Nevada League of Women Voters hosts first election forum in Brewery Arts Center in Carson City

League of Women Voters of Northern Nevada, AAUW Capital (NV) Branch and Sierra Nevada Forums presented the first of four election forums of 2022 on Friday, Oct. 7 located at the Brewery Arts Center in Carson City.

The U.S. Representative in Congress, District 2 candidates who participated in the forum included Republican candidate Mark Amodei and Democratic candidate, Elizabeth Mercedes Krause. The moderator was Silvia Villanueva.

Following these candidates, were speakers on behalf of Ballot Question 1, regarding the Equal Rights Amendment. The pro speaker for the ERA was the Chair of Equal Rights Nevada, Nnedi Stephens and the con speaker was President of Nevada Families for Freedom, Janine Hansen.

There were also speakers on behalf of Ballot Question 2, regarding the issue of raising the minimum wage. The pro speaker was Christine Sanders, the Policy Director of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada. The con speaker was President of Nevada Families for Freedom, Janine Hansen.

In each of the different parts of the forums, they are given an opening statement, asked questions and allowed a rebuttal. Some of the questions in all of the forums are questions from the audience.

U.S. House of Representative Candidates

The forum between candidate Amodei and candidate Krause began with their opening statements. It was agreed to let Krause give her opening statement first.

• Opening Statements:

In her statement, Krause discussed that her goal, if elected, was to return the seat to the public trust of Nevada. One of her primary goals is to improve the education system.

In Amodei’s opening statement, he discussed that, if elected, he wants to focus on the issues and not the “talking points” and he wants someone in the seat that can work with people to solve problems and get the policy right.

Here are the questions and summarized responses of each of the candidate, including rebuttals:

• Question 1: Do you accept the results of the 2020 presidential election as legitimate and what measures do you believe are necessary to ensure fair, accurate elections and equal voting access?

Amodei: Yes. Nevada clerks do a great job in counting results. Nevada needs to strengthen the system of security on ID’s and find more reliability in that system.

Krause: Yes. One of Nevada’s voting system’s greatest regrets is denial of or limited voter access and voter education for communities that have been “disenfranchised.” Nevada needs more voter access so eligible voters can make their voices heard.

• Question 2: What do you perceive to be the greatest threats to America’s democracy and what action should Congress take to counterbalance these threats?

Krause: The access to voting is the most at stake. The aim is to bring it back to voters, making sure they all know their vote matters.

Amodei: Money and social media. There shouldn’t be so much spending on candidates' campaigns and ads. There are no rules for social media and the government should attempt to regulate it.

• Question 3: The recently passed inflation reduction act includes provisions on reducing the federal deficit, combating climate change and lowering health care costs. What do you believe this legislation accomplishes and what revisions would you recommend?

Amodei: He voted against the act. There are no identified sources as to why Nevadans are experiencing inflation. The legislative process was wrong because it was all done behind closed doors instead of on the legislative floor.

Krause: The act accomplishes recognizing everyday problems the Nevadans are facing. It helps Nevadans get the funding we need to help struggling people and these are the bills she aims to push for.

• Question 4: The effects of climate change are already evident in Nevada with huge wildfires, drought and extreme heat. What policies or legislation would you support to help minimize America’s carbon dioxide emissions and how would you help our communities adapt to climate change?

Krause: She said there’s already fears of the future from climate change. Her own daughters talk about not wanting to have children because they’re afraid of the future. Discusses the need to talk with scientists and change something before it’s too late. She wants to possibly recover America’s Wildlife Act. She wants to include everyone in the conversation.

Amodei: The discussion is always one side or another, when it shouldn’t be. He said we need to stop ignoring the progress and look towards new technology, like lithium. However, if you want to find progress you need the materials. He said we need to focus on the issues, not the politics.

Krause's rebuttal: She said it’s not because of the politics, but because of the limited time that we have to correct things.

• Question 5: Would you support federal legislation that limits reproductive rights? Please explain your position.

Amodei: No. The decision is best left with the state, something Nevada already dealt with roughly 30 years ago. If you want to change it you have to go back to the voters.

Krause: She said she is a pro-choice candidate. She reiterates that the government should not be there when women are at their doctor’s appointments, that there should be no crossover. She then says Amodei voted against the contraceptive and abortion bill and that he is contradicting himself.

Amodei's rebuttal: He said he voted against the Pelosi bill because it allowed you to have an abortion on demand even after the second trimester and he doesn’t support that. In Nevada, he said you have 6 months already to figure it out and that contraception is already codified in this state.

• Question 6: What do you believe are the best politics to ensure students and teachers are safe from active shooters?

Krause: Increase mental health regulations and not such easy access to high-powered weapons. She also said she wants to make sure there’s a more rapid response and establish a plan for communities and school leaders so they can get to emergency services when needed. She said a mental health bill is needed, something Amodei voted against.

