Nevada Democrats Weaponized Redistricting to Flip GOP Strongholds

Clark County’s explicit racial map-drawing ‘carved out heavily white districts’ to engineer majority-Hispanic districts

In 2021, as Nevada conducted its post-census redistricting, Democratic-controlled Clark County openly engineered majority-Hispanic districts using explicit racial criteria, while the state Legislature—dominated by Democrats—drew maps with the help of an undisclosed consulting group whose identity has never been publicly revealed. The process systematically converted competitive and Republican-leaning areas into Democratic advantages, locking in structural gains designed to secure a veto-proof supermajority in a crucial swing state that remains closely divided overall.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

In an on-the-record interview at a public Clark County meeting, redistricting consultant Dave Heller—a Democratic activist—described how county commissioners (all Democrats) directed him to create two majority-Hispanic (Latino) districts from one, aiming to amplify Latino representation on the seven-member board which had zero Hispanic members. Pointing to a map of Districts E and G, Heller explained carving a “heavily white” portion from District G and adding it to District E “because I’m trying to create this majority Latino district… because I’m trying to get as many Latino voices heard as possible.” Predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods were shifted from the existing majority-Hispanic District D into District E, pushing both to approximately 50.01% Hispanic population. 

“These people right here [District G] are heavily white. These people in this little corner right here [District E] are more Latino. So because I’m trying to create this majority Latino district, I carve out this little piece of white. Because I’m trying to get as many Latino voice heard as possible. Make sense?” Heller told me in a brief, recorded interview after the meeting.

Heller also addressed Native American representation, urging the public to help “maximize the Native American population effect” in the districts to ensure their voices were heard through population cohesion.

At the meeting, one public questioner asked if the native American population would be appropriately represented. Mr. Heller pointed to a map and said, “I would ask you to help me make sure we maximize the native American population effect in this process. Tell me where they are and how to keep them together. I’ve tried to do that as I said, up here, with this cut and you can show me other places where they are. and if there are places where they’ve been divided in the past, I will do my very level best to make sure we don’t divide them.”

The county’s criteria for Heller explicitly included “racial balance and minority opportunity,” directing map-drawers to avoid packing or cracking minority voters.

This race-based approach prioritized ethnic identity over compact geography, traditional communities of interest, or neutral boundaries, pitting neighborhoods against one another and raising concerns about political motivations given Heller’s openly-partisan background. 

The maps were approved unanimously by the seven Democratic Commissioners in November 2021.

At the state level, Democrats used their trifecta control to pass Senate Bill 1 in a rushed five-day special session on party-line votes. The maps were created by an unknown consultant or firm hired by Democrats, whose identity has never been disclosed to the public. 

The Princeton Gerrymandering Project assigned Nevada’s congressional maps an “F” for partisan fairness, citing a significant built-in Democratic advantage. Democrats “unpacked” safe urban Democratic seats in Clark County—spreading reliable voters, including Hispanic communities that lean strongly Democratic—into swing or formerly competitive districts.

Similar manipulation extended to Washoe County, Nevada’s second-most populous county and a longtime political bellwether often called the “swingiest county in the swingiest state.” Post-redistricting analysis showed Democrats benefiting from boundary changes that helped flip key districts. Most notably, Senate District 15 in Washoe County flipped from Republican-leaning to Democratic control due to the new lines, contributing to broader Democratic footprint in northern Nevada despite competitive voter registration. Critics argued the maps diluted rural and conservative voices by adjusting boundaries in ways that spread Democratic-leaning voters from growing urban/suburban areas into formerly balanced or GOP-friendly seats.

