congressional District candidate Ruben Kihuen was invited by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to watch President Barack Obama‘s State of the Union speech tonight. Because, after all, Reid is totally and completely neutral in the 1st District Democratic primary race between Reid and former Congresswoman Dina Titus, right?

I mean, Reid would never send a not-so-subtle message that supports Kihuen for the seat over Titus by arranging for a nice photo opportunity that Kihuen could later use in a mailer or ad, right? That would be akin to turning down meetings would other would-be congressional aspirants while just happening to be photographed with Kihuen, as he was in this Las Vegas Sun photo (below).

But you know what might be funny? If U.S. Sen. Dean Heller hasn’t already picked a guest for the speech, maybe he could invite Titus. That way, no matter what Obama says in his speech, with both Kihuen and Titus in the House (chamber), Heller and everybody else is sure not to be bored!

Sorry, folks, I’ve been behind in the blogging this past week, and thus I’m tardy in posting the video of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid‘s appearance on Meet the Press discussing his support of President Barack Obama‘s recess appointments to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the National Labor Relations Board.

As you may have heard, the appointments are controversial, inasmuch as the Senate hasn’t really been on recess. Using a tactic that Reid himself invented back in 2007, the Senate has been meeting in short “pro forma” sessions to ensure the president can’t make recess appointments. But Reid abandons his previous support for presidential appointment-blocking, as shown in the clip below.

(BTW, Meet the Press has a really cool new set, don’t you think?)

The biblical book of Hebrews defines faith thus: “Being sure of what we hope for, and certain of what we do not see.” Of course, that refers to faith in God, and the objective reality of the universe itself argues for the existence of a supernatural creator.

Not so with the type of faith exhibited by the Keystone Corp., the right-wing political organization. It put out a news release today with the following statement from board Chairman John R. Gibson:

The Board of Directors of Keystone Corporation met today and authorized the following statement regarding the current discussion of taxation in the state of Nevada. “Keystone Corporation believes that Nevada attracts new and diversified business due in large part to the absence of general corporate and individual income taxation. Therefore, Keystone opposes any proposal which would result in the imposition or raising of corporate income taxes, a margin tax or a gross receipts tax. This is and continues to be the policy of Keystone Corporation.”

Oh, really? Then, pray tell, why is it that all the states surrounding Nevada — all of which impose some type of tax on business income — have lower unemployment rates than does Nevada? And why is it that Nevada — despite having no corporate or personal income tax — struggles so much to attract business?

Could it be perhaps that corporate income taxes are not the only or even the most important factor in deciding whether businesses move to a particular place?

Whether the Keystone Corp. believes something doesn’t make it true. In this case, objective reality argues against the group’s faith-based philosophy.

And a political note: I see nothing in this statement about opposition to a gambling or mining industry tax increase, of the type that Keystone board member Monte Miller has proposed. Surely, if those taxes crush businesses, we’ll never see another casino or mine in the state! Right, Keystone?

Then again, the real point of Miller’s tax plans is to confuse voters and get revenge on the uppity gambling and mining industries for breaking ranks and saying they’ll support a business income tax, right? So taxes are bad for business, but good for revenge!

New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner

And so, we come to the end of the Seven Holy Days of Reflection, the sacred time following the New Hampshire primary in which we ponder the meaning of the results and all states refrain from any other nominating contest of any kind. It was this insistence by New Hampshire’s prickly Secretary of State Bill Gardner — and the capitulation of Nevada’s GOP officials — that robbed Nevada of the chance to hold the nation’s third nominating contest last Saturday. You know, when it still matters.

Instead, our caucus will be held on Feb. 4, when we’ll be lucky to have Mitt Romney and Ron Paul still battling for delegates.

Before the final homily, let’s recap the previous lessons of the Seven Holy Days of Reflection:

• Day One: Voters in New Hampshire apparently don’t like Jon Huntsman that much.
• Day Two: Ususally, the winner of the New Hampshire primary is totally predictable.
• Day Three: New Hampshire is extremely white, and I’m not just talking about snow.
• Day Four: Not everybody can grow up to be president in America.
• Day Five: New Hampshire is not known for its cheese. That’s either Wisconsin or Vermont.
• Day Six: New Hampshire’s primary was almost totally meaningless.

And now, today’s final reflection: Next time, Nevada should insist on its rightful place as third in the nation, even if Bill Garder stamps his feet, holds his breath, cries like a little girl and threatens to build a time machine just so he can hold New Hampshire’s primary first.

Let’s face it, people: Nevada lost its standing this year because our officials decided to act like the adults in the room, and agree not only to let New Hampshire go first, but also to obey the stupid seven-day post-primary restriction, too. Nobody objects to letting the syrup sippers hold the nation’s first primary; but they have (or should have) no right to say when other states may hold their contests thereafter. (In fact, in 2008, the principled Gardner compromised, and Michigan held it’s primary exactly seven days after New Hampshire’s, thus violating the rule.)

But how did Gardner win the standoff this time? By specifically not acting like an adult. In fact, he acted like a petulant child, threatening to hold New Hampshire’s primary in December if Nevada didn’t agree to move its caucus. (I would have loved to see that happen, but the folks at the Republican National Committee didn’t, and pressured Nevada to knuckle under.) The lesson: Act like a petulant whiny child, and you will get your way.

Are you listening, Nevada officials? I hope so, because if not, we run the risk of again losing our chance to affect the national ticket by falling too far back in the calendar to make a difference. And that becomes all the more important if Barack Obama wins a second term, which will mean the presidency will be wide open in 2016.

