Jack For Assembly

[JackNino]

The following are the questions and my answers from the 2008 Nevada Families Voter Guide Candidate Questionnaire.

I have put the questions in bold and my answers are in regular type.
____________________________________________________________

1) Will you support/sponsor the proposed “Nevada Taxpayers and Citizen Protection Act of 2009” which is similar to the laws already passed in Arizona and Oklahoma. The new law insures that we have state enforcement of the laws on illegal immigration? See 1 page of the summary included with this questionnaire and the full 32-page bill at www.nevadafamilies.org

Yes_____ No_____ Undecided__X__ Comments:

Unfortunately, I do not have time to critically read the bill at this time and I would not want to give an answer I might disagree with later after having done a thorough examination of the bill.

2) Only American citizens should be voting in our elections. Will you support/sponsor legislation to insure that state ballots are printed only in English?

Yes_____ No_____ Undecided__X___ Comments:

I'm somewhat torn on this issue. I realize that all citizens are supposed to speak English but I would guess that there is a certain percentage of new citizens who still struggle with English. That being said, I wouldn't be against printing ballots only in English but I think the government has much higher priorities right now.

3) Will you support/sponsor legislation to stop illegal aliens from receiving Millennium Scholarships and other Nevada taxpayer-funded services?

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

It bothers me that someone that is here illegally can receive government-sponsored scholarships.

4) The US Congress passed the REAL ID Act of 2005, an un-funded mandate, turning state drivers licenses into de facto national ID cards creating a national ID system. REAL ID requires an RFID chip be placed in state drivers licenses. Numerous states have opposed this mandate citing privacy and liberty concerns. Will you oppose using state drivers licenses as de facto national ID cards?

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

I am very much against the REAL ID Act for a variety of reasons but Bruce Schneier, a renowned computer and general security expert has already written an excellent article on the topic here:
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/01/realid_costs_an.html

5) Will you oppose raising any taxes and/or fees (fees in excess of actual cost) and instead insist that government live within it’s current budget?

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

The only area where I would consider raising taxes is in the area of schools. However, there would need to be significant changes to the school system, especially in Clark County, in order for this to happen. First among these would be a change from the current system so that teacher pay is based on merit and the breakup up the Clark County School District into multiple smaller districts with less layers of bureaucracy.

6) Do you support the unabridged individual Constitutional right of Citizens to Keep and Bear Arms?

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

I am a very strong believer in the 2nd amendment. I believe that the 2nd amendment was written because our founding fathers had just earned their freedom from an oppressive government and they wanted to make sure that the people of this country always had that ability. Based on that assumption, I believe that when the 2nd amendment was being written they very much intended for people to be able to keep their own arms.

I also believe strongly that law-abiding citizens should not be punished or made to feel like criminals because of the wrongdoing of a small percentage of the population. I believe that most gun control laws take this form. The vast majority of people who purchase and use firearms, regardless of their type or size, are good, law-abiding people. When these people have to submit to background checks and fingerprinting in order to purchase a firearm, or they are prevented from buying a certain type of gun because someone decided that type of gun is "bad", or they must register all of their firearms, the average citizen is made to feel like a criminal for no reason, all while doing little or nothing to actually stop crime.

7) Will you support laws and regulations providing that federal officers (like the BLM) can only exercise the powers of a peace officer in this state if they are specifically authorized by state law; otherwise they must contract with the County Sheriff?

Yes_____ No_____ Undecided__X___ Comments:

I am for laws that limit the federal government's power within the state, as I believe that the federal government is involved in too many areas where it was never intended to be, but I would like to have more background on this particular question before responding.

8) Do you support freedom of choice in health care, including the fundamental right to not be forced to receive certain vaccines or medications?

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

I very much think that people should be able to decide what is best for their children and the government should not be forcing procedures on children that parents feel will do more harm than good.

9) Arizona recently passed an opt-in provision for any mental health screening for children in the government schools. This insures parents will have the right to decide the health care for their own children. Will you support/sponsor an opt-in provision for any mental health screening in the schools?

