It's that time of the cycle again. We're seeing a downpour of campaign finance reports. And of course, reporters and pundits are "analyzing" "who's up & who's down" due to how much each has raised.
We're seeing tremendous fundraising hauls for candidates in hot races... And we're even seeing tremendous fundraising hauls for candidates who aren't in hot races. So what does this all mean?
Now, we're even seeing attack ads over "gifts" paid for by "gifts" from "high friends in low places". Hell, these "high friends in low places" are even paying for attack ads that indirectly attack them! What on earth are we supposed to make of this?
This is actually what US Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) was talking about yesterday. This is what happens we allow so much corporate money to flood our politics.
Want to know why we're now having to decide major tax policy in the voting booth this year? Look no further than here... Or here... Or here.
Want to know why we're all too often subjected to a vapid debate over "optics" instead an actual, substantive debate on the issues we truly care about? Take a look here. Need we say more?
There's a reason why we keep harping on this. And there's a reason why religious texts, such as The Bible, have warned about the love of money.
Want to get to the root of all the evil that's seeped into our politics? Follow the money. And if you want to uproot this evil, you need to get this dirty money out of our politics.
Showing posts with label clean money. Show all posts
Showing posts with label clean money. Show all posts
Thursday, October 16, 2014
Wednesday, April 9, 2014
If It's Dirty, Why Not Clean It?
How many times have we confronted this? We've examined the shells. We've smelled the stinky juice. We've felt the shadows. We've even raced to catch up with the Speedway.
Yet through it all, we've become quite dizzy from all the rides on Nevada's notorious "Merry-go-round of Corruption". Sadly, we need to step back on that merry-go-round this morning to examine an aspect of Nevada politics that is often overlooked: our local judiciary.
We must give credit where it's due. "Newspaper" columnist Jane Ann Morrison (one of the few other reasons to even bother reading it) recently exposed the kind of bare knuckle political maneuvering that we typically don't expect on the judicial bench. There are now even accusations of what authorities in other states call bribery... But what we in Nevada just refer to as "politics as usual".
To be fair, there are a number of shady characters in this story. At this point, it's hard to figure out who's telling the complete truth (if anyone). However, what can't be denied at this point is that a number of judicial candidates are dependent upon well heeled contributors who also happen to visit the courtrooms they aspire to preside over. And that in and of itself is a problem.
One of the foundations of our judiciary is the guarantee of equal protection under the law. How are we supposed to expect that if we sense that those who can afford to "pay to play" happen to receive "more equal protection" than the rest of us? How are we supposed to trust our courts' ability to fairly interpret the law when they're under the influence of a few powerful & moneyed interests who expect a certain interpretation that happens to favor them?
We've said this many times before, but we must say it again today: If we want to end this dizzying feeling we sense when viewing the dirty reality of Nevada politics, we must stop the merry-go-round of corruption. And the only way to truly stop it is to end the seemingly endless flow of dirty money into all aspects of our political system... Even our judiciary.
We're again hearing debate over whether we should continue direct election of judges, or just allow the state to appoint them. And while fair arguments can be made for either side, we sense both sides are missing the point. After all, can we fully trust the Governor and legislators when they are also under the influence of numerous campaign donors?
For us, there's one clear solution to this problem: clean money. Why not simply level the playing field so we can all participate?
It's already working in other parts of the nation. Why not bring it here to Nevada? (And for that matter, why can't the entire nation have it?) Lordy knows we need a whole lot of disinfectant to clean up our system. So why not start cleaning it up already?
Yet through it all, we've become quite dizzy from all the rides on Nevada's notorious "Merry-go-round of Corruption". Sadly, we need to step back on that merry-go-round this morning to examine an aspect of Nevada politics that is often overlooked: our local judiciary.
We must give credit where it's due. "Newspaper" columnist Jane Ann Morrison (one of the few other reasons to even bother reading it) recently exposed the kind of bare knuckle political maneuvering that we typically don't expect on the judicial bench. There are now even accusations of what authorities in other states call bribery... But what we in Nevada just refer to as "politics as usual".
To be fair, there are a number of shady characters in this story. At this point, it's hard to figure out who's telling the complete truth (if anyone). However, what can't be denied at this point is that a number of judicial candidates are dependent upon well heeled contributors who also happen to visit the courtrooms they aspire to preside over. And that in and of itself is a problem.
One of the foundations of our judiciary is the guarantee of equal protection under the law. How are we supposed to expect that if we sense that those who can afford to "pay to play" happen to receive "more equal protection" than the rest of us? How are we supposed to trust our courts' ability to fairly interpret the law when they're under the influence of a few powerful & moneyed interests who expect a certain interpretation that happens to favor them?
We've said this many times before, but we must say it again today: If we want to end this dizzying feeling we sense when viewing the dirty reality of Nevada politics, we must stop the merry-go-round of corruption. And the only way to truly stop it is to end the seemingly endless flow of dirty money into all aspects of our political system... Even our judiciary.
We're again hearing debate over whether we should continue direct election of judges, or just allow the state to appoint them. And while fair arguments can be made for either side, we sense both sides are missing the point. After all, can we fully trust the Governor and legislators when they are also under the influence of numerous campaign donors?
For us, there's one clear solution to this problem: clean money. Why not simply level the playing field so we can all participate?
It's already working in other parts of the nation. Why not bring it here to Nevada? (And for that matter, why can't the entire nation have it?) Lordy knows we need a whole lot of disinfectant to clean up our system. So why not start cleaning it up already?
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
"Profiles in Courage"
What do you think of when the words "Profile in Courage" come to mind? And who do you think of? Probably not Senator Dean Heller (R)?
There are many things we can say about Senator Dean Heller. "Profile in Courage" likely isn't one of them. And it's certainly not something a certain prominent media pundit would say about the Senator.
And speaking of Jon Ralston, he's had some beef with Senator Heller over his refusal to indicate whether he was comped into a NASCAR race at Las Vegas Motor Speedway. He eventually told a reporter (from the "newspaper") that he paid for his own ticket, but that was only after Ralston revealed that Las Vegas Motor Speedway offers comps to lawmakers every yearin return for ensuring it won't get taxed. And that was only after three State Senators were shamed into reimbursing the Speedway owners once news broke that they (along with even more elected officials) were comped into the NASCAR race.
In reality, we may never really know the full truth of what happened at Las Vegas Motor Speedway. Why's that? Current Nevada law allows politicians to "accept gifts under $200" without reporting them as campaign contributions. Outgoing Secretary of State (& current Attorney General candidate) Ross Miller (D) attempted to close this and other campaign finance loopholes last year. And while he did ultimately succeed iin getting the Nevada Legislature to pass a modest campaign finance reform package, that was only after the "Gaming-mining-lobbying Industrial Complex" succeeded in watering it down so it wouldn't be too threatening to the choke hold it has on Carson City.
That's why Senator Heller and a bunch of state legislators figured it would be "no big deal" if they accepted Las Vegas Motor Speedway's generous invitation to a special NASCAR celebration in their honor. And as long as they they keep giving the "Gaming-mining-lobbying Industrial Complex" the "Black Card" treatment, they'll always get the red carpet treatment where they want it most.
Meanwhile, "We the People" keep getting the shaft. Why? As long as the game is continually rigged in favor of those can afford to "pay to play", we'll always be left out in the cold.
And that's why we always come back to this key point: If we don't like the "Black Card/Red Carpet/Pay-to-play" games being played in Carson City & DC, then we must change the game. And the only way we can effectively change the game to level the playing field for everyone is if we properly address the root of this problem.
Fortunately, solutions are available. And fortunately for Senator Heller, one of those solutions is within his reach. S 2023 would put us on the path to a fairer & cleaner election system by leveling the playing field so that big money interests can't simply buy their way to a complete political monopoly. It would allow "We the People" back into the game. And it would make elected officials more accountable to those who elected them into office in the first place.
What, you didn't think we'd take another opportunity to use another corruption scandal to direct your attention back to campaign finance reform? Come on! Of course, we had to do this. Unlike certain politicians who never seem to aspire to become actual "Profiles in Courage", we're not afraid to address the root of this problem. We're just wondering when enough of them will finally muster the courage to solve this problem once & for all.
There are many things we can say about Senator Dean Heller. "Profile in Courage" likely isn't one of them. And it's certainly not something a certain prominent media pundit would say about the Senator.