So, stand strong, Nevada. Remember the indignity of 2012 in four years. Insist on our place in the calendar. Don’t give in, especially to ridiculous demands. Otherwise, all we’ll get are seven stupid holy days of reflection. And who wants that?

Well, that was almost embarrassing.

New Hampshire’s vaunted primary had almost produced no change whatsoever in the Republican primary lineup, that is until former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman quit the race Sunday and threw his support behind rival Mitt Romney.

Winnowing out the weaker candidates is a tradition enjoyed by early voting states. Iowa’s results forced Rep. Michele Bachmann to leave the race. South Carolina’s upcoming primary may claim the campaigns of more than one lagging Republican. But up until Sunday, New Hampshire’s primary — won handily by Romney — hadn’t affected the race at all.

Had Huntsman not quit, today’s meditation for Day Six of the Seven Holy Days of Reflection after the New Hampshire primary was going to be, New Hampshire’s primary was totally meaningless. Instead, let’s just stipulate that it was this: New Hampshire’s primary was almost totally meaningless. Way to save things at the last minute, New Hampshire!

Editor’s note: The Seven Holy Days of Reflection are a nod to New Hampshire state law, which stipulates that the state must set its primary date so that no other state holds a primary or caucus within seven days following the New Hampshire primary. Ostensibly, this is to allow the rest of the nation to have time to contemplate the meaning of the message voters in New Hampshire were trying to send in their voting. Sadly, this seven-day period conflicted with Nevada’s Republican caucus this year, and Nevada GOP leaders moved our primary to Feb. 4, when it will have no excitement or intrigue whatsoever.

You readers know the drill by now: The state of New Hampshire demands seven uninterrupted days following its primary election in which other states may not hold elections of their own. So as a result, Nevada leaders capitulated and moved our caucus back to Feb. 4, when we’ll be lucky to have two viable candidates from which to choose.

But, to honor New Hampshire and its prickly and uncompromising secretary of state, Bill Gardner, I’ve been offering a daily homily upon which to meditate for these past few days, to ensure the holy days of reflection don’t go to waste. And, to be perfectly frank, it hasn’t been easy, since former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney wrapped up the New Hampshire primary easily and predictably.

As a result today’s thought was going to be New Hampshire kind of looks like one of those foam No. 1 fingers they sell at sporting events. Because, you know, it kind of does (see map image below).

But instead, I think today’s thought should instead be this: New Hampshire is not known for its cheese. That’s either Wisconsin or Vermont.

I know whereof I speak: My grandparents lived in a small town outside of Hartford, Conn., called Glastonbury. And when our family came to visit, we’d take road trips to acquire various foods, from lobsters to cheese. And my grandfather was of the firm opinion that the best cheese could be found in Vermont. I can’t quite remember if we ever went to New Hampshire for anything, now that I think about it.

I could be — and probably should have been — writing about Nevada’s Republican caucus today. But because the state of New Hampshire insists that nobody else in the country may select presidential candidates within seven days of its primary, I’m not. Instead, I’m trying to respect New Hampshire law and reflect upon the deep meaning and wisdom displayed in that state’s electoral process.

Did you know that nearly anybody can get on the ballot in New Hampshire? That tons of people you’ve never even heard of ran for president there, ignored by the media (and most New Hampshire voters)? For example, have you ever heard of people named Vestermark, Greenleaf, Lawman, Story or Huntsman? Of course not. But they all ran for president in New Hampshire as Republicans.

That leads us to today’s meditation for the Seven Holy Days of Reflection: Not everybody can grow up to be president in America.

We tell children in school that in America, anybody can be president. New Hampshire, with its liberal ballot access laws, perpetuates the myth. But the reality is, in 235 years of American history, only 44 men have become president. Literally millions of people who were constitutionally eligible for the office have been born, lived and died during that time, so clearly the odds are against you.

That’s what Texas Gov. Rick Perry, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and — oh, yeah, that guy! — ex-Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman are about to find out. But instead of Nevada teaching them that lesson, South Carolina and Florida will do the job. We lost our place in the primary lineup, and all we got are seven lousy (but holy) days of reflection.

Many people have questioned the role that early caucus and primary states play in the political process, suggesting they are not representative of the country as a whole. This is especially true in a place such as New Hampshire, which not only insists on having the first primary in the nation, but also demands that no one hold an election within seven days.

Why? So the rest of us can ponder the great and wondrous meaning of the New Hampshire results. That’s why I’ve been giving readers a little chunk of wisdom each day, in what I like to call the Seven Holy Days of Reflection. Today’s thought: New Hampshire is extremely white, and I’m not just talking about snow.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, New Hampshire’s population (1.3 million total, less than the number of people who live here in Las Vegas) is 93.9 percent white, with just 1.1 percent black, 2.2 percent Asian and 2.8 percent Latino.

Now, surely this is not representative of America. (Nevada, by contrast, is 66.2 percent white, with 26.5 percent Latino, 8.1 percent black and 7.2 percent Asian.)

Of course, racial patterns don’t necessarily mean different outcomes at the polls. Mitt Romney, the winner of the New Hampshire primary this week, is also favored in Nevada, although for different reasons. (He’s popular here with members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who turn out in enviable numbers to vote.) So despite our ethnic and racial diversity, Nevada’s caucus results would probably have been very similar to New Hampshire’s, if our contest had been held tomorrow, as originally scheduled.

Alas, it wasn’t. We were screwed out of it by New Hampshire, which stubbornly demanded its Seven Holy Days of Reflection.

Nobody ever accused Nevada Democrats of being subtle. I guess this is what happens when you have an incumbent president and you have to try to drive up turnout by other means…