Sunday, Oct. 15, 2006 | 7:25 a.m.
Candidates for the Nevada Supreme Court, like those for other offices throughout the state, could not officially enter the race until last May.
But for Supreme Court Justice Nancy Becker, her re-election battle began, in a very real sense, in July 2003.
In a momentous ruling that month, Becker joined five of her six colleagues in clearing the way for the Legislature to end a deadlock over a proposed tax increase.
When the Legislature eventually approved an $833 million increase, the largest in state history, opponents could not contain their anger - and began plotting to unseat the justices who, from their perspective, had the audacity to do something other than throw an immovable roadblock in front of any tax plan.
Leading the charge was the right-wing, libertarian Las Vegas Review-Journal, which reacted with editorial fury the day after the decision, calling for the defeat of all six justices when they came up for re-election - if not sooner, through recalls.
When Republican Gov. Kenny Guinn, who had proposed the record tax increase, signed it into law, he said that it ensured that school districts throughout the state, particularly in overflowing Clark County, would have money to hire badly needed teachers. Revenue from the taxes also preserved the state's ability to fund health insurance programs for seniors and children of the working poor, the governor said.
Supporters of the tax increase blamed the budget deadlock on a "radical minority" of conservative Assembly Republicans who were holding the Legislature hostage.
In three weeks Becker will become the first of the six justices to face voters - and learn whether the public responds with wrath or supports her for making what she believed was the right decision, knowing it could have severe political consequences.
The outrage from the libertarian right over that decision - and one other from the hundreds that Becker has made in eight years on the high court - has significantly altered the normal dynamics of the Supreme Court contest, typically low-profile affairs that generate little enthusiasm outside the legal profession.
History shows that the incumbent almost always has the advantage in Nevada Supreme Court races.
Only three incumbent justices have been defeated this century, the last being Noel Manoukian, who ran for re-election in 1984 during a period of bitter infighting on the high court, said state archivist Guy Rocha.
But this fall, Becker's strategists lament that she is the candidate at a disadvantage in her campaign against District Judge Nancy Saitta.
Not only has Saitta raised more money than Becker - $295,006 to $276,982, according to the latest August campaign reports - but Saitta also is benefiting from a mysterious political action committee linked to her campaign that has been airing television ads across the state attacking Becker.
Records show the group, Nevadans Against Judicial Activism, registered with the Nevada secretary of state's office on Aug. 31. Less than three weeks later, the PAC began running TV ads criticizing Becker for the 2003 opinion.
"The playing field is no longer level," said political consultant Jim Ferrence, who is running Becker's campaign.
Ferrence said the Saitta campaign, with the help of Nevadans Against Judicial Activism, has been able to circumvent the limits that television stations impose on the number of campaign ads they accept from candidates.
He estimates that since mid-September, Nevadans Against Judicial Activism, claiming to be an independent political action committee, has spent about $200,000 on anti-Becker television ads across the state.
"I'm totally convinced that there's no distinction between the Committee to Elect Nancy Saitta and Nevadans Against Judicial Activism," Ferrence said. "They are one and the same."
But Saitta - who is running in mid-term and would retain her District Court seat if she loses her Supreme Court bid - denied any involvement with the group.
"That's absolutely untrue," she said. "All I know is that I've got nothing to do with it."
Saitta, however, makes it clear on her campaign Web site that she shares the PAC's philosophy.
"No judge should be an activist by ignoring the law in order to reach a politically popular or expedient result in any case," she is quoted as saying.
There is one confirmed direct link between the Saitta campaign and the PAC.
Susan Lucas, the Las Vegas marketing executive who produced Saitta's television ads and bought air time for them, acknowledged that she is doing the same thing for Nevadans Against Judicial Activism.
"Some people called me and said they had seen the commercials I did for Judge Saitta and liked them," Lucas said. "They asked me to do that for them."
Lucas, who owns the marketing company Sunstone Inc., said she produced the PAC's television ad attacking Becker over the Supreme Court's 2003 tax opinion and bought about $60,000 worth of airtime for the ad at Las Vegas stations. The ad also has aired in Reno.
On one of Lucas' local television buys, a $48,600 invoice at KLAS Channel 8, the station listed "Nancy Saitta" as the billing contact.