Key swings from Republican strongholds or competitive seats to Democratic advantages included:

  • Congressional District 3: Shifted from a near-toss-up (previously rated competitive, with Biden winning by less than one point under old lines in some analyses) to a clearer Democratic lean. By incorporating more Democratic voters from Clark County suburbs while adjusting boundaries, it helped secure the seat for Democrats even in challenging cycles.
  • Congressional District 1: Once a solidly blue urban seat (Biden +25 points), it was unpacked—losing some core Democratic areas and adding more conservative portions of Henderson and Boulder City—reducing its Democratic margin. This “bleeding” of Democratic voters fortified adjacent swing districts like CD-3 and helped maintain the 3-1 Democratic edge in Nevada’s U.S. House delegation (holding the three Clark County-based seats while ceding rural northern NV-2 to Republicans). Democrats retained three seats even when Republicans won the statewide congressional popular vote in cycles like 2022. Even Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV1) herself complained vulgarly to a union audience, stating, “I totally got fucked by the Legislature on my district.” 
  • State legislative level: Multiple swing Assembly districts in Clark County became safer Democratic holds or leans, helping Democrats maintain majorities and limit losses in tough environments (e.g., minimal seat losses in 2022). Senate District 15 in Washoe flipped blue. Overall, the maps protected Democratic incumbents and converted competitive territory into structural advantages, advancing their goal of a veto-proof supermajority in a state with narrow registration edges. As The Nevada Globe previously reported, Assemblywoman Jill Tolles (R) noted that her district (AD25) was “carved up like a Thanksgiving turkey,” transforming it from a +6 Republican district to a near +4 Democratic district. Assmemblywoman Heidi Gansert made the case that Reno was “severed” and Reno and Washoe County voters were “disenfranchised.” Gansert claimed that Senate District 15 had been “artificially engineered.”

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

Nevada’s Mail Ballots Shipped to Scandal-Plagued Arizona Firm for Election ‘Processing’

Clark County’s mail-in ballots were outsourced to Runbeck Election Services’ facility in Maricopa County where they were allegedly commingled with Arizona ballots (and other western states) in an unsecured warehouse devoid of proper oversight

A stunning investigation has exposed a major breach in election security: Clark County’s mail-in ballots from Nevada were outsourced to Runbeck Election Services’ facility in Maricopa County, Arizona, where they were allegedly commingled with Arizona ballots (and other western states) in an unsecured warehouse devoid of proper oversight. 

This cross-state handoff not only caused damaging delays in Clark County tabulations but appears to have violated the fundamental chain of custody—the unbreakable documented trail that safeguards ballots from voter hand to official count.

Chain of custody is non-negotiable in secure elections. Nevada statutes (NRS Chapter 293 and related NAC regulations) require rigorous logging of every ballot transfer: who handles them, timestamps, locations, conditions, and tamper-evident seals. The U.S. Election Assistance Commission stresses bipartisan witnesses, no unsupervised access, and continuous accountability to prevent tampering, addition, or substitution. When ballots are shipped out-of-state to a private vendor like Runbeck, direct county control evaporates. Oversight shifts to non-government employees without Clark County officials, law enforcement, or bipartisan monitors present during critical phases violates state and federal law.

According to a damning memo from House Administration Committee observers, including a Republican staffer and a Democratic colleague, Runbeck’s Maricopa facility was a veritable Wild West of ballot handling.

Completed mail-in ballots from Nevada were stored in the same room as blank ballots—not just from Arizona, but potentially from other Western states like Colorado, California, and Utah. Pallets of blank ballots sat unattended with ripped wrapping, suggesting easy access for tampering.

Worse, Nevada’s ballots were sidelined while Arizona’s were prioritized, causing critical delays in Clark County’s tabulation on Wednesday and Thursday post-Election Day. “This may explain the delay in Nevada posting any new tabulated totals,” the staffer wrote, highlighting how Nevada ballots languished awaiting sorting and signature verification at Runbeck.

Congressional observers’ memo details the nightmare:  No Nevada election officials or independent watchers were on site at the Runbeck facility. This creates systemic vulnerabilities: ballots could be altered, swapped, or injected without detection or traceability.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Runbeck’s sordid history only heightens the alarm.

In 2022, Maricopa’s Election Day printer failures rejected thousands of ballots and claims of improper ballot insertions by staff sparked widespread fraud allegations (though later dismissed in court). Kari Lake’s legal efforts highlighted chain-of-custody lapses involving hundreds of thousands of mail ballots. Recent reports note unfulfilled promises of enhanced monitoring like cameras and observer access.

