Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Campaign Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Secretary of State seeks tougher disclosure and enforcement tools for campaign finance; administrative hearings proposed
Summary
Assembly Bill 79 would clarify allowable uses of campaign funds, require notice filings when candidates accept contributions, and create an administrative hearing process within the Secretary of State's office for campaign finance enforcement; proponents said changes would increase transparency while opponents warned of overreach and due-process
Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar and Chief Deputy Gabriel De Cara presented Assembly Bill 79, a wide-ranging campaign finance bill that would clarify permissible uses of campaign funds, change reporting and notification requirements, and institute a formal administrative hearing process for enforcement matters.
De Cara said the bill codifies the Federal Election Commission’s “irrespective” test (used to evaluate whether a campaign expenditure is permissible) and would permit certain expenditures such as child or elder care in conformity with FEC precedent. The draft would require entities that engage in political spending — even if they are nonprofits or labor unions — to report expenditures supporting or opposing candidates or ballot questions to the Secretary of State. The bill also would require a candidate who receives $100 in contributions before the filing period to file a notice with the Secretary of State; it would create a prescribed form to notify the state when candidates dispose of unspent campaign funds to create administrative finality.
A major addition is a proposed administrative hearing process for enforcement of campaign finance violations. That process would allow the Secretary of State’s office to adjudicate enforcement matters through a hearing officer and issue orders, rather than relying only on court proceedings. Supporters said the change is intended to provide a faster, clearer enforcement path and to formalize processes that already exist in other areas of law. Opponents called the administrative adjudication model a threat to due process, pointing to potential loss of jury trial rights, the imposition of fines and public lists of violators and the risk of criminal penalties for some violations. Janine Hanson of the Independent American Party said the bill “essentially makes the Secretary of State an administrative court.”
Stakeholders including county registrars, labor groups and transparency advocates participated in drafting amendments. De Cara said the administrative hearing language draws on existing statutory models (for example, Nevada securities law) and that the office already has investigative resources added in recent budget cycles to pursue enforcement.
No final committee vote was taken on AB 79 during the hearing.
Why it matters: AB 79 would change reporting expectations for entities that engage in political activity, clarify permissible campaign expenditures using a federal FEC standard, and expand the Secretary of State’s enforcement toolkit through administrative hearings — all of which could change how campaigns and third-party organizations comply with Nevada’s campaign finance law.
