Click for printable version
Click to send to a friend

Election 2002 Reno attorney Brian Sandoval, the Republican nominee for attorney general, tells the Nevada Press Association Saturday that his campaign will check out "everybody who contributes to my campaign because I think the attorney general needs to be held to a different standard." Las Vegas attorney John Hunt, the Democratic nominee for attorney general, says reasonable steps should be taken to check contributors. He said Saturday he is returning $10,000 from a company associated with NOS Communications, but he defended $160,000 in contributions from people with ties to Vestin Group, a mortgage company headed by Mike Shustek. Photos by Amy Beth Bennett.

Sunday, September 22, 2002
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

FUND-RAISING CONTRIBUTIONS: Donation origins debated

Attorney general candidates disagree on level of scrutiny

PAHRUMP -- The two major candidates for attorney general disagreed Saturday on the amount of scrutiny that campaign contributors deserve.

Republican Brian Sandoval said, "We are going to check out everybody who contributes to my campaign because I think the attorney general needs to be held to a different standard."

Democrat John Hunt called it "outrageous" that people who want to participate in the election process "now have the Brian Sandoval police check you out? I think that's inappropriate."

The source of campaign contributions has been argued by the two candidates since the start of the campaign, when Hunt criticized Sandoval for the large number of gaming contributions accepted by the former chairman of the Gaming Commission.

For the past 11 days, those disputes have escalated.

Hunt charged during a Sept. 11 event that, unlike Sandoval, he wouldn't take any money from Nevada Power because if he's elected, he might have to litigate against the company.

One week later, Sandoval's campaign filed a complaint saying Hunt's acceptance of nearly $160,000 in campaign contributions should be investigated because it looked suspicious that so much money --more than one-fourth of Hunt's total -- came to Hunt from people tied to Vestin Group, a mortgage company headed by Mike Shustek. The company is under investigation by the state but state officials say no action is planned.

Then Friday, Sandoval revealed he had rejected a $10,000 contribution from NOS Communications, a telemarketing company currently facing disciplinary action in Nevada which has been disciplined in Wisconsin and Florida. The probes against the Las Vegas company deal with questionable charges for long distance telephone service.

At a joint appearance before the Nevada Press Association meeting Saturday in Pahrump, Hunt acknowledged that he would return a $10,000 donation from a company associated with NOS based on the information revealed by Sandoval. "I wasn't aware of that. It was brought to my attention and as of yesterday, I'll return it."

While Hunt agreed the NOS Communications contribution was inappropriate, he defended the Vestin contributions that were at the heart of the complaint Sandoval's campaign filed Wednesday.

Hunt predicted Sandoval will eventually be apologizing to those Vestin contributors and said, "There is nothing wrong with those contributions."

Sandoval's complaint asked Secretary of State Dean Heller to investigate whether the 41 people and companies with ties to Vestin Mortgage were giving the money voluntarily. It's not legal to give money to a candidate in the name of another person.

Moderator Steve Sebelius asked Sandoval "Where's your proof?" there was something sinister about the fund-raiser Shustek hosted.

"I don't think it's the process that's sinister; it's the amounts," Sandoval replied. "If I go to a fund-raiser and have people I've never met in my life handing me checks for $5,000 and $10,000, and they are midlevel or lower employees, it raises an issue for me. It's not often you get a check for $5,000 or $10,000 from individuals you've never met."

Hunt described Sandoval's focus on the discussion about campaign donations before the Nevada Press Association as "a sign they don't want to talk about issues."

But after the hour-long question-and-answer session ended, the Hunt campaign was poised with a list of campaign contributors who had some form of complaint pending against them at the time Sandoval accepted donations.

The businesses included the Bellagio, which had a money-laundering probe pending when it gave $10,000 to Sandoval, and the Hard Rock Hotel, which had an investigation into sexual activity pending when it gave Sandoval the second of two $5,000 contributions.

Nevada gaming regulators were negotiating a $25,000 fine with Peter Eliades' Olympic Garden to settle violations including failing to prevent prostitution by strippers around the time Eliades gave $2,500 to Sandoval's campaign.

Hunt's campaign manager Dan Hart said Hunt wouldn't refuse to take money from any of these contributors. However, Hart contended the list showed that Sandoval broke his promise in Thursday's Review-Journal when he said, "I would not accept a contribution from an entity or an individual who has a pending complaint against him or with the state of Nevada."

Sandoval later said the list was "a desperate and feeble attempt to divert attention from NOS Communications. There's a big difference between the Hard Rock and Bellagio and Vestin and NOS Communications."

On one issue, the two lawyers agreed.

Both opposed the ethics law that allows the Ethics Commission to issue fines over the truthfulness of political materials. Newspapers across the state have pummeled the law as limiting free speech.

Sandoval said he doesn't support that provision of the ethics law and believes the Legislature should change it. Hunt went a step further.

"I don't think it passes constitutional muster," he said. The remedy for libelous mailers, they agreed, is court, not the Ethics Commission, Hunt said.

Sandoval and Hunt had different approaches toward improving the office of attorney general.

Sandoval's priority is to create three units -- an elder protection unit, a family and child protection unit and a public integrity unit.

The public integrity unit would investigate and prosecute ethics and election violations as well as train elected and appointed officials about ethics, Sandoval said. He believes the three units could be developed by reassigning existing attorneys and wouldn't need more money to enact.

Hunt didn't have a specific proposal for changing existing priorities, saying he would "look and listen" before making those decisions. "I can lead by example," he said.