• We at Various Things & Stuff are hard on U.S. Sen. John Ensign, who we hear does more work in the House gym than he does on the Senate floor. But every now and then, Ensign shows up with a genuinely good idea.

According to the Review-Journal, Ensign has introduced a bill that would deny federal tax benefits to private corporations that take advantage of property seized by local governments using eminent domain. (The bill, of course, is a reaction to the infamous Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. New London, which legalized government theft of private land for “economic development.”)

“It is a fundamental right of American homeowners to have their property protected from government seizure,” Ensign said. “Despite what the Supreme Court says, we cannot allow a government entity to decide that an individual should lose his or her home so that a city can make money.”

No, they shouldn’t.

Now why, you might ask, didn’t Ensign just write a law that says the government can’t take private property for the private gain of companies? Well, funny thing: They already have a law like that. It’s called the Fifth Amendment. Now if only they had a U.S. Supreme Court that would actually enforce it.

• The Las Vegas Monorail saw its ridership drop, to less than 29,000 riders per day in September, according to R-J Road Warrior Omar Sofradzija. The record number of riders — 32,928, recorded in July — is well below ridership projections of 50,000 or more that monorail backers made when trying to sell the train. And it’s well shy of the number of people needed to break even, too: The train needs $139,000 per day in farebox revenue, but it only took in $85,328 per day in September.

Ironically, the ridership numbers are very close to what critics of the line predicted long before the first shovel of earth was turned to make way for the project. It’s something to keep in mind when monorail officials — or anybody else talking about mass transit ridership, like the Regional Transportation Commission — makes promises in the future.

• Were all those political machinations over the proposed contract for Metro Police at the Clark County Commission for naught? It could be, now that Las Vegas Councilman Larry Brown has come out in favor of the pact, which will add about 26 percent in costs to policing Las Vegas, according to estimates.

The commission on Tuesday removed Commissioner Tom Collins from the Fiscal Affairs Committee, a five-person board made up of city and county reps and developer Peter Thomas that decides Metro’s budget, because Collins favored the deal while a majority of the commission doesn’t. Commissioner Rory Reid is the new county rep, joining Commissioner Chip Maxfield.

But it may not matter: Yes votes include Brown and Councilman Gary Reese, which means its all up to Thomas now. If he votes yes, the deal is approved, and the county bounced Collins — a totally unprecedented move, by the way — for nothing. Thomas has not yet said how he’ll vote, but he’s got to make up his mind by Monday, when the matter comes up on the Fiscal Affairs Committee agenda.

• So the Stacey and Amanda Darling Memorial Tennis Center — where The Tennis Channel Open is slated to be played next year — is already in ill repair. The new center has experienced cracking, the Las Vegas Sun reports today.

The city is blaming the contractor, but is in the process of expanding two courts in order to accommodate the open, at a cost of $100,000. Add that to the $300,000 in tax dollars the city will give to the open in 2006, and another potential $800,000 in 2007, and you get a whopping cost to taxpayers of $1.2 million to subsidize an event that’s sure to make plenty of money all on its own.

And speaking of the open, the R-J’s usually anti-government editorial page went all soft on the question in Tuesday’s paper, saying only that attendance at the event will prove whether or not it was worth it. The paper regularly slams the city for paying public employee salaries, including harsh coverage of the recent police salary negotiations, but says subsidizing a private tennis tournament is OK? Those are some messed up priorities, if you ask us.

• U.S. Sen. Harry Reid has come up with his slogan for 2006: “America can do better.” And boy, is he right. America can do better than a minority party that fecklessly votes to give President George W. Bush the authority to go to war, even when they have reservations about his reasons. America can do better than a minority party that rubber-stamps unqualified appointees like former FEMA Director Michael Brown. America can do better than senators who won’t lift a finger to help unseat a member of the opposing party in their own state (we’re not naming names).

How about a slogan that really captures the essence of what’s going on in politics today? A House majority leader under indictment on campaign finance charges. A Senate majority leader under investigation for alleged insider trading. A deputy White House chief of staff to the president, and chief of staff to the vice-president, under investigation for outing a CIA operative for political reasons. An increasingly unpopular war, started on false pretenses, that has claimed the lives of almost 2,000 service members. A terrible hurricane that claimed more lives here at home, in which scores died unnecessarily due to government incompetence. Crony capitalists who benefit from no-bid contracts in the wake of both events. Top Republican lobbyists under investigation for campaign finance violations. Tax cuts and increased spending that have resulted in higher deficits that future generations will have to pay off.

Republicans claimed to be the party that could protect America, that was more ethical and honest than the Democrats, not to mention more fiscally responsible. Every single one of those contentions have been proven totally false by the Bush administration.

You could easily get by with a slogan as simple as “hey, we’re not these guys.” But perhaps something more appropriate, like “No lies, no excuses: It’s time again for adult supervision in Washington.”

Now if only there was a political party with adults ready to do the supervising.

• Quotable: “I started to call us the Feckless Five because it sounded good, until I looked up feckless and realized it didn’t mean what I thought it did. Feckless means incompetent.” — Review-Journal columnist Jane Ann Morrison, in a piece today. (Actually, “feckless” means weak, ineffective, careless or irresponsible.)

These have been busy days over here at Various Things & Stuff. We missed a few things on Tuesday that must be commented upon:

• The Las Vegas Sun reported the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has denied attorney John Watkins’ request for a rehearing for Jessica Williams, the woman who tragically feel asleep at the wheel of her minivan, drifted off the roadway and killed six teens in March 2000.

Watkins had argued Williams was subject to double jeopardy, since she was charged under two different statutes for the same crime.

Williams was found by a jury to have marijuana in her blood, but the same jury ruled she was not under the influence of the drug. But under a law proposed by then-state Sen. Jon Porter, driving with even a miniscule amount of certain drugs in your blood is a felony, and Williams was sentenced to 18-48 years in prison.

Thus the insanity: You can legally blow a .07 BAC, and be impaired, but not be legally drunk. But you can be 100 percent unimpaired, have a tiny amount of marijuana in your blood, and face years of jail time.

Watkins has vowed to take his arguments to the U.S. Supreme Court, the last chance Williams will have to get out of jail before her sentence expires. Let’s hope the justices correct this screaming injustice.

• The Sun on Wednesday had the lamest quote we at Various Things & Stuff have seen in a long, long time. It was contained in a Matt Hufman analysis piece of the case of New York Times reporter Judith Miller.

“She is a journalistic conundrum wrapped in a quandary wrapped in a newspaper,” Hufman wrote.

That’s just awful.

• Is it the Hatchet Act? That’s what Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins must be thinking after the U.S. Office of Special Counsel decided to appeal an administrative law judge’s ruling that Perkins violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits employees paid with federal funds (or whose agencies deal with federal funds) from partisan political activity. Perkins, a deputy police chief in Henderson, holds a partisan office in the Assembly.

In September, a California administrative law judge ruled Henderson’s efforts to shield Perkins from dealing with federal funds were effective, and that he didn’t violate the act. (Henderson created a program whereby Perkins worked only with state and local money.)

But Special Counsel Scott Bloch disagrees, and is thus appealing to the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. “We continue to believe Mr. Perkins was covered under the Hatch Act and we feel confident in the outcome of this appeal.”

For Perkins, it’s not a moot issue: If he is found to be in violation, he could be removed from his job, lest Henderson lose the equivalent of two years’ worth of Perkins salary. Moreover, it could have an impact on his political future. (Although he’s dropped out of the race for governor in 2006, he’s still a viable candidate for other offices, this year and into the future.)