And speaking of Jon Ralston, he's had some beef with Senator Heller over his refusal to indicate whether he was comped into a NASCAR race at Las Vegas Motor Speedway. He eventually told a reporter (from the "newspaper") that he paid for his own ticket, but that was only after Ralston revealed that Las Vegas Motor Speedway offers comps to lawmakers every year
In reality, we may never really know the full truth of what happened at Las Vegas Motor Speedway. Why's that? Current Nevada law allows politicians to "accept gifts under $200" without reporting them as campaign contributions. Outgoing Secretary of State (& current Attorney General candidate) Ross Miller (D) attempted to close this and other campaign finance loopholes last year. And while he did ultimately succeed iin getting the Nevada Legislature to pass a modest campaign finance reform package, that was only after the "Gaming-mining-lobbying Industrial Complex" succeeded in watering it down so it wouldn't be too threatening to the choke hold it has on Carson City.
That's why Senator Heller and a bunch of state legislators figured it would be "no big deal" if they accepted Las Vegas Motor Speedway's generous invitation to a special NASCAR celebration in their honor. And as long as they they keep giving the "Gaming-mining-lobbying Industrial Complex" the "Black Card" treatment, they'll always get the red carpet treatment where they want it most.
Meanwhile, "We the People" keep getting the shaft. Why? As long as the game is continually rigged in favor of those can afford to "pay to play", we'll always be left out in the cold.
And that's why we always come back to this key point: If we don't like the "Black Card/Red Carpet/Pay-to-play" games being played in Carson City & DC, then we must change the game. And the only way we can effectively change the game to level the playing field for everyone is if we properly address the root of this problem.
Fortunately, solutions are available. And fortunately for Senator Heller, one of those solutions is within his reach. S 2023 would put us on the path to a fairer & cleaner election system by leveling the playing field so that big money interests can't simply buy their way to a complete political monopoly. It would allow "We the People" back into the game. And it would make elected officials more accountable to those who elected them into office in the first place.
What, you didn't think we'd take another opportunity to use another corruption scandal to direct your attention back to campaign finance reform? Come on! Of course, we had to do this. Unlike certain politicians who never seem to aspire to become actual "Profiles in Courage", we're not afraid to address the root of this problem. We're just wondering when enough of them will finally muster the courage to solve this problem once & for all.
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Postscript on Whittemore Verdict, SB 49, & the Real Solution to Nevada's Culture of Corruption
What a fall from grace. Not too long ago, Harvey Whittemore was one of Nevada's top power players. But now, he's officially a convict.
Oh, and what we discussed over two months ago still stands.
Last month, we saw a glimmer of hope in SB 49's passage. And while the final bill does offer some campaign finance reform and more transparency than what we had become accustomed to, it's nonetheless a shadow of its former self. And it still comes nowhere close to ending Nevada's infamous culture of corruption.
Of course, we're not alone in this. New York has had its own share of recent scandals. And earlier this year, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) showed some real courage in addressing the root of these corruption scandals... And advocating the real solution.
So my demand still stands. Before we hear any pundit and/or rival politician spin the Whittemore verdict against another politician, let's see these pundits and politicians discuss the real solution to this systemic corruption. This is what Nevada truly needs, not another meaningless round of finger pointing blame games.
A U.S. District Court jury has found developer Harvey Whittemore guilty on three counts of making illegal campaign contributions.
Jurors are telling U.S. District Court Judge Larry Hicks they don't think they can reach a verdict on charges Whittemore lied to the FBI. Hicks is sending the jury back to deliberate on the lying charge.
Oh, and what we discussed over two months ago still stands.
Of course, the usual suspects will try to spin this all sorts of ways. So let's first clear this up: Harvey Whittemore was an opportunistic and bipartisan "juice man". He once had close ties to Harry Reid, Dean Heller, and a whole host of politicians at all levels of government across the state. He was only abandoned when the FBI began investigating him.
As we've discussed before, this is the tactic often used to deflect from the real pursuit of real solutions to this ongoing problem of corruption in Nevada Government. It's easy to just blame a politician who once received campaign contributions. It's much riskier to actually propose shutting down the ongoing "Merry-go-round of Corruption". [...]
We will only experience more of these embarrassing corruption scandals if we fail to address the root of this problem. That's why we eventually need real, serious dialogue on clean money. With clean money (or public financing of campaigns), we can finally have clean elections. And with clean elections, our elected officials are no longer beholden to shady "juice men" and conniving corporate lobbyists.
So before we hear any pundits and politicians restart the blame game on this and/or any future corruption scandals to emerge, we should dare them to offer a solution. Are they ready to bring clean money & clean elections to Nevada? If not, and if they don't like the concept of public financing, what is their solution?
Last month, we saw a glimmer of hope in SB 49's passage. And while the final bill does offer some campaign finance reform and more transparency than what we had become accustomed to, it's nonetheless a shadow of its former self. And it still comes nowhere close to ending Nevada's infamous culture of corruption.
Of course, we're not alone in this. New York has had its own share of recent scandals. And earlier this year, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) showed some real courage in addressing the root of these corruption scandals... And advocating the real solution.
So my demand still stands. Before we hear any pundit and/or rival politician spin the Whittemore verdict against another politician, let's see these pundits and politicians discuss the real solution to this systemic corruption. This is what Nevada truly needs, not another meaningless round of finger pointing blame games.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Finally, a Step Forward
About an hour ago, another bill passed to live another day. This time it was SB 49, the campaign finance reform bill pushed by Secretary of State Ross Miller (D). It had to endure some weakening alterations in committee, but ultimately much of what Miller wanted survived.
And just moments ago, the amended SB 49 passed the full Senate. The vote was 13-8 in favor. All Democrats voted for the bill, and Senators Joe Hardy (R-Boulder City) & Scott Hammond (R-Las Vegas) joined the Democrats to vote to approve. All the other Republicans voted against the bill.
But of course, the ones who voted against SB 49 are claiming it's actually the Democrats who oppose campaign finance reform. "Oh, Armani! Oh, the reporting requirement here isn't good enough!" To be fair, Senator Ben Kieckhefer (R-Reno) did offer an amendment. However, the others did not. So really, their excuses for voting against SB 49 sound all too familiar.
Is this bill a panacea for better transparency and ethics? Not quite. In fact, we've discussed what's really needed to clean up the hot mess that's Nevada government.
Yet with that being said, SB 49 is a good start. It finally sets real standards for campaign finance reporting. And remember, knowledge is power. So tonight, the Nevada Legislature finally took a major step in the direction of meaningful reform.
And just moments ago, the amended SB 49 passed the full Senate. The vote was 13-8 in favor. All Democrats voted for the bill, and Senators Joe Hardy (R-Boulder City) & Scott Hammond (R-Las Vegas) joined the Democrats to vote to approve. All the other Republicans voted against the bill.
But of course, the ones who voted against SB 49 are claiming it's actually the Democrats who oppose campaign finance reform. "Oh, Armani! Oh, the reporting requirement here isn't good enough!" To be fair, Senator Ben Kieckhefer (R-Reno) did offer an amendment. However, the others did not. So really, their excuses for voting against SB 49 sound all too familiar.
Is this bill a panacea for better transparency and ethics? Not quite. In fact, we've discussed what's really needed to clean up the hot mess that's Nevada government.
Yet with that being said, SB 49 is a good start. It finally sets real standards for campaign finance reporting. And remember, knowledge is power. So tonight, the Nevada Legislature finally took a major step in the direction of meaningful reform.
Friday, April 12, 2013
SB 49 Campaign Finance Reform Passed Committee, Now Moving to Full Senate
Last month, we discussed the importance of the campaign finance & ethics reform bills pending in the Nevada Legislature this session. One such is bill is SB 49, Secretary of State Ross Miller's bill that calls for more campaign finance reporting. Believe it or not, SB 49 also moved out of committee yesterday. And that's no small feat.
So what happened? Yesterday, the bill had its final day in the Senate Legislative Operations & Elections Committee. A few members grumbled over the reporting requirements.
And then, the bill was amended. Secretary Miller already changed the minimum amount of immediately reportable contributions from $1,000 to $2,000. He also decided to include internet advertising as required expenditure reporting, and he agreed to exclude charitable and educational events from gift reporting. But on top of that, Senator Kelvin Atkinson (D-North Las Vegas) further amended the bill by delaying the start of the new reporting rules to 2014.
And then, finally, it was time to vote. Senators Barbara Cegavske (R-Spring Valley) and James Settlemeyer (R-Minden) voted against SB 49. Meanwhile, Senators Atkinson, Pat Spearman (D-North Las Vegas), and Mark Manendo (D-Paradise) voted in favor. So SB 49 passed as amended.
So was it watered down some? Yep, though it was also strengthened in other ways (like required online ad reporting). But ultimately, it passed committee. It's moving onto the full Senate. And finally, something may happen.
How often have we seen ugly corruption scandals emerge? And how often have we seen the exact same reaction of petty finger pointing while offering no real solutions?
It's time for a chance. And SB 49 starts to move Nevada in a new direction of transparency. Knowledge truly is power. And the more we know about the flow of money in and out of campaigns, the more we can do to identify the problems in our campaign finance system and change them.
