THE EIGHTH DAY

Carson City (Monday), February 10, 2003

Senate called to order at 11:06 a.m.

President Hunt presiding.

Roll called.

All present.

Prayer by the Chaplain, Reverend Louie Locke.

Lord, we thank You for another beautiful day. We ask for Your blessings, Your leadings, Your guidance and wisdom in all areas of the legislative processes. Bless and protect this body of Senators, their staff and families. We also ask for Your ongoing care and protection for the many of our servicemen and women during this important time. And finally, “Let all those who seek You rejoice and be glad in You, and let those who love Your salvation say continually, Let God be magnified!” (Psalm 70.4)

Amen.

Pledge of allegiance to the Flag.

Senator Raggio moved that further reading of the Journal be dispensed with, and the President and Secretary be authorized to make the necessary corrections and additions.

Motion carried.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Madam President:

Your Committee on Commerce and Labor, to which was referred Senate Bill No. 11, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Do pass.

Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman

MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND NOTICES

By the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities:

Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 3—Urging each community in Nevada to form a coalition of agencies and service providers to reduce the number of suicides and provide support for survivors.

Senator Rawson moved that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities.

Motion carried.

By the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities:

Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 4—Urging the Clark County Health District to plan and coordinate a public information campaign relating to suicide prevention and expand injury prevention efforts in Clark County.

Senator Rawson moved that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities.

Motion carried.

By the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities:

Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 5—Urging agencies in Clark County to cooperate in the establishment of a plan for suicide prevention in Clark County.

Senator Rawson moved that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities.

Motion carried.

INTRODUCTION, FIRST READING AND REFERENCE

By the Committee on Government Affairs:

Senate Bill No. 71—AN ACT relating to contractors; authorizing a contractor to withhold money or require a surety bond to guarantee the payment of certain indebtedness of subcontractors and other contractors; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.

Senator O'Connell moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.

Motion carried.

By the Committee on Judiciary:

Senate Bill No. 72—AN ACT relating to conservation camps; authorizing the State Forester Firewarden of the Division of Forestry of the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources to determine the amount of wages that must be paid to offenders who participate in conservation camps and who perform work relating to fire fighting and other work projects of conservation camps; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.

Senator Amodei moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Natural Resources.

Motion carried.

By the Committee on Judiciary:

Senate Bill No. 73—AN ACT relating to juries; revising the provisions governing exemptions from jury service; revising the provisions governing the selection of jurors in certain counties; revising the provisions regarding the compensation of jurors; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.

Senator Amodei moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

Motion carried.

By the Committee on Judiciary:

Senate Bill No. 74—AN ACT relating to firearms; authorizing a person who holds a permit to carry a concealed firearm issued by another state to carry a concealed firearm in this state under certain circumstances; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.

Senator Amodei moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

Motion carried.

SECOND READING AND AMENDMENT

Senate Bill No. 7.

Bill read second time and ordered to third reading.

SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY

Veto Messages of the Governor

The hour of 11 a.m. having arrived, Vetoed Senate Bill No. 56 of the 71st Session was considered.

Vetoed Senate Bill No. 56 of the 71st Session.

Bill read.

Governor's message stating his objections read.

MESSAGES FROM THE GOVERNOR

State of Nevada

Executive Chamber

Carson City, Nevada 89701

June 12, 2001

The Honorable Senator William J. Raggio, Majority Leader, Nevada State Senate, Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada 89710

Dear Senator Raggio:

I am herewith forwarding to you, for filing within the constitutional time limit, and without my approval, Senate Bill No. 56 of the 71st Session, entitled:

AN ACT relating to transportation; creating the legislative oversight committee on transportation; prescribing the membership and powers of the committee; revising certain provisions concerning the board of directors of the department of transportation; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.

Senate Bill No. 56 of the 71st Session establishes a legislative committee on transportation that would evaluate, review and comment on issues related to transportation in this State. I commend this effort to study transportation issues in light of the growing population in our State. However, I do not support establishing another committee at taxpayer expense when the existing fiscal resources of Nevada are so limited that substantial cuts were made during the legislative session to programs furthering the health safety and welfare of our citizens.