The lack of oversight is staggering: No state election officials, law enforcement, or bipartisan observers were present during ballot processing. Runbeck’s own promises of upgraded monitoring—cameras, observer rooms, and live feeds—went unfulfilled, despite CEO Jeff Ellington’s assurances. This isn’t just incompetence; it’s a recipe for disaster.

As Rep. Abe Hamadeh (R-AZ) detailed in his June 2025 letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, demanding a DOJ probe: “The commingling of blank ballots with live ballots poses a significant risk to the accuracy and fairness of election results.” Hamadeh’s call came amid reports of boxes of printed blanks from multiple states mixed with voted ballots, raising “serious questions about the security and integrity of the election process.”

This outsourcing fiasco stems directly from Nevada Democrats’ pandemic-era power grab.

With a legislative supermajority in 2020, Democrats ushered in sweeping changing to Nevada’s election laws: mandating universal mail ballots, permitting UNLIMITED, non-family ballot harvesting, relaxing postmark requirements, and diluting signature verification. Made permanent in 2021 over GOP objections, these changes—six major expansions since 2020 per the Brennan Center—prioritized “voter access” over security. As chronicled in my Nevada Globe reporting, lawsuits forced purges of over 100,000 inactive voters and commercial addresses, exposed Indian reservation voter registration drives, and challenged the Nevada Supreme Court’s ruling allowing undated ballots to count days after Election Day.

To uncover the full extent of this outsourcing, the California Globe has filed an open records request with the Clark County Elections Department under the Nevada Public Records Act (NRS Chapter 239). We seek all contracts, agreements, scopes of work, amendments, and related documents with Runbeck Election Services from 2020 to present; the number of Clark County ballots processed by Runbeck per election cycle (broken down by type); and detailed descriptions of services performed—printing, sorting, signature verification preparation, storage, or other handling—along with any timelines, delays, or custody logs.

California Taxes, Over-Regulation Force 1,800 Businesses To Relocate

Leaving CaliforniaCalifornia – notorious for high taxes and a stifling regulatory environment – reportedly saw 1,800 businesses either relocate or disinvest from the state in 2016.

Business relocation consultant Joe Vranich wrote concerning the results of a new study he authored that he is advising clients “to leave the business-hostile state because its business climate continues to worsen,” according to Investors Business Daily.

Vranich, president of Spectrum Location Solutions LLC, noted that the 1,800 “disinvestment events” that occurred in 2016 were the most since 2008.

Additionally, 13,000 companies left the state during that nine-year period.

“Departures are understandable when year after year CEOs nationwide surveyed by Chief Executive Magazine have declared California the worst state in which to do business,” Vranich said.

“The top reason to leave the state no longer is high taxes,” he said. “The legal climate has become so difficult that companies should consider locating in jurisdictions where they will be treated fairly.”

One business regulation Vranich cited was California’s new Immigrant Worker Protection Act, which fines companies for following federal immigration law.

The consultant pointed out the law creates a dilemma for business owners: face fines either from the state or from the federal government.

“Think about it. California may penalize someone in business who is a legal citizen operating a legal business that is in compliance with every federal, state and local law, who pays state and local taxes, and who creates employment – and all that counts for nothing in the state’s eyes,” Vranich said. “Signs are that California politicians’ contempt for business will persist.”

Vranich argued that it’s not just this new law, it’s the plethora of other laws and regulations California businesses must comply with and the concern of what may be coming down the line.

The American Tort Reform Foundation said California is among the nation’s worst “Judicial Hellholes” for businesses.

According to the Vranich, three previous California governors – Gray Davis, Pete Wilson and George Deukmejian – have cited earlier versions of his business climate study to raise awareness of why companies are leaving the Golden State.

The top states where businesses are relocating, ranked in order, are: Texas, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, North Carolina, Florida, Georgia and Virginia.