Amodei: He said Nevada needs to better school security and make them more like airports with high restricting access. The legislation passed the STOP School Violence Act which gave grants to state and local governments to improve school security. He said the 21st Century Cures Act allowed funding to law enforcement for things like de-escalating training. He voted against it because it affected people’s Constitutional rights and had no input from the otherside.

Krause's rebuttal: She said she thought it was a no-brainer to vote on that bill.

• Question 7: [From the audience] Do you think the federal government is doing enough to make affordable housing available and what do you see as a federal role in affordable housing?

Krause: No. The federal government needs to limit out-of-state and foerign investors from buying everything up. She says this crosses over with education. If Nevada wants high-quality educators, we have to get them good health-care and housing so they can come here. She believes adding a tax-credit could help.

Amodei: Everything is involved in moving parts. Nevada is all surrounded by federal land so there needs to be transfer planning and zoning authorities for use as low-income housing. However, he said the county keeps voting against it, so if they don’t want it they won’t have it. The first step he explained was finding the real estate.

• Question 8: [From the audience] What do you think of Medicare for all as a solution to exorbitant cost and poor quality care in the US?

Amodei: Single-payer means no competition and no choice. Everywhere that has single-payer has had no success, he said. The federal government just needs to keep an eye on insurance companies for competition.

Krause: For some people she knows, she said it’s cheaper for them to fly to another country with their dual-citizenship to get healthcare there than it is to be taken care of here. She believes all Nevadans need health care.

Amodei's rebuttal: There’s already a doctor shortage across the country and in Nevada, making it hard to get into doctors. He said it will become even more acute with this system.

• Question 9: [From the audience] Do you agree with some legislators who want to see Social Security phased out?

Krause: No. However, she said there needs to be an expansion with the social security system.

Amodei: No. He said as a man who’s 64, he said he wants to keep it here. It’s a bad idea to phase it out with the financial realities people face today.

• Question 10: [From the audience] What legislation is necessary, if any, to improve the criminal justice system to ensure equal justice under the law?

Amodei: He said the challenge is having a system that lets people do what’s appropriate in circumstances. It needs to be an “all of the above approach.” Since it’s hard to agree, he explained the states need to play a major role.

Krause: She said Nevada needs to make sure we don’t have a for-profit justice system, where there should be no benefit for incarcerating people. Nevadans need to work together to ensure funding, starting with funding education and improving mental health.

• Question 11: [From the audience] Will you support legislation to reverse Citizens United in an effort to get dark money out of elections?

Krause: Definitely. She said she doesn’t like that money is a factor in who ends up being leaders of the country.

Amodei: He said “me too.” He believes too much money goes to candidates and there shouldn’t be so much control based on how much money a campaign has for ads or TV time.

Krause's rebuttal: She believes there should be some sort of call-out against extreme commercials so they’re no longer effective. Amodei agreed.

• Closing Statements:

In Krause’s closing statement, she discussed that she is running because her heart is in this race and she wants to lead Nevadans. She also takes the time to acknowledge the 11 new tribal polling locations in the state.

In Amodei's closing statement, he explained he feels it’s his responsibility to advocate for Nevada and he believes his heart is in this with Nevadans as well.

Ballot Question 1 Speakers

Ballot Question 1: Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended by adding a specific guarantee that equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this State or any of its cities, counties or other political subdivisions on account of race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, disability, ancestry or national origin?

The forum between pro speaker, Nnedi Stephens and the con speaker, Janine Hansen began with their opening statements. It was agreed to let Stephens give their opening statement first.

• Opening Statements:

In Stephens's opening statement, they explained Nevada should add the Equal Rights Protection clause in the Constitution because "it's about time." Their goal is to be more inclusive and expansive and ensure protections for everyone in the Nevada Constitution. They explained that it's time for Nevadans to come together and live up to their duties.

In Hansen's opening statement, she explained the ERA is much too radical to put in the state constitution. It would allow "biological males" to participate in female sports, minor children to receive puberty blockers without parental consent, force taxpayers to pay for abortions, threaten religious liberty and etc. She said they don't know the long term affects of the bill.

• Question 1: How does the Nevada Equal Rights Amendment tie in with the federal Equal Rights Amendment?

Stephens: National ERA makes sure we're providing U.S. Constitutional rights, but it prohibits it just to "sex." They said the state ERA is much more expansive and inclusive. It may be "uncomfortable" to some they said, but it's a base level protection to make sure everybody has equal rights.

Hansen: The federal ERA was originally defeated by Nevadan voters and it was just sex, not this one includes much more broadened categories which is a cause for "considerable concern" according to Hansen. She believes the courts will misinterpret it and it will get rid of "age of consent" laws.

Stephens's rebuttal: They explain that there are acts in place to protect age consent laws. They also said the biggest concern is how it took so long for the ERA to get here.

• Question 2: What is the purpose and need of a Constitutional Amendment when we have the ability to address the issues with statute and regulations?

Hansen: There is no reason. She said the federal and state laws plus court rulings already protect equal rights without complications. She said she has 17 grandchildren and she is concerned for their safety with this law. She said we're putting too much power in the hands of the courts instead of in our own hands.

