NCPE in the News: 2008-2009

Auto Body Shop Bill's Backer Denies Conflict (Sun)

With Ethics Commission Challenged, Lawmakers Move to Police themselves (Sun)

Chancellor Rogers Enlists Campus Help in Budget Plea (Sun)

Click here to view the Saturday, January 10th, 2009, Town Hall Meeting.

"Taxpayers Give Money: LVCVA Gers Award" (Las Vegas Review Journal)

"Casa Rosa's Days Numbered" (Las Vegas Review Journal)

"Court Hopeful Says Consultant Pitched Deal" (Las Vegas Review Journal)

"Given $50,000 He Decides to Run" (Las Vegas Sun)

Acting President Julie Tousa on Jon Ralston's "Face to Face: Ethics Complaint"

Meet the Acting President of NCPE, Julie Tousa

"New Watchdog of Public Ethics Continues Enforcing Vital Unwritten Law" (Las Vegas Review Journal)

"Partying Away As Taxpayers Pay and Pay" (Las Vegas Sun)

Ethics Legislation 2007

NCPE at the 2007 Nevada State Legislature: Summary and Details

"Article 6 Commission" to study and recommend improvements in the Nevada judiciary
See Dr. Craig Walton's summary of May Meeting

NCPE statement about the danger of big donors contributing to Supreme Court justice election campaigns.

Judicial Ethics & the Complaint Processes

Craig Walton's letter, to the Las Vegas Business Journal in favor of the new plan for judicial selection

Candidate Pledge

Email NCPE Treasurer

News and Reports

NCPE at NV Legislature- AB 80

AB 80, to require Limited Liability Corporations (LLC’s) to report contributions. As to the relationship to NCPE's 11 proposals, AB 80, is close to NCPE's proposal on p. 1 of our doc.

To:    Chairwoman Senator Barbara Cegavske  and members,
Senate Legislative Operations and Election Committee

Date:       May 2, 2007

Subject:   Support for AB 80 as amended. , to require certain business entities  to report political contributions.

As you know, Nevada had a time when it sought to emulate Delaware in hosting secret business projects for a fee. In 2005 alone, Nevada licensed 40,000 LLC’s. Many, if not all, came here because of the Secretary of State’s website invitation: “Why incorporate in Nevada?  [Because you shall have] “Minimal reporting and disclosure requirements. Stockholders are not public record”.  Recently this advertisement was removed from that website.  But for 15 years it was carrying out a Legislative policy, intended to attract businesses in emulation of Delaware. Sadly and badly, we acquired a dark reputation:  as Patrick Coolican points out in the April 29th’s Las Vegas SUN story,  we have been telling certain elements that “your investors need know little about how their money is being used, or by whom. If you prefer to operate in the shadows, Nevada is the place”.  So now, victims of Ponzi and “pump and dump” schemes have lost their savings.  Canada is investigating some Las Vegas LLC’s.  The Securities and Exchange Commission has stepped in, in some cases. Some CEO’s are in prison.  Secrecy was an advantage to the wrong kind of entrepreneurs. 

And a “side-effect” of our quest for those who crave secrecy has been that some of them have been contributing to Nevada political races. We have made it very easy for them to “bundle” money by simply incorporating 5, 10 or more companies for a fee of $75 apiece, each with a $10,000 limit and no one the wiser.  Very large amounts of money have been given, for and against Nevada candidates and ballot measures, with no accountability whatsoever. Our political life has followed their deceptive business practices.

            Because these practices corrupt political dialogue, and undermine the chance of having an informed electorate, the Nevada Center for Public Ethics drafted a precursor to AB 80 over a year ago, and sent it to many of you, leaders of both parties in both houses. We also put that draft on our website, and have held two Town Hall meetings and interviewed on KNPR to discuss these problems.  Since last Fall we have sought to cooperate on bill draft requests by taking part in hearings here (SB 144) and in the Assembly (AB 80).  As you will see in what follows, by today,  Republicans and Democrats have contributed to the amended AB 80.  Flaws have been removed and new ideas added during deliberation and the work sessions, with many voices taking part.

