Gibbons: Jobless benefits at risk - News

PRINT THIS Popular

Dec. 01, 2009
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

Gibbons: Jobless benefits at risk

Legislator says move won't cause hardship

By ED VOGEL
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL CAPITAL BUREAU

CARSON CITY -- Gov. Jim Gibbons accused legislators Monday of putting jobless benefits for 120,000 Nevadans in jeopardy and pledged to issue an emergency declaration to fix the problem.

Gibbons said he was "stunned that the Legislature would show such callous disregard" for families when its Subcommittee to Review Regulations failed last week to adopt a regulation setting the unemployment tax rates for 2010.

Most Popular Stories

'YOU DON'T BLOW A BUNCH OF CASH IN VEGAS ...': Obama remark reopens wound

LAUGHLIN EDGEWATER: Two dead in casino car crash

NORM: Ad's Strip scenes raised eyebrows

Shutting down the Ritz

Former commander of USS Cole considers run against Reid

NORM: $1 million wager on Super Bowl approved

Tourist describes chaos as car plows into Laughlin casino, killing two

IMAGES FROM 1860S: Photos show historic Nevada

Fighter battles rare disease that shatters mixed martial arts dream

Flood advisory for Las Vegas Valley

Without the tax rates charged employers in effect, the U.S. Department of Labor could deny as much as $1 billion in loans the state needs to keep giving out unemployment checks starting in January, he stated.

But legislators did not see it that way. Sen. Randolph Townsend, R-Reno, said they made it clear during the meeting that they could meet again in December if passage of the regulation was necessary to keep unemployment pay coming.

When asked whether the benefits remain at risk, Employment Security Division Administrator Cindy Jones said Monday that no Nevadans will lose any unemployment benefits.

She said Gibbons in coming days will approve the regulation on an emergency basis, a step recommended by legislators at last week's meeting.

Emergency regulations by law remain in effect for 120 days. Legislators, in the meantime, can meet again and pass the regulation, Jones said.

In a news release, Gibbons said the unemployment tax rates -- which average 1.33 percent on the first $27,000 of each employee's wages but vary from business to business -- were set in October by the Nevada Employment Security Advisory Council.

But Legislative Counsel Brenda Erdoes pointed out that the rates actually are set by Jones, not by the council. The council can only recommend tax rates.

She said the subcommittee decided against adopting the regulation before Jones conducted a public hearing on the proposal. A public hearing is set for Dec. 7.

Townsend said he was surprised by Gibbons' comments. He said Republicans and Democrats on the panel decided it would be inappropriate to adopt the regulation before Jones' hearing.

But Daniel Burns, Gibbons' communication director, contended Monday that legislators risked some unemployed Nevadans' ability to put food on the table.

He said that in the past 75 years the employment security administrator never has reversed the council's tax rate recommendation. Jones herself said in October that she would keep the 1.33 percent unemployment tax rate.

On Monday Jones said she attended the subcommittee hearing last week and was prepared to request "pre-approval" of the regulation, but committee members did not ask her to speak.

Townsend said Assemblyman Marcus Conklin, D-Las Vegas, the panel's chairman, can schedule a telephone meeting after Dec. 7 to approve the regulation.

Share & Save

Leave Your Comment	7 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor. Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Please enter your name Name: Please enter your email Email: Please enter a comment COMMENTS : (word count limit is 300) You have reached the maximum number of words allowed Current Word Count: Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background. NLuscombe wrote on December 02, 2009 01:56 PM: It's damned if you do, damned if you don't. The legislators are responsible to an apathetic public. If they did pass it and the public didn't like it, I suppose people like you, Ben, would be in an uproar because the legislator that is responbile to those that elected him, did not take this issue to the people right away. And so they didn't sign it into effect, and yet people who refuse to do anything but type on a computer are still spewing BS of which they know very little about. Ask Jim Gibbons why he refused the stimulus to HELP his state? ben wrote on December 01, 2009 12:44 PM: Hey NLuscombe, you're leaving out the facts! There was a public hearing Oct 6 on this. At the second public hearing...NO ONE FROM THE PUBLIC SHOWED UP! Shut your pie hole before you spout off. The legislators held a 7 hour meeting and accomplished nothing...except earning a paycheck you and I will pay for. Get the facts before you speak. NLuscombe wrote on December 01, 2009 11:19 AM: SEE: The real problem here is that Jim Gibbons is not telling the truth. He may be "stunned" about what the legislator did not do, but he isn't telling the whole story. The legislators did not act because if they did, it would have become the law and the public would have no say. Meaning: if the legislator had approved this regulation, it would go into effect. And if the people, meaning you and I, didn't like it, than too bad. This regulation could never be put to public opinion. So are the legislators really doing a bad job and screwing everyone? Or are they doing what they were elected to do and representing the people? They are representing the people because they DO NOT know how the public feels about this regulation because the people have NEVER heard anything about this regulation. If this reg had been passed, it would never be subject to public scrutiny, nor could the public challenge it if they did not like it. Get the facts before you speak! Ken wrote on December 01, 2009 09:43 AM: They all need to go. I've tried to support Gibbons but any public servant who manages to send his mistress 800 text messages in a month is dysfunctional and has to go. EVERYONE in the Legislature has to go as well. They just do not get it that their spending is driving this state into bankruptcy. They so much want to be like California and unfortunately, fiscally, they are going to have their way. Too_much_government wrote on December 01, 2009 07:55 AM: Subcommittee to Review Regulations failed last week to adopt a regulation setting the unemployment tax rates for 2010. The Legislature is sine die. AFAIK, Gibbons hasn't called a special session. Why is that subcommittee meeting? If the crooked politicians want to further burden Nevada firms with unemployment insurance premiums (taxes) -- an actuarially unsound program to begin with -- let them wait until 2011 and do it out in the open. judy wrote on December 01, 2009 07:29 AM: Gibbons said he was "stunned that the Legislature would show such callous disregard" for families .... Is this the same Jim Gibbons who regjected the stimulus which allowed for additional unemployment benefits? What a piece of work this duffus is. Does he ever stop campaigning? SEE wrote on December 01, 2009 06:47 AM: Nevada Legislators screw the people AGAIN..... The State of Nevada is run by a bunch of CROOKS. Its bad enough it police and court abusive, with excessively high Cop Sales Tax's, but to deney unemployment benefits, will cause many to default their homes and sell out. Maybe thats what they want to happen. People of the world. DON'T move here. Its a bad place to live. Its ABUSIVE and CORRUPT.. See. We told you so..You wanted proof. So here it is.. The Nevada Legislature'show callous disregard for families.