Born in Puerto Rico and raised in Latin America, Diana Sande’s father worked for Coca Cola, and every two years her father was relocated to a different country. At 17, living in Paraguay, Sande was corned on a public street by a high ranking general who served under the dictatorial regime, an experience that “marked her.”

Sande told The Globe, “If my boyfriend at the time did not show his identification that he was the son of a diplomat, there is no telling what the regime would have done to me if I was alone. That was the moment I knew I would someday run for office. It was such an abuse of power. I quickly realized that I never wanted to be voiceless again.”

Sande is now using her voice in her republican campaign for Assembly District 25, with hopes to flip the seat from Democratic incumbent Selena La Rue Hatch,“union leader” and Washoe County teacher.

Our interview has been edited for publishing.

How long have you been in Reno and why are you running for office?

I moved to Reno from the east coast after the twin towers fells on September 11, 2001. My mom lives in Reno and I wanted to pursue an advanced degree in medicine and chose UNR for my studies. As a single mom, I postponed my ambitions of being a doctor, but later found my calling in Public Health and finished my degree. I met my husband 13 years ago and we both had dreams of running for office, but after the pandemic, he encouraged me to run because of how I navigated the pandemic from an apolitical perspective and my ability to talk through difficult conversations in a way to unite people, rather than divide people.

The team I led at the time were all Democrats, but they didn’t know I was a Republican until I announced my candidacy. It was so important to me to not make [the pandemic] political. Our job is to do the research from as many different sources as we can and translate it. We needed to make our research and our messaging easily understood by the community. Our job wasn’t to get into the politics of one of the largest public health crises that we have faced.

I had one of my colleagues, who is pretty progressive, tell me that he hadn’t worked with me, he would have gone farther down the rabbit hole to the left. He said, “you really helped me see more of what there was going on in the middle and what was wrong with some of the rhetoric.” I was happy to hear that, because if you haven’t questioned who you are in a party or why you’re with that party, you’re with the wrong party. You should be questioning it. What has always fundamentally kept me a Republican is my belief and my feeling that small government is what is ideal, where there is less of the government telling me what to do. I didn’t agree with the mandates, because I’ve been under the thumb of the government. I’ve seen it and experienced it.

What compelled you to finally to pull the trigger and run for office?

My frustration with the political divide. During the pandemic, I was helping families and I got close to many of them. Many of the people I worked with died because they were in living situations where they couldn’t isolate from one another. This loss and experience also shaped me. It wasn’t our job in public health to tell them what to do, but to explain the options, the pros and cons, and to provide them information. Our department was subject to protests, but I talked with the protestors and had the hard conversations, but I made them feel heard through all the noise.

These super-divisive conversations were a test but compelled me to run, because the potential for one-party rule in the legislature is not going to give Nevadan’s good legislation. As legislators, we’re here to serve our district and constituents first, but how we vote affects all Nevadans. If I do not win, we’re in one-party world.

You’re facing an incumbent seeking her second term, what are you hearing from her constituents in relation to her first term? 

Well, when we knock on doors, nobody really knows who she is, unless they’re part of the union. We don’t talk a lot about her, but we do get a lot of excitement from our constituents when we talk about the issues and that we want to bring civility back to politics. We want to represent the forgotten middle class. Democrats and Republicans that I have met can and do come to an agreement on the issues when there isn’t a lot of political posturing.

What are the issues that are important to you and your district?

One big issue is mental health. Whether it is in special education in schools or in the community at large, we don’t have enough quality providers. I’d like to see more mental health providers brought into the state, whether that is from a licensing standpoint or a furthering of what we’ve already done at the legislature with tuition reimbursement. We need to come up with more ideas on how to get more quality providers here because we don’t have enough. We also don’t have enough doctors and nurses, so we need to attract these professionals in order to increase access to healthcare.

I’ve lived outside of this country, and I still think that we should maybe look at some of the social programs, but with sound economics in mind. I’m very fiscally  conservative and I believe in small government, so everything that I’m going to look at from a legislative standpoint is going to be through those lenses.

Another big issue is education. My opponent is a public school teacher and voted against Opportunity Scholarships for needy families. Many of them are minorities.

It blows my mind that this is a partisan issue. We’re literally talking about the success of a child, yet she is demonizing parents who want another option than being forced into a failing option. How is diversifying options in education a bad thing?

As a Latina, I take it personally. I have family that had to move their kids because they were getting bullied, or because the school just didn’t work for their kids, or the child needed a school that challenged them more. So, how can we not give them that option to choose a school that best suits their needs?

At the end of the day, that’s a decision that the parent should be to make so their child can thrive.

I was endorsed early on by the Clark County Education Association (CCEA) representing the 5th largest school district in the United States. I am very proud of that endorsement, because they could see in me someone that is for a good education for these kids.

This leads to another reason why I’m running, and that is I’m trying to represent people, not a party, and she’s representing a party and repeating talking points from a party. She is my representative and I don’t feel represented.

When someone decides to run for office and they’re currently an activist, they have to realize that they have to take that activist hat off. Once you decide to serve people, you can no longer be an activist. You can advocate and you can have some ideas that you want to advocate for, but our job as legislators is to serve constituents, not to be an activist. My opponent is an activist. She’s a one-issue candidate.

Speaking of which, abortion is on the ballot in November. What is your position?

Abortion is protected by state statute, but it seems to be utilized to further divide us. Yet, the law is in place and cannot be undone unless Nevadan’s change the law. I support the law as it stands as Nevadans voted to protect abortion in a prior ballot initiative. Unfortunately, we are going too far with this ballot initiative. If we are going to amend our constitution, don’t we want clear, concise language that protects women? That’s not what I see in this ballot initiative. I don’t see it doing more to protect women. I will not be voting for this initiative.

Is there a debate scheduled for this race?

I would love to. I remember watching her last debate. I think debates are really helpful to understand where the candidate stands and how they articulate these conversations.

At the time of publishing, a debate had not yet been scheduled.