Connect with us

Nevada

'Fierce Bipartisan Advocate' Enters Assembly Race With Partisan Baggage – Nevada Globe

Published

on

'Fierce Bipartisan Advocate' Enters Assembly Race With Partisan Baggage – Nevada Globe


Ryan Hampton, a self-proclaimed “fierce bipartisan advocate” who is endorsed by the Nevada Democratic party for Assembly District 4, vows to end toxic politics and seeks to find bipartisan solutions to “make real change for Nevada’s hard-working middle class.” Yet, Hampton’s public record indicates a strong, partisan alignment with Democratic politicians, controversial public statements, and outward support of left-of-center policies that do not align with his campaign’s claims.

A once-homeless and now-recovering opiod addict, Hampton became a career advocate against drug addiction starting a nonprofit organization advocating for people with addiction and mental health challenges. His nonprofit aligned with the Clinton Global Initiative’s Overdose Response Network. Prior to his opioid addiction, Hampton was a staffer at the Clinton White House in the 1990’s.

Since its inception, Hampton’s nonprofit has evolved into an organization that trains community organizers, with a focus on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in order to break down the barriers of systemic racism.

Working to dismantle systemic racism can require both community action and legislative advances. In Oregon, racial justice advocates are working to require racial impact statements from chief sponsors of all legislative bills to analyze potential impacts to black, indigenous, people of color (BIPOC) communities. Assessing existing and future state laws for racial impacts and consequences can help communities that historically have been most marginalized and make sure nobody is being left behind when drafting state policy that impacts the recovery community.

His organization highlights legislation in California, Oregon, New York and Maryland as models for legislative and systemic change, including the decriminalization of drugs and removing the box on job applications that asks potential employees about criminal records before an interview.

Ballot Measure 110, an Oregon statute passed three years ago, decriminalized the use and “small” possession of drugs (including heroin and fentanyl) in public spaces and provided voluntary addiction services through diverting cannabis tax revenue to addiction service providers. In two years, the state distributed over $300 million in marijuana tax revenue to 235 addiction services organizations, and reportedly treated 8,400 people.  The measure was lauded by Hampton 0n X (formerly Twitter).

Now, Oregon’s business and political leaders are highlighting the consequences and are fighting to have the measure revised, according to a report by Oregon Public Broadcasting:

“Ballot Measure 110 didn’t create Oregon’s homeless crisis or its behavioral health crisis or the rampant crime we are experiencing,” Max Williams, a former Republican state lawmaker and former head of the Oregon Department of Corrections, told Oregon Public Broadcasting. “But we know it’s making things worse.”

Williams stressed the latest ballot measures would not “repeal” the original, but would prohibit the use of hard drugs in certain spaces and make the use and possession of small amounts of methamphetamine, fentanyl and heroin illegal again.

Advertisement

The Globe asked Hampton about Ballot Measure 110 and if he would support similar legislation in Nevada.

Hampton replied, “I was not involved in the Measure 110 campaign, as I do not live in Oregon. Specific to Nevada, our healthcare infrastructure needs a lot of improvement. As a principle, I strongly believe we should never criminalize addiction. And people with addiction who have not committed crimes need treatment, not jail.”

In June, 2023, Hampton defended the homelessness crisis in San Francisco in a social media thread, calling the narrative a result of “sensationalist media” and that the city is “not much that different than any other big city you’ll visit in Anytown, USA.” The solution to the crisis, according to Hampton, is to “dismantle the system of social oppression.”

Ryan Hampton meets with President Joe Biden (Photo: @RyanForRecovery)

In 2019, Hampton wrote an op-ed for USA Today condemning border security efforts. “In order to save American lives, we don’t need to stop immigrants at our border, we need to stop America’s homegrown big pharma cartel,” Hampton claimed.

Today, the nation’s border crisis reached epic proportions. According to reports, a record-breaking wave of migrants crossed the southern border as 12,600 migrants flooded into Eagle Pass, TX. 4,000 migrants were taken into custody yesterday and border patrol is reporting that they are “overwhelmed,” with border-processing facilities at 260% over capacity.

Advertisement

The Globe reached out to Hampton for clarification/context of his 2019 editorial. Hampton told The Globe

“Clearly border security is an important topic that should be taken seriously; however, this reference was to show that Big Pharma companies are ravaging communities across our country and tearing apart families, from raising the costs to lifesaving medicines to fueling opioid addiction in America. We must take on these companies and save our communities from the overdose crisis they created. If elected to the State Assembly, I will make sure these companies do not take advantage of Nevadans.

