More taxes won’t create jobs

As part of his “Jobs First” plan, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry says he wants to create incentives to keep jobs and punish corporations that outsource jobs overseas. Since he’s never successfully run a business, let alone started one, I have doubts whether he has the slightest idea how to create an environment conducive to business, which, contrary to Democratic rhetoric, is what creates jobs.

Since Johnny came marching home, he’s been feeding at the public trough as a prosecutor, lieutenant governor and senator, before going on to leach off his wife’s inherited wealth. This clearly gives him the practical experience necessary to create jobs in the private sector.

In similar fashion, the Nevada Democratic Party’s Web site proudly proclaims, “Democrats in Nevada are prepared to lead our state into unparalleled prosperity with responsible action to promote: an advanced job market that supports today’s key industries such as gaming, mining and technology. We are dedicated to a government that promotes new jobs in areas such as developing the state’s enormous renewable energy resources.”

Of course, it was this group that supported the obscene business gross receipts tax in the last legislative session and, along with turncoat Republican Gov. Kenny Guinn, was responsible for $883 million in other taxes. Clearly these examples are the type of “responsible action” we can expect from future Nevada Democrats after the next round of “who can work a ballot” come November.

A simple rule of capitalism is that when government creates an unfriendly business environment, businesses will inevitably seek greener pastures or cut jobs. Whether out of state or offshore, the result is the same: When business takes a hit, so do jobs. This is a rather elementary concept that some legislators don’t seem to grasp. Perhaps someone from the Nevada Democratic Party can explain how it will lead Nevada into “unparalleled prosperity” once it gets another crack at the business gross receipts tax?

Doubtless this is the reason for the citizens’ initiative that was promulgated to prohibit government employees from serving in the Legislature. The currently stalled initiative came on the heels of Nevada Attorney General Brian Sandoval’s legal opinion that said it was a constitutional violation for those employed within the executive branch to concurrently serve in Nevada’s Legislature as elected officials.

Responding to the attorney general’s opinion, Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie (D-Reno) was quoted as saying, “If we’re going to have a citizen Legislature, we’ve got to have all points of view represented.” That’s a nice platitude until you consider that the assemblywoman is also an employee with the judicial system. The system of checks and balances contemplated by the Constitution is violated in the worst way when any elected legislator also works for another branch of government.

While the 100,000-plus state and local public employees represent only about 4 percent of the population, they have almost one-fifth of the Assembly’s voice. That is, 19 percent of the Assembly works for some state or local government agency in addition to serving in the Legislature. Most notably, all but two are Democrats. Clearly, a constituency that is not subject to layoffs, downsizing or recessions needs over-representation within the Assembly.

It’s rather difficult to make the claim that “all points of view” are being represented here.

Democrats spent the last legislative session heaping tax hikes onto business. Some who voted for said taxes had full-time government positions and then returned to them, without suffering any repercussions as a result of the tax policies they’d voted for. I’d like one of them to explain to the people who lost jobs because of those policies exactly what constituency they were representing.