Repeal of mudslinging campaign law sought

CARSON CITY -- A Las Vegas assemblywoman wants to junk Nevada's 2-year-old law that has the state policing mudslinging political campaigns.

"It's too much of an infringement on a person's right to free speech," says Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, D-Las Vegas. She will ask her Committee on elections, Procedures and Ethics today to introduce the bill to repeal the law that gave the state Ethics Commission authority in this field.

But Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio, R-Reno, said he would oppose any attempt to remove the law he authored. "I don't think it's perfect, but it did provide a forum for people to go to for people who felt they were being maligned in a campaign."

"We want to encourage people to clean up campaigns and do away with negative campaigning," Raggio said. "It's not a perfect vehicle but unless somebody comes up with a better idea, I'm not for taking it out."

The law was part of a campaign reform package two years ago, but Giunchigliani says it's unconstitutional.

Giunchigliani's remarks came Tuesday as the Assembly Ways and Means Committee reviewed the budget of the ethics commission, which received 17 complaints and issued nine opinions on the issue of false statements about candidates. Seven complaints were withdrawn and one case is still pending.

Ethics Commission Chairwoman Mary Boetsch told the committee it spent a "significant" amount of time on these cases. Giunchigliani wondered if the ethics commission was the proper body to handle these complaints.

Boetsch replied it was the "logical" place to file the complaints since the commissioners are prohibited from engaging in partisan politics. The law provides a candidate, who thinks a false statement has been made about him by his rival, can petition the ethics commission, which has the power to levy fines.

One member of the Ways and Means Committee -- Bob Beers, R-Las Vegas -- was fined $5,000 by the ethics commission, which found he had distributed untrue information about his opponent. The case is being appealed to the courts.

After the hearing, Giunchigliani said the law creates a "chilling effect" on free speech. It was added to the campaign reform act in 1997 by Raggio to kill the bill, she said. "We made the decision to let it sit there for two years with the intention of coming back and repealing it."

"I totally applaud the senator's intent when the language was added to make people be less negative in their campaign tactics ... to make sure they are providing accurate statements about what they do, what their job is and so forth. But we can't police that," because it's a violation of free speech.

Raggio denies it was added to kill the reform act. It was a compromise to those who wanted to make it a felony to make false statements during the campaign. "This was an effort to provide some relief, and I would oppose taking it out."

Giunchigliani said some of those summoned before the commission, including Beers, felt "they were being prosecuted. That they were judged almost guilty before anything even got started. And it forces them into a court system to clear their name, and I don't think that was the intent."

She said there may be other ways to accomplish the goal. Maybe candidates should include on campaign disclosure statements under oath "That you really do have a job in X market, that you really to live at this place ..."

Giunchigliani said the public should judge the truthfulness of the campaign statements.

The ethics commission itself may be reorganized. There are at least five bills to change the structure.

Boetsch told the ways and means committee that she wants to have an executive director, paid $70,000 to $80,000 a year, to set up the meetings, gather the evidence, answer questions from lawyers and the press and to tour the state training newly elected officials.

archive