MPP's Nevada election complaint

December 4, 2002

Dear Ms. Bilyeu:

During the recent campaign season, there was a direct violation of your campaign finance laws committed by Mr. John Walters, Director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). Mr. Walters, despite his admitted efforts to advocate the defeat of Question 9 on the November, 2002 ballot, failed to file a statutorily-required Report of Campaign Contributions and Expenses.

NRS 294A.150 provides, in pertinent part, that:

"1. Every person or group of persons organized formally or informally who advocates the passage or defeat of a question or group of questions on the ballot at any election including any recall or special election shall, not later than…

(b) Seven days before a general election or general city election, for the period from 12 days before the primary election or primary city election to 12 days before the general election or general city election … list each of the contributions received during the period on the form designed and provided by the secretary of state and signed by the person or a representative of the group under penalty of perjury."

(emphasis added)

NRS 294A.220 provides similar language about who shall file expense reports and when. This is not surprising since contributions and expenses are combined in one report. NRS 294A.220 also requires filers to include the following information:

"2. Expenditures made within the state or made elsewhere but for use within the state, including expenditures made outside the state for printing, television and radio broadcasting or other production of the media, must be included in the report."

There can be no question that Mr. Walters expended funds while advocating the defeat of Question 9. He paid to travel from Washington, D.C. to Nevada ' with a security detail in tow ' in order, as he said in the October 11 edition of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, "to challenge this ballot initiative." He had a motorcade that shuttled him from one television appearance to another, on each of which he denounced the initiative and repeatedly called marijuana a "dangerous drug." In addition, he campaigned against the initiative in Las Vegas on October 10 and in Reno on October 11, which presumably would have required hotel related expenditures.

Perhaps most significantly, Mr. Walters authorized and approved a series of anti-marijuana commercials which aired virtually around the clock in Nevada during the latter months of the campaign. According to a source familiar with the development of these commercials, they were designed to be used to defeat ballot initiatives. Boston University School of Public Health professor William De Jong, who consulted with a White House contractor on the media campaign, was quoted in an Alternet article (October 24, 2002) saying, "[ONDCP's] true motivation is being revealed: to influence referenda, though they will claim otherwise. They're trying to use the campaign to present information that might influence the outcome of voter referenda."

The commercials would appear to satisfy the provisions of NRS 294A.220(2), in that they were produced outside the state for use within the state. Of course, any expenditures made to air ONDCP commercials related to marijuana in Nevada should also be considered a campaign expense.

Given the activities described above, Mr. Walters and/or the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) should have filed a Report of Campaign Contributions and Expenses by October 29, 2002, detailing contributions received and total and detailed expenditures. (Of course, whatever expenses were incurred would be matched by one huge contribution by the American taxpayers.) It is for you to investigate whether the vast number of commercials aired by Mr. Walters and ONDCP should be considered part of the effort to defeat Question 9. We, obviously, believe that they should be.

Overall, Mr. Walters' activities in your state signal a dangerous new tack by the federal government to subvert state campaign finance laws. We hope that you appreciate the seriousness of this complaint and its significance to state-federal relations.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please contact me if you have any questions about this complaint.

Sincerely,

Rob Kampia

Executive Director