So what happened? Yesterday, the bill had its final day in the Senate Legislative Operations & Elections Committee. A few members grumbled over the reporting requirements.
And then, the bill was amended. Secretary Miller already changed the minimum amount of immediately reportable contributions from $1,000 to $2,000. He also decided to include internet advertising as required expenditure reporting, and he agreed to exclude charitable and educational events from gift reporting. But on top of that, Senator Kelvin Atkinson (D-North Las Vegas) further amended the bill by delaying the start of the new reporting rules to 2014.
And then, finally, it was time to vote. Senators Barbara Cegavske (R-Spring Valley) and James Settlemeyer (R-Minden) voted against SB 49. Meanwhile, Senators Atkinson, Pat Spearman (D-North Las Vegas), and Mark Manendo (D-Paradise) voted in favor. So SB 49 passed as amended.
So was it watered down some? Yep, though it was also strengthened in other ways (like required online ad reporting). But ultimately, it passed committee. It's moving onto the full Senate. And finally, something may happen.
How often have we seen ugly corruption scandals emerge? And how often have we seen the exact same reaction of petty finger pointing while offering no real solutions?
It's time for a chance. And SB 49 starts to move Nevada in a new direction of transparency. Knowledge truly is power. And the more we know about the flow of money in and out of campaigns, the more we can do to identify the problems in our campaign finance system and change them.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
On Harvey Whittemore (& Heidi Gansert)... & A Way to Shut Down That Merry-go-round
Yesterday, Harvey Whittemore was denied a motion to drop his charges. Wait, what? Who?
Remember Harvey Whittemore? He was once at the top of Nevada's political ladder. He was the "preeminent juice man". And then, all of a sudden, his house of cards started tumbling down. His planned mega-development at Coyote Springs fell apart when last decade's "Real Estate Bubble" burst. His business partners then turned on him. And now, he will indeed go to trial on corruption charges.
Of course, the usual suspects will try to spin this all sorts of ways. So let's first clear this up: Harvey Whittimore was an opportunistic and bipartisan "juice man". He once had close ties to Harry Reid, Dean Heller, and a whole host of politicians at all levels of government across the state. He was only abandoned when the FBI began investigating him.
As we've discussed before, this is the tactic often used to deflect from the real pursuit of real solutions to this ongoing problem of corruption in Nevada Government. It's easy to just blame a politician who once received campaign contributions. It's much riskier to actually propose shutting down the ongoing "Merry-go-round of Corruption".
So what can be done? Secretary of State Ross Miller has offered SB 49 for better campaign finance reporting. State Senator Justin Jones (D-Enterprise) has offered SB 203 as a companion bill, as it calls for lobbyists to file quarterly reports. These bills at least allow for more transparency.
However, there's another step we can take to curb corruption. We've discussed it before. And we need to bring it up again now.
We will only experience more of these embarrassing corruption scandals if we fail to address the root of this problem. That's why we eventually need real, serious dialogue on clean money. With clean money (or public financing of campaigns), we can finally have clean elections. And with clean elections, our elected officials are no longer beholden to shady "juice men" and conniving corporate lobbyists.
So before we hear any pundits and politicians restart the blame game on this and/or any future corruption scandals to emerge, we should dare them to offer a solution. Are they ready to bring clean money & clean elections to Nevada? If not, and if they don't like the concept of public financing, what is their solution?
We don't have to continue riding this merry-go-round. We can stop it... If we want to.
1:30 PM UPDATE:
Ha! That didn't take long. Nevada's next great corruption scandal is now here. Thanks, Heidi Gansert!
Surprise! Heidi Gansert raised a ton of money in her last campaign. Yet when she left the Assembly to become Governor Brian Sandoval's Chief of Staff, she didn't leave that ton of money behind. Rather, she moved that money into her own PAC, then spent it on her favored candidates... Who were, of course, Nevada Republicans like Senator Greg Brower (R-Reno) and Assembly Minority Leader Pat Hickey (R-Reno).
Just who is actually surprised by this crap? Again, we see this all the time. So when will we actually do something about it? I wonder what supposed "corruption fighter" Pat Hickey has to say about this.
Remember Harvey Whittemore? He was once at the top of Nevada's political ladder. He was the "preeminent juice man". And then, all of a sudden, his house of cards started tumbling down. His planned mega-development at Coyote Springs fell apart when last decade's "Real Estate Bubble" burst. His business partners then turned on him. And now, he will indeed go to trial on corruption charges.
A federal judge has denied motions by a former Nevada political powerbroker to dismiss charges alleging he used his family and employees to make illegal campaign contributions to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
The Reno Gazette-Journal reports U.S. District Judge Larry Hicks on Tuesday denied four motions filed by Harvey Whittemore seeking dismissal of the government's case.
Whittemore was indicted June 6 by a federal grand jury on four counts stemming from campaign contributions made in 2007 to Reid.
Of course, the usual suspects will try to spin this all sorts of ways. So let's first clear this up: Harvey Whittimore was an opportunistic and bipartisan "juice man". He once had close ties to Harry Reid, Dean Heller, and a whole host of politicians at all levels of government across the state. He was only abandoned when the FBI began investigating him.
As we've discussed before, this is the tactic often used to deflect from the real pursuit of real solutions to this ongoing problem of corruption in Nevada Government. It's easy to just blame a politician who once received campaign contributions. It's much riskier to actually propose shutting down the ongoing "Merry-go-round of Corruption".
So what can be done? Secretary of State Ross Miller has offered SB 49 for better campaign finance reporting. State Senator Justin Jones (D-Enterprise) has offered SB 203 as a companion bill, as it calls for lobbyists to file quarterly reports. These bills at least allow for more transparency.
However, there's another step we can take to curb corruption. We've discussed it before. And we need to bring it up again now.
We will only experience more of these embarrassing corruption scandals if we fail to address the root of this problem. That's why we eventually need real, serious dialogue on clean money. With clean money (or public financing of campaigns), we can finally have clean elections. And with clean elections, our elected officials are no longer beholden to shady "juice men" and conniving corporate lobbyists.
So before we hear any pundits and politicians restart the blame game on this and/or any future corruption scandals to emerge, we should dare them to offer a solution. Are they ready to bring clean money & clean elections to Nevada? If not, and if they don't like the concept of public financing, what is their solution?
We don't have to continue riding this merry-go-round. We can stop it... If we want to.
1:30 PM UPDATE:
Ha! That didn't take long. Nevada's next great corruption scandal is now here. Thanks, Heidi Gansert!
A former Democratic Party chairman has filed a complaint alleging former GOP Assemblywoman Heidi Gansert illegally kept campaign funds, then funneled them to a PAC she controlled and then disbursed the money.
The complaint, field today by ex-Washoe Democratic Party Chairman Chris Wicker, alleges Gansert kept more than $100,000 in unpsent campaign contributions after she left office in November 2010. (She later served as Gov. Brian Sandoval's chief of staff.)
Then, in October 2011, Gansert gave most of her unspent cash -- about $74,000 -- to a PAC called Nevada First, which was controlled by....Heidi Gansert.
Wicker, who is still a spokesman for the Washoe party, sent his complaint to the secretary of state's election integrity task force, saying Gansert took too long to dispose of the money and then chose a vehicle disallowed by the law.
Surprise! Heidi Gansert raised a ton of money in her last campaign. Yet when she left the Assembly to become Governor Brian Sandoval's Chief of Staff, she didn't leave that ton of money behind. Rather, she moved that money into her own PAC, then spent it on her favored candidates... Who were, of course, Nevada Republicans like Senator Greg Brower (R-Reno) and Assembly Minority Leader Pat Hickey (R-Reno).
Just who is actually surprised by this crap? Again, we see this all the time. So when will we actually do something about it? I wonder what supposed "corruption fighter" Pat Hickey has to say about this.
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
On Stopping That Merry-Go-Round of Corruption
It's a time honored tradition in Nevada politics. Corruption scandals emerge. Certain former legislators re-emerge as lobbyists. Ugly campaign finance reports surface. And all of a sudden, certain politicians pay lip service to "reform"... While actually working behind the scenes to kill actual reform.
This time, it's supposed to be different. Assembly Minority Leader and "born again reformer" Pat Hickey (R-Reno) has wanted us to forget his own checkered past on the subject and notice his newfound zeal for combating corruption. Yesterday, Hickey was trumpeting his own bill (AB 77) to slow the revolving door from the Assembly & Senate floors to lucrative lobbyist careers by implementing a one session "cooling off period". This sounds noble. And it seems like common sense. So of course, it's under attack by the very legislators-turned-lobbyists Hickey is targeting.
And of course, there's "Moose Juice". Remember this?