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

There seems to be a movement these days that decides that almost every child in school has some sort of disorder or behavioral problem that needs to be solved by drugs and that the children shouldn't be allow in school unless they are taking those drugs and I very much against forcing parents to drug-up their kids.

10) The right to petition is protected in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and in the Nevada Constitution Articles 10 and 19. However, recent Nevada Legislatures have passed numerous provisions, which make it nearly impossible for any initiative to make it to the ballot. Will you sponsor/support the restoration of the people’s right to petition, which will remove legislatively imposed roadblocks to petitioning?

Yes_____ No__X___ Undecided_____ Comments:

Personally, I do not believe that it is nearly impossible for a petition to make it to the ballot. Beyond that, I will admit that a couple of years ago my response to this question would have been absolutely. However, now I believe that it is far too easy for an initiative petition to allow a small majority of the population to impose its will on the other half of the population and that initiatives tend to be rather poorly written.

A good example of one half of the population forcing its will on the other half is the smoking ban that was recently passed. 54% of the population voted for the ban, which is quite close to half. I would much rather issues like this be handled by the market. An excellent example of the market taking care of the smoking issue is with poker rooms in casinos. A few years back poker rooms started becoming non-smoking and now most of them are. This was all done without the government forcing the casinos to do anything. The casinos discovered that people liked the non-smoking poker rooms so they went with it. Because the government wasn't involved this also allowed some poker rooms to still allow smoking and they can even advertise that fact to smokers. In this way, everyone is happy, and the heavy hand of government isn't involved.

The smoking ban was also rather poorly written, as it wasn't clear what exactly businesses could do to make it so that people could smoke while still being able to eat so you ended up with a big mess. Some businesses basically ignored it, others closed their kitchens, still others would still serve you food but required you to eat out of to-go containers and some even closed off part of their facility so that it could house the "restaurant", even though you could still get food at the bar. Many of the bars affected by the smoking ban lost a lot of business after it passed and are still recovering. I also see a lot of people ignoring the smoking ban.

All that being said, I definitely think initiatives have their place. The people should have a way to have their voice be heard. My preference would be that initiatives (and constitutional amendments) be required to pass with a 2/3 vote instead of 50%.

11) Do you support a parent’s right to choose government, charter, private, religious, or home schooling for their children?

Yes___X__ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

I absolutely believe that parents should be able to choose where they want their children educated.

12) The elimination of the Electoral College would make irrelevant the votes of Americans in about 25 smaller states like Nevada because candidates would focus on piling up votes in large-population states. Will you oppose any measure to eliminate the Electoral College? See article at: http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/2007/dec07/psrdec07.html

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

I believe the Electoral College is working as it should be. Every State has a voice and is important to the election. That is the way this country is supposed to work. I believe that if the nation switched to using a purely popular vote system in presidential elections that small states like Nevada would be ignored because it would be too easy for her votes not to matter.

13) Currently, there is no meaningful way for citizens to hold accountable government officials/employees who violate the law or rights of citizens. Would you support/sponsor legislation lowering the number of signatures required by NRS 6.132 from 25% to 10% of the registered voters in a county in order to convene a Grand Jury?

Yes_____ No_____ Undecided__X___ Comments:

This is not an issue that I have put sufficient thought into and therefore I feel uncomfortable answering at this time.

14) Invasive campaign reporting and financial disclosure laws discourage people from running for office and violate free speech by empowering government to monitor political campaigns. Senator Townsend said on May 7, 2003 concerning mandatory campaign finance disclosure, "At some point, you are not going to get anyone to run for office anymore! I am terrified.” Do you support/sponsor making all campaign contribution and spending reports 100% voluntary?

Yes_____ No__X___ Undecided_____ Comments:

I think anyone running for office should have to disclose all donations, in kind contributions and expenses that they incur in running their campaign and/or their office. I think this information is invaluable to voters and I seriously doubt that it is actually preventing anyone honest from running for office.

15) The federal government has usurped control of 91% of Nevada’s land. Do you support maintaining Nevada’s current criminal jurisdiction over these lands?

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

I think it is ridiculous that the federal government is in control of so much of Nevada, so I favor as much control as Nevada can get over those lands.

