News

Dueling ‘news’

Within minutes of each other, the two sides in the fight over ballot Question 1 put out news releases on May 16:

At 11:15 a.m., Nevadans for State Gun Rights put out a news release headed, “Nevadans for State Gun Rights Unveils Anti-Bloomberg T-shirts and Gun Rights Bumper Stickers.”

At 11:42 a.m., Nevadans for Background Checks put out a news release headed, “Las Vegas Fraternal Order of Police Endorses question 1.”

The Bloomberg referenced in the first release is billionaire Michael Bloomberg, who is funding much of the Nevada campaign along with campaigns in several other states, although the initiative petition was placed on the Nevada ballot by signatures of Nevadans.

The Las Vegas police organization is the latest of several law enforcement organizations or individuals who have endorsed enactment of Question 1.

According to Nevadans for Background Checks, the measure “would provide for more background checks for all gun sales, with reasonable exceptions for family, hunting, and self-defense.” According to Nevadans for State Gun Rights, it would provide for “a federal universal gun registry.”

Definitive answer

Recently we received a letter to the editor in response to Brad Bynum’s report “Licensed to ill” (cover story, April 28). The letter claimed, “California medical marijuana cards are only good in California as Nevada medical marijuana cards are only good in Nevada.”

Pam Graber, spokesperson for the Nevada program, reports in a prepared statement:

“The following states have medical marijuana programs and issue medical marijuana cards: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington. The Medical Marijuana dispensaries of the State of Nevada are authorized to sell medical marijuana to card holders from the states above if the patient presents a state or local government-issued medical marijuana card.”

The Nevada card may not be recognized in some states.

GE crops adjudged safe

The nation’s leading scientific panel says there is a scientific consensus that genetically engineered (GE) crops are as safe as other crops.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine issued a report saying, in traditionally stilted scientific language, that “the committee could not find persuasive evidence of adverse health effects directly attributable to consumption of GE foods” and that there is “no conclusive evidence of cause-and-effect relationships between GE crops and environmental problems.”

The report also said that pest-resistant crops that poison insects through a soil bacterium reduces the need for farmers to use pesticides.

But the two-year study also said genetic food research is not yet leading to higher crop yields needed to deal with population growth. The development of genetically modified wheat—which produced higher yields in the 1960s—dealt with famine and food riots in India, and there is hope that further research in the field will accommodate today’s terrific planetary growth.

The report was no surprise to scientists, but it acknowledged the folklore that challenges the science: “Policy regarding [GE] crops has scientific, legal and social dimensions. For example, on the basis of its review of the evidence on health effects, the committee does not believe that mandatory labeling of foods with GE content is justified to protect public health, but it noted that the issue involves social and economic choices that go beyond technical assessments of health or environmental safety; ultimately, it involves value choices that technical assessments alone cannot answer.”

It called for “transparency and public participation in the oversight” of crops by regulators to deal with the folklore. Attorney Amanda Morgan at an interview with the RN&R.

School grants case nears state high court

Lawsuits kept law inert

A Nevada district judge has upheld the constitutionality of Nevada’s program for by paying parents to take their children Dennis Myers out of public schools. Judge Eric Johnson said on May 18 that arguments by the American Civil Liberties Union were in avoidance of the issues at hand and ruled that the program does not breach constitutional prohibitions against the use of tax dollars for religious purposes, the thrust of the ACLU suit.

“Theywereworriedabout asystemthatwasonly accessibletothewealthy.”

Amanda Morgan Educate Nevada Now

The program is available only to parents who remove their children from public schools. At that point they become eligible for grants in the $5,000 range that can be used for private schools. All the leading private schools in Nevada are religious.

“The state has no influence or control over how any parent makes his or her genuine and independent choice to spend his or her ESA [education saving account] funds,” Johnson’s ruling read.

Those funds, he wrote, are “reserved for educational purposes, and not for any sectarian purpose.”

The ruling still leaves the program far from implementation. If Johnson’s ruling survives the Nevada Supreme Court, there is still a second lawsuit by a group of parents that wields an entirely different legal argument against the program.

The program was enacted in 2015, delayed by various machinations, enjoined by Judge James Wilson on Jan. 11, and so has never taken effect. Democrats have said they will take action against it in the 2017 Nevada Legislature if they win back a majority in the November election.