No really, he tried that. He didn't succeed there, but he's nonetheless now a lobbyist. Ah, Nevada politics at its best. (/snark)
And then, there's Ross Miller. Mr. Secretary of State made waves late last year with SB 63, his election reform bill. However, that's not the only legislation he's pursuing. Miller is also pushing for SB 49, which calls for more comprehensive and timely campaign finance reporting.
Ross Miller isn't new to this. He's tried campaign finance reform before. Of course, his past bills were quietly killed. He's also suing AFP over its questionable campaign activities, and he may find more success in court.
Ross Miller is hoping this Legislature session will be different. After all, he has some help. Not only is Senator Justin Jones (D-Enterprise) supporting SB 49, but he's also offering SB 203 as a companion bill. Jones' bill calls for lobbyists to file quarterly reports on their activities. (FYI, Jones was one of the candidates targeted by AFP last year.)
Of course, Miller and Jones are running into resistance. While no lobbyists actually showed up yesterday to testify against SB 49, they nonetheless found a more nefarious way to make their position clear on this and other campaign finance reform efforts. Make no mistake. This is coming.
That's what's really at stake. And that's why the superpower legal/lobbying firms' arm of "The Gaming-Mining-Lobbying Industrial Complex" will likely go all in to kill all the transparency and ethics legislation pending this session. You likely won't see this at the committee hearings and the Assembly & Senate floors, but this will be pushed behind the scenes. After all, they hate it when the mask is pulled from the corrupt reality of Carson City.
We've discussed this many times before. Nevada Government has been a merry-go-round of corruption for quite some time. And while the modest reforms mentioned above won't completely end the ride on their own, they at least have the potential to slow the merry-go-round of corruption enough to where we have a better view of what's happening. That alone is why Miller's, Jones', and even Hickey's respective bills have a tough ride ahead.
This time, it's supposed to be different. Assembly Minority Leader and "born again reformer" Pat Hickey (R-Reno) has wanted us to forget his own checkered past on the subject and notice his newfound zeal for combating corruption. Yesterday, Hickey was trumpeting his own bill (AB 77) to slow the revolving door from the Assembly & Senate floors to lucrative lobbyist careers by implementing a one session "cooling off period". This sounds noble. And it seems like common sense. So of course, it's under attack by the very legislators-turned-lobbyists Hickey is targeting.
“I am the definition of the revolving door,” joked contractors lobbyist Warren Hardy, who was an assemblyman who became a lobbyist who became a senator who became a lobbyist again. “Saying I couldn’t go back to lobbying would be like saying (Sen.) Joe Hardy couldn’t got back to being a doctor.”
Of the handful of former lawmakers-turned-lobbyists interviewed by the Sun, all readily acknowledged their time in the Legislature has given them a leg up as a lobbyist.
They know the process. They know the people. They know the pitfalls.
“I don’t think I’d ever own my own independent business as a lobbyist if I hadn’t been a lawmaker first,” gaming and mining lobbyist Josh Griffin, who served one term in the Assembly, said. “Sure, it’s valuable experience for a lobbyist.”
And of course, there's "Moose Juice". Remember this?
“I think you have to hit things while the iron is hot,” said [Morse] Arberry [D-Las Vegas], who was in his final term in the Assembly because of term limits. “For 25 years I served in the Legislature and in public, and I bring relationships and a lot of knowledge to the table. A cooling-off period hinders an individual. Momentum you have is lost because then you’re not involved in the field.”
Clark County Commissioner Steve Sisolak laughed at Arberry’s comment. He called Arberry a friend, but said his remarks reflect “exactly why we need a cooling-off period.”
No really, he tried that. He didn't succeed there, but he's nonetheless now a lobbyist. Ah, Nevada politics at its best. (/snark)
And then, there's Ross Miller. Mr. Secretary of State made waves late last year with SB 63, his election reform bill. However, that's not the only legislation he's pursuing. Miller is also pushing for SB 49, which calls for more comprehensive and timely campaign finance reporting.
Ross Miller isn't new to this. He's tried campaign finance reform before. Of course, his past bills were quietly killed. He's also suing AFP over its questionable campaign activities, and he may find more success in court.
Ross Miller is hoping this Legislature session will be different. After all, he has some help. Not only is Senator Justin Jones (D-Enterprise) supporting SB 49, but he's also offering SB 203 as a companion bill. Jones' bill calls for lobbyists to file quarterly reports on their activities. (FYI, Jones was one of the candidates targeted by AFP last year.)
Of course, Miller and Jones are running into resistance. While no lobbyists actually showed up yesterday to testify against SB 49, they nonetheless found a more nefarious way to make their position clear on this and other campaign finance reform efforts. Make no mistake. This is coming.
Miller’s bill says any contribution of $1,000 or more must be reported to the secretary of state within 72 hours.
Whatever arguments you hear from legislators –how onerous that is, the great imposition – are smoke screens. How can they argue with a straight face that the public should not know as soon as possible when a contribution is made and for how much?
They can’t, so they will create diversions. Mark my words. Other parts of Miller’s bill also should sail through the committee and the Legislature because they would make the system more transparent:
Reporting how much a candidate has on hand, a glaring omission on current reports
Stricter reporting and policing of gifts from lobbyists
Defines what personal uses of campaign contributions are prohibited
One reason most readers might not take any of this seriously is because unless you are a political insider, you might find it hard to believe these loopholes exist. But they do, and their closure is long overdue.
So stay awake folks. Anyone who tries to kill this bill is interested only in perpetuating a corrupt system and is guilty of the kind of insidious, subtle corruption that is often invisible to the naked eye.
That's what's really at stake. And that's why the superpower legal/lobbying firms' arm of "The Gaming-Mining-Lobbying Industrial Complex" will likely go all in to kill all the transparency and ethics legislation pending this session. You likely won't see this at the committee hearings and the Assembly & Senate floors, but this will be pushed behind the scenes. After all, they hate it when the mask is pulled from the corrupt reality of Carson City.
We've discussed this many times before. Nevada Government has been a merry-go-round of corruption for quite some time. And while the modest reforms mentioned above won't completely end the ride on their own, they at least have the potential to slow the merry-go-round of corruption enough to where we have a better view of what's happening. That alone is why Miller's, Jones', and even Hickey's respective bills have a tough ride ahead.
Monday, June 25, 2012
So This Is Why Pat Hickey Flip-flopped on Campaign Finance Reform!
Remember the hullabaloo Pat Hickey tried to create around the campaign finance reform package he proposed (yet opposed last year)? Now, we're getting a better sense of why he's done such a 180 on this.
Ah, so now we see! It's just so convenient for Pat Hickey to declare himself "The White Knight of Good Government". It's just so convenient for him to take up this cause andmisuse it to smear his political opponents. And niece we finally see why Hickey is doing this. Pat Hickey doesn't want us to see his own ethical shortcomings.
So why didn't Hickey lift a finger to help Ross Miller and Sheila Leslie enact any campaign fiance reform last year, when something actually could have been done? Why is Hickey only talking about it now, when the Legislature is not in session?
Well, this is an election year. This is indeed an election year. And in an election year, crafty politicians devise all sorts of initiatives to garner support.
If you’re going to paint yourself as the white knight of transparency, you better make sure to clean up after your horse.
Assemblyman Pat Hickey, R-Reno, listed $13,594 in unitemized credit card payments in this year’s campaign contribution and expense reports, nearly 30 percent of all his expenditures.
Lumping expenses onto credit cards does not violate campaign finance laws, according to the Secretary of State’s Office. But the occasional practice by candidates has been marked as a shortcoming of state law — a way for candidates to potentially obscure how they’re spending the money.
Ah, so now we see! It's just so convenient for Pat Hickey to declare himself "The White Knight of Good Government". It's just so convenient for him to take up this cause and
[Hickey] called on the lawmakers to “hold itself to higher standards in Nevada.”
“I am asking members of both parties to lead the way in establishing higher standards of public transparency and accountability,” he said.
Hickey’s reforms, which he urged lawmakers to make the first order of business when the Legislature meets in 2013, included reporting contributions in real time, requiring candidates to report ending fund balances, and reporting trips and gifts from lobbyists and donors when the Legislature is not in session.
[Secretary of State Ross] Miller has attempted to pass many of those same reforms since 2007.
So why didn't Hickey lift a finger to help Ross Miller and Sheila Leslie enact any campaign fiance reform last year, when something actually could have been done? Why is Hickey only talking about it now, when the Legislature is not in session?
Well, this is an election year. This is indeed an election year. And in an election year, crafty politicians devise all sorts of initiatives to garner support.
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Thanks, Pat Hickey... But Where Were You Last Year?
How many times have we talked about the endless culture of corruption in Carson City? And how many times have we suffered in agony as politicians and media pundits played petty blame games while ignoring the real solution to this problem? Nevada has endured an ongoing merry-go-round of corruption in state government since... Well, really since we first became a state!
