Sharron Angle Touts Endorsement By Out-of-State Sheriff Who Doesn’t “Know Too Much About Her”
Las Vegas -- Sharron who? That was essentially what one of Sharron Angle’s only general election endorsers said today after the Angle campaign trumpeted the "big get" – a sheriff…from Arizona.
In a fairly anemic attempt to counter the overwhelming support Senator Harry Reid is receiving from nearly every major law enforcement agency in the state…of Nevada, Sharron Angle rolled out the endorsement today of out-of-state sheriff, Joe Arpaio to…err…embarrassing fan fare.
“I don’t know too much about her,” Arpaio told the Associated Press.
Ouch. Awkward…
"Given Sharron Angle’s extreme and dangerous agenda on the issues important to Nevada’s law enforcement community it’s no wonder she can only get out-of-staters to (sort of) back her candidacy," said campaign spokesman Kelly Steele. "Angle’s anti-law enforcement record includes voting to prevent Nevada from enforcing valid protective orders pertaining to domestic violence issued in another state, voting against allowing law enforcement to fully investigate a potential recruit’s background, and voting against a special fund to help non-profits keep sex offenders from working with children. Maybe if Sheriff Arpaio learned a little more about her he would come to same conclusion the rest of Nevada's law enforcement community has."
Click here to watch former Clark County Sheriff Bill Young discuss Sharron Angle’s extreme and dangerous views.
Extreme Vote #1:
Angle Voted To Prevent Nevada From Enforcing Valid Protective Orders Pertaining To Domestic Violence Issued In Another State. In 2001 Angle voted against AB 581, which the attorney general’s office testified, “mandates foreign protective orders that are not registered or have not been domiciled in the state be enforced based on the fact that they are valid on their face. Furthermore, it goes on to provide the officers not only will enforce the protective order, but will also make the arrest unless it is apparent to the officer the order is not authentic.” AB 581 passed the Assembly on a 31-9 vote. [Senate Judiciary Committee minutes, 4/27/01; AB 581, 4/19/01]
Legislation’s Defeat Would “Enable Domestic Violence Perpetrators To Continue Their Behavior.” Testifying before the Assembly Judiciary Committee in April, Judge Mitch Wright, Chief Judge of the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California, stated “He expressed the need for protection orders to be enforced, regardless of arbitrary borders. He informed the committee if the bill was not passed, it would enable domestic violence perpetrators to continue their behavior.” [Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 4/10/01]
AB 581 Called “Model Code For Domestic Violence,” Protects Victims. According to the attorney general’s office, the legislation being considered was “being done throughout the country and considered the model code for domestic violence. It assures victims of domestic violence, fleeing from one state to another, often without time to get their order domesticated in another state, but instead carry their order. In the instance of the aggressor following them to another state, this provides them the protection they need, and the officers the assurance of a valid order, and the officers are required to arrest the person for the protection of victims.” [Senate Judiciary Committee minutes, 4/27/01]
Extreme Vote # 2
Angle Voted Against Allowing Law Enforcement To Fully Investigate A Potential Recruit’s Background. Angle in 1999 opposed legislation requiring employers to provide information to law enforcement regarding former employees seeking to work for the law enforcement agency; the information included any record of disciplinary action taken with the past employee, and whether the employee voluntarily terminated employment or was dismissed. AB 297 was adopted by the Assembly on a 34-8 vote. [AB 297, 3/26/99]
Legislation Had Support Of Law Enforcement “Throughout The State” And Would Give Them Access To Information “Critical In Assessing A Person’s Ability To Serve In Law Enforcement.” In March 1999, Captain Jim Nadeau, representing the Washoe County Sherriff’s Department and the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association, told the Assembly Government Affairs Committee the bill “was supported by law enforcement throughout the state.” Captain Nadeau testified, “The public needed to know law enforcement officers had the best training but also the personality to stay on an even keel. No one with abusive tendencies or characteristics should be in uniform and enforcing the law. There were several instances where requested background information was sought, but because of a concern over civil liability the only information forthcoming was benign, such as starting and ending dates of employment but no further job history. If someone had a history of beating people or had an explosive nature, that information would be critical in assessing a person’s ability to serve in law enforcement. The bill was asking for evaluation of attendance records, disciplinary action, or other types of information impacting hiring procedures.” [Assembly Committee on Government Affairs, 3/3/99]
Extreme Vote #3
Angle Voted Against Special Fund To Help Non-Profits Conduct Criminal Background Checks On Volunteers Working With Kids. In 1999, Angle was one of only two votes in the Assembly opposing AB 239, which gave nonprofit agencies access to a special fund that helped underwrite the costs of background checks on volunteers to determine whether they had committed sexual offenses. During a March discussion of the bill in the Assembly Judiciary Committee, Angle “expressed concern with the possible invasion of privacy and liability issues included in the bill. She stated voluntary programs always stepped up to become mandatory and she did not want to see the state get involved with things of a first amendment nature.” AB 239 passed the Assembly on a 40-2 vote. [AB 239, 4/15/99; Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]
Girls Scouts And Boy Scouts Of America Supported The Bill. According to Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, both the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts were in favor of AB 239. Vicki N. Wright, Executive Director for the Sierra Nevada Girl Scout Council, testified, “the cost of conducting background checks on their current 4,000 volunteers was financially prohibitive. She opined A.B. 239 would address that concern, would add an extra level of scrutiny to their screening process, and would make children safer.” [Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]
Sharron Angle Touts Endorsement By Out-of-State Sheriff Who Doesn’t “Know Too Much About Her”
Las Vegas -- Sharron who? That was essentially what one of Sharron Angle’s only general election endorsers said today after the Angle campaign trumpeted the "big get" – a sheriff…from Arizona.
