OnTheIssuesLogo

Steven Horsford on Government Reform

 

 


Audit the cost of capital punishment

AB501: Provides for an audit of the fiscal costs of the death penalty.

Analysis by Center Right NV blog: AB501 calls for the legislative auditor to examine the costs of capital cases compared to non-death penalty cases. The study includes pre-trial, trial and appeal costs, plus how much it costs to keep an inmate on death row.

Veto message analysis by Nevada Prison Watch blog analysis of Veto Message: Sandoval was not convinced it would be a fair audit. "The bill lists the costs to be assessed in determining the overall fiscal impact of the imposition of the death penalty, but it does not specify how it is these costs will be assessed," the governor said. Sandoval said that death row inmates make "individualized litigation choices" that drive up the costs of their cases.

Legislative Outcome: Passed Assembly 28-14-0 on Apr/25/11; Passed Senate 11-10-0 on May/28/11; Senate Majority Leader Horsford voted YES; Vetoed by Gov. Sandoval on May/31/11.

Source: Analysis of Nevada legislative voting record AB501 , May 28, 2011

Approved legislative majority-minority redistricting

AB566: Revises the state legislative districts and revises the districts from which Representatives of Congress are elected..

Analysis by Ballotpedia.org: Both parties have claimed to have the best interests of minority voters at heart in their map. Republicans accuse Democrats of diluting reliably Democratic Hispanic votes to maximize the party's chances without giving equal consideration to what Hispanics specifically want. Democrats shoot back that the GOP is, far from creating majority-minority district to benefit Hispanics, actually packing them in order to weaken their power overall.

Gov. Sandoval's veto message: The plan reflected in the bill did not provide for the fair representation of the people of the state of Nevada, nor did it comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Legislative Outcome: Passed Assembly 26-16-0 on May/18/11; Passed Senate 11-10-0 on May/25/11; Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford voted YES; Vetoed by Gov. Sandova

Source: Ballotpedia analysis: Nevada legislative voting record AB566 , May 25, 2011

Full disclosure of campaign spending.

Horsford co-sponsored DISCLOSE 2013 Act

Disclosure of Information on Spending on Campaigns Leads to Open and Secure Elections Act of 2013 or DISCLOSE 2013 Act:

Source: H.R.148 13-HR0148 on Jan 3, 2013

No photo IDs to vote; they suppress the vote.

Horsford signed Voting Rights Amendment Act

Congressional Summary:Amends the Voting Rights Act of 1965 with respect to the requirement that a federal court retain jurisdiction for an appropriate period to prevent commencement of new devices to deny or abridge the right to vote. Expands the types of violations triggering the authority of a court to retain such jurisdiction to include certain violations of the Act as well as violations of any federal voting rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. [This bill would ban requiring photo IDs in order to vote].

Opponents recommend voting NO because:Sen. Bob Dole (on related bill from 2007, whether to add an amendment allowing photo ID): I am proposing a commonsense measure to uphold the integrity of Federal elections. My amendment to require voters to show photo identification at the polls would go a long way in minimizing potential for voter fraud. When a fraudulent vote is cast and counted, the vote of a legitimate voter is cancelled. This is wrong, and my amendment would help ensure that one of the hallmarks of our democracy, our free and fair elections, is protected. Opinion polls repeatedly confirm that Americans overwhelmingly support this initiative.

Proponents support voting YES because:Sen. Dianne Feinstein (on related bill from 2007): If one would want to suppress the vote in the 2008 election, one would vote [for Dole's amendment] this because this measure goes into effect January 1, 2008. It provides that everybody who votes essentially would have to have a photo ID. If you want to suppress the minority vote, the elderly vote, the poor vote, this is exactly the way to do it. Many of these people do not have driver's licenses. This amendment would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to actually carry out. It goes into effect--surprise--January 1, 2008 [to affect the presidential election].

Source: H.R.3899/S.1945 14_H3899 on Jan 16, 2014

Establish "My Voice Voucher" small campaign contributions.

Horsford co-sponsored Government By the People Act

Congressional summary:

Proponent's argument in favor (by Reps. Nancy Pelosi & John Sarbanes): Citizens United shook the foundation of our democracy: the principle that it is the voices of the people, not the bank accounts of the privileged few, that determine the outcome of our elections and the policies of our government. Most members of Congress would leap at the chance to fund their campaigns without having to turn to a familiar cast of big donors and entrenched interests. Today, that's virtually impossible. But we can and must break the grip of special interests on our politics: rally around H.R. 20.

Opponent's argument against (The Examiner): The proposed legislation seeks to undo the Citizens United v. FEC ruling which has been a thorn in the side of progressives ever since the Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that political spending was "a form of protected speech under the First Amendment." Although the "Government by the People Act" innocently claims to want to get big money out of politics, the real goal is to smash the Tea Party. The fear that conservative groups would have access to funds typically granted to progressive groups and unions was too much to bear.

Source: H.R.20 14-H0020 on Feb 5, 2014

Holiday on election day; revamp for easier voting access.

Horsford voted YEA For the People Act of 2019