Questions 3 & 4 deserve thumbs up
Churchill County residents will be asked to vote on four state questions and a county question on fuel indexing.
The LVN has previously weighed in on questions 1 and 2 as well as Churchill County 1.
Question 3 calls for an amendment to the Nevada Constitution: “Shall Article 1 of the Nevada Constitution be amended to require the Legislature to provide by law for the establishment of an open, competitive retail electric energy market that prohibits the granting of monopolies and exclusive franchises for the generation of electricity?”
A “yes” vote supports inserting language into the Nevada Constitution requiring “an open, competitive retail electric energy market,” the reduction of energy market regulations, and the elimination of energy monopolies.
A “no” vote opposes this proposal to insert requirements for an “open and competitive” energy market into the state’s constitution.
Opponents to the bill cite the problems with deregulation such as with the airline industry and telephone industries. Opponents say rates have gone up with the deregulation of these two major industries; however, we have no way of telling since the airline industry was deregulated decades ago as was the telephone industry with the breakup of AT&T in the 1980s.
Since this is an amendment to the Nevada Constitution, if passed, voters will be required to cast ballots again in 2018. If it passes a second time, then the Nevada Legislature will then begin work on crafting legislation on Nevada’s energy industry, which will also include solar, geothermal and wind. By the time the Nevada Legislature crafts a bill and approves it as a law, we are looking at 2023.
The LVN favors passage of Question 3 because we would like to see more information on both sides disseminated to the public. Compared to Questions 1 and 2, which has received the bulk of attention, many Nevadans are not as familiar with this question, and since voters have another opportunity to cast ballots in two years, we say, “Why the rush?”
State Question 4 reads “Shall Article 10 of the Nevada Constitution be amended to require the Legislature to provide by law for the exemption of durable medical equipment, oxygen delivery equipment, and mobility enhancing equipment prescribed for use by a licensed health care provider from any tax upon the sale, storage, use, or consumption of tangible personal property?”
Opponents say the state grants more than enough tax abatements and rebates. Nevada’s citizens, particularly the elderly who will be affected most by this ballot measure, deserve better.
On the ballot measure, “A “Yes” vote would amend Article 10 of the Nevada Constitution so that the Legislature would be required to pass a law exempting durable medical equipment, oxygen delivery equipment, and mobility enhancing equipment prescribed for human use by a licensed health care provider from taxation related to the sale, storage, use, or consumption of the equipment.”
We agree and support Question 4.