Blog

I bet you forgot about that Qatar plane that was gifted (?) to Donald Trump to use as his new Air Force One, that he will take personal possession of after leaving office through his presidential library. Lots of other stories have been taking up our space, but this one is now back in the news.

New reporting shows what that “free” jet will cost the taxpayer to retrofit.

The New York Times (David Sanger) reported that there has been a mysterious, $934 million transfer of funds from a Pentagon project that is designated to modernize our nation’s ground-based nuclear missiles. This price tag is in addition to the $4 billion already being spent for Boeing to deliver new Air Force One planes, but Trump doesn’t want to wait for those new planes. The Qatar jet will become his — not the new Boeing jets.

The gold-adored plane will need to be retrofitted with communications and safety systems. Some experts believe the price tag will exceed $1 billion.

This, of course, is a bigger priority of the Trump Administration than feeding starving children around the world, providing Meals on Wheels to elderly residents, medical care for the poor that would stop infectious diseases from spreading, food stamps for single mothers with children, Head Start to give poor children basic skills before starting school, and adequate Medicaid funds to facilitate end-of-life care for those who cannot afford to pay for a nursing home. This is the United States of America now.

Here is a YouTube video from The Bulwark which further details this story. It is about seven minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbnzkDSfMsY&t=315s

NORTH LAS VEGAS – Congressman Steven Horsford [on Friday] organized and led public opposition to a Republican field hearing of the House Ways and Means Committee in his Las Vegas Congressional District.

Horsford led a joint press conference, delivered remarks at the GOP field hearing, and coordinated real-time counterprogramming to elevate local voices during the hearing.

The Republican field hearing, which was billed as an event to “highlight the One, Big, Beautiful Bill’s benefits for American families and workers,” came as report after report and article after article highlight the ways Nevadans will actually be harmed by the new law. Three weeks after President Trump signed it into effect, public sentiment remains staunchly against it. The field hearing was further hamstrung by news this morning of focus groups showing Nevada swing voters turning against President Trump.

“Congressional Republicans came to Las Vegas this week to sell a lie that my constituents are way too savvy to buy,” Rep. Horsford said. “Their tax law strips healthcare from more than 110,000 Nevadans, eliminates 8,300 clean energy and manufacturing jobs from our state, and increases our average energy costs by $500 per year. Any money saved from taxes will be squandered on Trump’s tariffs and the economic turmoil they continue to cause. We should be rewarding work over wealth, and creating the economic opportunities for families to thrive – not just survive.”

More information about how the Republican Tax Law impacts Nevada is available here.

Video of Rep. Horsford’s press conference is available here.

From the Las Vegas Review Journal 

Trump has called the bill “the biggest tax cut in the history of our country … bigger than any Ronald Reagan tax cut”. The centrepiece of the bill will extend Trump’s 2017 cuts, which include a reduction in the marginal rate of income tax. These were the signature achievements of Trump’s first term and were due to expire at the end of the year. Retaining them will cost about $4.5 trillion.

They also include Trump’s promise from the election campaign to abolish taxes on tips and overtime. The abolition is due to last until 2028. According to an analysis by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, tax-free tips would reduce federal revenue by $31 billion between the 2026 and 2029 fiscal years, while tax-free overtime would reduce federal revenue by $90 billion during the same period. 

Federal Taxes on Social Security

A portion of the federal taxes that you pay on your Social Security goes back into the trust funds of Social Security and Medicare Hospital Insurance. This policy was enacted with the 1983 Amendments to the Social Security Act as a way to strengthen the financial solvency of social security.

The “enhanced deduction” for taxpayers 65 and older eliminates federal income taxes for most beneficiaries.” It is implied that two provisions of the budget bill reduce taxes for seniors, when in fact there’s only one. The deduction applies to all income, not just Social Security. Like so much else in the budget bill, the tax break as it might apply to Social Security benefits goes mostly to wealthier taxpayers. That’s because of the way Social Security benefits are taxed.

Moreover, as labor economist Teresa Ghilarducci observed at Forbes, “The bill doesn’t do anything directly to Social Security.” A provision that would have specifically exempted Social Security benefits from taxes was dropped from the bill when it came under consideration by the Senate.

The claim that beneficiaries will “no longer pay federal income taxes on their benefits” is also inaccurate: The enhanced deduction — $6,000 for single filers, $12,000 for couples — will expire in 2028, unless it’s extended by Congress. It’s also limited by income: The full deduction is available only to singles up to $75,000 in income, $150,000 for couples. The deduction phases out above those levels, zeroing out for singles with $175,000 in income or higher, $250,000 for couples.

