Archive for May, 2010

In Surprise Move, State Senate Majority Leader Replaces Long-Time Top Staffer

By Sean Whaley | 10:45 pm May 25th, 2010

CARSON CITY – In what took many members of the Nevada state Senate by surprise today, Majority Leader Steven Horsford accepted the resignation of the body’s top staff member, Secretary of the Senate Claire Clift.

Word of Clift’s departure, which occurred today while Horsford was in the capital attending a meeting of the Interim Finance Committee’s Subcommittee for Federal Stimulus Oversight, circulated quickly among members of the Senate.

Clift was appointed as secretary of the Senate in 2000 by Sen. William Raggio, R-Reno, who was majority leader at the time.

Horsford, D-Las Vegas, became majority leader in 2009 after Democrats gained the majority in the upper house for the first time since 1991.

Clift, reached at home, said she was surprised but accepting of Horsford’s decision. The decision came today without any advance notice. Clift left today and said she will seek other, hopefully less stressful, work opportunities.

“The secretary of the Senate works at the prerogative of the majority leader,” she said. “Sen. Horsford felt he needed someone else in the position. I respect that.”

Clift said the 2011 legislative session will be challenging for lawmakers, but she expects the Senate to find a qualified person to serve as secretary.

As to an explanation for her departure, Clift said she believes Horsford wants to take the Senate in a new direction.

“I’m OK with that,” she said. “It is just an opportunity for the majority leader to change things up.”

Clift said the Senate was a wonderful place to work, and the 21 senators of the upper house were great people to work for.

“It will remain a wonderful place to work,” she said.

Horsford could not immediately be reached for comment on his decision.

Clift worked for the Senate in 1987 and 1989, taking a full-time position in 1997. She took over as secretary of the Senate in 2000 after Jan Thomas retired after many years of service.

Sen. Barbara Cegavske, R-Las Vegas, said she was perplexed by the decision, especially since the 2011 legislative session will be one of the most difficult ever, with a major budget shortfall, several new members due to term limits and many pressing issues for lawmakers to deal with.

“You can’t get better than Claire,” she said. “Bringing in someone new with no experience makes no sense. Claire is absolutely excellent at what she does. I’m in shock, actually.”

Congressional Effect Fund (CEFFX) Outperforms S&P, Celebrates Two Years

By Elizabeth Crum | 7:40 pm May 24th, 2010

This post has nothing whatsoever to do with Nevada so is nothing more than a personal indulgence on a subject of interest (and some amusement) to me.  It is not a PR plug or advice to invest.

Yesterday marked the two year anniversary of a new investment fund founded (by my friend Eric Singer) on the premis that you could consistently outperform the S&P 500 Index if you (1) bought and sold when Congress is adjourned and (2) did nothing when Congress is In.

I remember being quite amused when Eric first told me that the broad stock market historically performs significantly better on an annualized basis on days Congress is on recess compared to days Congress is in session.

And Eric’s fund has outperformed the broad stock market by avoiding the stock market when government is governing most.  Since its launch in 2008, the Fund has a cumulative return of +1.49%, as compared to the S&P 500 Index, which has lost -18.21% over the same time period.

A shareholder who invested with CEFFX on the first day the Fund launched has earned a small profit (a $10,000 investment would have grown to $10,149) as compared to a large loss ($8,179) if he had invested the same amount in the S&P 500.

This constitutes a CEFFX performance difference of +24.09% over the S&P 500, as follows:

Performance Since Inception (May 23, 2008*)…

Congressional Effect Fund S&P 500
Inception through June 30, 2008 +1.97% -7.81%
Inception through Sept. 30, 2008 + .10% -15.70%
Inception through Dec. 31, 2008 -2.19% -34.20%
Inception through Dec. 31, 2009 -4.11% -10.78%
Inception through Mar. 31, 2010 -0.05% -6.82%
YTD through May 22, 2010 +8.70% -1.71%

Expense Ratios–Gross 4.97%, Net 1.75%. The Congressional Effect Fund is a no-load Fund. The Advisor has agreed to maintain the Fund’s total annual operating expenses at 1.75% through 08/01/11.

As you can see, year to date, the Fund is up +8.70% as compared to -1.71% for the S&P 500 Index.  And during a  period when the S&P fell 34%, CEFFX lost only 2%.

Its current Morningstar ranking on year to date performance can be found here.

