Editorial: Campaign police aren't necessary

THE state Ethics Commission has been dragged -- once again -- into an area it has no business policing: political campaign ads.

Last week the Ethics Commission fined Assembly candidate Bob Beers $5,000 for campaign material it said was false and misleading, even though the commission acknowledged it was factually correct. Beers sent out campaign literature before the primary suggesting that his opponent, Dennis Silvers, may have been culpable in a 1996 restaurant fire. Silvers, who lost the Republican primary to Beers by a large margin, said in his complaint that Beers was aware he didn't own the restaurant at the time the fire destroyed the restaurant, having sold it five months before.

This isn't the first complaint the Ethics Commission has heard under a new law allowing it to police campaigns. One month ago the Ethics Commission dismissed a complaint filed by Ken Santor, a candidate for state treasurer. He claimed he was maligned by an ad by his opponent, Brian Krolicki, in which Krolicki questioned how voters could trust him with state funds.

In the Santor-Krolicki case, the Ethics Commission ruled that there was not enough evidence that the ad was false. While it was heartening to see the Ethics Commission reject Santor's complaint, the fact is there should be no law giving the commission any type of authority in judging the truthfulness of campaign ads.

The provision of the 1997 campaign finance reform law that lets the Ethics Commission police campaigns was an effort to stop candidates from making false and malicious statements about an opponent. But no one realistically can expect that candidates, especially during the heat of a campaign, are going to be angels.

The reality is that misleading statements are as much a part of politics as oxygen is a necessary ingredient of fire. And just like fire, politics can be incendiary, creating misleading accusations that can be devastating to an opponent.

But the 1997 Nevada Legislature's solution -- to create campaign dialogue bereft of misstatements -- was foolhardy. Voters are the best judges of deciding whether a candidate has stepped over the line, not an ethics panel searching for purity in candidates. In addition, candidates who believe they have been libeled or slandered can file a lawsuit and have a court settle the matter.

The Ethics Commission has enough on its plate already without trying to also police campaigns. The 1999 Legislature should get rid of this ridiculous law and let the commission spend its time more wisely.

archive