NEWs

TiTus supporTs probe

U.S. Rep. Dina Titus has become the 108th member of the U.S. House to support an impeachment inquiry. A statement posted on her website reads:

“My decision isn’t based on my disagreements with the President’s policies or my disapproval of his temperament, though I have both. I’m calling for an impeachment inquiry because of the mounting evidence that Donald Trump has repeatedly broken the law to protect his own interests. To be clear, misleading the public and the press is not an impeachable offense. But lying to law enforcement officials who are investigating the Russian attack on our democracy—and ordering his staff to do the same—are serious crimes. … And on its own, greed is not an impeachable offense. But after his election, Donald Trump refused to divest from his businesses despite obvious conflicts of interests. So now he’s profiting from foreign government officials who are trying to curry favor by staying at his hotels—even though the emoluments clause of the Constitution prevents the President from accepting foreign payments. In the Constitution, those payments are called ‘emoluments,’ but today you can just call them ‘bribes.’ Either way, it’s unethical and illegal. The subcommittee I lead is going to recharge its investigation into those foreign payments when Congress returns to Washington in September. Rest assured I am going to demand answers.”

There has been considerable debate over whether what the House Judiciary Committee launched following Robert Mueller’s congressional testimony constitutes an impeachment investigation, and House leaders have been unwilling to clarify things. Titus used the term inquiry.

The administration tried to dismiss the Mueller testimony as falling flat. However, since congressmembers returned to their districts, they seem to have found it resonated with the public, resulting in momentum in the House for impeachment.

As recently as July 17, the House voted 332 to 95 to block an impeachment effort by Texas Rep. Al Green. Titus then voted against the successful move to table Green’s resolution.

Titus chairs the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management that has charge of the investigation into Donald Trump’s alleged breach of the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution, also known as the foreign emoluments clause (article I, section 9, paragraph 8) that generally prohibits federal officeholders from receiving anything of value from a foreign state or its officials. There is also a domestic emoluments clause in the Constitution. On April 30, a federal court rejected Trump’s attempt to block a lawsuit filed by 200 members of the House and Senate charging that Trump has violated the foreign emoluments clause. The emoluments issue has had a lower profile than other Trump scandals. —Dennis Myers

Average child care costs in Nevada are approaching the average rents.

Child care unaffordable?

State cost through the roof

Most child care legislation considered this year by Nevada’s new woman-majority legislature dealt with regulation or licensure, not access to care. Legislators went into the 2019 legislature with no expectation of many gains, to the point that in February the Nevada Current ran the headline, “Child care reform: Baby steps expected at Legislature.”

Now, the Economic Policy Institute in D.C. has issued a new survey on child care in the state. It reported that in Nevada average child care for a 4-year-old costs $9,050 a year, or $754 monthly. That’s 72 percent of the average cost of housing in the state.

Infant care is even higher—$11,408 annually.

The Institute reported, “Infant care in Nevada costs $5,488 (92.7 percent) more per year than in-state tuition for four-year public college. That makes Nevada one of 33 states and D.C. where infant care is more expensive than college. In Nevada, infant care costs just 8.7 percent less than average rent.”

And given Nevada’s heavy reliance on low income workers: “A minimum wage worker in Nevada would need to work full-time for 35 weeks, or from January to August, just to pay for child care for one infant.”

The report adds flatly, “Child care is unaffordable for typical families in Nevada.”

That might be shocking except that the same thing is often said of the United States. At least one survey has shown some parents holding down the size of their families because of the cost of child care.

Some parents who would like to be in the job market never get there because of child care costs.

The depth of the problem in the state can be seen in the lives led by child care workers themselves:

“A median child care worker in Nevada would have to spend 50.7 percent of her earnings to put her own child in infant care.”

That does not create much of an incentive to go into child care work.

“My granddaughter did that kind of work for awhile while she was going to college, but it’s usually like that—temporary—to support yourself until you get through school,” said Marlene Lockard. Lockard is a professional lobbyist and represented the Nevada Women’s Lobby in the 2019 legislative session. She said there were a number of pieces of legislation dealing with other kinds of family issues, and that dealt with administrative child care matters, but not much on availability. And the reason always came down to money.

“There were bills, but they didn’t make it,” she said. “There were a couple of bills at the 2017 legislature that touched on higher salaries for

“Child care for two children—an infant and a 4-yearold—costs $20,459.” Economic Policy Institute

child care workers, but they didn’t make it, either.”

The state receives some federal money to help low income families with child care, but it serves only the neediest and poorest— basically, those on public assistance.

CAMPAIGN ISSUE

The Institute supports a program of government subsidies that effectively caps child care at 7 percent of a family’s income. In Nevada, that would free up $7,143 of the average family’s money for other purposes and would, the Institute argues, increase economic activity in the state by almost a percentage point, or $1.4 billion.

The 7 percent figure comes from the federal government, which defines that as child care affordability.

But there is nothing on the political horizon even close to such a program.

In the Democratic presidential race, child care is being emphasized by many of the candidates. In February, candidate Elizabeth Warren unveiled an extensive $700 billion proposal for universal child care, which also pegged a cap to the 7 percent figure. Nevada hosts one of the nation’s first presidential nominating events in February. Other Institute findings: • Nevada median family income: $57,057 • Full-time minimum wage salary: $17,160 • Annual rent: $12,501 • Infant care costs as a share of median family income: 20.0 percent • Infant care as a share of rent: 91.3 percent • Share of families able to afford infant care (i.e., costs are 7 percent or less of income): 6.8 percent • Infant care costs as a share of minimum wage earnings: 66.5 percent • Share of (post–child care) median income freed up by capping infant care expenditures at 7 percent of income: 15.6 percent • Median child care worker salary: $22,510 • Infant care costs as a share of child care worker earnings: 50.7 percent • Infant care costs as a share of public college tuition: 192.7 percent □

right as rain

July was dry for the region, but rain and thunderstorms rolled through the Truckee Meadows late last week. The thunderstorms were the cause of several fires in the region. Thankfully, the rain cleared up on the afternoon of July 26 in time for the RN&R’s final concert in our annual Rollin’ on the River series, and produced a rainbow in Plumas Park .