Eric says that the market’s volatile performance last week was a good example of why the Congressional Effect Fund approach has worked.

“The market was riveted with the riots in Greece, and speculation on whether the Euro would hold together,” said Singer.  “Added to this was news about elections around the country, and the announcement on Wednesday night that the “logjam” on financial reform had been broken and a new broad set of regulatory burdens would be imposed on the financial services industry.”

“While some reforms may be appropriate, when coupled with European instability caused by Greece, breaking the logjam on these new prospective laws was like adding hard rain to a set of conditions that caused a traffic accident,” he said.

“For the week…CEFFX outperformed the S&P 500 index by 4.67%,” he said.

Congrats to Eric for what looks to have been a good/clever idea.  I’ll be curious to see how the fund does when the economy rebounds and he is competing with the S&P Index in better times.

Other CD-3 Candidate Has YouTube Attack Ad on Joe Heck

By Elizabeth Crum | 7:05 pm May 24th, 2010

Considering that early voting has begun and Joe Heck is assured to be the CD-3 GOP primary winner barring some major disaster twixt now and June 8, Republican candidate Steve Nohrden has picked an odd time to come out with this YouTube ad (posted on May 19).

If Nohrden cannot afford to get the ad up on TV, as one assumes he cannot, why bother?  Ad making practice?

More stuff to file under Too Little Too Late.

Sec of State Ross Miller to Seek Restraining Order Against PAC Running Pro-Sandoval Ads

By Elizabeth Crum | 6:02 pm May 24th, 2010

Secretary of State Ross Miller is seeking a temporary restraining order to stop the TV airing of a pro-Sandoval political ad, according to this oh-no-you-di’n't press release re: the Alliance for America’s Future (AFF) refusal to properly register itself as a PAC.

Ross says he got a cool response from the group’s attorney re: complying with Nevada law.

Says Ross:

“Nevada election law is very explicit. In order to spend money on TV ads in an effort to influence the outcome of an election, you must file as a PAC. Here we have an out-of-state group that’s unwilling to fill out a simple two-page registration form, as does every other PAC that legally conducts political activity in this state,” Secretary Miller said. “It’s my job as Chief Elections Officer to enforce state law that provides voters transparency in election activity. This shadowy, out-of state group, which won’t identify the individuals behind it, leaves me no choice but to go to court to force them into compliance.”

The Secretary of State’s Office will seek injunctive relief in Carson City’s First Judicial Court.

Here’s what (little) I know about AFF:

GOP operative Barry Bennett (Ohio) recently left his position as chief of staff to Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Loveland, to help launch the organization.  The mission is to help Republicans in key races in key states such as Ohio, Arkansas and Nevada.  Bennet’s partner is Mary Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney.

I’m guessing the refusal to comply with our rules is intentional in order to create some press for the brand new PAC.  The court will order cessation of the TV ad until they register; they will immediately register; the ad (or a new one) will go back up; and everyone will know their name.

Update (6:36 PM): A reader just pointed out, though, that headlines like this one from the RJ are not really a good thing for your candidate:

Sandoval group violated election laws, official says

Martin Pounds Away on Marshall in State Treasurer’s Race

By Elizabeth Crum | 3:24 pm May 24th, 2010

A really good attack campaign will always nail the competition twice:  when he/she initially errs, and when he/she “finally” straightens out (but only under pressure, it is insinuated).

An example, from the Steve Martin for State Treasurer campaign, which today points out that Kate Marshall has ceased running unclaimed property auction notices starring herself:

Treasurer Changes Advertisements

Without Her Picture and Her Name, How Will We Know it’s Kate?

Treasurer changes ads, scaling back her practice of using tax dollars to promote herself

LAS VEGAS, NV – It seems an ethics complaint has put the brakes on Kate Marshall using official State Treasurer notices as campaign ads. In 2009 Marshall issued unclaimed property auction notices from the State Treasurer’s office with her picture and name prominently displayed in a fashion more closely resembling a campaign ad than an official notice. If the latest notice is any indication, maybe Marshall has finally gotten the picture – by taking her picture off the notice.

“I am glad to see that Kate Marshall has finally gotten the message that the taxpayers are not responsible for funding her campaign,” said State Treasurer candidate Steve Martin. “Nevadans deserve a State Treasurer that recognizes the responsibility to use state resources for the people and not for campaign efforts. We need principled, ethical leadership, and that is why I am in this race.”

