Letter: Ethics Commission fulfills its mission

Sunday, Jan. 24, 1999 | 11:11 a.m.

In 1997 our state Legislature passed Assembly Bill 485, which effectively precludes any candidate who is not wealthy from seeking recourse in the courts for libel or slander by his opponent.

Not only does that bill allow for summary dismissal of such libel suits, but it allows the party who engaged in the lying campaign to bring a separate action to recover punitive damages from the complaining candidate for daring to bring the action. With the passage of that bill, the only deterrent to prevent blatant lies during election campaigns is the Ethics Commission.

The Ethics Commission has carried out its mandate on two occasions and each time it has been severely criticized by the Nevada ACLU for performing its duties.

The ACLU's attorney stated, "Politics is a bit rough and tumble, but it was designed that way." I don't think our system of elections was designed to allow candidates to freely lie about each other with the conscious intent of misleading the voters.

As a voter, I am outraged at candidates who attempt to get my vote by deceiving me with their lies.

The ACLU further states that the Ethics Commission rulings which punish candidates for deceitful advertising "will scare off potential candidates." I disagree. The Ethics Commission may scare off the liars.

But more potential honest candidates will be scared off by the threat of being lied about and having their reputations tarnished by the lies, without any possible recourse.

I am grateful for the recent rulings by the Ethics Commission.

Mel Lipman