The top 10 urban areas gaining from the California exodus are Austin, Texas; Reno, Nevada; Las Vegas; Phoenix; Seattle; Dallas; Portland, Oregon; Denver; San Antonio; and Scottsdale, Arizona.

Among the businesses that have left the state in recent years are Toyota, Occidental Petroleum, Chevron, Nestle USA, Carl’s Jr., Jamba Juice and Numira Biosciences, according to Chief Executive Magazine.

There was a net outflow of approximately 143,000 Californians leaving in 2016 over people moving in from other states, based on numbers from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The only reason the state’s population is not decreasing overall is due to the 100,000-plus people per year immigrating into California from other countries and the birth rate exceeding the death rate in the state.

In addition to business regulations driving people from the state, The Sacramento Bee reported that California lawmakers are concerned about the wealthiest residents fleeing due to high taxes.

California has the highest top income tax bracket in the nation at 13.3 percent, and its treasury receives a disproportionate 44 percent of income tax revenues from the top 1 percent of wage earners.

Vranich said he is glad he took his own advice and moved his business from California to the Pittsburgh suburb of Cranberry Township.

“I moved for three reasons — taxes, regulations and quality-of-life,” he said. “First, I’ll have greater freedom in my business now that I’m free of California’s notorious regulatory environment and threats of frivolous lawsuits that hurt small businesses like mine.”

“Finally, we are enjoying a superior qualify-of-life here. We bought a house larger than what we had in California for about half the cost. We can afford to engage in more activities because the cost-of-living in Cranberry Township is 44 percent lower than in Irvine.”

This article was originally published by Western Journalism

Californians fed up with housing costs and taxes are fleeing state in big numbers

Californians may still love the beautiful weather and beaches, but more and more they are fed up with the high housing costs and taxes and deciding to flee to lower-cost states such as NevadaArizona and Texas.

“There’s nowhere in the United States that you can find better weather than here,” said Dave Senser, who lives on a fixed income near San Luis Obispo, California, and now plans to move to Las Vegas. “Rents here are crazy, if you can find a place, and they’re going to tax us to death. That’s what it feels like. At least in Nevada they don’t have a state income tax. And every little bit helps.”

Senser, 65, who previously lived in the east San Francisco Bay region, said housing costs and gas prices are “significantly lower in Las Vegas. The government in the state of California isn’t helping people like myself. That’s why people are running out of this state now.”

Based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey data, “lower income Californians are the ones who are leaving, not higher income,” said Christopher Thornberg, founding partner of research and consulting firm Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. …

Click here to read the full article from CNBC

Businesses Joined by Non-Profits in Leaving California for Friendlier States

Friends in economic development agencies and in the site selection consulting world have asked why I haven’t posted anything in quite awhile. My answer is simple: I’ve been exceptionally busy. It certainly isn’t because there aren’t things to write about.

Another question I’m usually asked is whether businesses are still leaving California.

They are, especially with the state legislature again failing to provide tax or regulatory relief to its home-state companies. Overall, taxes, fees and regulations have gotten worse. Such a difficult business environment, combined with grim treatment by local governments, have caused operating costs to grow faster in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles than in virtually every other metropolitan area in the nation.

NevadaSo large corporations and small business entities continue to look for ways to partially or fully exit the state. Today alone brought two examples, which by coincidence both involve Nevada.

The first is a loss for Los Angeles with Virtual Guard, Inc. leaving the city’s Sherman Oaks section. The company plans to relocate its headquarters and interactive command and control center to Clark County (Las Vegas area), citing an “unfriendly economic environment” in California. The move is likely to occur later this year.

There, Virtual Guard plans is expected to hire 80 new employees within its first two years of operations. The video monitoring company is also a developer and integrator of technology in the perimeter security sector and its solutions are being used throughout the United States and Canada.

California, which a long time ago was a haven for aerospace companies, will lose another one next year.

ERG Aerospace Corp. plans to relocate its Oakland operations to McCarran, Nevada and make the Silver State its headquarters. The company manufactures materials and components for the aerospace, national defense, semiconductor manufacturing, biotech and other high technology industries. The target date for the move is the second quarter 2018, with operations to commence in the same quarter.