The 2009 and 2010 auction notices are attached to Martin’s release which ends with these words:  “better late than never.”

Nomination for Worst Mailer of Campaign Season

By Elizabeth Crum | 2:59 pm May 24th, 2010

Dullard Mush has it (calling it the worst contrast ad in the history of political mailers) along with an analysis.

Definitely nominated.

Other similar categories on our 2010 list:  Worst/Best TV Ad, Worst/Best Radio Ad, Worst/Best Campaign Press Release, and Worst/Best Response from a Campaign Spokesperson

Statewide Local Government Employment Rate Drops

By Sean Whaley | 2:32 pm May 24th, 2010

CARSON CITY – Nevada’s unemployment rate keeps creeping upward despite signs the economic slowdown has hit bottom, and April statistics from the Nevada Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation show job losses are now being seen in the government employment sector as well.

Nevada’s record 13.7 percent seasonally adjusted unemployment rate reported for the month of April equates to 193,000 people out of work, the agency reported Friday.

While the private sector was shedding jobs for more than two years in the downturn that officially began in December 2007, state and local government employment remained unaffected for much of that time.

But the April report shows that local government employment statewide has lost 5,500 jobs compared to April 2009 for a 5.2 percent decline. Local government employment totaled 100,900 in April 2010.

The 5.2 percent decline in local government jobs is greater than the 3.5 percent decline in jobs for all employment sectors statewide from April compared to April 2009, the report shows.

A number of county and city governments have eliminated positions and implemented layoffs due to declining tax revenues. The Las Vegas City Council last week approved a budget for the new fiscal year that will mean 200 layoffs.

State government employment actually grew slightly during that same period, by 400 jobs to 38,600. Federal government employment remained unchanged at 18,300, but grew by 600 jobs from March due to hiring for the census.

William Anderson, chief economist for the department, said the large decrease in local government employment is notable.

“Despite numerous wage concessions and other cutbacks, many local governments are being forced to lay off employees,” he said. “In the last year, local government employers shed 5,500 jobs, or 5.2 percent. Local government employment slid by 1,000 in April alone. Job losses will likely increase in the coming months as municipalities adjust to lower budgets set to begin July 1st.”

Anderson said the census hiring is temporarily offsetting some of the local government job losses.

The census work has provided work to a total of 1,150 workers, 460 of whom were added in April, he said. Census employment is expected to peak in May or June, and then begin to taper off into the fall.

Nevada actually added 2,500 jobs in April over March, but Anderson said the labor force has also increased every month this year as workers entered the job market either out of necessity or because of renewed optimism in potential job prospects.

“Construction remains one of the most discouraging sectors in the labor market,” Anderson said. “Construction employment has fallen to a level not seen since April 1995. Since the height of the housing boom in June to 2006, construction has fallen from 148,800 to 62,700, a loss of 86,100 jobs.”

The Anti-Angle Argument: She Can’t Win the General

By Elizabeth Crum | 1:12 pm May 24th, 2010

Is there enough time for this line (“The Woman Who Can Save Harry Reid”) — which is TIME online’s echo of this morning’s POLITICO piece (“Reid angles for tea party foe in Nev.”) — to sway the voters and save Sue Lowden’s campaign?

I wondered all last week why Team Lowden was running an ad going after Angle on more flimsy criticisms while ignoring her most obvious weakness:  she’s so conservative on so many issues that she may not be able to beat Reid in the general election.

Team Reid will definitely pummel Angle on that very thing all summer and half the fall.

(It is also worth noting that during the Big Announcement tour last fall, Lowden pledged not to go negative on her GOP primary opponents. But that was when she thought she would easily win and long before the Tea Party Express (and their money) gave Angle a huge boost.)

Hat Tip on the TIME and POLITICO links:  @RalstonFlash on Twitter.

- – -

Speaking of Angle’s conservative creds, this is kinda funny, as Tweeted by Sebelius:

MT @SteveSebelius: Does Sharron Angle think liquor should be illegal? http://bit.ly/bj9x8c

and ReTweeted and commented upon by @RalstonFlash:

Extremism in defense of imbibing is no vice.

How dare Ralston hijack the great words of Barry Goldwater that way?!  I am outraged.  (No, not really.)

(Actually, I bet a lot of Americans don’t know that Goldwater lifted those words — “Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice” — from Roman philosopher/statesman/lawyer Marcus Cicero.)

