Editorial: Political spin is in overdrive

Friday, Feb. 11, 2000 | 9:24 a.m.

Politicians have an innate knack to take credit for successes that they actually play a small role in -- if at all. For instance, Vice President Al Gore received well-deserved ribbing for his initial claims that he helped invent the Internet. Closer to home, to hear Republican Nevada congressional candidate Jon Porter tell it, Porter singlehandedly persuaded the GOP leadership in the House this week to scuttle the bill that would ban college sports betting.

"They saw that the bill was aimed at only Nevada and wouldn't do anything to curb illegal bookmaking around the country," Porter said in a statement issued Wednesday. Porter said he had talked by phone with members of Congress and was so encouraged that he traveled to Washington over the weekend to make his pitch in person. We can only imagine the conversations in the darkened corridors of power:

"Congressman, this bill not only infringes on states' rights, it also could harm our economy," Porter pleads with Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. Davis, who is leader of the effort to elect Republicans to the House, places his hand on Porter's arm and reassures him by saying, "You know, Jon, you're right. This would be a terrible thing for a small state like Nevada. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. This bill is going nowhere."

Yeah, right. Only in fantasy could someone who is relatively unknown outside Nevada wield such power in Washington. If in fact the legislation is dead -- and that's a big "if" -- Porter's impact has been negligible. While Nevada's current members of Congress have played a role, the fact is that the overwhelming reason the bill may be in trouble is the clout of the casinos.

The gaming industry has given hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions to the Republican Party and GOP candidates. This legislation indeed is unreasonable, but the reality is that the GOP congressional leadership has a nasty habit of aiding big-money interests instead of doing what's right. This is one of those rare instances, though, where clout and fairness may have intersected to produce the right decision.