Mayoral primary closes with some bangs
To begin with, let’s acknowledge the mayor of Las Vegas has no power over federal immigration policy or gay marriage. No matter the outcome of today’s primary, immigrant children still won’t have a path to citizenship and gay people still won’t have the same rights as their straight counterparts.
But that doesn’t mean it’s not a good idea for candidates for public office to know about those issues. In fact, we should expect it.
In recent days, however, political groups and journalists have discovered shocking gaps in the knowledge of some candidates, gaps that might lead voters to question who has the mettle to head up a local government.
For example, Las Vegas Councilman Steve Ross appeared to be stumped at a forum when the group Sí Se Puede asked him about the DREAM Act, which would allow the children of illegal immigrants to gain U.S. citizenship by serving in the military or attending college.
(Among the top 10 signs a group might ask you about immigration issues: It’s name is Spanish for “Yes, we can.”)
It’s probably a good thing mayors have limited powers, since Ross and Clark County Commissioner Larry Brown said they favor repealing Senate Bill 283, the 2009 bill allowing domestic partnerships in Nevada. (Clark County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani and mayoral spouse Carolyn Goodman both oppose repeal.)
To be sure, SB283 is a separate-but-equal compromise made necessary because the voters of Nevada have made gay marriage constitutionally impossible. The law provides a mere sliver of equality to a community that suffers discrimination on a daily basis, and is a poor substitute for full marriage equality.
Goodman also raised eyebrows with her responses to some questions from freelancer and blogger Steve Friess. She gave a muddled answer about the DREAM Act, and first wondered why legal contracts wouldn’t be a suitable alternative to gay marriage.
On Monday, Goodman said she supports the intent of the DREAM Act, but still has questions about how it could be implemented. If the parents of a student were deported, for example, who would be responsible for that person’s education?
But the most perplexing Goodman remark came in response to criticism from Giunchigliani, who claimed Goodman was primarily a fundraiser and not an administrator at the Goodman-founded Meadows School.
In reply, Goodman told Friess: “That’s weak. She has no idea. Look, this is her life. She doesn’t have children, she doesn’t have a family. Her life is politics, from what I see. And caring for children with special needs. She does the Lord’s work there, in my opinion.”
Say what?
“I was shocked, and disappointed,” said Giunchigliani, a former Clark County special education teacher. “It’s something that’s so disrespectful of people’s circumstances.”
Asked Monday to explain, Goodman said her answer needs context. Her work at the Meadows School — which included hiring and firing faculty, designing curriculum and spending time in classrooms, although not teaching — flows from her decision to adopt and raise four children. Because Giunchigliani doesn’t have children of her own, Goodman said she doesn’t understand the work Goodman did at the Meadows.
“Once you have children, it’s a whole different perspective,” Goodman said. “The fact is she has not had children. Is that bad? Of course not.”
No matter the context, the remark still sounds bad.
Today’s voting likely won’t produce a winner; it will produce two candidates who will face off in June. And judging by the tail end of the primary, it looks like the general will be a much tougher contest, where knowledge of specific issues and well-chosen words will be much more important than they’ve been up until now.
Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal columnist and author of the blog SlashPolitics.com. Reach him at 387-5276 or at ssebelius@reviewjournal.com.
