Candidates in Congressional District 4 race tackle tough questions in debate

By Megan Messerly

Thursday, April 14, 2016 | 11:44 p.m.

An intense primary battle has been brewing for months between the three frontrunners vying for the Democratic nomination in Congressional District 4.

Former Assemblywoman Lucy Flores, state Sen. Ruben Kihuen, and philanthropist Susie Lee have attended countless debates over the last several months, comparing and contrasting themselves as they seek to challenge incumbent Republican Rep. Cresent Hardy at the ballot box in November. They debated again Thursday night at the Pearson Community Center in North Las Vegas.

Flores, Kihuen and Lee were joined by four newcomer candidates: Dan Rolle, Rodney Smith, Mike Schaefer, and Brandon Casutt. Moderated by political journalist Jon Ralston, the debate touched on everything from immigration to whistleblower Edward Snowden.

The three frontrunner candidates also had to tackle tougher questions on their past records — for Kihuen and Flores their Legislative records, and for Lee, her work in philanthropy and past investments.

Here’s a look at some of the highlights from the debate:

Flores

Flores continued to present herself as the progressive choice among the three, noting endorsements from major progressive organizations as well as the support of Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.

Flores disagreed that Lee had an edge in a “year of the outsider,” saying she thought it was “the year of the person who has been effective.” She said that, in the Legislature, she was able to work through “partisan gridlock” to pass legislation.

Flores also criticized Lee for personal contributions to her campaign, saying that’s something that “frankly other candidates aren’t able to do.” She added that more than 50-percent of the members of Congress are multimillionaires, but “that’s not who my neighborhood is surrounded with.”

She also acknowledged that the pro-choice group EMILY’S List had endorsed Lee in the race, though the group endorsed Flores in her bid for lieutenant governor in 2014. She contended the reason they chose Lee over her was that Lee had more money.

When asked about a survey that identified Flores as the worst legislator, she countered that the survey was taken from a small sample of lobbyists.

“The fact that special interest lobbyists consider me a thorn in their side, I’m very proud of that,” Flores said.

She also said she had no problem taking campaign contributions from a group and then going against their interests when voting on a piece of legislation. “I have no problem, none whatsoever in pissing anyone off,” Flores said.

Flores, Kihuen and Lee also each said that they would agree to release their campaign contributions weekly, as long all of them did so.

Kihuen

Kihuen tried to portray himself as the most experienced legislator, while fending off criticisms that he should’ve done more during his time in the Legislature.

“It’s not just about passing bills but defeating the bad ones,” Kihuen said, noting the legislation targeting unions during the last session.

Kihuen, like Flores, highlighted that Congress “doesn’t look like most of us here” and “doesn’t represent the diversity of America.”

At one point, Flores attacked Kihuen for his presentation of a bill to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, saying he was unable to answer why the number had been set at $15. Kihuen’s response was that it took “courage to sit there in front of big corporation lobbyists who were right behind me ready to kill this bill.”

When asked repeatedly whether he agreed with a letter the Culinary Union, which endorsed Kihuen, had sent attacking Lee, Kihuen skirted the question. The union had called Lee “part of the wealthy elite that (Congressman Cresent) Hardy has worked so hard to protect” and accused her of “trying to purchase this Congressional seat.”

Kihuen said he disagreed with multimillionaires trying to buy the election, but didn’t specifically call out Lee.

“I’m talking about the Koch brothers, those billionaires who after this primary they’re going to invest millions of dollars into defeating the Democrats in the general election,” he said.

Lee

The biggest issue Lee had to contend with was her wealth.

Lee highlighted how she had been raised the daughter of a steel plant worker and a stay at home mom, adding that she also worked and pitched in to help her family.

“To say I don’t understand the struggle of the working class family is vastly unfair,” Lee said.

She said that she was “given the hand up at times” and said that she’s wanted to provide that same help to the community.

Lee also addressed some of her controversial investments, including oil company Halliburton, saying that the money was invested by a manager and that once she saw she owned it, she sold it. When asked whether she should’ve been more proactive on the front end about her investments, Lee said she was wrong but “made the changes make it right and made the commitment not to do it again.”

On campaign transparency, Lee said contributions should be made immediately available online, given the digital age. She also took a jab at Kihuen and Flores for not enacting more reforms during their time in the Legislature.

Lee also broke with Kihuen and Flores over a question on the Iran nuclear deal, saying that, unlike them, she does not support the deal. She called Iran an “exporter of terrorism” and a “major destabilizer in the Middle East.”

Rolle

Rolle spent most of the debate both attacking the three frontrunner candidates as well as distancing himself from them.

At the beginning of the debate, Rolle highlighted that his name had not been listed on the official flyer for the event as Kihuen, Lee and Flores did, but grouped into the category of “other” candidates who might be attending. He also touted how little he had spent on his campaign so far, saying that it was less than Lee’s outfit and Kihuen’s suit.

“People have stopped believing in their politicians,” Rolle said. “It’s OK to want a different option.”

On immigration, he criticized the three frontrunners’ support for the so-called “Gang of Eight” immigration bill, calling it “a lot of copy and paste immigration solution policies.” He urged more training for people who work with immigrants to treat them in a humane way.

In response to some backlash on Twitter for using the word “illegal” to refer to immigrants, Rolle both defended himself and apologized saying, “I’m sorry if that’s an offensive term, I appreciate that feedback.”

Smith

Smith drew on his background as a veteran in making his case to the crowd at the debate.

“This country has gotten into a bunch of wars, but hasn’t always taken care of the veterans afterwards,” Smith said.

When asked about whistleblower Edward Snowden, Smith called him a traitor.

“I have worked in some of the highest positions when it comes to security classifications,” Smith said. “There are always safeguards, always backups and resources, to bring those things to light.”

Smith also said that he was “all for” campaign finance reform, adding that there are too many millionaires in Congress.

In his closing remarks, he highlighted the Black Lives Matter movement, saying that racial inequality gets talked about as an “afterthought” but should be thought about as a “forethought.”

“I think we the people can change the direction of this country to go further and better for all of us with you involved,” Smith said.

Schaefer

Schaefer’s biggest argument throughout the debate was that Yucca Mountain should be a nuclear repository. “They’re all for motherhood and apple pie and so am I, but there’s one issue I’m pushing — nuclear power,” Schaefer said.

Though the numbers show that a majority of Nevadans oppose the Yucca Mountain project, Schaefer said he wasn’t sure that the overwhelming majority of voters oppose it. When the candidates were asked when they had broken with their party, Schaefer again pointed to his stance on Yucca Mountain.

“I’m the one that’s going against the grain by promoting Yucca Mountain,” Schaefer said.

Schaefer also raised a concern that Morse Arberry Jr. — a former assemblyman who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge for fraudulent appropriation of money — would receive 20 percent of the vote for appearing first on the alphabetized ballot. Arberry did not attend the event.

Casutt

Casutt argued that a political newcomer should face Hardy in November to “not give him any ammunition to fire against us.”

“I think if we present ourselves with fresh ideas and fresh solutions to problems, we can have the edge going into the general election,” Casutt said.

In response to a question about whistleblower Edward Snowden, Casutt said that he was “kind of glad” that Snowden did it but that he went about it the wrong way.

Casutt said he was in favor of tightening campaign finance rules, saying people shouldn’t be able to donate to a candidate’s campaign and also to the PAC that is supporting that candidate.

“They should be limited to that actual amount,” Casutt said.