So are we now ready for real change? And will this change be led by a conservative Republican who's next in line to lead the Assembly Republican Caucus next year? This just seems too good to be true.
This really does look like a great idea and a nice way to bring some real campaign finance reform to Nevada. So yes, I appreciate Pat Hickey's proposal and his newfound zeal to change the way this state is governed. And yes, I really do mean it.
However, I must still ask this: Why now? Why is Pat Hickey doing this now? Last I checked, the Legislature is not in session.
And as Former Senator and current Senate candidate Sheila Leslie noted in Anjeanette Damon's Sun article today, this is not the first time that the Legislature tried to tackle campaign finance reform.
Sheila Leslie was referring to SB 206, her bill which would have required lobbyists to file reports on lobbying activity occurring when the Legislature is not in session. It actually passed unanimously in the Senate. But for some reason, it died in the Assembly. I wonder why?
Here's a hint: Take a look at the minutes of the hearing SB 206 received in the Assembly's Legislative Operations and Elections Committee. In particular, notice the hostile tone of several Assembly Members of both parties. When Pat Hickey had the chance to "carpe diem" and build on the strong bipartisan support that Leslie's pro-transparency bill earned in the Senate, he punted... And he pretty much joined his colleagues in showing deep hostility towards this bill.
So why did Hickey say that then? And why is he trying to cast blame on everyone but himself for past failed reform efforts? He had a chance to champion SB 206 last year, when the Legislature was actually in session and something could have been done. Why did we wait until now to propose his reform package?
Again, I genuinely appreciate what Hickey is saying and doing now. This is exactly the kind of conversation that we need to have. However the Legislature is not in session now. We haven't even...
Oh wait, that's right! This is an election year. Ah yes, strange things happen in election years. All of a sudden, proposals that never saw the light of day suddenly become the campaign centerpiece as soon as they poll well. Now, I get it.
So are we now ready for real change? And will this change be led by a conservative Republican who's next in line to lead the Assembly Republican Caucus next year? This just seems too good to be true.
Assembly Republican leader Pat Hickey, R-Reno, made swings in Carson City and Las Vegas on Monday, touting his ideas to beef up campaign finance reporting requirements.
Flanked by Assembly Republicans and candidates for office, he pitched five bullet points that he said should be a top priority when the Legislature next meets in 2013, including reporting contributions in real time, requiring candidates to report ending fund balances, and reporting trips and gifts from lobbyists and donors when the Legislature is not in session.
But many of the ideas have been proposed before, only to die with little evidence of who did the deed.
While the Legislature passed reform last year that requires electronic filing and allows reports to be searched — what Miller called “the most significant campaign finance reforms passed in state history" — lawmakers shied away from stiffer measures.
This really does look like a great idea and a nice way to bring some real campaign finance reform to Nevada. So yes, I appreciate Pat Hickey's proposal and his newfound zeal to change the way this state is governed. And yes, I really do mean it.
However, I must still ask this: Why now? Why is Pat Hickey doing this now? Last I checked, the Legislature is not in session.
And as Former Senator and current Senate candidate Sheila Leslie noted in Anjeanette Damon's Sun article today, this is not the first time that the Legislature tried to tackle campaign finance reform.
“People in the system like the system the way it is,” Leslie, the bill’s sponsor, said Monday. “They like the status quo. They don’t see the need to change it.”
She added that, on the Assembly side, neither Republican nor Democratic leadership were helpful in pushing her bill for a vote.
“The animosity toward the bill came from both sides,” she said. “There was equal opportunity hostility to the bill.”
She called Assembly Republicans bringing forward this issue now “a little hypocritical” but said, “I welcome them to the transparency bandwagon.”
Sheila Leslie was referring to SB 206, her bill which would have required lobbyists to file reports on lobbying activity occurring when the Legislature is not in session. It actually passed unanimously in the Senate. But for some reason, it died in the Assembly. I wonder why?
Here's a hint: Take a look at the minutes of the hearing SB 206 received in the Assembly's Legislative Operations and Elections Committee. In particular, notice the hostile tone of several Assembly Members of both parties. When Pat Hickey had the chance to "carpe diem" and build on the strong bipartisan support that Leslie's pro-transparency bill earned in the Senate, he punted... And he pretty much joined his colleagues in showing deep hostility towards this bill.
Assemblyman Hickey:
You mentioned unpaid lobbyists. I assume one must pay a lobbying registration fee during the session. Do they then have to pay an additional fee during the interim?
Senator Leslie:
That would be something the Legislative Commission would have to set— whether it would be one fee every two years, an annual fee, or one fee during the session. This bill does not cover those types of decisions. Right now, a nonpaid veteran lobbyist pays nothing. A nonpaid lobbyist pays $20, and a paid lobbyist pays $300 for the session. I imagine the Legislative Commission would review those regulations and make that determination. I am not trying to make money with this bill. For the first time, we raised the lobbying fees significantly, and it was a revenue-generating act, but that is not my intent.
Assemblyman Hickey:
Lobbyists should report campaign contributions, so the point of this bill is obviously about transparency, but what perceived problem are you trying to address?
Senator Leslie:
What I have heard from my constituents is that there is a public perception that there is a lot of lobbying activity, and that lobbyists are paying for things for legislators such as golf games, fancy dinners, or whatever it might be. As a result, there is a lot of consternation that that activity is not reported. The public just wants to know. This is purely about sunshine. If it is so important that we have them report during session, I believe it is equally important that they also report out of session, when a lot of planning and legislative activity— interim committees or planning for the next session—happens. It is good government to have this kind of reporting. Most states do have year-round reporting, but of course most states meet more often than we do.
Assemblyman Hickey:
Mr. Murphy's [a Clark County lobbyist] house needs painting. Should I paint it? Is that something my business should report?
Senator Leslie:
No, it is not about you; it is about Mr. Murphy. If Mr. Murphy was the painter and was painting your house for free or giving you a discount, yes, that should be reported. It is not about you.
So why did Hickey say that then? And why is he trying to cast blame on everyone but himself for past failed reform efforts? He had a chance to champion SB 206 last year, when the Legislature was actually in session and something could have been done. Why did we wait until now to propose his reform package?
Again, I genuinely appreciate what Hickey is saying and doing now. This is exactly the kind of conversation that we need to have. However the Legislature is not in session now. We haven't even...
Oh wait, that's right! This is an election year. Ah yes, strange things happen in election years. All of a sudden, proposals that never saw the light of day suddenly become the campaign centerpiece as soon as they poll well. Now, I get it.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Another Day, Another Campaign Finance Scandal
Wait, didn't we already have Groundhog Day? So why does it seem like we keep waking up to the same damned story?
This time, the latest scandal du jour involves real estate developer Harvey Whittemore. Because he's the subject of an federal investigation and involved in a growing number of law suits, all of a sudden everyone from Harry Reid to Dean Heller and others (in both parties) is throwing out Whittemore's campaign contributions like rotten eggs.
And this morning, Jon Ralston tried to explain "how Harvey Whittemore became a leper".
And so that's what's happening. No one wants to be associated with someone who "looks like a crook", even if we don't really know yet if he's actually a crook. As Heidi Klum would say on "Project Runway": "One minute you're in, but the next minute you're out." Six years ago, Whittemore (and all his campaign cash) may have been oh-so-stylish and in. But now that there's a legal gray cloud hanging over his head, he suddenly finds himself out.
And funny enough, Ralston also predicted the next campaign finance scandal to erupt soon. Remember how Sheldon Adelson becameNewton Leroy Gingrich's #1 Sugar Daddy the casino mogul who singlehandedly revived Newt Gingrich's political career (if only for another three weeks)? Apparently after promising Willard Mittens Romney that he'll become Romney's #1 Sugar Daddy switch his campaign cash flow to him if he becomes the G-O-TEA nominee, Adelson may end up throwing another $10 million into the pro-Newton Super PAC just because he doesn't like "Frothy" Ricky Santorum.
Right now, Newton and Willard are competing to be Adelson's new BFF. But at some point in the near future, that may all change. A while back, WikiLeaks released a series of diplomatic cables that we now know included concern about Adelson directly lobbying China's central government in Beijing over his Macau casinos. Now, the federal Department of Justice and Securities & Exchange Commission are investigating Las Vegas Sands (Adelson's global casino empire) over possible illegal bribing of Chinese government officials, as well as over LVS' long rumored involvement with the Macau mafia.