Anyhow, the linked piece is a post by Sebelius on Angle’s uber-conservative stance on both marijuana and alcohol as expressed in an interview she did a few years back.

Sebelius asks:

Wait, what? Alcohol — which is currently legal — should be treated the same as marijuana — which is currently not legal? Is she serious? A candidate from the state of Nevada, which is practically sponsored by booze companies, is not a proponent of legal alcohol?

Ha.

But then this:

Despite the 2006 interview, however, Angle’s spokesman, Jerry Stacy, said today Angle doesn’t want to bring back Prohibition. “Sharron doesn’t want to make alcohol illegal,” he said, noting that Angle has never introduced legislation along those lines, and even voted against taxes on booze.

“Alcohol is a legal substance, and adults can choose to imbibe,” Stacy said.

So, for the record, Sharron Angle is not a Prohibitionist.

But as Politico points out, she is still for/against all this stuff:

She wants to privatize Social Security; cut federal spending by hundreds of billions of dollars; build nuclear power plants inside Yucca Mountain; abolish the federal income tax and institute a “simpler, fairer, flatter tax system”; “defund Obamacare”; pull the United States out of the United Nations; ban nearly all abortions; get rid of the Energy and Education departments as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; and remove all campaign finance restrictions, requiring instead immediate reporting of donations.

And in a state with a large and growing Hispanic population, Angle takes a hard-line view on immigration, siding with the tough new Arizona law that gives law enforcement officials broad discretion to crack down on suspected illegal aliens.

In Which Tea Party Organizer-Activist Debbie Landis Further Explains AIB’s Endorsement of John Chachas

By Elizabeth Crum | 9:15 am May 24th, 2010

File this one under the label that pretty much describes John Chachas’ entire U.S. Senate campaign:

Too Little Too Late.

Or, if you prefer, tuck the folder behind Ralston’s recent characterization:

What Might Have Been.

This weekend one of the largest, most influential grassroots groups in Nevada – Anger Action is Brewing – surprised everyone by coming out with a late-in-the-game endorsement of John Chachas.

A spokesperson for the Tea Party Express couldn’t call me fast enough to give me his three cents.  (Can you guess what he said…?)

I later chatted with AIB founder Debbie Landis about her decision.

Here’s what she said about her organization’s ability to endorse within the limits of its non-profit status:

Apparently, when I was on my paperwork filing binge for AIB to make sure we were in compliance with everything we needed to be, we filed an intent to influence elections with the SOS as a non-profit…so although as a 501c(4) we cannot contribute financially nor dedicate ourselves to a campaign, we can endorse candidates we think will further our cause.

As for why she decided to endorse at all, and why so late:

I have been getting non-stop emails asking who we like, why, and whether we’re afraid to commit because we only want to support the Republican who wins the primary.

It wasn’t an emotional decision, and I tried to make that clear. It’s okay to like Tarkanian and Angle personally and still think somebody else can do a much better job.

I guess it’s up to John to get out there, but the fact that his team is not doing as much as they could is no excuse for me not to do so.

On whether she thinks she’ll regret it:

The one regret I have is being so stupid as not know what our abilities were under NRS 294A.375 and for waiting so long to announce who we were supporting.

Re: why this endorsement is “special” (if it is):

I think the difference is that we’re not profiting and we’re responding to people who honestly respect the work AIB has done and the time we’ve taken, and who really want to know what our conclusions are.

On whether she stands to gain or lose by doing this:

I’m sure I burned a ton of bridges with this endorsement, but I can’t turn off that little voice that says Chachas is better, faster, smarter and a much more logical choice than any of the other candidates given the state of Nevada and the financial health of the U.S. today.

Perhaps he is.  Soon to be Was.

“HARRY: Money, Mob and Influence in Harry Reid’s Nevada”

By Elizabeth Crum | 8:22 am May 24th, 2010

That’s the title of this book by some guy named Daxton Brown, just in time for the general election.

The book has a publication date of March 2010 and is for sale at Barnes & Noble and other sites.

Here’s the sales site blurb:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s connections to a substrata of money, mob and influence in Nevada going back fifty years. Revelations from Reid’s former campaign manager paints an unkind picture of a politician looking for money on the side. Most shocking is the claim that Harry Reid took campaign donations from pimp Joe Conforte of the Mustang Ranch brothel. Also disturbing are accounts of Reid’s long friendship with a lawyer to many of the most notorious strip clubs in Las Vegas. Oscar Goodman, Las Vegas Mayor and lawyer to the mob also enters the picture. Sweetheart treatment of land developers, the G-Sting scandal, fat cat campaign contributors and more taint the record of one of the most powerful politicians in the U.S. and therefore the world.