The important goals of this legislation can be accomplished without creating another governmental committee. For instance, this committee, if approved, could receive reports concerning expenditures and other financial matters of the Department of Transportation (“The Department”). This type of information is already available to Legislators and legislative staff. Nonetheless, I have instructed the Department to contact the Legislative Counsel Bureau to develop a schedule for providing this information to Legislators and legislative staff. This schedule will provide a method for Legislators to receive information about the Department and will allow them to study issues related to transportation during the interim without having to create another governmental committee.

I recognize some may be concerned that this committee is needed to allow the public an opportunity to comment on issues related to transportation. However, the Board of Directors of the Department of Transportation (“The Board”) has already held four public meetings this year on transportation issues. These were open meetings and agendas for the meetings were posted throughout the State. During each meeting, the Board allowed for public comment and citizens present in Carson City or Las Vegas were able to provide input on relevant matters. Therefore, another governmental committee will not materially improve the ability of our citizens to comment on transportation issues affecting this State.

The Board also annually approves a report entitled Transportation Projects, which covers a ten-year period. Included in the report are the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program and the Annual Work Program. As Chairman of the Board, I invite the sponsors of Senate Bill No. 56 of the 71st Session and other Legislators to come before the Board and comment on these reports or other transportation matters affecting our citizens. This will provide Legislators with ample opportunity to publicly discuss transportation issues and does not require taxpayers to fund another governmental committee.

Senate Bill No. 56 of the 71st Session further describes this legislative committee as an oversight committee on transportation and places this committee within Chapter 408 of our statutes. Chapter 408 is known as the Highways and Roads Law. This chapter has historically given to the Board the executive authority to manage the state highways and roads. Senate Bill No. 56 of the 71st Session, however, sets forth that, “it is the express intent of the legislature to make the Board, in consultation with the legislative oversight committee on transportation, custodian of the state highways and roads” and allows this legislative committee to make “recommendations” on matters pending before the Board. All of this language is troublesome because it appears to require the Board to receive prior approval for its decisions from the legislative oversight committee. If true, this raises serious constitutional questions.

The State Constitution distributes governmental powers equally among the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Branches. Each branch is vested with defined powers. When a branch of governments acts, it is presumptively exercising the power the constitution has delegated to it.

The legislature possesses the legislative power of our state government. Legislative power is the power of law-making representative bodies to frame and enact laws, and to amend or repeal them. The United States Supreme Court has determined that when a legislative branch takes action that has the “purpose and effect of altering legal rights, duties and relations of persons outside the legislative branch” then “it must take action by the procedures authorized in the Constitution.”

A review of the legislative oversight committee’s powers reveals that it could alter “the legal rights, duties and relations of persons outside the legislative branch” through its oversight of our state highways and roads. However, the State Constitution does not provide any procedures for this legislative committee, which is composed of four legislators, to carry out this function. Therefore, if the legislative oversight committee is exercising legislative power, it appears to be exercising this power outside the procedures set forth in our State Constitution. Our highest court has strictly forbidden such an endeavor.

The Legislature may also not invest itself or its members with executive power. A delegation of executive power to members of the Legislative Branch constitutes an aggrandizement of power by the Legislative Branch. Such an encroachment alters the balance of our three co-equal branches of government.

Legislative encroachments into the Executive Branch are labeled a legislative veto. A legislative veto can take various forms. However, the essential elements of this concept arise when the Legislative Branch grants to itself, one of its Houses, or some of its members the ability to influence the execution of laws through a process not authorized by the Constitution. This reservation of authority by the Legislative Branch violates the separation of powers doctrine. Therefore, if the members of this legislative oversight committee are exercising executive power, then they are exercising this power in violation of our State Constitution.

In conclusion, I cannot support the creation of this legislative oversight committee because it implicates the separation of powers between the branches of our state government. Therefore, I am exercising my right to veto this legislation.

Sincerely,

Kenny C. Guinn

Governor of Nevada

The question was put: "Shall the bill pass, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor?"

Remarks by Senators Titus, Schneider, Neal, Amodei and Coffin.

Senator Titus requested that the following remarks be entered in the Journal.