Whoops. How long can Willard and Newton keep dancing with this? And how much longer can they, along with many Nevada Republicans, ignore the Macau problems now plaguing their other favorite casino mogul? We all know how Steve Wynn believes that America has become some hot socialist mess, yet China has somehow become the new global beacon of freedom. (HUH??!!) Former Wynn BFF and business partner Kazuo Okada is now calling BS on Wynn's delicate China dance, and he's asking for documents regarding Wynn Resorts' recent $135 million pledge to the University of Macau, a pledge that just happens to coincide with the expiration of Wynn Resorts' Macau gaming license. Recently Steve Wynn has become more a beloved figure in Nevada GOP circles because of his constant rants against President Obama and constant campaign donations to Dean Heller, but how long will this last?
And really, how long can we keep missing the forest for the trees? I'm already seeing the usual "tea party" suspects claim that Harry Reid is some epic, "EVIL!!!" figure for taking Harvey Whittemore's donations. So when will they condemn Dean Heller for doing the same? And when will they condemn the likes of Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney for flirting with casino billionaires suspected of bribing the Chinese government?
And when will the entire Nevada political establishment stop this ridiculous kabuki theater that resumes whenever another campaign finance scandal emerges? In 2010, we saw plenty of "outrage" over scandals encircling state legislators Barbara Cegavske and Steven Horsford... But very little was done last year to change the system. The same "outrage" surfaced again once Rory Reid's politically posthumous campaign scandal surfaced. And again, no one wanted to talk about the root of this problem.
So I guess I have to bring out the handy dandy clean elections video yet again...
And yes, I will keep doing this until Nevada's pundits and political elite stop with the kabuki theater and mindless finger pointing, and start discussing real solutions to this ongoing fiasco.
Until we clean the campaign money supply, we'll only see more of these scandals surface. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. It's time to put up or shut up. If folks here are serious about stamping out the corruption of big corporate money in our politics, then it's time to take the big corporate money out of our system and support clean money & clean elections.
This time, the latest scandal du jour involves real estate developer Harvey Whittemore. Because he's the subject of an federal investigation and involved in a growing number of law suits, all of a sudden everyone from Harry Reid to Dean Heller and others (in both parties) is throwing out Whittemore's campaign contributions like rotten eggs.
And this morning, Jon Ralston tried to explain "how Harvey Whittemore became a leper".
Whittemore’s ebullience and intellect endeared him to many elected officials, who often counted him as a friend and counselor as well as donor. His insinuation into their lives brought him immense power and them hundreds of thousands of campaign dollars. The man everyone simply called or knew as Harvey was ubiquitous, whether lobbying in Carson City or building at Coyote Springs.
Now, like Jimmy Stewart’s Harvey, he is invisible, turned into a not-so-benign ghost because of three scarlet letters that see-no-evil politicians cannot abide: F-B-I.
I make no judgment yet on the sulfurous allegations that have made their way into court documents and the media as part of the acidic breakup of Whittemore and his business partners. But without knowing exactly what Whittemore may or may not have done (the schadenfreude contagion notwithstanding) and putting aside years of cozy, unquestioning interaction, suddenly these politicians have adopted a guilty-until-proven-innocent posture and shed Harvey’s campaign cash like it was mob money.
This I do judge. And I judge it to be craven, pathetic and phony.
The default response here, as it is in almost any situation for elected officials, is not whether someone they have consorted with for years did anything wrong. No, it is a simple calculus that is brought to bear: How does this make me look? This solipsistic reflex thus allows them — to borrow the immortal words of ex-Nevada Sen. Paul Laxalt, who offered them to Ferdinand Marcos when his time was up — to cut and cut cleanly.
And so that's what's happening. No one wants to be associated with someone who "looks like a crook", even if we don't really know yet if he's actually a crook. As Heidi Klum would say on "Project Runway": "One minute you're in, but the next minute you're out." Six years ago, Whittemore (and all his campaign cash) may have been oh-so-stylish and in. But now that there's a legal gray cloud hanging over his head, he suddenly finds himself out.
And funny enough, Ralston also predicted the next campaign finance scandal to erupt soon. Remember how Sheldon Adelson became
Right now, Newton and Willard are competing to be Adelson's new BFF. But at some point in the near future, that may all change. A while back, WikiLeaks released a series of diplomatic cables that we now know included concern about Adelson directly lobbying China's central government in Beijing over his Macau casinos. Now, the federal Department of Justice and Securities & Exchange Commission are investigating Las Vegas Sands (Adelson's global casino empire) over possible illegal bribing of Chinese government officials, as well as over LVS' long rumored involvement with the Macau mafia.
Whoops. How long can Willard and Newton keep dancing with this? And how much longer can they, along with many Nevada Republicans, ignore the Macau problems now plaguing their other favorite casino mogul? We all know how Steve Wynn believes that America has become some hot socialist mess, yet China has somehow become the new global beacon of freedom. (HUH??!!) Former Wynn BFF and business partner Kazuo Okada is now calling BS on Wynn's delicate China dance, and he's asking for documents regarding Wynn Resorts' recent $135 million pledge to the University of Macau, a pledge that just happens to coincide with the expiration of Wynn Resorts' Macau gaming license. Recently Steve Wynn has become more a beloved figure in Nevada GOP circles because of his constant rants against President Obama and constant campaign donations to Dean Heller, but how long will this last?
And really, how long can we keep missing the forest for the trees? I'm already seeing the usual "tea party" suspects claim that Harry Reid is some epic, "EVIL!!!" figure for taking Harvey Whittemore's donations. So when will they condemn Dean Heller for doing the same? And when will they condemn the likes of Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney for flirting with casino billionaires suspected of bribing the Chinese government?
And when will the entire Nevada political establishment stop this ridiculous kabuki theater that resumes whenever another campaign finance scandal emerges? In 2010, we saw plenty of "outrage" over scandals encircling state legislators Barbara Cegavske and Steven Horsford... But very little was done last year to change the system. The same "outrage" surfaced again once Rory Reid's politically posthumous campaign scandal surfaced. And again, no one wanted to talk about the root of this problem.
So I guess I have to bring out the handy dandy clean elections video yet again...
And yes, I will keep doing this until Nevada's pundits and political elite stop with the kabuki theater and mindless finger pointing, and start discussing real solutions to this ongoing fiasco.
Until we clean the campaign money supply, we'll only see more of these scandals surface. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. It's time to put up or shut up. If folks here are serious about stamping out the corruption of big corporate money in our politics, then it's time to take the big corporate money out of our system and support clean money & clean elections.
Friday, March 4, 2011
Rory Be Gone? Get to the Root of It
"The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil"- 1 Timothy 6:10, Bible
It's saddening to see this...
In one of the most brazen schemes in Nevada history, gubernatorial candidate Rory Reid’s campaign formed 91 shell political action committees that were used to funnel three quarters of a million dollars into his campaign, circumventing contribution limits and violating at least the spirit – and maybe the letter – of the laws governing elections.
Reid, who was fully aware of what was done, essentially received more than $750,000 from one PAC – 75 times the legal limit -- after his team created dozens of smaller PACS that had no other purpose other than to serve as conduits from a larger entity that the candidate funded by asking large donors for money. Indeed, the shell PACs were formed in the fall and dissolved on Dec. 31, after they had served their short-term function, which was to help the candidate evade campaign contribution laws.
Reid solicited donations for the Economic Leadership PAC, which raised more than $800,000 over a five-month period – donations that were then disbursed in $10,000 increments to dozens of other PACS, which quickly funneled the money back to the candidate’s campaign account.
But why would any of us really be surprised? This is the system we have, and the politicians who raise the most corporate money are rewarded.
Already, we are hearing of "OUTRAGE!!!" over this... But this is merely the symptom. Hardly anyone in Carson City wants to talk about the disease.
Hmmm... I wonder why?
Nevada’s campaign finance laws are written to favor incumbents and the special interests that fund them — and that won’t change any time soon.
Let’s say a candidate is weighing a run against an incumbent and wants to know how much money the office-holder has. That’s nearly impossible because candidates for office aren’t required to report money in the bank.
Perhaps a constituent wants to see who is funding a candidate’s campaign before deciding how to vote. Even getting that basic information can prove tricky. Many reports are written by hand and are suspiciously hard to read.
The reports also can’t be searched electronically, making it difficult to track an individual donor’s contributions.
Critics also take issue with the schedule for releasing candidates’ contribution and expense reports.
For years, Ross Miller has lobbied The Legislature to reform our horribly antiquated Nevada campaign finance laws to make them more transparent. But for some reason, it keeps getting killed.
Hmmm... I wonder why?
Maybe instead of screaming about the symptoms, we should look at the disease.
And what might be the disease, you ask? Go back to the top of this diary.
Must we really keep asking what the problem is? It's all the corporate money flooding our system, buying and selling candidates to the highest bidder, and silencing all those who can't afford to bribe their way into power. We are now seeing this on the national level with the Koch family and their fellow "Tea Party, Inc." comrades in bloated checkbooks trying to buy wholesale control of our entire government, but it seems Nevada has been plagued by this kind of manipulation for even longer.