Sounds juicy (which former campaign manager is telling tales?) but not sure I wanna spring for the $20 to find out.  Time to offer to do a book review so I can get a free copy, I guess…?

Hey, Teachers: Leave Those Flyers Home

By Elizabeth Crum | 8:06 am May 24th, 2010

Oops.  The following campaign flyer appeared in teacher and staff mailboxes at C.C. Ronnow-Edison elementary school last week:

Olivia Diaz – Campaign Flyer

Olivia Diaz, a Democrat candidate for NV Assembly District 11, is an ELL (English Language Learner) coordinator at the school.

As you could have probably guessed if you did not already know it, distributing campaign materials on school property is a definite no-no.

Michael Rodriguez, public information officer and media manager for the Clark County School District, confirms that Clark County School District (CCSD) policy prohibits political pushing on campus.

“There is a policy in place that we are not to have employees campaigning on school property,” he said.

CC Ronnow-Edison principal Jon Herring said a staff member (not Ms. Diaz) distributed the flyers without realizing it was against the rules.

“It was an unfortunate incident,” Herring said.  “It was not done with Ms. Diaz’ or my knowledge.”

“One of my staff members thought she was helping out,” he said.

As a result of the incident Herring said he sent out a general notice to school staffers informing/reminding them of district policy.

Ms. Diaz could not be reached for comment.

Here’s the full CCSD policy regarding political activities:

CCSD Political Policy

Conservative Candidates Challenge Moderates in Key GOP State Senate Primary Races

By Sean Whaley | 3:55 pm May 21st, 2010

Part 2 of a Series on Key GOP State Senate Primary Races

CARSON CITY – While Republican voters have a rare chance to chart the course of the GOP Senate caucus in the upcoming primary, the candidates described by some political observers as the establishment choice say they too are true fiscal conservatives who believe in core party values.

Both Ben Kieckhefer, running against Ty Cobb in the Washoe 4 race, and Bob Larkin, running against Don Gustavson in the Washoe 2 race, reject any label to the contrary.

Both have been endorsed by the Senate Republican Caucus headed by Sen. Bill Raggio, R-Reno.

“I consider myself a pretty darn conservative guy,” said Kieckhefer, a former press secretary to Gov. Jim Gibbons. “Any notion of me as some pro-tax Republican is totally flawed. I’m not.”

Larkin said his work on the Washoe County Commission, which has involved cutting $100 million from the budget over the past three years and eliminating 500 positions, is evidence of his strong GOP philosophy.

“Government can’t live beyond its means,” he said. “There was too much fat. That is what a conservative does.”

Joe Hardy, running for the Clark Senate 12 seat against newcomer Patrick McNaught, could not be reached for this story.

Sen. Dennis Nolan, who is facing a challenge in his re-election bid in Clark Senate 9 from newcomer Elizabeth Halseth, also could not be reached for comment.

The June 8 primary offers an unusual opportunity for GOP voters. Five GOP Senate contests are on the ballot with four offering a choice between what some observers say is an establishment candidate and a more conservative opponent.

The Capital Senatorial District race will see conservative representation regardless of which GOP candidate wins in the November general election. Both James Settelmeyer and his primary opponent, Steve Yeater, say they will not be willing to compromise on tax issues in the 2011 session where lawmakers face a potential $3 billion funding shortfall.

Gustavson, Cobb, Settelmeyer and Hardy, all current members of the Assembly, voted against a package of tax increases in the 2009 session. Nolan voted with Raggio and three other GOP senators for the tax increase, giving the bill three more votes than needed to meet the two-thirds requirement for passage and enough to override a veto by Gibbons.

Republicans were in the minority in the Senate in the 2009 session for the first time since 1991. But Republican support was critical to reaching the two-thirds vote needed to raise sales and payroll taxes on Nevada’s largest businesses as part of the final budget.

A new position of unwavering opposition to general tax increases on the part of Senate Republicans could make the 2011 session one of the more contentious in state history.

In addition to Larkin, Kieckhefer and Hardy, Settelmeyer has also been endorsed and given financial support by the Senate Republican Caucus headed up by Raggio.

