PHOTO/DENNIS MYERS
Republicans crowded into Dilworth Middle School in Sparks for the 2012 presidential caucuses.
Listen up, kids. For months, a claim has been bouncing around Nevada journalism. Laura Myers/Las Vegas Review Journal: “The last time the GOP controlled all of Nevada government was in 1929.” Michael Green/Asseveration: “This marked the first time Republicans controlled all six statewide offices and both houses of the Legislature since 1929.” Associated Press Carson City bureau: “Nevada Republicans heralded Nov. 4 as the start of a brave new world, with the party taking control of the Assembly, Senate and every constitutional office for the first time in state history.” Nevada AFL-CIO news release: “In Nevada, for the first time since 1929, the Republican Party controls all Constitutional offices and both houses of the Legislature.” Samantha Coachman/Huffing tonPost: “After Republicans took full control of the state’s government for the first time since 1929 ...” The assertion even appeared here in the RN&R. We apologize to our columnist Sheila Leslie for not catching it when she referred to “a state government under complete Republican control for the first time since 1929.” A writer named Mark Z. Barabbas at the Los Angeles Times came up with his own variant—that there has never been a Republican sweep in Nevada: “Republicans not only seized control of the Legislature—giving them full run of the capitol for the first time since 1929—but also staged an unprecedented sweep of statewide offices” (emphasis added). OK, here’s what we know about 1929. Yes, the Republicans took control of both houses of the Nevada Legislature, but no, they did not sweep all state government offices elected statewide. Democrats still held the statewide offices of secretary of state (William Greathouse, in his second term), attorney general (Michael Diskin, in his second term), and state printer (Joe Farnsworth, in his fifth term). As best we can tell, the last time Republicans controlled both houses of the Legislature and all state government offices elected statewide was in 1890. That included not just constitutional officers like governor, surveyor general, and supreme court justice (all partisan elections then), but also state government offices elected statewide that were created by statute, such as state printer and state school superintendent—a whopping 13 offices that all went Republican on a single date. And that doesn’t include one federal office, the state’s lone U.S. House member, which also went to the GOP. In the Legislature that year, the Democrats were left with only two members of the 20-member Senate and five members of the 40-member Assembly.
Stonewall The Reno Gazette-Journal last week quoted local officials saying that one of the reasons they were reluctant to allow souvenir pieces of the Virginia Street Bridge to be given or sold was that they wanted “to be sensitive to concerns of local historians who may think it’s inappropriate to sell off pieces of an historic structure.” That didn’t sound like local historians we know, so we asked the city who they were. A city spokesperson referred us to Kristine Hansen at the Army Corps of Engineers. Hansen suggested we contact the Nevada State Historic Preservation Office. She also added that her office “has received no comments from the public regarding sale of pieces of the bridge.” State historic preservation officer Rebecca Palmer, in turn, told us her office had not been consulted on the matter. We called some local historians, and none of them knew anything about it. “No one asked me,” said Phil Earl. “I don’t see what the big deal is. I think it’s fine if people want to have a souvenir of the bridge. I don’t understand why they don’t just put them out there and let people carry them off.” The RGJ story also quoted one official saying the city would face “potential safety issues with handing out jagged chunks of concrete.” When the Berlin Wall came down in 1989, pieces about an inch wide were sold in convenience stores.
—Dennis Myers 8 | RN&R |
JUNE 18, 2015
Close call Nevada’s early presidential year spot is saved The Nevada Legislature’s decision not to step into the issue of how the state’s delegates to national presidential by nominating conventions are selected Dennis Myers has some Republicans concerned. The lawmakers chose not to enact a bill creating a Nevada presidential primary election. That bill threatened to end Nevada’s early place in the nominating calendar. The state got a lot of publicity in 2008 and 2012 when it was given a starring secondround role.
“Republican legislators were trying to completely diaper the libertarian wing.” Fred Lokken Political analyst The Legislature’s action left Nevada presidential caucuses in place, which was key to the state keeping its early date. The way the early calendar has shaken down over the years is that Iowa and New Hampshire go first— the first caucuses in Iowa, the first primary in New Hampshire. Then they are followed by Nevada and South Carolina—the second caucuses in Nevada, the second primary in South Carolina. Those are all in February. All other caucuses and primaries follow starting in March.
The fact that Nevada has caucuses instead of a primary got it the early slot in the first place. In 2008, coaxed by U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, the Democratic National Committee awarded the early position in the presidential nominating race to Nevada, elevating the state’s visibility and possibly its issues. Though they were suspicious of anything associated with Reid, Nevada Republicans went along with holding their caucuses on the same day as the Democrats, drawing additional attention to the state. The GOP caucuses attracted more than 40,000 participants in 2008, and more than 30,000 in 2012—still more than turned out before Nevada got the early berth. Changing Nevada to a primary election instead of caucuses would throw a monkey wrench in both political parties’ calendars and likely would have prompted the national parties to revoke Nevada’s early status. Other caucus states would have been lining up to displace Nevada as the second caucus state. There had already been some talk of Nevada losing the slot, with Colorado—a caucus state—a prime candidate to replace Nevada. “When Nevada was moved up in the process as an early state it was contingent on Nevada as a caucus state, not a primary,” Reid aide Kristen Orthman told the New York Times in an email. The Republicans have had more anxiety over the caucuses than just their association with Reid. There is
ongoing tension between established Republicans and insurgents who are often highly motivated and outorganize the traditionalists. Nevada political parties have used caucuses virtually through the state’s entire history, though the term “caucus” to describe them is relatively new. They were usually called mass meetings or precinct meetings—the correct term under state law. They are held not just in presidential years but in all election years, because they are not just used for nominating convention delegate selection, but for regular party business as well. And even when the state has used presidential primaries, the precinct meetings were still held for selection of delegates. Caucuses are basically neighborhood meetings, in which registered voters in a precinct choose one or more of their neighbors to go to the party’s county convention, setting in motion the process that leads to a handful of Nevadans going to a national convention. Nevada Republican traditionalists have had difficulty getting along with new groups coming into the party— particularly libertarian supporters of presidential candidate Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012. Mitt Romney won Nevada both years, but his supporters did not get to the county and state conventions, when national convention delegates are selected, in as big numbers as the Paulists, prompting rough tactics against Paul’s forces. In 2008, established party leaders adjourned the GOP state convention when Paulists were about to win the delegate count and elect their candidates for national convention seats. In 2012, the Nevada Paulists won the national convention delegation and were intending to vote for Romney at the convention in accordance with the outcome of the Nevada caucuses. But then the national convention changed the rules at the last minute to prevent Paul from addressing the convention in prime time and the Nevada Paulists revolted. The ill treatment of the Paulists led to the state party machinery—now in their hands—being unavailable to Romney during the fall campaign, forcing the traditionalists to set up a sort of party-in-exile to support the Massachusetts governor. With Ron Paul’s son Rand planning to run for president in 2016—and likely to command a similar level of enthusiasm in Nevada—the traditionalists turned to state law to try to create a national convention process they could control better, akin to the way the Democrats created “superdelegate” seats for party elected