Senator Titus:

Madam President, with all due respect to the Governor, I must rise in opposition to his veto of Senate Bill No. 56 of the 71st Session, which created a much-needed legislative oversight committee for transportation. A great deal has happened since the Governor vetoed Senate Bill No. 56 of the 71st Session, and a great deal more is anticipated in the next 110 days which make this proposed oversight committee even more critical.

First, let me address the Governor’s arguments specifically:

The goal of oversight is not achieved under the current structure because the Legislature cannot participate in any discussions or ask questions of the Transportation Board.

Second, the Governor incorrectly states this committee would be placed in Nevada Revised Statutes chapter 408; rather, it is in chapter 218, which deals specifically with the Legislature.

Third, oversight functions are common and do not constitute a breach of separation of powers at the federal or state level. For example, the Lake Tahoe oversight committee is often consulted on various policy matters, including when a species is listed as endangered.

Having said all that, however, the main reason we need this committee is to assure the public we are watching their tax dollars closely. We must be vigilant and guarantee public dollars are spent in the most efficient, effective and judicious manner possible. Nowhere is this more critical than the area of transportation.

The Nevada Department of Transportation spent over $368 million for fiscal year 2001-2002 and has come with a budget request for next year which is $619.8 million, or a 68 percent increase, with another 8 percent increase for 2004-2005 to $670 million. These figures represent approximately 10 percent of the total projected expenditures for state agencies. The budget also includes 42 new positions for NDOT.

Furthermore, in his State of the State address, the Governor called for the issuance of a total of $524 million in bonds for the completion of several highway projects in the north and south including the Carson City Bypass and the Henderson Spaghetti Bowl.

And let us not forget that these tax dollars will be spent by an agency that was recently audited by our own Legislative Counsel Bureau’s auditor and was found to have serious problems. Let me just quote some of the conclusions of the audit.

“The department’s short-term and long-term transportation planning efforts need to be improved. Important aspects of the process are unclear and poorly documented. Also decisions about projects prioritization were made without explicitly using criteria and data. Furthermore, NDOT has performed little, long-term financial planning concerning its needs and resources. As a result, decision-makers DO NOT have complete information to make decisions about the State’s transportation system and stakeholders DO NOT have the information to fully participate in the process.”

The agency has a new acting Director who may or may not become permanent and has not yet proven himself able to make the recommended changes.

Finally, the voters in Washoe and Clark Counties passed ballot initiatives which include tax increases for various transportation improvements by their respective RTCs. These figures amount to $2.7 billion over the next 25 years in Clark County and $820 million in Washoe County. Legislators must authorize the taxes and should maintain oversight of the activities they finance.

Clearly, this is not the time to “step back,” but rather, we should “step up.” The public is crying for more accountability. As we look at the possibility of raising taxes, we should do everything in our power to have strict oversight over government agencies that spend the public’s money. I oppose the Governor’s veto.

Senator Schneider:

Thank you, Madam President, to you, and through you to the members of this esteemed body. No member of this body voted against this bill two years ago in this House or the other House. My district is dissected right though the middle by Interstate 215 with stoplights everywhere and construction stops. We are getting ready to spend hundreds of millions of dollars, and I am afraid we do not have any oversight over all the money that is being spent.

On the north end of my district is the U.S. 95 express way, totally under construction, and this past weekend Decauter Boulevard at U.S. 95 was shut down and surface streets were clogged and over congested. Who is watching that money? On the east side of my district is Interstate 15, and for the past six years, as I left this House on my way home to Las Vegas on Friday at 2:00 p.m., equipment would be stopped and parked. Is this how our money is spent, and who is watching? How do people quit working at 2:00 p.m. and go home? We are spending hundreds of millions of dollars, and I know my constituents want to know how that money is being spent. In Clark County, there is a boondoggle going on over a big government building. It is running tens of millions over budget, and it is now a year past the due date. The citizens are getting upset over it because it appears no one has been in control of the project.

I am standing to support the Governor on this bill, to work with him and not go to war with him about it. Please help us get some oversight over these billions of dollars that are going to be spent over the next few years.

