(Mike Montandon for Governor campaign) – Brain Sandoval was against domestic partnerships before he was for them, and signed pledges before he said he never signed them.
Sandoval continues to confuse himself on where he stands on critical issues. After several inconsistent statements about raising taxes, Brian Sandoval finally arrived at his politically expedient position of opposing tax increases.
However, after a long list of inconsistent positions, conservatives naturally pushed Sandoval to stick to this new position by signing the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. Sandoval responded, “I haven’t signed any pledges, and I am going to remain consistent on that.”
However, on July 10, 2002 Sandoval signed the Marriage Protection Pledge. Voters now know Sandoval lied about not signing pledges, and more importantly his new position on marriage violates his earlier pledge. Maybe Brian Sandoval should sign a pledge that he will not sign pledges.
In a detailed article, the Nevada News Bureau points out the many stances of Brian Sandoval. In 2002 Sandoval pledged, “I believe that awarding spousal equivalent rights to non-married couples defeats the civil purpose of marriage . . . and oppose any government recognition or endorsement of marriage imitations, including ‘domestic partnerships,’ ‘civil unions,’ ‘reciprocal beneficiary relationships’ or any similar arrangements.”
In 2009 on Face to Face with Jon Ralston, Sandoval broke his promise when he stated “I support the domestic partnerships” and Nevada Senate Bill 283 that created domestic partnerships “was an issue of fairness and equality.”
Actually, violating a promise to “oppose any government recognition” of “domestic partnerships” is an issue of honesty and truthfulness. Sandoval’s campaign slogan promises voters “a reason to believe again,” but his record actually leaves voters wondering “what to believe.”
Sandoval has a pattern on misleading. Sandoval mislead when he told voters that he never has nor will sign pledges; he mislead by signing a pledge and then breaking his promises to voters; and now he further misleads by telling the Review Journal, “I do think the language in the pledge is different than the bill that was passed.”
It is unconscionable that an earlier promise to “oppose any government recognition” of any “imitation” or “similar arrangement” of marriage provides enough wiggle room to later support a landmark law celebrated by gay rights groups in Nevada. Sandoval wants voters to believe his support for a law, making Nevada the 17th state to legally recognize same sex relationships by providing a government run registration for domestic partnerships, is consistent with his promise to oppose any and all government recognition of same sex relationships.
Not a very compelling reason to “believe again.”
“It is important for primary voters to know where candidates stand and to make an informed decision of who they want to represent them in the general election,” noted Mike Montandon. “I have been asking my opponents for months to have a debate on the issues anytime anywhere; however, with the steady stream of revelations concerning Sandoval’s misleading statements, broken promises, and general election vulnerabilities – I understand his reluctance to debate me.”
Mike Montandon further states, “I am committed to protecting the sanctity of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Traditional marriage is a foundational unit of our society and must be protected and encouraged. I am not ashamed of my position to protect the sanctity of marriage and will continue working to protect this fundamental institution.”
(Mike Montandon is the former mayor of the City of North Las Vegas and is currently running for Governor of Nevada)