Thursday, July 27, 2006 | 7:39 a.m.
The first half of a televised debate between the two Democrats running for governor looked like a friendly policy seminar, with candidates agreeing that the state needs to spend, spend, spend on education. With their campaigns leveling relentless personal attacks, it was remarkable for being so civil, and so dull.
It became a real battle only during the second half of the debate on "Face to Face with Jon Ralston," when state Sen. Dina Titus and Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson left behind the schoolkids and turned their attention to the unborn and to each other's integrity.
The tone returned to the hard edge of the campaign, with Titus attacking Gibson, accusing him of being in the pocket of developers and not being sufficiently pro-choice. Gibson counterattacked, though he spent much of the second half defending himself on unfriendly ground.
Gibson's challenge has always been convincing voters that he's a true Democrat, an important virtue in an Aug. 15 primary that may draw only the most hard-core partisans. Abortion continues to hound Gibson after a previous appearance on "Face to Face," in which he said he could support a ban on abortions, except in the case of rape, incest or to save a woman's life. His campaign later said he was opposed to criminalizing abortion.
On Wednesday, Gibson said his comments had been taken out of context. "The abortion matter is settled," Gibson said. "I have no agenda. I have never had an agenda that would change abortion law I would never criminalize abortion."
In 1990 Nevada voters decided the abortion debate with a ballot initiative that protected abortion rights. For abortion to be criminalized here, the U.S. Supreme Court would have to overturn its landmark Roe v. Wade decision and then anti-abortion forces would have to wrest control of both the state Assembly and Senate, which at the moment seems highly unlikely.
Still, Titus seemed to sense that pro-choice voters feel besieged as abortion rights are being challenged all over the country, most notably in South Dakota - which she specifically mentioned - where the state legislature recently voted to criminalize abortion with a law expected to challenge Roe v. Wade.
Gibson burnished his Democratic bona fides in the first half of the debate, when the two candidates agreed that the state needs to spend vast new sums on education. They both favor all-day kindergarten for all Nevada children and substantially higher teacher salaries; both said Clark County teachers should start at $40,000.
Titus and Gibson also said they would favor an endowment to support the uncertain long-term finances of the Millennium Scholarship program, which gives qualified Nevada high school graduates a scholarship to Nevada colleges.
The candidates, who also agreed on the concept of awarding outstanding teachers bonuses, said the money for all this education spending would come out of the state's surplus, not from new taxes.
The cheery consensus ended when moderator Ralston played attack ads the candidates have launched against each other and asked them to respond. A Titus ad charges that Gibson is "for sale," alleging a connection between a $150,000 campaign contribution Gibson received from Henderson developer Tony Marnell and favorable treatment Marnell received from the city of Henderson for the resort he is building.
Gibson said the project was important to the future of Henderson and that the campaign contribution had nothing to do with his votes on the project.
A Gibson ad charges that Titus had received thousands of dollars from insurance companies and telemarketers and voted for legislation favorable to telemarketers. The ad also reminds voters that Titus voted to raise taxes in 2003 and voted to increase the Legislature's pension by 300 percent.
In response, Titus pointed to numerous votes she cast against the telemarketing industry and said her vote increasing the Legislature's pension did not affect her at the time because she had not been there long enough to qualify for the pension.
archive