Senator Neal:

Though, I agree with their explanation of the issue, I will be opposed to the Governor’s veto for different reasons than those expressed by my colleagues. When I read the Governor’s veto letter, I find the letter to be unusual in the way he arrives at the fact that this Legislature is encroaching upon the executive power. Nowhere in this veto letter does the Governor sight a constitutional provision that is being violated, even though he states that the Legislature is wrong to try to exercise this oversight. I gather from reading his letter that any act passed by this Legislature would put the Governor in charge of a committee or board and that the Legislature is forever excluded from making any laws governing the operation of that board. The Nevada Department of Transportation Board, which the Governor sits upon, is not covered in the Nevada Constitution. It is covered by statute. If the argument is that once this Legislature passes a statute giving authority to the Governor to sit on a board along with other individuals, then it seems to me, the Legislature is forever forbidden from making any changes. That is not the case here. For that to happen, the act of sitting on the board must emanate from the Constitution itself and not from statute. Then the Legislature could not touch that board or make any rules governing the operation of that board.

The Governor seems to be, if I might state, exercising a Saddam Hussein mentality, as long as he is the head of something the Legislature created, the Legislature cannot touch it even though the Legislature allows for him sit on the board. That is wrong, and it is wrong public policy. If we allow that to happen, then we, in effect, have given up our legislative authority to make rules and regulations governing this State.

There are many other committees the Governor sits upon and the Nevada Board of Pardons is one of them. That is written into the Constitution. We cannot dictate nor can we touch what he can do on that board. We can, when we legislate, make the laws governing the operation of that board.

The Governor’s veto is saying we cannot do that when he is on the board. I would hate to sit here and think that as a Legislative Branch that is supposed to operate under separation of powers, that we cannot act legislatively unless the Governor tells us what we should do. That is wrong. We have to have some type of independence in making the laws of this State.

Of course, we are not supposed to encroach on executive powers. They are written into the Constitution. Where the powers are not covered by the Constitution, then the Legislature is free to act. The board the Governor is talking about is not covered by the Constitution of this State. Even though he states it in his letter, he does not make any citations as to where this could be found. He goes as far as to utilize a Supreme Court decision. That has no bearing upon what we have done here. We are talking about state operation. We are talking about oversight. When you cannot have oversight of millions of dollars then why should we be here? We should sit at home and just answer the telephone telling the Governor to do what he wants because we are not needed. This body has these powers. There are distinct differences between the legislative powers, the executive powers and the judicial powers of this State. One cannot encroach upon the other. If we vote to sustain the Governor’s veto, we are saying that once the Governor is placed on a committee created legislatively, then the Legislature is forever barred from doing anything about that committee or that operation. I find that to be the wrong public policy for this Legislature to consider.

Senator Amodei:

Thank you, Madam President. My name is one of the names on the bill. This is an issue that is serious. With respect to Senator Neal, I am not a constitutional scholar but I find myself agreeing with many of the things he indicated as to whether or not this is a legitimate topic for oversight. Senator Titus’ citations to the audit report were accurate.

I think I am going to vote to uphold the veto. It will be because of things that happened during the interim. We did exercise our rightful oversight authority to conduct an audit through the Legislative Commission. For those of you who sat on the audit committee, Senator Neal was there, I was very proud of the work the committee did. When you see someone like the Minority Leader citing from it, the work the audit people did was excellent. I am proud of what they produced. It was very accurate. I am not happy about the way we had to get it, but we did. When you look at the agency’s response to that report, there is a draft report of compliance. The agency accepted all of those audit findings Senator Titus correctly cited for you. The final report on how they are going to respond is due in 30 days. We will have a chance, and for those of you who have not looked at the draft report, I encourage you to do so for purposes of seeing how they are responding to our concerns. I agree this is an appropriate area for contacts and oversight. I expect we will continue to oversee this area.

Letting the veto stand is not the final issue in terms of constitutionality or this issue area. If need be, we can revisit, again, just like we did the issue of the audit. As you all know, leadership is going through an evolutionary phase in that department. They ought to be given a chance to respond to the audit report. So far, they have done so on time. Let us take a look and see what they are doing, and if we are not happy with their response, then we will have options available to us throughout this session and during the interim.

As one of the sponsors of the bill, I will be supporting the veto.