We can address border security and immigration in a responsible manner — and actually tackle the overdose crisis with public health and safety solutions that will save lives — and at the same time hold the pharma billionaire criminals who helped create this crisis responsible.”

Assembly District 4 was formerly represented by Republican Assemblyman Richard McArthur, who is now running for and open state senate seat in District 18.

Latest statistics published by the Nevada Secretary of State show Assembly District 4 as a swing district with a near-equal number of registered Democrats, Republican and Independent voters. Governor Joe Lombardo has endorsed businesswoman Lisa Cole in a crowded Republican primary for the Northwest Las Vegas district.

Advertisement
Print Friendly, PDF & Email





Source link

Nevada

Can Nevada ride out Russ Vought? • Nevada Current

Published

on

Can Nevada ride out Russ Vought? • Nevada Current


The semi-celebrities and quacks (not that they’re mutually exclusive) get a lot of attention, but one recent appointment announced by Donald Trump is cause for even more concern, and especially for historically anti-government states like Nevada.

Trump on Friday named Russ Vought his director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Of all the Project 2025 authors, none is more eager to create chaos within and dismantle much of the federal bureaucracy than Vought

“We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected,” Vought has declared. “When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains.”

Advertisement

Minimizing the the federal workforce and traumatizing what’s left of it is Vought’s raison d’etre.

That might sound all “ooh, cool, that’ll teach ’em” — until the federal government can’t competently distribute grandma’s monthly Social Security benefit or process your federal income tax refund.

In Nevada, there are many dedicated state and local government employees who work hard to deliver a vast array of programs and services – from nutrition programs for low-income families to processing tax abatements for multi-billion-dollar corporations.

As in every state, those myriad programs and services and initiatives are contingent on federal money, or federal cooperation, or clarity and timeliness of federal rules and regulations.

And while there are many dedicated Nevadans working to provide and/or administer government programs and services the best they can, there are very rarely enough of them. Nevada can be very generous to big business. But when it comes to financing government, Nevada has always been a notoriously cheap state – bottom of the good lists, top of the bad lists, etc.

Advertisement

Vought’s – and Trump’s – crusade against federal civil servants promises to wreak havoc on the delivery of programs and services in every state, red and blue alike.

All states will struggle to compensate for the carnage Vought vows to inflict on the United States civil service.

The states that will have the best fighting chance of safeguarding continued and competent delivery of vital services will be those with something approaching adequately funded and staffed state and local government. Nevada has never been one of those.

***

A pleasant (if short-lived) surprise. But back to the aforementioned quacks and semi-celebrities… it’s as if Trump has been deliberately debasing his own supporters, nominating obviously outlandish and offensive people to jobs they have no business being anywhere near, for the depraved satisfaction of watching his followers – both those who are elected and those within the electorate – obsequiously go along with whatever he says or does.

Advertisement

Initially it looked as if Republican senators were prepared to surrender unconditionally, and  grovel in submission while Trump insults their intelligence and rubs their noses in it.

So their willingness to tell Trump to shove his nomination of Matt Gaetz you know where, is a fine thing.

So that’s on the bright side.

On the not so bright side… Yes, though it’s a low bar – subterranean, even – Pam Bondi, the person Trump has named to be AG instead of Gaetz, is far more competent than Gaetz. But she’s also no less loyal to Dear Leader, meaning she could be even worse for the nation and the rule of law than Gaetz. And not surprisingly – her being an extreme Trump loyalist and all – she has documented dalliances with corruption (shielding the Trump University grift) and rejecting reality (election denier).

Stay strong, Republican senators,

Advertisement

Portions of this column were originally published in recent editions of the Daily Current newsletter, which is free and which you can subscribe to here.



Source link

Continue Reading

Nevada

NEVADA VIEWS: Lessons from Nevada’s Question 3

Published

on

NEVADA VIEWS: Lessons from Nevada’s Question 3


A majority of Nevada voters rejected Question 3 on the Nov. 5 ballot. This complex amendment would have eliminated party primaries, advanced five candidates to general elections and introduced a new voting method in general elections

I moved to Nevada in 2021 to care for my aging mother. Before that time, I lived in Maine, where I led efforts that opened Maine’s primaries to all voters and protected the nation’s first statewide ranked-choice voting law.

My values and experience inform me that initiatives to change how we elect our leaders should make their way to voters as the result of home-grown and grassroots movements that are thoughtful, collaborative, strategic and patient.