            To summarize:  the bill has  3 main features:  [1st ] Listed business entities must register and give to the Sec. of State some information as to who they are, what they do, and what money they are spending for political purposes; [2nd] the SOS will then put this information on the internet for Nevadans to read and evaluate before voting;  and [3rd] the same penalties now set for PAC’s and nonprofits who fail to comply with NRS 294A, will now be set for these (no longer secret) business entities if engaging in political campaigning.
            Sec. 2 defines “business entity” to include business trusts, LLC’s partnerships and sole proprietorships.  This Section grew out of Committee discussion where some asked why include LLC’s but omit these other kinds of entities which could cause the same problems for political dialogue and voter choices. Thus this change.
            Sec. 3 requires that they register on a form made by the SOS, if they solicit or receive money, contribute to candidates or ballot measures, or otherwise make expenditures to influence the outcome of a primary, general or special election. The form includes needed identifying information, and will be electronically shared with Nevadans on the SOS website, in a timely manner.
            Sections 5,6, and 8 through 14 are show editing needed to include business entities as defined in Sections 2 and 3, so that those sections now conform with the new ideas in Secs. 1, 2 and 3.
            Sec. 7  provides the same terms for reporting as are now set for PAC’s and non-profits  (if ≥ $10K is spent or received, then they must report a year’s political transaction activity by Jan. 15th of the next year; and also 7 days before a primary, general or special election (as with other campaign contributions).

            The objection has been raised, that when one goes door to door during election campaigns, registered voters do not ask for campaign funding disclosure reform. Maybe this kind of ethics reform is just not needed.
            But those doorbell conversations are not necessarily focused on ethics in government.  It is a weakness of wide distrust between citizens and politicians, that too widely we distrust people in government, but do not speak directly to them about the distrust. This is a failure by us, the citizens, and by you, the politicians – the unspoken issue must be spoken:  what do we need from you, in order to trust you?  And what do you need to do, in order to be trusted by us?  If we explicitly ask Nevadans about this issue, there is a different answer than gets at the door:  Monday the Reno Gazette-Journal published its poll of Nevadans, conducted with a statistically significant , representative sample (handout, enclosed). The result was that 62% of Nevadans want more frequent campaign disclosure reports; we want to know who gave what to whom, and before the election, not just at the same time or afterwards.  Democrats, Republicans and non-partisans all took part, and all three groups, in various percentages, favored more, and more timely campaign disclosure.  AB 80 is one of the bills designed to do this, and to face up to the unintended consequences of our drive to get more secrecy-craving people to come here for their financial environment.  Let them come, let them operate this side of fraud.  But, if they want to use their secrecy to fiddle with our political lives as we try to evaluate and discuss records and policies, then let them register and report.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of AB 80.  

From:   Craig Walton, President, and members,
Nevada Center for Public Ethics

Go to other 2007 testimonies

AB 79, to close a huge, unintended loophole in NRS 281.411-581, our “Ethics in Government” law.

AB 80, to require Limited Liability Corporations (LLC’s) to report contributions. As to the relationship to NCPE's 11 proposals, AB 80, is close to NCPE's proposal on p. 1 of our doc.

AB 109, - allows leftover campaign monies to go to a public-purpose Trust Fund.

AB 143, - changes the NV. Commission on Ethics deadline for completing an inquiry from 45 days to 1 year, and also allows the complainee to be told what is happening to his or her complaint.

SJR 1 - removes the requirement that affidavits be provided with ballot initiative petitions.

SB 79 - brings our statutes into line with a court ruling that the affidavit requirement for ballot petitions is a violation of the First Amendment.

SB 144, to require Limited Liability Corporations (LLC's) to report contributions.

AB 142, to require ethics instruction and lobbyists to the Executive Dept. to register and report expenditures.

AB 335 - dealing with campaign disclosure

SB 425 - to new detail on political contributions, and to include legal defense funds in that category.

AB 312, dealing with campaign disclosure

AB 605 requires ethics training for new public officers and also for lobbyists, forbids the use of one’s office staff or equipment for campaign purposes, and doubles the three levels of penalties for violating ethics laws.

SB 495 provides a one-year cooling off period for persons leaving the Public Utilities Commission, the Gaming Control Board, or “former public officers or employees”.
         Original Testimony
         Revised Comments

SB 494 - dealing with primary, general, and municipal elections, SB 494 changes the filing deadline for campaign contribution reports.