Senator Coffin:

It astounds me that the honorable Senator from Carson City who was a sponsor of the bill has defended the Governor’s position on this bill. I know, as Senator Titus has said, we are trying to treat this with the utmost respect to the Governor of the State, but I think what we just heard from the previous speaker was a promise. It is a promise made this session and for ten other sessions during which I served in this Legislature. It is a promise to us from former Governors and on and on and on. Observing us, today, is a former Senator with 40 years of service, and he has heard that promise repeatedly. There is always the promise of change. My good friend, Grant Sawyer, who passed away seven years ago this month, told me when he was Governor, from 1959-1966, that he could never get a handle on the Department of Transportation. It was impossible. There was a culture there, inbred with nepotism, friendships and networks, impossible for a Governor to conquer―imagine that. He had spoken to previous Governors, and they said the same thing. Forty, fifty, sixty years with no change.

When Nevada was a small state and the department was based up here with the vast majority of its employees based in Carson City, we could live with it. Today, in the 21st century, nothing has changed. The vast majority who design and oversee construction of the highways, particularly in Clark County, more than 400 miles away, do not drive the roads. They do not know what we are living with. They do not know what your constituents are living with in Clark County. You drive these roads. Your constituents drive them, and they die on them. They die and are maimed every year because of bad design or bad delineation, created, constructed and responsible by people right here in Carson City who cannot see the blood on the highway.

While there has been a lot of talk of money and constitutional discussions about whether or not we have the right to stick our nose into this to have something to say about it, I want you to see the face of death. I want you to think about what your constituents feel when they are driving. Not just the anger about the sloppy construction times and wondering about when things will be completed, but what happens when it is finished, when the lines go this way and that, and people are weaving and bobbing and do not know where they are because they cannot see the lines. These problems lead to death over and over again.

If we do not reassert our position, as we unanimously did during the last session, we are leaving the lives of our constituents to hang twisting in the wind one more time. If you could vote for this bill once, you can vote to override the veto. Someone, please, rise and tell me that the life of their constituents is not important. Thank you, Madam President.

Senator Amodei:

Thank you, Madam President, again, just briefly, so that the record is clear on my remarks. My remarks are not a vote to make somebody’s life unimportant in a highway safety context. While my colleague from Clark County has made his position clear, I would appreciate it if my remarks could be defined by me as opposed by somebody else on the floor. I am not suggesting that oversight is not appropriate because I believe that it is and should continue. I would suggest to you that we have done oversight over the Department of Transportation in the past and that we will continue to do even more. If this issue is not resolved, I am not asking you to wait for anything. Obviously, people are going to vote the way they want to on the floor today. I am saying that I am going to give these folks, with the new leadership, a chance to perform. If that does not materialize to my satisfaction, then we are early enough in the session that we can do things. This is a timing issue in my mind, and it is a performance issue. Nobody made any promises, and I am not going to vote or not vote on the basis of any promises. I am going to be watching what the good folks at the Department of Transportation do and the folks in the executive branch do. To anyone who thinks that this is a vote about the disregard of highway safety in this State, I can only tell you that it is not, and that if I say that, then I will take on that responsibility. But in the interim, those categorizing my vote for me would please do so after consultation with me.

The roll was called, and the Senate sustained the veto of the Governor by the following vote:

Roll call on Senate Bill No. 56 of the 71st Session.

Yeas—8.

Nays—Amodei, Cegavske, Hardy, McGinness, Nolan, O'Connell, Raggio, Rawson, Rhoads, Shaffer, Tiffany, Townsend, Washington—13.

Vetoed Senate Bill No. 536 of the 71st Session.

Bill read.

Governor's message stating his objections read.

MESSAGES FROM THE GOVERNOR

State of Nevada

Executive Chamber

Carson City, Nevada 89701

June 12, 2001

The Honorable Senator William J. Raggio, Majority Leader, Nevada State Senate, Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada 89710

Dear Senator Raggio:

I am herewith forwarding to you, for filing within the constitutional time limit, and without my approval, Senate Bill No. 536 of the 71st Session, entitled:

AN ACT relating to the control of air pollution; requiring the creation, by cooperative agreement, of a separate entity to establish and administer a program for the control of air pollution in certain counties; setting forth the powers and duties of such an entity; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.

