Columnist Jon Ralston: Pols learning when ‘no’ means ‘maybe’

Wednesday, April 19, 2000 | 9:35 a.m.

Jon Ralston, who publishes the Ralston Report, writes a column for the Sun on Sundays and Wednesdays. Ralston can be reached at 870-7997 or by e-mail at ralston@vegas.com.

Extremism in the defense of Nevada against the nuclear waste dump may be no vice in the minds of some. But spewing absolutist rhetoric inevitably leads to sinful behavior, for rare is the pol who can always practice what he or she preaches.

Ex-Rep. John Ensign's acceptance of $2,000 from a dumpsite contractor brings home this issue, as well as how carelessly and endlessly candidates take checks. Ensign's best defense here would be that he was agnostic on Science Applications International Corp. His worst defense would be that it shows he will take money from anyone, even from those who have interests inimical to the state's. His actual defense is that he noticed the name and asked his staff to check it out and that they sent it back -- after an intrepid journalist pointed it out one day before the deadline.

Ensign returned the money, but it's still an issue. Or would be if not for Sen. Harry Reid, who Democratic candidate Ed Bernstein must think is a de facto member of the Republican's campaign. This goes beyond that embarrassing incident this weekend when Reid forgot to mention Bernstein in his rah-rah remarks at the county Democratic Party convention. This time Reid was rendered mute by his acceptance in the last cycle of $4,000 from SAIC.

The senior senator has proved to be the perfect prophylactic for Ensign. Reid, though, is different from Ensign. The erstwhile congressman has mouthed the "no way, no how" dump rhetoric lately but has had to explain an equivocating statement he made the first time he ran, a problematic vote on a dump resolution and now the SAIC check. But Reid has never been pure on the dump; in fact, he is almost schizophrenic.

Reid can summon the fornicating metaphors if called upon and he can use his legislative legerdemain to help stop the bill. But this is the same man who thought it was kosher to take money from J. Bennett Johnston, the senator-turned-lobbyist who concocted the plan to target only Yucca Mountain for the dump. And Reid also once blithely said that he would not "throw himself under the train" for the current bill.

Reid spokesman Mark Schuermann claimed that no one, including the senator, knew when he accepted the SAIC money last cycle that the corporation was a dump contractor. Really? SAIC had been there since '93 and had received sporadic news coverage, including at the beginning of 1998 when an SAIC engineer said, "I think everybody on our program agrees that we ought to get Yucca Mountain right."

Even if he didn't know about SAIC, what standard does Reid -- or anyone -- set for which contributions they will take? Schuermann called back to say the standard is that "we do not take money from nuclear utility companies." Really? But Johnston and his law firm associates who gave to Reid during the last cycle lobby for the Nuclear Energy Institute, the most powerful advocate for the dump and an umbrella group for the utilities.

It doesn't seem to be much of a gray area, if you are making principled decisions, to reject money from the man who screwed Nevada and continues to try to screw Nevada. It also shouldn't take too long to decide whether to take cash from one of the companies charged with building Yucca Mountain. (Rep. Jim Gibbons also took $1,000 from the corporation and has not yet decided whether to send it back.)

But as Reid knows -- and perhaps Ensign is trying to discover -- this may be the worst kind of rank hypocrisy, the kind that would disgust the average voter. But, in a world of grays, this kind of, ahem, flexibility, helps accelerate your climb up the capital power ladder.