The reduction of taxes on benefits will weaken, not protect, Social Security (and Medicare too). The reason is that about 60% of the revenues generated by those taxes is credited to the Social Security trust funds. The rest goes to Medicare.

In 2025, that sum is expected to come to about $60 billion for Social Security, or more than 4% of the program’s overall income, and $40.7 billion for Medicare, or nearly 9% of the funding for Medicare Part A, which covers hospital services. The budget bill has no provision for replacing that money.

Subtitle C–Increase in Debt Limit (HR 1 Sect C of The Big Ugly Bill)

SEC. 72001. MODIFICATION OF LIMITATION ON THE PUBLIC DEBT.

The limitation under section 3101(b) of title 31, United States 

Code, as most recently increased by section 401(b) of Public Law 118-5

(31 U.S.C. 3101 note), is increased by $5,000,000,000,000.

What it Means per Gemini (AI)

1. Affect on the Deficit:

• Increased Deficits: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that HR1, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” will increase deficits by approximately $2.8 trillion over the 2025-2034 period, and potentially up to $3.4 trillion or more when factoring in additional debt service costs and various provisions. This is largely driven by a reduction in revenues ($3.7 trillion) despite some reductions in outlays ($1.3 trillion) over the same period.
• New Spending and Tax Cuts: The bill includes various tax cuts and new spending initiatives. While it also incorporates some offsets, the net effect is a significant increase in the primary deficit.
• Debt Service Costs: A substantial portion of the increased deficit will come from higher debt-service costs, estimated to be hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade, as the government needs to borrow more and potentially at higher interest rates.

2. Affect on the National Debt:

• Higher National Debt: The $5 trillion increase in the debt limit directly allows the federal government to borrow this additional amount. This means the national debt will increase by at least the amount of the increased deficits, pushing it further upward.
• Debt-to-GDP Ratio: The CBO projects that enacting HR1 would increase debt held by the public at the end of 2034 to 123.8% or 124% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), up from their January 2025 baseline projection of 117.1% of GDP. This indicates a growing burden of debt relative to the size of the economy.
• No New Spending Authority (but enables existing obligations): It’s crucial to understand that raising the debt limit doesn’t authorize new spending. Instead, it allows the government to pay for existing legal obligations that Congresses and presidents have already made. However, HR1 itself contains significant new spending and tax cut provisions that will lead to higher borrowing.

In summary:

The $5 trillion increase in the debt limit within HR1, signed on July 4, 2025, has a clear and substantial impact:

• It will significantly increase the federal deficit over the next decade due to a combination of tax cuts and new spending.
• This will directly lead to a higher national debt, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP.

Critics argue that this bill represents a “striking display of fiscal hypocrisy” as it increases the debt ceiling while simultaneously creating new deficits, potentially delaying a much-needed debate over unsustainable government spending. Supporters, however, may view it as necessary to avoid a potentially catastrophic default and to implement desired policy changes.

Congress.gov

www.congress.gov

Tax Provisions in H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act: House-Passed Version | Congress.gov

No Tax on Tips. Section 110101 of the bill. New Section 224 of the IRC. This provision would create a new income tax deduction for qualified tip income

PwC

www.pwc.com

President Trump signs H.R. 1, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” – PwC

The bill also includes a provision to increase the federal government’s current $36.1 trillion statutory debt limit by $5 trillion. The Joint Committee on …

U.S. Department of the Treasury (.gov)

home.treasury.gov

Debt Limit | U.S. Department of the Treasury

The debt limit is the total amount of money that the United States government is authorized to borrow to meet its existing legal obligations, including Social …

AInvest

www.ainvest.com

H.R. 1 Passes: A Mixed Bag for Federal Employees and the Economy – AInvest

This increase in public debt could lead to higher borrowing costs for the government and potentially for private sector entities as well, as investors demand …

Congressional Budget Office (.gov)

www.cbo.gov

Effects on Deficits and the Debt of Enacting H.R. 1 and of Making Certain Tax Policies in H.R. 1 Permanent | Congressional Budget Office

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1 and making 16 tax provisions within H.R. 1 permanent would raise debt-service costs by $687 billion over the 2025–2034 …

Last week, Congress betrayed the American people by passing one of the worst pieces of legislation in history which hurts the most vulnerable to the benefit of the wealthiest.

It was signed into law on July 4 — an ironic date chosen to send a message.

We will be covering details and how the various provisions will affect you, your friends, family and neighbors. Follow us.