Janine Hansen, a long-time political activist as a member of the Independent American Party, said that support is an enormous hurdle for Republican challengers to overcome.

“More money and access to the establishment power base is a significant issue in any race,” she said. “For non-establishment Republican candidates it is incredibly difficult to overcome. It will be very significant if it happens.”

Gustavson said he is being outspent by Larkin, who he describes as his more moderate GOP opponent, but that a low turnout in the June 8 primary could benefit his campaign. Conservatives will turn out, and Gustavson said the conservative mood of GOP voters in Nevada should be a trend in his favor.

“I think it is a revival for the true Republican Party, the conservative wing that values true conservative principles,” he said. “This is the best opportunity we have had in years.”

Gustavson said there is no question but that the Senate Republican Caucus approach in the Legislature will change if he and his conservative colleagues win in the primary.

“We would have a much more conservative state Senate that we have had for years,” he said.

Raggio’s leadership position could also be jeopardized as a result, Gustavson said.

Larkin said that if he is elected to the Senate, he will work to balance the budget while maintaining the core Republican values of limited government, minimal taxes and fostering business growth and individual freedoms.

“I am the conservative candidate who gets things done,” he said.

Cobb said he is not a member of the Senate GOP caucus and so declined to comment on what the future might hold for the group following the November general election.

But Cobb said the caucus approach would likely change with the election of himself and his fellow conservatives.

“We would be getting rid of a lot of the old school way of handling things,” he said. “There would be more conservative, aggressive members of the caucus.

“There will be a new type of leadership focused on core values,” Cobb said. “We will use every bit of leverage we have when we enter into negotiations with the opposition.”

Kieckhefer disputed any characterization of him being the establishment candidate, noting that it is Cobb who is serving in the Legislature.

While he has not signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, Kieckhefer said he won’t be supporting a budget in 2011 that is any larger than the current spending plan.

“Now is not the time to increase taxes,” he said. “We need to look at our spending.”

Kieckhefer said Cobb voted for the 2007 budget that saw spending go up by 17 percent over the 2005 budget.

“So let’s be clear who people claim to be as well,” he said.

Kieckhefer said the real choice for GOP voters is a candidate who is focused on solving problems or one who has a track record of failure. Cobb has only seen one of his 17 bills become law, he said.

“We don’t need people who just sit there and be conservative and accomplish nothing,” Kieckhefer said. “The question is who is going to be an effective legislator, an effective conservative voice.”

Kieckhefer said he has the endorsement of the Reno-Sparks Chamber of Commerce, which he described as a fairly conservative business organization in Northern Nevada. He believes anti-incumbent sentiment among voters will also help his bid in the primary.

Settelmeyer said the Senate GOP caucus will see more focus on core conservative values next session, but to what degree will depend on the voters.

“If they choose to send more conservative representatives we will see less going along with the increases in taxes and spending” he said. “Efforts in the past to place surpluses towards the unfunded liability of the retirement and health programs have always taken a back seat to new program creation.”

While general tax increases have been a part of many budget compromises in the past, Settelmeyer said he won’t be on board with such proposals because they, “just kick the can down the road.”

Continuing the sales and payroll taxes approved in the 2009 session, for example, won’t be an option, he said.

“They are killing businesses in the state, and we need jobs, not more boarded up businesses,” he said.

“There will definitely be a roadmap for the future of Nevada after this primary,” Settelmeyer said. “But that roadmap will be dictated by voters, as it should.”

Yeater said a true conservative will be representing the Senate capital district regardless of which GOP primary candidate wins the general in November. Yeater said he has signed the taxpayer pledge and does not believe raising taxes is a good idea, especially in the current economy.

“I want to reduce existing taxes,” he said.

Yeater said GOP voters are energized and informed and as a result, the conservative candidates will win out on primary election day.

“I believe the Senate will look a lot more conservative in 2011 than it does in 2010,” he said.

Halseth said she will not be a vote for tax increases if elected to the Senate.

Negotiations in past sessions seem always to end up favoring the Democrats, she said.

“This election cycle will be different,” Halseth said. “I’ve been meeting with the people in my district for eight months. What they want is lower taxes. Raising taxes has never been the answer. We can’t afford that anymore.”

McNaught said he decided to run for the seat because of concerns Hardy has been too willing to compromise with Democrats in the past, sacrificing core GOP issues in the process. The Republican Party has lost its way by giving in to Democratic demands, he said.

McNaught said he won’t be the party of “no.”