For the reasons set forth below, I must veto Senate Bill No. 536 of the 71st Session. The provisions of Senate Bill No. 536 of the 71st Session would, in part, amend chapter 445B of NRS to mandate that:

In a county whose population is 400,000 or more, the board of county commissioners of the county and the governing body of each city in the county shall, acting jointly, enter into a cooperative agreement pursuant to chapter 277 of NRS to create a separate legal entity for the control of air pollution within the county.

The proper control, management and mitigation of air quality problems in southern Nevada is an issue that is crucial to this State. One step in this process is combining the planning, regulatory and enforcement functions in one agency. However, the creation of this agency without the passage of the companion-funding bill, S.B. No. 357 of the 71st Session, has the potential to do more harm than good. I cannot support the creation of an agency without a proper source of funding to accomplish its mission.

Additionally, the creation of the agency with a stable, on-going funding source is one of the criteria by which the federal Environmental Protection Agency will judge the quality of our efforts. Creation of the agency without funding could jeopardize EPA compliance and result in substantial fines and loss of federal funding. Both our State Environmental Protection staff and Clark County staff have indicated that it is possible to consolidate these functions at the county level through inter-local agreements, and that the program could be managed adequately.

Since Senate Bill No. 536 of the 71st Session would expressly prohibit any local government entity from managing the air quality program, if enacted, this bill would make such inter-local agreements impossible. Therefore, it is my opinion that because this bill does not provide any funding mechanism to implement the mandated programs, it does not constitute good public policy.

Sincerely,

Kenny C. Guinn

Governor of Nevada

The question was put: ‘Shall the bill pass notwithstanding objections of the Governor?"

Remarks by Senators Rhoads and Titus

Senator Rhoads requested that the following remarks be entered in the Journal.

Senator Rhoads:

Madam President, Senate Bill No. 536 of the 71st Session would have created a new Air Quality Management organization in Clark County, replacing the designation of the County Board of Commissioners, a designation in place since 1978. The bill provided that the new body would be formed by an inter-local agreement among the city and county governments in Clark County, and prohibited any other body from involvement in managing air quality.

The funding for the new agency was contained in a separate bill, S.B. No. 357 of the 71st Session, which was not passed by the Legislature. After consulting the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection and the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the Governor vetoed the bill because there would not be adequate funding to implement the plan, meet federal requirements and avoid sanctions.

The Governor is responsible for the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Air Quality and, under federal and state law, may designate a local agency in areas on non-attainment. Failure with the SIP, including the local non-attainment areas such as Clark County, would have subjected the State to sanctions.

There is considerable oversight of the county by the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection, the State Environmental Commission, the Governor and the Federal Government. In addition, NRS 445B.503 requires the Regional Transportation Commission to ensure a “program of integrated, long-range planning that conserves the economic, financial and natural resources of the region.”

The Governor also holds quarterly meetings with members of the Department of Air Quality Management and any local government representatives who wish to attend. These meetings are designed to get regular progress reports on the efforts of the county to meet state and federal requirements.

The Department of Air Quality Management has made good progress towards its goals and is serving the Clark County citizens well in improving air quality and avoiding costly federal sanctions.

Senator Titus:

Thank you, Madam President. I too rise in support on the Governor’s action on this. I originally sat on the interim committee that was chaired by former State Senator Jon Porter who recommended that we have a regional body for air quality in southern Nevada because we did not think that air quality stopped at the boundary. Since that time, however, when the county took this over, the reports are that they are doing a good job and that we are moving out of the category of non-containment. Everybody says that Christine Robinson is doing an excellent job. The local governments, after some initial complaining about the county taking it over, now seem to think that things are going along smoothly. I will support the Governor in his action on this matter.

The roll was called, and the Senate sustained the veto of the Governor by the following vote:

Roll call on Senate Bill No. 536 of the 71st Session.

Yeas—None.

Nays—Amodei, Care, Carlton, Cegavske, Coffin, Hardy, Mathews, McGinness, Neal, Nolan, O'Connell, Raggio, Rawson, Rhoads, Schneider, Shaffer, Tiffany, Titus, Townsend, Washington, Wiener—21.

MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND NOTICES

By Senators Rawson, Amodei, Care, Carlton, Cegavske, Coffin, Hardy, Mathews, McGinness, Neal, Nolan, O'Connell, Raggio, Rhoads, Schneider, Shaffer, Tiffany, Titus, Townsend, Washington, Wiener; Assemblymen Koivisto, Anderson, Andonov, Angle, Arberry, Atkinson, Beers, Brown, Buckley, Carpenter, Chowning, Christensen, Claborn, Collins, Conklin, Geddes, Gibbons, Giunchigliani, Goicoechea, Goldwater, Grady, Griffin, Gustavson, Hardy, Hettrick, Horne, Knecht, Leslie, Mabey, Manendo, Marvel, McClain, McCleary, Mortenson, Oceguera, Ohrenschall, Parks, Perkins, Pierce, Sherer, Weber and Williams:

Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 6—Commending Nevadans for Antibiotic Awareness for its work on preventing the abuse of antibiotics, and urging public and private health agencies to continue to work together to prevent the abuse of antibiotics in this state.

WHEREAS, Antibiotics are strong medicines used to treat infections caused by bacteria, and they have been responsible since their discovery in the 1940s for dramatically reducing illness and death caused by infectious diseases and for revolutionizing medical care in the 20th century; and

WHEREAS, In the United States and throughout the world many bacteria are becoming resistant to antibiotics, thereby reducing the ability of antibiotics to effectively control bacterial growth and treat infectious diseases; and

WHEREAS, Antibiotics are only effective against bacterial infections and thus should only be used to treat bacterial infections and not to treat viral infections such as the common cold, cough, most sore throats and the flu; and

WHEREAS, According to the Centers for Disease Control, up to 50 percent of antibiotic use may be inappropriate; and

WHEREAS, The widespread overuse and abuse of antibiotics promotes the spread of antibiotic resistance thus jeopardizing the usefulness of essential medicines; and

WHEREAS, Antibiotic resistance can cause significant danger and suffering for children and adults who have common infections which were at one time easily treatable with antibiotics, making antibiotic resistance one of the world’s most pressing public health problems as well as one of the top concerns of the Centers for Disease Control; and

WHEREAS, The consequences of larger numbers of bacteria becoming resistant to antibiotics include extra visits to health care providers, hospitalization and extended hospital stays, the need for more expensive antibiotics to replace the ineffective antibiotics, lost time at school or work, and sometimes death; and

WHEREAS, Persons who are ill and the parents of ill children can prevent the development of antibiotic-resistant infections by ensuring that antibiotics are only taken for bacterial infections and not for viral infections, that antibiotics are taken exactly as directed, that the entire regimen is completed as directed by a health care provider and that antibiotics are taken only by the person for whom they were prescribed; and

WHEREAS, Health care providers can prevent the development of antibiotic-resistant infections by prescribing antibiotic therapy only when it is likely to be beneficial to the patient and by prescribing antibiotic therapy in the proper dose and for the correct amount of time using an agent that targets the bacteria that are likely causing the illness; and

WHEREAS, By promoting and practicing good hygiene, including washing hands often and thoroughly, cooking meat properly, washing fruits and vegetables thoroughly, and handling food hygienically, people can prevent many infections and thus lessen the need for antibiotics; and

WHEREAS, Nevadans for Antibiotic Awareness is a statewide task force of over 40 state and local public and private agencies and companies committed to addressing the problem of antibiotic resistance by educating the public about the consequences of the inappropriate use of antibiotics, training health care providers concerning the appropriate use of antibiotics, decreasing the inappropriate use of antibiotics and improving the control and surveillance of infections; and

WHEREAS, Nevadans for Antibiotic Awareness has partnered with the Centers for Disease Control and 31 other states to develop programs to increase awareness of the public health dangers of antibiotic resistance; and

WHEREAS, Nevadans for Antibiotic Awareness has addressed the serious public health issue of antibiotic resistance in the State of Nevada by developing and distributing statewide guidelines for the use of antibiotics, developing and delivering a comprehensive educational program for health care providers, establishing a bilingual media campaign with the support of its partners, conducting surveillance of antibiotic resistance rates for certain bacteria, and distributing educational materials throughout emergency rooms, pharmacies, health care facilities, doctor’s offices, school nurse offices and childcare facilities in this state; and