I am dumbfounded that out-of-state donors and advocates would come into Nevada, steamroll stakeholders and potential allies, rush a constitutional amendment to ballot and spend millions to score a quick win for their preferred policy prescription to our political ills.

Advertisement

As a recent Review-Journal editorial noted, the national coalition behind Question 3 pushed similar initiatives in other states in 2024. Voters rejected each of these proposals.

Here are a few of my takeaways from these failed efforts:

■ Mission and strategy must align. Election reform is inherently hopeful and optimistic. Ramming through policy changes and seeking to buy elections are anti-democratic and deeply cynical approaches to politics. Coalitions with antithetical missions and strategies will almost always fail to achieve the real and lasting change that they seek.

■ Patience is practical. Process matters. How change is made can be as important as what change is made, especially when it comes to process reforms. Elections and voting reform initiatives must be organized by local leaders who will build coalitions and recruit volunteers to secure majority support for their cause, one voter and one conversation at a time. The proper role of national groups is not to lead or dictate, but to support.

■ There is no single solution to fix our broken politics. There are 50 states and more than 50 ways of conducting elections and voting in the United States. While policymakers and advocates should learn from one another, we should be skeptical of anyone or any group that promises a silver bullet or pushes a one-size-fits-all solution.

Advertisement

Voters aren’t stupid. We have a sense when politicians and special interests are trying to put one over on us. Question 3 didn’t pass the straight-face test.

That’s too bad because my experience with ranked-choice voting in Maine has taught me that it works to eliminate vote-splitting and ensure majority winners. You have the freedom to vote for the candidate you like best without worrying that your vote will be “wasted” or that you will help to elect the candidate you like least. In both Maine and Alaska, ranked-choice voting has stopped extreme candidates from winning congressional races.

Ranked-choice voting also increases voter turnout, reduces negative campaigning and encourages more women and minorities to run for office.

Surveys from the states and cities in which millions of Americans rank their vote indicate that voters find it to be simple and easy to use and preferable.

One of the most disappointing false attacks on ranked-choice voting is that communities of color might find it difficult to rank candidates. To suggest that white voters are intellectually superior to voters of color is a racist argument.

Advertisement

Nevadans are frustrated with politics as usual. We know that our system isn’t working like it should. We know that billionaires and corporations have too much power and influence over decisions that affect us all. We want to strengthen our democracy for future generations.

Had the national advocates behind Question 3 approached this effort differently, I believe that there might have been a different outcome.

Kyle Bailey moved to Nevada in 2021 and previously served in the Maine House of Representatives.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Nevada

Nevada high school football championships 2024: How to watch state finals online

Published

on

Nevada high school football championships 2024: How to watch state finals online


The Nevada state high school football championships are here. Here’s how you can watch any of the championship games online on NFHS network.

Watch: Nevada High School football championships

The NIAA state football championships will air from Nov. 23 to Nov. 26 in Las Vegas, Nevada.

How can I watch Nevada high school football? Fans can subscribe to NFHS Sports Network, a nationwide streaming platform for more than 9,000 high school sports. You can find the list of available schools here.

Advertisement

How much does an NFHS subscription cost? Is there a free trial to NFHS Network? An annual subscription costs $79.99, or you can pay monthly for $11.99 per month.

Can you watch NFHS on your phone or TV? NFHS Network is available on smart TVs like Apple TV, Roku, Amazon Fire and Google Chromecast, as well as on iOS and Android smartphones.

Nov. 23:

10 a.m. PT: 2024 NIAA 2A Football Championship Incline Vs. Pershing County

1:30 p.m. PT: 2024 NIAA 5A Div. II Football Championship Faith Lutheran Vs. Bishop Manogue

Advertisement

Nov. 25:

Noon PT: 2024 NIAA 5A Div. III Football Championship Galena Vs. Centennial

Nov. 26:

9 a.m. PT: 2024 NIAA 1A Football Championship Pahranagat Valley Vs. Tonopah

12:20 p.m. PT: 2024 NIAA 3A Football Championship Truckee Vs. SLAM Nevada

Advertisement

3:40 p.m. PT: 2024 NIAA 4A Football Championship Canyon Springs Vs. Mojave

7 p.m. PT: 2024 NIAA 5A Div. I Football Championship Arbor View Vs. Bishop Gorman

Advertisement

Thank you for relying on us to provide the journalism you can trust.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending