Rich Dunn
I attended all the pre-election forums at the BAC performance hall, and found myself a little bit confused by Republican Assembly candidate Al Kramer’s position on background checks for non-FFL firearm purchases. At the forum, I thought I heard Al say he supported universal background checks, by which I assume he meant that he’d be willing to vote for such a bill were he elected as our Assemblyman.
But on his campaign website he quotes himself as saying, “I support the Second Amendment and think there are enough gun laws on the books.” By that I assume he meant that he would not be willing to even consider voting for a background check bill as Carson City’s representative in the Assembly.
Under the heading “No Tax Hikes or New Taxes,” Al’s website says, “The City of Sparks is going to push to remove the cap on property taxes. I will oppose this effort. Furthermore, there is talk of reducing or eliminating the payroll tax and replacing it with a tax on services. I will oppose this also.”
This is a real head scratcher. First of all, why is it Carson City’s business where Sparks sets its property taxes? Shouldn’t we respect their perogatives on things like that? Do we want Sparks telling us what we can or can’t do about our own city? I don’t think so.
The legislature is there for our representatives to legislate, meaning they consider the pros and cons of bill drafts submitted by members and constitutional office holders. When all the testimony has been duely considered, a vote is taken on the bill and all its amendments.
You don’t go into that process pledging never to vote for any new taxes or gun laws. That makes a mockery of the whole process, which is why I agree with Michael Greedy, his Democratic opponent, when he calls himself “the responsible choice” on his campaign signs.
If you agree with me that Carson should be represented by someone who will approach the job with an open mind and respect for the process, the responsible choice is Michael Greedy.