Several months ago a non-profit organization said it would relocate out of state, too. Horizon University, a private, Christian school that started classes in 1993 in San Diego is heading to Indianapolis.

Horizon’s President Bill Goodrich calls the decision “a no-brainer.” He said Indiana offers a “climate” that was slipping away in California, and by that he wasn’t referring to San Diego’s sunny days. Goodrich said that the university helps people “grow academically” while integrating the “strong biblical teachings and we find in Indiana, there’s an openness to that.”

The move will allow the, accredited university to grow on a 97-acre spread – in a state with less “red tape” – and attract more students.

Thanks to high costs, a sizeable non-profit move is upcoming: Toastmasters International will shift its headquarters from its birthplace in Orange County to Colorado.

With about 180 employees, Toastmasters CEO Daniel Rex said costs in California were a concern. “When you look at the availability of workers, when you look at the cost of commerce and real estate, this is something that makes sense.” The organization is spending $19.5 million to buy a building in Englewood, south of Denver. Toastmasters is a legendary California institution, founded in 1924 in Santa Ana. Since 1990 it’s been based in Rancho Santa Margarita.

Business people who endure the decline in California’s business climate and pervasive cost increases can take some comfort knowing that some non-profit brethren are members of the same club.

I’ll write more about how California treats its commercial enterprises. But first I need to see how many business-helpful bills and business-damaging bills Gov. Jerry Brown will sign into law.

One focus of this blog has been to address California’s perennially difficult business environment. Joseph Vranich is known as The Business Relocation Coach while the formal name of his business is Spectrum Location Solutions. Joe helps companies find great locations in which to grow. Also, Joe has been a Keynote Speaker for more than 20 years – see A Speaker Throughout the U.S. and in Europe and Asia.

This article was originally published by Fox and Hounds Daily

New Overtime Rules Burden CA Small Businesses

Money

The Department of Labor’s new overtime rules come at a jarring time for California businesses which have seen recent changes in California laws to increase both the minimum wage and mandated leave. Small business employers can’t catch a breath before a new mandate comes down affecting their employees and ultimately their bottom line.

The Department of Labor’s new rule allows workers earning $47,476 annually time-an-a-half for every hour they work beyond 40 hours. The previous annual salary threshold for requiring time-an-a-half pay was $23,660.

National Federation of Independent Business California State Executive Director Tom Scott said in a release responding to the new rule, “We see this as particularly troubling here in California where the cost of doing business is already prohibitively high. Small businesses are still grappling with the news of a $15 minimum wage; now they have to go through each salary exempt position and decide which employees they have to shift to hourly workers. This will adversely affect workplace morale as many will view this adjustment as a demotion.”

However, there is a way for employees of all stripes to get a pay increase without affecting a businesses bottom line. Unfortunately, because of the increased burdens California businesses face more businesses are looking at this benefit for their employees: Move to a state with no income tax.

If an employee receives the same wage in, say, Texas or Nevada, which have no income taxes, more money stays in the employees’ pocket. It’s like a pay raise without the companies increasing payroll.

Too many California businesses are doing the math because of the constant attack on their bottom line.

Originally published by Fox and Hounds Daily

Nevada governor hits back against Jerry Brown’s gun control comments

As reported by the Sacramento Bee:

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval on Sunday joined the governor of Arizona in hitting back California Gov. Jerry Brown’s comments that their states’ lenient gun laws are a “gigantic back door through which any terrorist can walk.”

Brown, asked in Paris on Saturday if stricter gun control laws were warranted following the mass shooting in San Bernardino, said, “California has some of the toughest gun control laws of any state. And Nevada and Arizona are wide open, so that’s a gigantic back door through which any terrorist can walk.”

Sandoval spokeswoman Mari St. Martin said in a prepared statement Sunday that Brown’s remarks were “wrong and irresponsible.”

“This type of political rhetoric is discouraging to hear at a time when all Americans are looking for thoughtful, honest leadership,” she said.