Stephens They said the use of the term "biological male" was offensive and that they trust the courts because a lot of their rights are here and being protected, because of the courts. They reiterate that there is fear-mongering on the opposing side against trans-individuals.

Hansen's rebuttal: She said there is no need for name-calling or accusing of fear-mongering. She said she is simply talking about the facts and concerns, including her biggest concern of freedom of religion.

• Question 3: The original ERA dealt with sex. Why does the current measure expand the rights so dramatically so that opponents can attack it?

Hansen: The federal ERA was defeated with just using the "sex" term. Before her concerns were with women being drafted and non-gender specific bathrooms. The expansion of the terms she said threatens the current rights of the people and Nevadans have to think of religious freedoms.

Stephens: They said that this ERA speaks to values as Nevadans. The answer is to protect and expand those protections, they said, and they are from a religious family, but they think it is a different conversation of religious freedom and equal rights protections.

Hansen's rebuttal: She said the ERA threatens a lot including religious liberty in the state.

• Question 4: How many other states have similar ERA provisions in their constitutions?

Stephens: They said they think there are 27 states who already have an ERA and Nevada is one of the handful trying to fix that oversight in their Constitution. Their goal is to get rid of discrimination.

Hansen: No other state has an ERA as radical as the one proposed, Hansen said. She said Nevadans don't know what the consequences will be, but she knows they'll could be dangerous.

Stephens's rebuttal: Protecting equal rights for everyone is the goal and this is an opportunity to the country that Nevada has equal rights, according to Stephens.

• Closing Statements:

The speakers then gave their closing statements, starting with Stephens.

In their closing statement, Stephens said this could be an amazing opportunity to show diversity and how it should be represented in the state constitution.

In Hansen's closing statement, she said it's important to hear all sides to maintain the liberty of speech, but she's concerned that there will be rights taken away with this amendment.

Ballot Question 2 Speakers

Ballot Question 2: Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended, effective July 1, 2024, to: (1) establish the State's minimum wage that employers must pay to certain employees at a rate of $12 per hour worked, subject to any applicable increases above that $12 rate provided by federal law or enacted by the Nevada Legislature; (2) remove the existing provisions setting different rates for the minimum wage based on whether the employer offers certain health benefits to such employees; and (3) remove the existing provisions for adjusting the minimum wage based on applicable increases in the cost of living?

The forum between pro speaker, Christine Sanders and the con speaker, Janine Hansen began with their opening statements. It was agreed to let Hansen give her opening statement first.

• Opening Statements:

In her opening statement, Hansen said her biggest concerns is that this amendment does not belong in the constitution. She also believes this takes away the incentive of one less dollar an hour to add employee benefits and it harms the categories of teens, low-skilled workers and minorities who need it.

In Sanders's opening statement, she explains that the amendment will set a minimum wage in the Constitution that is aligned with Bill 456, the amendment will remove benefits for a dollar cheaper system that businesses take advantage of and that it clarifies that the legislature has the authority to increase wages.

• Question 1: When did Nevada first adopt a minimum wage in the Nevada Constitution?

Sanders: She believes it was first put in in 2004 and 2006 when the two-tier system was established. She said the minimum wage never increased without the legislature taking action since 2010.

Hansen: It's not necessary to have in the constitution, she said. According to Hansen, there is no guarantee it will help and it's more effective to have an earned-income tax.

Sanders's rebuttal: The minimum wage will reduce the racial and gender wage gaps, according to Sanders.

• Question 2: How does Nevada's amendment on minimum wage compare to other states?

Sanders: She said this amendment will clarify that this is the last time Nevada has to update its system. It will create a one minimum wage instead of a two-tiered system and it will ensure the legislature continues to have authority to increase wage.

Hansen: She said this won't make a difference because the legislature already brought up the minimum wage and wages are already increasing naturally due to inflation.

Sanders's rebuttal: She said the Berkley study from 2018 showed 6 cities benefitted from wage increase.

• Closing Statements:

The speakers did not have time to give closing statements.

---

To view the livestream of the first election forum on Oct. 7, click here.

To access nonpartisan information on local and state candidates, go to www.vote411.org

Mail-in ballots will be sent to all Carson City voters. In person early voting is from Saturday, October 22 through Friday, November 4. Election Day is Tuesday Nov. 8.

For more information, check the Carson City elections website https://www.carson.org/government/departments-a-f/clerk-recorder/electio... and the Secretary of State elections website https://www.nvsos.gov/sos/elections/election-information.

The League of Women Voters of Northern Nevada is a non-partisan non-profit organization supporting public information and involvement to promote informed voting and public participation.

Sierra Nevada Forums provides citizens with fact-based verifiable information to assist them in making well-informed decisions on issues of importance to our community and beyond.

The mission of the American Association of University Women is to advance gender equity for women and girls through research, education and advocacy. AAUW Capital (NV) branch is the local entity.