[Now Senator] Sheila Leslie, D-Reno, said campaign finance reform is unlikely without constituent pressure.
“The only way it’s going to happen is if the public demands it,” she said. “The people who benefit the most from loose campaign finance rules are those in elected office.”
The ultimate solution to the state’s transparency problems, Leslie said, is public financing of campaigns.
“If you take the money out, you’ll get a lot more qualified people to run for office,” she said. “You’ll take away the power of special interests, who will not have as much influence.”
Sheila Leslie is right. And so is Bill Moyers. So who else is listening?
Instead of whining about the symptoms, we need to take on the disease. In the near term, it helps to have a better idea of who is donating to whom. And in the long term, we need to make people understand that the only way to clean the system is to clean the money supply.
So before I hear anyone else screaming about what Rory Reid did or didn't do, or whatever new campaign money scandal soon emerges, I want to hear real solutions. Like Clean Money. Seriously, it's time to put up or shut up.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
10 of '10: Scandaliciousness (& The Solution)
Scandal. We've heard plenty about it this year. How many politicians were caught with their hands in the cookie jar when they weren't supposed to be anywhere near it? How many accusations, true, false, and sometimes downright bizarre, have we heard this year? It's been pure insanity...
But amidst all the usual complaints of "corruption", how often do we hear about actual solutions? Any takers?
Back in August, I wrote this. Let's take another look, and perhaps offer this challenge to anyone claiming to "fight corruption" in 2011. Next time one complains about the problem, one also needs to address real solutions like the one I highlight below.
---
Oh goody, Ralston is back... And he hits hard on the new "scandal" everyone in Carson City is talking about.
Of course, Ralston is talking about State Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford (D) sending out a ridiculous letter recently promising special meals with him for big contributions. He even promised meals and extra "quality time" with Committee Chairs, apparently without even asking them if they wanted to do this!
It was pathetic. It was lame. It was dirty... And oh boy, it was clumsy!
So what exactly were the Republicans criticizing?
So Raggio and Amodei bash Horsford over his clumsy letter and want us to forget everything they did when in the majority? Seriously? And they want us to ignore their newest scandal involving their "Star Senator" Barbara Cegavske?
And if anyone is truly serious in uprooting Carson City corruption, why not discuss possible solutions? Solutions like clean money campaigning?
It's already being implemented in several states, and the results so far have been clear. If we really want to solve this problem, let's get to the root of it.
So what's the real root of this problem? It's MONEY, as in the corporate money that buys access in Carson City. Take the big corporate money out, and none of this has to happen any more. For many decades now, it's been standard operating practice that the "big bid'nis'eez" with the best connected lobbyists, best parties, and biggest campaign contributions get the most access in state government. If we really want to do something about this problem, let's get to the source of it by ridding our election system of all this corporate corruption.
So when will we ever get a serious discussion on clean money campaigns and serious election reform? When will we demand that our elected officials listen to us instead of the big corporate powers that be?
But amidst all the usual complaints of "corruption", how often do we hear about actual solutions? Any takers?
Back in August, I wrote this. Let's take another look, and perhaps offer this challenge to anyone claiming to "fight corruption" in 2011. Next time one complains about the problem, one also needs to address real solutions like the one I highlight below.
---
Oh goody, Ralston is back... And he hits hard on the new "scandal" everyone in Carson City is talking about.
I have been ruminating on what the proper reaction is to Steven Horsford’s “Money for Something and Your Access Ain’t Free” fundraising pitch. Or what the proper reaction to the reaction might be. [...]
What Horsford did was crass, heavy-handed and arrogant. But it takes a spectacular naiveté or a willful ignorance — and there is much more of the latter than the former in much of the reaction — not to realize this is just par for a course where membership is reserved only for a closed circle and where the entry fee for influence is often too rich for almost anyone without a Las Vegas Boulevard South address.
Of course, Ralston is talking about State Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford (D) sending out a ridiculous letter recently promising special meals with him for big contributions. He even promised meals and extra "quality time" with Committee Chairs, apparently without even asking them if they wanted to do this!
It was pathetic. It was lame. It was dirty... And oh boy, it was clumsy!
So what exactly were the Republicans criticizing?
I smiled when I read of state Senate Minority Leader Bill Raggio tut-tutting about Horsford’s solicitation, suggesting his counterpart had been intimidating lobbyists not to contribute to Republicans during the campaign season. This is laugh-out-loud funny, folks.
Raggio is the anti-Horsford, but not in the way he implied. When he was majority leader, Raggio was anything but blunt. A master of finesse, he knew how to inspire fear with a carefully chosen word or two, or perhaps by using someone else to send a message.
Don’t misunderstand: I don’t suggest Raggio ever did anything unethical. But when a consummate insider, a man who served on gaming and managed care boards while being the most powerful legislator in the state for decades, expresses disdain for Horsford’s blunt instrument, I figured he must be muttering, “That young man needs to learn a little subtlety.”
Even better, state GOP Chairman Mark Amodei’s sense of outrage was comically outrageous. “We never operated that way when we were in the majority,” Amodei told the Las Vegas Review-Journal. “Probably no laws were broken, but it sends a bad sign about the whole process. You need to raise money, but you don’t do that.”
This from the man who, while a state senator, auditioned for a job as the mining association’s top lobbyist and formed a political action committee with business interests he regulated. A sense of irony is always helpful, Mr. Chairman.
So Raggio and Amodei bash Horsford over his clumsy letter and want us to forget everything they did when in the majority? Seriously? And they want us to ignore their newest scandal involving their "Star Senator" Barbara Cegavske?
And if anyone is truly serious in uprooting Carson City corruption, why not discuss possible solutions? Solutions like clean money campaigning?
It's already being implemented in several states, and the results so far have been clear. If we really want to solve this problem, let's get to the root of it.
So what's the real root of this problem? It's MONEY, as in the corporate money that buys access in Carson City. Take the big corporate money out, and none of this has to happen any more. For many decades now, it's been standard operating practice that the "big bid'nis'eez" with the best connected lobbyists, best parties, and biggest campaign contributions get the most access in state government. If we really want to do something about this problem, let's get to the source of it by ridding our election system of all this corporate corruption.
So when will we ever get a serious discussion on clean money campaigns and serious election reform? When will we demand that our elected officials listen to us instead of the big corporate powers that be?
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Leg Watch: Sex, Lies, & Corporate Cash
Oh goody, Ralston is back... And he hits hard on the new "scandal" everyone in Carson City is talking about.
Of course, Ralston is talking about State Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford (D) sending out a ridiculous letter recently promising special meals with him for big contributions. He even promised meals and extra "quality time" with Committee Chairs, apparently without even asking them if they wanted to do this!
It was pathetic. It was lame. It was dirty... And oh boy, it was clumsy!
So what exactly were the Republicans criticizing?
So Raggio and Amodei bash Horsford over his clumsy letter and want us to forget everything they did when in the majority? Seriously? And they want us to ignore their newest scandal involving their "Star Senator" Barbara Cegavske?
And if anyone is truly serious in uprooting Carson City corruption, why not discuss possible solutions? Solutions like clean money campaigning?
It's already being implemented in several states, and the results so far have been clear. If we really want to solve this problem, let's get to the root of it.
So what's the real root of this problem? It's MONEY, as in the corporate money that buys access in Carson City. Take the big corporate money out, and none of this has to happen any more For many decades now, it's been standard operating practice that the "big bid'nis'eez" with the best connected lobbyists, best parties, and biggest campaign contributions get the most access in state government. If we really want to do something about this problem, let's get to the source of it by ridding our election system of all this corporate corruption.
So when will we ever get a serious discussion on clean money campaigns and serious election reform? When will we demand that our elected officials listen to us instead of the big corporate powers that be?
I have been ruminating on what the proper reaction is to Steven Horsford’s “Money for Something and Your Access Ain’t Free” fundraising pitch. Or what the proper reaction to the reaction might be. [...]
What Horsford did was crass, heavy-handed and arrogant. But it takes a spectacular naiveté or a willful ignorance — and there is much more of the latter than the former in much of the reaction — not to realize this is just par for a course where membership is reserved only for a closed circle and where the entry fee for influence is often too rich for almost anyone without a Las Vegas Boulevard South address.
Of course, Ralston is talking about State Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford (D) sending out a ridiculous letter recently promising special meals with him for big contributions. He even promised meals and extra "quality time" with Committee Chairs, apparently without even asking them if they wanted to do this!
It was pathetic. It was lame. It was dirty... And oh boy, it was clumsy!
So what exactly were the Republicans criticizing?
I smiled when I read of state Senate Minority Leader Bill Raggio tut-tutting about Horsford’s solicitation, suggesting his counterpart had been intimidating lobbyists not to contribute to Republicans during the campaign season. This is laugh-out-loud funny, folks.