Read about The Big Ugly Bill. Tell everyone you know how this bill is affecting them. This is how we fight back — with facts. This is how we change minds — one at a time. This is how we encourage civic engagement like voting. This is how we will win the next election.

Here is an 8 minute description by Steve Schmidt.

Source is Nevada State Legislature website.

After the session ended on June 2, Governor Lombardo had 10 days to either sign, veto or let the bill become law without his signature. 

At the last deadline there were 34 bills still moving through the process, eight of them passed.

AB 73 relating to Artificial Intelligence, requiring certain communications relating to elections, to disclose if it contains synthetic media.  Effective 1/1/2026.

AB92 requires that rooms or spaces in public buildings be provided to certain political parties without charge. Effective 7/1/2025.

AB148 relating to election deadlines for a county or city clerk to distribute sample ballots. Effective 10/1/2025.

AB176 relating to health care that prohibits a government entity from substantially burdening certain activity relating to reproductive health care under certain circumstances. Effective 1/1/2026.

AB197 relating to governmental administration with certain exceptions to keep personal information regarding donors, members, or volunteers of nonprofit organizations private. Effective 7/1/20/27.

AB235 relating to health care providers who practice reproductive health and employees or volunteer for the facility, and providers for gender affirming care, spouse, domestic partner or minor child that request that certain personal information in the possession of a county recorder, county assessor or elections official be kept in a confidential manner. Effective 7/1/2025.

AB343 relating to health care requiring hospitals to publish certain information relating to the pricing of goods and services. Effective 1/1/2026.

SB443 relating to elections revising provisions to voter registration during certain periods preceding an election. Effective 10/1/2025.

Governor Lombardo broke his 2023 record by vetoing 87 bills, some of which were really good bills. I have listed some.

Source is the Las Vegas Review Journal:

SB217 which would have established a statutory right to in vitro fertilization and expanded it to Medicaid for coverage for infertility diagnosis and treatment. Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro “Even Donald Trump has backed efforts to expand IVF, but Lombardo is picking out-of-state extremists over protecting Nevada doctors and patients,” Cannizzaro, D-Las Vegas, said in a statement. “By vetoing this bipartisan bill, Lombardo has turned his back on ordinary Nevada families who need a little help to overcome the hardships of infertility in order to experience the joy of parenthood.” (quoted from press release).

SB428 would require incumbents to live in the district they represent during their entire term. This passed on a party-line vote in favor of Democrats in the Senate and unanimously in the Assembly. But Lombardo said in his veto message he believed the bill did not protect candidates’ privacy because residential addresses could be considered part of the public record.

AB499 which would have expanded access to ballot drop boxes and implemented voter ID requirements. The bill was the result of a compromise between Yeager and the governor, who has long supported voter ID. Yeager sought to match the language in the ballot question to implement voter ID, which passed in 2024 but needs to be approved by voters in 2026.

In his veto message, the governor said that he wholeheartedly supports voter ID, but he said the bill is not entirely consistent with the language in the ballot question. He said it fails to resolve inconsistencies in how voter ID is reviewed, does little to improve signature verification and leaves too much ambiguity for future interpretation. He also expressed concerns about increased access to ballot drop boxes.

He specifically took issue with the proposed mail ballot ID verification and argued it would apply voter ID requirements unequally between in-person and mail ballot voters, saying that mail ballots would continue to be accepted solely on the basis of a signature match. Their identifying information written on the return envelope is only checked if the signature needs to be verified, while in-person voters must show ID every time.

“This inconsistency undermines the principle of uniform voter verification,” he wrote. “Voter ID is essential for ensuring election integrity, and it should be applied consistently across all voting methods.

AB416 which would have prohibited school boards or other leadership from banning or removing material that they may find “objectionable” — “fundamentally flawed” in his veto message on Thursday. Community members seeking to have materials removed would need to petition a court to do so, according to the bill sponsored by Assemblymember Brittney Miller, D-Las Vegas.

“Decisions about what library materials are appropriate for students should be made locally — by educators and families who understand the unique needs of their communities — not by judges through a rigid, one-size-fits-all legal process,” he wrote.

SB156 sponsored by state Sen. Edgar Flores, would have required the attorney general to appoint a special counsel for the Prevention of Gun Violence, authorizing the counsel to administer a grant program for gun violence prevention initiatives, to collaborate with professors and researchers in developing data relating to gun violence, and to put together educational campaigns relating to firearm safety and suicide prevention.

The bill passed the Assembly 25-14 and the Senate 11-8.

AB223 sponsored by Assemblymember Venicia Considine and other Democrats, would have authorized a tenant to file a complaint for relief if their landlord fails to maintain a rental unit in habitable condition, such as if the unit lacks proper measures to control rodents and insects, or if it lacks doors and windows in good repair.