In a fairly anemic attempt to counter the overwhelming support Senator Harry Reid is receiving from nearly every major law enforcement agency in the state…of Nevada, Sharron Angle rolled out the endorsement today of out-of-state sheriff, Joe Arpaio to…err…embarrassing fan fare.
“I don’t know too much about her,” Arpaio told the Associated Press.
Ouch. Awkward…
"Given Sharron Angle’s extreme and dangerous agenda on the issues important to Nevada’s law enforcement community it’s no wonder she can only get out-of-staters to (sort of) back her candidacy," said campaign spokesman Kelly Steele. "Angle’s anti-law enforcement record includes voting to prevent Nevada from enforcing valid protective orders pertaining to domestic violence issued in another state, voting against allowing law enforcement to fully investigate a potential recruit’s background, and voting against a special fund to help non-profits keep sex offenders from working with children. Maybe if Sheriff Arpaio learned a little more about her he would come to same conclusion the rest of Nevada's law enforcement community has."
Click here to watch former Clark County Sheriff Bill Young discuss Sharron Angle’s extreme and dangerous views.
Extreme Vote #1:
Angle Voted To Prevent Nevada From Enforcing Valid Protective Orders Pertaining To Domestic Violence Issued In Another State. In 2001 Angle voted against AB 581, which the attorney general’s office testified, “mandates foreign protective orders that are not registered or have not been domiciled in the state be enforced based on the fact that they are valid on their face. Furthermore, it goes on to provide the officers not only will enforce the protective order, but will also make the arrest unless it is apparent to the officer the order is not authentic.” AB 581 passed the Assembly on a 31-9 vote. [Senate Judiciary Committee minutes, 4/27/01; AB 581, 4/19/01]
Legislation’s Defeat Would “Enable Domestic Violence Perpetrators To Continue Their Behavior.” Testifying before the Assembly Judiciary Committee in April, Judge Mitch Wright, Chief Judge of the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California, stated “He expressed the need for protection orders to be enforced, regardless of arbitrary borders. He informed the committee if the bill was not passed, it would enable domestic violence perpetrators to continue their behavior.” [Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 4/10/01]
AB 581 Called “Model Code For Domestic Violence,” Protects Victims. According to the attorney general’s office, the legislation being considered was “being done throughout the country and considered the model code for domestic violence. It assures victims of domestic violence, fleeing from one state to another, often without time to get their order domesticated in another state, but instead carry their order. In the instance of the aggressor following them to another state, this provides them the protection they need, and the officers the assurance of a valid order, and the officers are required to arrest the person for the protection of victims.” [Senate Judiciary Committee minutes, 4/27/01]
Extreme Vote # 2
Angle Voted Against Allowing Law Enforcement To Fully Investigate A Potential Recruit’s Background. Angle in 1999 opposed legislation requiring employers to provide information to law enforcement regarding former employees seeking to work for the law enforcement agency; the information included any record of disciplinary action taken with the past employee, and whether the employee voluntarily terminated employment or was dismissed. AB 297 was adopted by the Assembly on a 34-8 vote. [AB 297, 3/26/99]
Legislation Had Support Of Law Enforcement “Throughout The State” And Would Give Them Access To Information “Critical In Assessing A Person’s Ability To Serve In Law Enforcement.” In March 1999, Captain Jim Nadeau, representing the Washoe County Sherriff’s Department and the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association, told the Assembly Government Affairs Committee the bill “was supported by law enforcement throughout the state.” Captain Nadeau testified, “The public needed to know law enforcement officers had the best training but also the personality to stay on an even keel. No one with abusive tendencies or characteristics should be in uniform and enforcing the law. There were several instances where requested background information was sought, but because of a concern over civil liability the only information forthcoming was benign, such as starting and ending dates of employment but no further job history. If someone had a history of beating people or had an explosive nature, that information would be critical in assessing a person’s ability to serve in law enforcement. The bill was asking for evaluation of attendance records, disciplinary action, or other types of information impacting hiring procedures.” [Assembly Committee on Government Affairs, 3/3/99]
Extreme Vote #3
Angle Voted Against Special Fund To Help Non-Profits Conduct Criminal Background Checks On Volunteers Working With Kids. In 1999, Angle was one of only two votes in the Assembly opposing AB 239, which gave nonprofit agencies access to a special fund that helped underwrite the costs of background checks on volunteers to determine whether they had committed sexual offenses. During a March discussion of the bill in the Assembly Judiciary Committee, Angle “expressed concern with the possible invasion of privacy and liability issues included in the bill. She stated voluntary programs always stepped up to become mandatory and she did not want to see the state get involved with things of a first amendment nature.” AB 239 passed the Assembly on a 40-2 vote. [AB 239, 4/15/99; Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]
Girls Scouts And Boy Scouts Of America Supported The Bill. According to Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, both the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts were in favor of AB 239. Vicki N. Wright, Executive Director for the Sierra Nevada Girl Scout Council, testified, “the cost of conducting background checks on their current 4,000 volunteers was financially prohibitive. She opined A.B. 239 would address that concern, would add an extra level of scrutiny to their screening process, and would make children safer.” [Assembly Judiciary Committee minutes, 3/1/99]