16) Do you support PISTOL (The Peoples Initiative to Stop the Taking of Our Land) ballot question which stops government 's abuse of eminent domain by prohibiting the taking of property from one private property owner to sell or give to another private property owner? (see copy of PISTOL at www.sos.state.nv.us )

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

I am completely against eminent domain being used for any purpose other than purely public purposes, which would exclude situations where the land did not remain in the public's hands after eminent domain was used.

17) In 2002, 63% of Nevadan’s voted to place in Nevada’s Constitution a provision to keep marriage only between a man and a woman. Marriage brings with it certain recognition and benefits. Will you oppose any form of domestic partnership, civil unions, or other efforts to grant the benefits of marriage to same-sex or unmarried partners?

Yes_____ No__X___ Undecided_____ Comments:

I do not believe that the government should be involved in things related to marriage as far as it relates to the religious definition of marriage. The State's involvement in marriage should mainly be related to probate issues and things of that nature. In that regard, I have no problem with any two people deciding they want to be in a union as far as the State is concerned. I also believe that no one else's marriage has any effect on me, so if gay people want to get married I don't believe it is any of my concern.

18) Will you support laws to protect from conception to natural death the right to life of unborn babies, the elderly, and the handicapped?

Yes_____ No__X___ Undecided_____ Comments:

As I would say that this question is geared towards abortion, there are two things about this issue that relate very strongly to some opinions I have about what government's role should be:

• In any issue where there is a lot of debate and people on both sides of the issue feel very strongly about their opinion, the government should do its best to stay out of the issue and err on the side of being the least restrictive and giving people the most personal freedom.
  
  Abortion is probably the best example I can think of where I apply this thought process. Personally, I feel uncomfortable with abortion and I do not believe that if I got a woman pregnant that I could ask her to nor would I feel comfortable with her getting an abortion. I think it would haunt me for the rest of my life.
  
  That being said, that is my personal feeling about the issue, and there are plenty of people who feel the same way and plenty of people that feel differently and a great many of those on both sides of the issue feel very strongly about their feelings. As I stated above, in situations such as this I feel strongly that the government should err on not being involved and giving people the most personal freedom, which in this case is to keep abortion legal. The reason I feel that way is because if I don't believe in abortion, I don't have to consider it as an option in my personal life, but someone who does believe in abortion can consider it as an option. Therefore, from a personal first-hand viewpoint, we both have all the options we want available to us. In a hotly debated issue, I think this is the best you can hope for. Any other option would start infringing on other people's rights.
  
  
• In any widely debated issue where making something illegal is not going to prevent it from happening, but instead force it underground and make it less safe while making normally law abiding citizens criminals, the government needs to seriously consider not making a law related to that issue.
  
  Everything I have heard says that when abortions were illegal they still occurred; except that they were done very secretively and were much less safe than abortions that are done now. In a situation such as that, where making abortion legal would not stop it from happening, I think it is an error for the government to make it illegal, which ends up putting some people's health at risk while making them criminals at the same time.
  

19) State administrative courts deny people the Constitutional Right to Trial by Jury (Nev. Constitution Art. 1, Sec. 3). Will you support/sponsor legislation to restore the right to trial by jury as an appeal from administrative courts to protect citizens from the abuses of bureaucratic administrative courts?

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

I believe that people should always the option of a trial by jury.

20) The National Animal Identification System (NAIS) will require RFID chips for all agricultural animals and pets. It will allow search and seizure for animal control without search warrants. Will you oppose any state legislation or regulation, which would allow state agencies to police the NAIS system?

Yes__X___ No_____ Undecided_____ Comments:

I don't think people should ever be forced to get RFID chips, either for themselves or their animals. I also think that animals, whether they are pets or not, are people's property and they should not be taken from people without proper warrants.

21) What do you view as the proper role of government?

I believe it is the government's (and by extension an Assemblyman's) responsibility to ensure that people are free to live the lives they want with the least amount of government intervention possible while ensuring that people feel secure in their personal property and punishing those who take advantage of other people.[/list]