“I will be the party of no taxes,” he said. “Any corporate or broad-based business tax will drive away jobs.”

McNaught said the state has lost tens of thousands of jobs and, “we need to get those jobs back.”

McNaught said he reached out to Raggio but that the minority leader failed to respond, instead opting to “anoint” Hardy for the open seat. He also noted that Hardy has passed up at least three different opportunities to debate him on the issues in recent weeks.

The voters in Clark Senate 12 have a clear choice, he said. A candidate who won’t raise taxes and who will seek fiscal reform, or a candidate who will consider tax increases to balance the state budget, McNaught said.

Dear AD-25 Candidates: Might Be Time to Get Those Issues Pages Up

By Elizabeth Crum | 3:25 pm May 21st, 2010

Amazing.

There are five candidates vying for the GOP nomination for Heidi Gansert’s Assembly seat and only one of them has an Issues page on their campaign website.

This guy:

http://www.orrinjohnson.com/issues.html

*

These candidates don’t:

http://www.berniecarterforassembly.com/
http://www.votepathickey.com/index.php
http://www.votejasondias.com/Home_Page.html
*
And the other candidate, Dan Meyer, doesn’t even seem to have a website.  (Can’t find it.)

You guys know early voting starts tomorrow, right…?

The Dem candidate, who is unchallenged and is waiting to take on the winner of these five, does have an issues page:

http://www.votetownsend.com

Dems Up with Second Busgate Song

By Elizabeth Crum | 3:11 pm May 21st, 2010

Are we having fun yet?

From @RalstonFlash on Twitter just now:

First Edgar Winter (“Free Ride”) and now Dion and the inevitable “Runaround Sue” as the Ds push the Lowden/bus story. http://bit.ly/cIAOiR

Here was the first ad if you missed it.

Angle Votes to Raise Legislative Pay Confirmed, Spokesperson Calls Lowden Attack Ad “Desperate”

By Sean Whaley | 1:39 pm May 21st, 2010

CARSON CITY – Republican U.S. Senate candidate Sue Lowden has a new ad attacking her GOP rival Sharron Angle over her past votes in the Nevada Legislature to raise lawmaker pay as the June 8 primary draws near and early voting is set to begin tomorrow.

Lowden, who is seeking the GOP nod to take on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., in the November general election, also issued a release this week charging that Angle twice voted to raise her own pay while a member of the Nevada Assembly.

The release came after Angle on Wednesday denied in a radio interview ever voting to raise her own pay.

Lowden spokesman Robert Uithoven then responded with this statement: “For years, campaign after campaign, Sharron has run on the motto of ‘Don’t read my lips, read my record.’ It is clearly stated in the Assembly record that Sharron voted to raise her pay not once, but twice, while serving in the state Assembly. Sharron invites Nevadans to support her based on her record. Therefore, they have a right to know the truth.”

“As a fiscal conservative, Sue has never voted to increase her salary,” Uithoven said.

The legislative record shows that Angle voted to raise her own pay in 2001. Then, in 2005, she voted for Senate Joint Resolution 11, which asked voters in 2006 to amend the state constitution to allow lawmakers to be paid for every day of a legislative session rather than the 60 days limited in the constitution currently.

Since sessions now last 120 days, the resolution would have doubled lawmaker pay if voters had approved the ballot question.

Voters rejected Question 11 in 2006 by 70 percent to 30 percent.

In 2001, Angle was one of 36 members of the Assembly who voted for Assembly Bill 606, which would have raised legislative pay from $130 a day for the first 60 days of a legislative session to $175 a day for the first 60 days, a 35 percent increase.

Under the measure, lawmakers would not have received the pay increase until they stood for re-election.

The bill passed the Assembly but never saw a vote in the Senate. The bill also proposed to raise the pay of other public officials.

Lowden is week noted that as a state senator in 1995, she voted against a bill to raise her own pay.

Angle campaign spokesman Jerry Stacy said the 2001 bill was “convoluted,” containing numerous pay provisions for many different elected officials. The small section on legislative pay “just got by her,” he said. As to the 2005 vote, Stacy said Angle was already planning to run for Congress and so knew it would not affect her.

Angle voted against three other legislative pay measures, Stacy said.

“Clearly Sharron has never tried to benefit from any her votes in the Legislature,” he said.  “They’ve spent thousands of dollars doing research. If this is the best they can come up with, they are pretty desperate.”