The bill passed down party lines in both houses.

Lombardo said the bill disrupts a “well-established balance” in Nevada law that provides adequate tenant protections while ensuring landlords maintain safe and quality housing. He criticized a provision of the bill that would require landlords to remedy issues within 48 hours after receiving notice, calling it an “onerous requirement.” He also said that a tenant’s own negligence may cause their apartment to become uninhabitable.

Nevada State Democratic Party spokesperson Tai Sims:

SB414  would have required elected officials to disclose their financial investments, including stocks, that could create conflicts of interests. After Lombardo vetoed a similar bill last session that passed with bipartisan support, he was asked if he would use dark money in order to win elections and he replied, “I’m going to use everything available to ensure success.” Once it was revealed that Lombardo registered his inaugural committee as a dark money group, Republicans in the Nevada State Senate unanimously voted against SB414 — after it received bipartisan support last session. 

SB89  prohibits individuals who have been convicted within the past 10 years of certain offenses, such as hate crimes or violent crimes motivated by characteristics like race, religion, or sexual orientation, from purchasing, owning, or possessing firearms. It also specifies that each firearm purchased by such a person is a separate violation. Additionally, the bill allows individuals convicted of these offenses before July 1, 2025, to retain firearms they legally owned prior to that date.

AB205 This bill changes the consent process for sexuality education in public schools from an opt-in to an opt-out system, requiring school districts to provide a form allowing parents or guardians to refuse their child’s participation. It also sets deadlines for providing the form and allows it to be posted on the district’s secure website, with a notice that parents may opt out at any time during the school year

Passed Bills

Source is Nevada Independent Veto Tracker

SB404 which passed both the Senate and Assembly unanimously.The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by state Sen. Melanie Scheible, a Las Vegas Democrat, crafted the proposal in response to a Review-Journal investigation which found that Nevada law placed few restrictions on who manages a probate case when an individual dies without a will. State law, in fact, allows anyone “legally qualified” to step up.

This created a lucrative market for third-party interests — real estate investors, private administrators and attorneys — to profit from the process while relatives received a pittance, if anything.

The investigation revealed that these agents “often started cases without family involvement and routinely obtained court authority to sell homes through a process that does not require a judge’s approval of the deal or a competitive bidding that could boost the price.” They also “frequently sold homes at steep discounts to estimated values, often to the same circle of repeat buyers who resold them within months” at prices well above the cost of the original purchase. “The probate cases,” the report revealed, “often ended with nothing for heirs.”

The law was intended to allow for the timely and orderly disposition of an estate when relatives didn’t exist, couldn’t be found or didn’t want the bother. But fairness dictates that every effort should be made to ensure family members have the opportunity to take part in the task if they so desire. This bill imposes safeguards to assure that third-party administrators don’t abuse the state’s liberal probate statutes. The reforms demand that those seeking to be deemed “legally qualified” now provide a court with evidence to that effect, along with affidavits indicating their efforts to locate any potential heirs. It also limits who can become an “independent administrator,” and thus able to sell the deceased’s home without a judge’s approval or open bidding.

AB540 is one of the Governor’s 5 priority bills. The Nevada Attainable Housing Act focuses on housing access and attainability. It creates an account in the state general fund which will be administered by the Housing Division. This account will provide loans and other financial assistance for attainable housing projects.

The bill establishes the attainable Housing Council to oversee and guide the administration and allocation of funds from the Attainable Housing Account. The funding and initiatives allocates funds that were originally $200 million which was amended to $150 million but finally appropriated to $133 million to the account. Also amended out of the bill was the prevailing wage clause.

AB121 Landlords will no longer be able to charge a tenant a fee to make a payment through an online portal or website which prohibits junk fees from corporate landlords when paying rent.

AB111 makes wrong-way driving on a divided highway a misdemeanor rather than a civil infraction aiming to curb the large number of roadway fatalities that occur every year.

SB460 this bill is a combined bill from Lombardo education bill into Senator Cannizzaro bill.

It revises provisions governing the annual report of accountability for a school district. Revises the duties of the Commission on Innovation and Excellence in Education, impanels a Public Education Oversight Board. It establishes boards of trustees of certain school districts as well as measures for the designation of focus and priority school districts, sponsors of charter schools and public schools, and much more.

All in all out of 605 bills that made it to the governor’s desk, he passed 518 bills. If you would like to read any of the bills but don’t know how, I would be glad to help you out. Contact me at [email protected].

The next session will be in 2027.