Raggio is the anti-Horsford, but not in the way he implied. When he was majority leader, Raggio was anything but blunt. A master of finesse, he knew how to inspire fear with a carefully chosen word or two, or perhaps by using someone else to send a message.
Don’t misunderstand: I don’t suggest Raggio ever did anything unethical. But when a consummate insider, a man who served on gaming and managed care boards while being the most powerful legislator in the state for decades, expresses disdain for Horsford’s blunt instrument, I figured he must be muttering, “That young man needs to learn a little subtlety.”
Even better, state GOP Chairman Mark Amodei’s sense of outrage was comically outrageous. “We never operated that way when we were in the majority,” Amodei told the Las Vegas Review-Journal. “Probably no laws were broken, but it sends a bad sign about the whole process. You need to raise money, but you don’t do that.”
This from the man who, while a state senator, auditioned for a job as the mining association’s top lobbyist and formed a political action committee with business interests he regulated. A sense of irony is always helpful, Mr. Chairman.
So Raggio and Amodei bash Horsford over his clumsy letter and want us to forget everything they did when in the majority? Seriously? And they want us to ignore their newest scandal involving their "Star Senator" Barbara Cegavske?
And if anyone is truly serious in uprooting Carson City corruption, why not discuss possible solutions? Solutions like clean money campaigning?
It's already being implemented in several states, and the results so far have been clear. If we really want to solve this problem, let's get to the root of it.
So what's the real root of this problem? It's MONEY, as in the corporate money that buys access in Carson City. Take the big corporate money out, and none of this has to happen any more For many decades now, it's been standard operating practice that the "big bid'nis'eez" with the best connected lobbyists, best parties, and biggest campaign contributions get the most access in state government. If we really want to do something about this problem, let's get to the source of it by ridding our election system of all this corporate corruption.
So when will we ever get a serious discussion on clean money campaigns and serious election reform? When will we demand that our elected officials listen to us instead of the big corporate powers that be?
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Corporate $tate$ of America? SCOTUS Opens the Door
Thanks, Supremes! Just when we need the big multinationals to finally take control of everything...
We're fucked. From Justice Stevens' dissent (full decision PDF here):
Wonderful. So the big corporate interests can stop pretending and just buy politicians outright? I guess this just means all the rest of the country will soon be looking like Nevada?
Yep, we're fucked. After all, who would want sensible clean money reforms when we can become a corporate aristocracy!
The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations may spend freely to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress, easing decades-old limits on their participation in federal campaigns.
The court on Thursday overturned a 20-year-old ruling that said corporations can be prohibited from using money from their general treasuries to pay for campaign ads. The decision almost certainly will also allow labor unions to participate more freely in campaigns and threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states.
The justices also struck down part of the landmark McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill that barred union- and corporate-paid issue ads in the closing days of election campaigns.
We're fucked. From Justice Stevens' dissent (full decision PDF here):
In the context of election to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant.Although they make enormous contributions to our society,
corporations are not actually members of it. They cannot vote or run for office. Because they may be managed and controlled by nonresidents, their interests mayconflict in fundamental respects with the interests ofeligible voters. The financial resources, legal structure,and instrumental orientation of corporations raise legitimate concerns about their role in the electoral process. Our lawmakers have a compelling constitutional basis, if not also a democratic duty, to take measures designed to guard against the potentially deleterious effects of corporate spending in local and national races.
Wonderful. So the big corporate interests can stop pretending and just buy politicians outright? I guess this just means all the rest of the country will soon be looking like Nevada?
Yep, we're fucked. After all, who would want sensible clean money reforms when we can become a corporate aristocracy!
Thursday, October 8, 2009
NV-Sen: VP Biden to Headline Reno Reid Fundraiser... And the GOP Cries Crocodile Tears
Anjeanette Damon broke the news at RGJ yesterday that Vice President Joe Biden will be in Reno tomorrow for Harry Reid's latest fundraiser. If you really want to know why Reid will again be reelected next year, here it is. The White House definitely has his back!
But already, the Republicans are whining and throwing a fit over it. Lisa Mascaro at The Sun has the money quote:
What a joke! I don't remember the Republicans complaining when Bush and Cheney did big dollar fundraisers for Ensign, Heller, and Porter. Jeez, the hypocrisy of the far right...
Next time Sarah Palin or Newt Gingrich or some other big "GOP rising star" comes here to raise money for any of the circus clown candidates running against Reid or some other Republican here, I want to see Democrats turn this argument back at them. Reid IS working hard for this state, delivering needed Medicaid and unemployment aid that John McCain continually mocks. I'm sure he'll also deliver on green collar jobs that Sue Lowden and Lil' Tark Shark would quickly turn their noses at.
If the Republicans don't like big dollar fundraising, then I want them to endorse clean money campaigns. (Btw, Joe Biden actually has!) Otherwise, they need to sit down, shut up, and get back to pandering to teabagger crazies and making themselves look like fools.
But already, the Republicans are whining and throwing a fit over it. Lisa Mascaro at The Sun has the money quote:
The Republican National Committee jumped on the chance to blast the fundraiser, saying, “Hard-working families of Nevada, not the wealthy few, deserve to hear firsthand from Vice President Biden and Senator Reid on how they plan to turn around Nevada’s ailing economy.”
What a joke! I don't remember the Republicans complaining when Bush and Cheney did big dollar fundraisers for Ensign, Heller, and Porter. Jeez, the hypocrisy of the far right...
Next time Sarah Palin or Newt Gingrich or some other big "GOP rising star" comes here to raise money for any of the circus clown candidates running against Reid or some other Republican here, I want to see Democrats turn this argument back at them. Reid IS working hard for this state, delivering needed Medicaid and unemployment aid that John McCain continually mocks. I'm sure he'll also deliver on green collar jobs that Sue Lowden and Lil' Tark Shark would quickly turn their noses at.
If the Republicans don't like big dollar fundraising, then I want them to endorse clean money campaigns. (Btw, Joe Biden actually has!) Otherwise, they need to sit down, shut up, and get back to pandering to teabagger crazies and making themselves look like fools.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Gibbons Gets His Way... And Maybe Democrats Can Learn a Lesson?
OK, it's no surprise. Luv Guv Gibbons will take control of the federal stimulus funds. He says he'll be "responsible", but we can never really trust someone who spends state funds on such useful "stimulus" projects as texting a girlfriend from a state-issued cell phone. That's why Democrats (and even some Republicans!) in Carson City are nervous.
The legislators obviously saw the Interim Finance Committee (IFC) as their only way to check and balance the Governor's power. And in these times when we have a complete psychopath as Governor, it's absolutely necessary. However, they may have crossed the legal line in trying to block the Governor from doing what is necessary "for the protection of life and property". Still, just because what Gibbons is doing (in this case) is legal doesn't make it right. This should be a wake-up call to Carson City Democrats to stop with the IFC-esque "quick fixes" and propose the bolder changes we need to really make state government function properly.
Instead of trying to bypass the Nevada Constitution, Democrats should consider amending it to allow for a full-time Legislature. This would prevent any future Governors from abusing their power and spending state funds as they wish when the Legislature is not in session. And perhaps with other reforms, such as curbing lobbyist influence and implementing full, "clean money" public campaign financing (as Arizona and Maine already do), we can really clean house in Carson City and finally make it work again.
Think about it. How would things be different today if Sig Rogich and his band of merry "bidness lobby" multimillionaire/billionaire buddies hadn't bought the 2006 election for Gibbons? And if the Legislature weren't always so susceptible to the powerful corporate lobby? Maybe we'd have a State of Nevada that works for working people?
The legislators obviously saw the Interim Finance Committee (IFC) as their only way to check and balance the Governor's power. And in these times when we have a complete psychopath as Governor, it's absolutely necessary. However, they may have crossed the legal line in trying to block the Governor from doing what is necessary "for the protection of life and property". Still, just because what Gibbons is doing (in this case) is legal doesn't make it right. This should be a wake-up call to Carson City Democrats to stop with the IFC-esque "quick fixes" and propose the bolder changes we need to really make state government function properly.
Instead of trying to bypass the Nevada Constitution, Democrats should consider amending it to allow for a full-time Legislature. This would prevent any future Governors from abusing their power and spending state funds as they wish when the Legislature is not in session. And perhaps with other reforms, such as curbing lobbyist influence and implementing full, "clean money" public campaign financing (as Arizona and Maine already do), we can really clean house in Carson City and finally make it work again.
Think about it. How would things be different today if Sig Rogich and his band of merry "bidness lobby" multimillionaire/billionaire buddies hadn't bought the 2006 election for Gibbons? And if the Legislature weren't always so susceptible to the powerful corporate lobby? Maybe we'd have a State of Nevada that works for working people?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)