Re-election battle brews in Pahrump

The announcement from Assemblyman James Oscarson, R-Pahrump, that he's running for re-election reads like dozens of others emailed around this time of year.

It gives no hint of the battle yet to come, of the controversy looming for Oscarson, or of his strained relationship with his hometown political party.

Far away from bustling Las Vegas, Oscarson's re-election could be a litmus test for the future of a political party at war with itself, when being mostly conservative isn't enough to remain in the good graces of the base.

"Assemblyman James Oscarson, representing Assembly District 36, is excited to announce that he is running for re-election," the announcement begins. "First elected in 2012, Assemblyman Oscarson seeks his third term in the state Assembly, representing Nye County, Lincoln County and part of Clark County."

Innocent enough. Oscarson continues to explain why he wants to go back to Carson City.

"I am extremely proud of the historic reforms we were able to pass in the last legislative session. We accomplished more than I ever thought possible, but there is still more to do," he said. "Among other things, our seniors and veterans need more help, rural Nevada needs more attention and our Second Amendment rights need more protection. With my background, my experience and my leadership as chair of the Health and Human Services Committee, I will continue to be a strong advocate for District 36."

Sounds like a perfectly reasonable list of reasons to vote again for an elected official who hails from rural Nevada. So what's the big deal?

Taxes. As in the taxes that Oscarson and 13 of his fellow Republicans in the Assembly voted to approve during the 2015 Legislature. Led by Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval, lawmakers in both houses approved a package of taxes to accompany a host of education reform efforts. That package included the first business revenue tax ever imposed in the state of Nevada, a long-needed adjustment to Nevada's tax system.

It's a good story to tell, but maybe not in Oscarson's district.

There, the Nye County Republican Party has denounced Oscarson, and the Pahrump Valley Times has identified at least two people who may run against him because of the tax issue. He's been called out by conservative activist Chuck Muth for his tax vote, too.

No wonder he skipped that part in his news release!

It's not as if Oscarson regrets his vote: He explains it by saying it was necessary to move the state forward and improve economic development by providing a better-educated, better-prepared workforce for future potential employers.

"The status quo is no longer acceptable," Oscarson said during the session. He acknowledged the tax vote was difficult, especially for a guy who represents what he calls "the most fiscally conservative district in Nevada." It's not like he was expecting a parade down Pahrump Valley Boulevard.

But the voters of District 36 would do well to consider that Oscarson faced an enormously difficult choice, weighed the options, and did what he knew to be the politically unpopular thing in order to do the right thing for the state. That kind of political courage is rare and immensely valuable in an elected official.

Oscarson may prefer to talk about other things now; politically, that's probably the smartest thing to do. But his tax vote — and the reasons behind it — are far more solid a reason to re-elect him than any garden-variety rhetoric about guns.

What Oscarson did, he did for the future of Nevada and for all its students. He may pay for his foresight with his political career. But maybe there are enough voters in District 36 to recognize a man of conscience when they see one.

— Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist and co-host of the show PoliticsNOW airing at 5:30 p.m. Sundays on 8NewsNow. Follow him on Twitter (@SteveSebelius) or reach him at 702-387-5276 or SSebelius@reviewjournal.com.