But Misty Morgan, Channel 8's national sales manager, said that was an error, adding that the station was writing a letter of apology to Lucas and Saitta acknowledging what she called an innocent mistake.
Lucas would not say who asked her to provide her services to Nevadans Against Judicial Activism, and several attorneys working to elect Saitta either denied involvement in the PAC or ducked questions about it.
"I've heard there have been some television ads, but I have no involvement with the organization," said Reno attorney Robert Maddox, a construction defects specialist who, along with his wife, has contributed a combined $20,000 to Saitta's campaign.
Maddox said he is supporting Saitta because she "has a heart" and is the right person for the job. Becker, he argued, sides too often with big special interests. The casino industry, the biggest political player in the state, has been a major Becker campaign donor over the years.
Laura FitzSimmons, a Las Vegas eminent domain lawyer who also has contributed heavily to Saitta's campaign - donating a total of $20,000 individually and through an investment firm she runs with her husband - would not discuss the political action committee other than to claim that it has nothing to do with her work on behalf of Saitta.
In an e-mail, FitzSimmons praised Saitta as having a "real understanding of the human condition" and a willingness to take on "those in power."
Kermitt Waters, a libertarian-leaning eminent domain lawyer who has been bankrolling an anti-Becker telephone message campaign aimed at voters, did not return the Sun's phone calls about the campaign. But he has not been shy in the past about accusing Becker of being unfriendly to private property owners.
Ellick Hsu, deputy secretary of state for elections, said that even if the Saitta campaign is directly involved in Nevadans Against Judicial Activism, it would not be illegal.
"There's nothing in state law that prohibits a candidate from being associated with a political action committee," Hsu said.
The PAC, however, will have to file a report with the secretary of state's office listing its contributions and expenses by the Oct. 31 deadline, Hsu said.
But by that time, a week before the election, Ferrence said, it may be too late to undo the competitive damage the Becker campaign will have suffered.
"It puts us at a big disadvantage when other people are trying to circumvent the rules," Ferrence said. "It's just not fair."
A huge portion of the displeasure that the libertarian right has with Becker stems from the July 2003 tax decision in which she joined in ruling that the Legislature did not have to abide by a constitutional provision requiring a two-thirds majority to pass a tax increase.
The ruling, known as "Guinn v. Legislature," broke a costly deadlock that was preventing the Legislature from recessing in 2003. The Legislature ended up passing the tax hike by two-thirds majorities in both houses anyway.
Libertarians like Waters also were angered by a September 2003 decision written by Becker that concluded that the city of Las Vegas' eminent domain purchase of downtown land owned by the Pappas family was constitutional. The land was taken by the Downtown Redevelopment Agency years earlier to build a parking lot for the Fremont Street Experience.
Waters, who is spearheading a property rights initiative on the November ballot, attacks Becker in his privately financed telephone campaign over both decisions.
"These are individuals who are using these issues because they dislike me personally," Becker said. "These are simply the issues they are grabbing onto."
Becker insists that she is not a judicial activist - the pejorative that her opponents have tried to hang on her.
"I think that is a buzz word that's inaccurate," she said. "None of us, all seven of us, are known to be judicial activists. We follow the Constitution and require the court to follow the Constitution."
That buzz word that has hounded her on the 2006 campaign trail can be traced to the opposition to Becker that the Review-Journal began trying to whip up three years ago.
Since its initial editorial, the Review-Journal has continued to write editorials and gave prominent play to stories on the efforts of right-wing groups, such as the Nevada Eagle Forum, to recall Becker and her colleagues. The recall campaign, however, failed to gather enough signatures and was aborted.
This year, in stories and editorials, the newspaper has repeatedly reminded readers that Becker is the first of the six judges who signed the tax decision to appear on the ballot.
The Las Vegas Sun has not yet made an endorsement in the race.
Saitta said she is challenging Becker because she wants to be part of a changed Supreme Court that gives "proper respect" to the Constitution and individual rights.
Becker responds by saying her entire career has been based on respecting the Constitution.
"My philosophy is trying to find out what the framers of the U.S. Constitution and the Nevada Constitution intended and abide by that," she said.
And when voters go to the polls, Becker said she hopes they will judge her on her entire record, not just the few decisions being shopped around by the political fringe.
archive