The Nevada Constitution is highly anti-clerical. Nevadans twice voted to curb spending for religious purposes: “No sectarian instruction shall be imparted or tolerated in any school or University that may be established under this Constitution. … No public funds of any kind or character whatever, State, County or Municipal, shall be used for sectarian purpose.” Another section revokes funds from school districts if they seek to pay for religious instruction. Since last year’s legislature, some supporters of the Nevada program have sought to discredit this language by characterizing it as the product of an era of anti-Catholicism.

Nevertheless, the language is in the constitution. And even without that language, which was added to the constitution a decade after statehood, the original constitution still has plenty of anti-clerical language, the product of a period of anti-Mormonism in Nevada.

The second lawsuit, which likely faces a June hearing, goes at the issue on other grounds than religion. There is constitutional language providing for a “uniform system of common schools” in the state and another, newer section whose inclusion was sponsored by Jim Gibbons in 2003 that says the education budget must be drawn up first during a legislative session, and then cannot be diverted.

In the case of the “common schools” language, lawyers for Educate Nevada Now—the group that obtained the injunction against the program—commissioned historian Michael Green to scrutinize the state constitutional debates and determine what the state’s founders had in mind.

“They were very clear that this education article was all about ensuring a strong public education system that wasn’t controlled by any particular faction,” said ENN attorney Amanda Morgan.

“They wanted a uniform public system where everyone was welcome. … They were very clear that they were worried about a system that was only accessible to the wealthy. And that was really one of their big concerns because at that time, there was a huge movement to make sure there was a common school system in all states.”

According to Reno GazetteJournal reports, about 80 percent of the people who have applied for the grants under the new Nevada program have median incomes greater than the average median income.

“It almost harkens back to what the founders were worried about,” said Morgan.

Supporters of the new law have pointed to a section of the constitution reading, “The legislature shall encourage by all suitable means the promotion of intellectual, literary, scientific, mining, mechanical, agricultural and moral improvements, and also provide for a superintendent of public instruction and by law prescribe the manner of appointment, term of office and the duties thereof.”

That is very broad, empowering language. But Morgan said it does not empower lawmakers to override

companion language in the same document. Laws which breach constitutional restrictions would not be “suitable means.”

“You can create a whole new system and you can divert funds to private schools and you can divert funds to religious schools—that kind of doesn’t make sense with what the founders were saying,” Morgan said.

Hired gun

As for the “Education First” language sponsored by Gibbons and approved by voters, Morgan said the 2015 legislature did exactly what that amendment said not to do—writing and finishing a common schools budget and then draining it for purposes unrelated to the common schools.

“This is exactly what you’re doing,” Morgan said. “You’re appropriating money for public education, and now you’re coming back with this program and sticking a spigot in those funds, and it’s pouring out.”

Morgan said she and her colleagues “knew it [the constitutional language] was really good when the opposition didn’t really talk about it. They just kind of ignored our arguments about the founders.”

Her side may not be that lucky again. On March 8, the Nevada Board of Examiners (the governor, secretary of state and attorney general) approved $125,000 to pay former U.S. solicitor general Peter Clement to aid the state in defending the new law. That came on top of $295,000 already expended for Clement’s services.

The solicitor general represents the federal government before the U.S. Supreme Court, and Clement served in that role during the second Bush administration. He also represented 26 states in the unsuccessful case that sought to overturn the Affordable Care Act. Clement has appeared before the Supreme Court more than 20 times. Ω

“Anyparentmakeshis orhergenuineand independentchoice.”

Eric Johnson Nevada district judge

Take shelter

Best Medical Marijuana DISPENSARY IN RENO

We Offer The Highest Level Of MedicalGrade Marijuana And The Broadest Selection Of Alternative Health Resources And Educational Assistance

• Premium Marijuana • Locally Grown • Wide Variety of Strains • Delivery Service Available • Open 7 Days A Week

Visit Us Today For a Free Consultation Learn How Nevada Residents And Out-Of-State Customers Can Purchase From Our Dispensary

20% OFF

For New Patients With This Ad!

It can’t exactly be called a celebration: Supporters of the Committee to Aid Abused Women attended an open house on May 19 at a new shelter created to handle clients of CAAW and their families.

5398 SUN VALLEY BOULEVARD | SUN VALLEY, NV 89433

Serving Sun Valley, Reno and the Lake Tahoe Region MON-SAT 9AM-7PM | SUNDAY 9AM-5PM 1-775-674-0420 | www.kannareno.com