WHEREAS, The effectiveness of the work done by Nevadans for Antibiotic Awareness is evidenced by a decrease in the use of common antibiotics by outpatients in Nevada and its recognition by the Centers for Disease Control as having one of the best programs in the United States addressing the abuse of antibiotics and the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED BY THE SENATE OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, THE ASSEMBLY CONCURRING, That the Nevada Legislature is committed to creating a greater public understanding of the abuse of antibiotics and to supporting the need for educating the public and health care providers on the consequences of abusing antibiotics; and be it further

RESOLVED, That the Nevada Legislature commends Nevadans for Antibiotic Awareness for its efforts in educating the public and health care providers in this state about the harm that results from the abuse of antibiotics and the actions that residents of this state can take to address this serious public health issue; and be it further

RESOLVED, That the Health Division of the Department of Human Resources and the local health authorities in this state are urged to continue to work with Nevadans for Antibiotic Awareness to take actions to prevent the abuse of antibiotics in Nevada, including, without limitation, working with the medical community and health care providers to educate the public concerning antibiotic resistance, its causes and the steps that can be taken to reduce and inhibit its spread; and be it further

RESOLVED, That the Secretary of the Senate prepare and transmit a copy of this resolution to Nevadans for Antibiotic Awareness, and to the Health Division of the Department of Human Resources for transmittal to all local health authorities in Nevada.

Senator Rawson moved the adoption of the resolution.

Remarks by Senators Rawson and Neal.

Senator Rawson requested that his remarks be entered in the Journal.

Thank you, Madam President. I would like to say that, the year that my grandfather was born, physicians did not wash their hands or instruments before operating. They did not understand the germ theory and, simply, were not concerned about germs on their instruments or their hands. As a result, people died from infection. The year that my father was born, we had wonderful anesthetics. The germ theory had been discovered, but still, physicians did not understand that fully. People survived complicated operations but died from the infections.

The year that I was born, antibiotics had been discovered. We left World War II with a magic bullet that could treat almost everything. It was a super medication—penicillin. There were concerns in the hearts of some people when everyone began to flock to the usage of penicillin because it was a wonder drug.

The year that my first son was born, we knew antibiotics were being inappropriately used. For every virus, that they acquired, people asked for penicillin or some other antibiotic. Resistant strains were developing. It is interesting we have come full circle. Nurses and physicians are not as careful about washing their hands because we have a miracle drug that can cure anything. Today, the lives of newborns can be seriously jeopardized because of the super infections that develop from these potent microbes that have developed a resistance to the widespread and indiscriminate use of antibiotics. This is an important issue before us today. One hundred million antibiotics are prescribed every year, half of those inappropriately. Not only does it cost us billions of dollars for those inappropriate prescriptions, but also, they are producing microbes that put all of our lives in jeopardy. With this attention, I would urge your adoption of this resolution.

Resolution adopted.

Senator Rawson moved that all rules be suspended and that Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 6 be immediately transmitted to the Assembly.

Motion carried unanimously.

Resolution ordered transmitted to the Assembly.

CONSENT CALENDAR

Senate Bill No. 13.

Bill read.

Roll call on Senate Bill No. 13:

Yeas—21.

Nays—None.

Senate Bill No. 13 having received a constitutional majority, Madam President declared it passed.

Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

Signing of Bills and Resolutions

There being no objections, the President and Secretary signed Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 2; Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 2.

GUESTS EXTENDED PRIVILEGE OF SENATE FLOOR

On request of Senator McGinness, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Shelbie Guillermo, Montano Guillermo, Cherrish Guillermo and Sienna Reid.

On request of Senator Nolan, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Geoff Krump.

On request of Senator Rawson, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Dr. Christine Petersen.

On request of Senator Raggio, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Natalie Whittemore.

Senator Raggio moved that the Senate adjourn until Tuesday, February 11, 2003, at 11 a.m.

Motion carried.

Senate adjourned at 12:08 p.m.

Approved: Lorraine T. Hunt

President of the Senate

Attest: Claire J. Clift

Secretary of the Senate