Editorial: Jon Ralston clarifies why opponents of the Tax and Spending Control initiative are worried about it getting on the ballot

Wednesday, Feb. 8, 2006 | 12:33 p.m.

So the organizers of the Tax and Spending Control initiative, responding to a labor lawsuit to block their efforts, are yelping that the special interests are frightened by the initiative.

And they are right about the left. But they are wrong about the source of their fright.

The liberal groups that filed the lawsuit - the AFL-CIO, teachers union, progressive groups - are, as TASC leader Ann O'Connell put it, "obviously running scared." But it is what terrifies these groups and their political allies that is so disturbing.

Many Democratic politicians and some Republicans, along with these special interests and others, are less scared of what TASC might do if it is enacted than they are of having the debate about whether it is an idea whose time has come or an idea that should be thoroughly discredited.

Their timorousness, which extends back to The Great Tax Increase of 2003, is about standing up for what they believe in, fighting not just for the right of legislators and governors to fund the programs they see fit at levels they see fit, but for openly supporting higher taxing and spending when they believe it is needed.

The lawsuit, which alleges a few dozen legal infirmities in the way the initiative has been constructed, could have been drawn up with some blanks to fill in before O'Connell and TASC father Bob Beers ever filed it. This is about using the law to try to block - or at least slow down - the one initiative that could crystallize two disparate visions of the future. One view holds that Nevada needs to stop spending so much and the other holds that the fastest-growing state needs to keep up.

I have long believed that the initiative process has been spiraling out of control here and is being exploited by opportunists bleating about "the will of the people" and subverting the republic form of government that underpins the system. TASC is a classic example of the perversion of the process, but the Gang of 63's dithering on this debate, as they cobbled together grotesque tax and spending packages, has allowed Beers to bring it to the fore and given him hope for his quixotic gubernatorial bid.

So instead of saying, "Bring it on," the opponents sound like those Monty Python grail seekers when confronted by a killer rabbit: "Run away, run away."

These folks are fearful that TASC will get on the ballot for one reason and one reason alone: They think that Beers and O'Connell can sound-bite the issue - reining in profligate spending, giving citizens the right to vote on taxes - and thus win the day.

So instead of being willing to take them on based on core principles, the lefties are trying to entomb TASC before it can be qualified because they don't think they can win the debate.

What they don't understand is that the idea will not go away and at some point they, especially the Democratic Party, will have to stand for something. If they don't, they won't just stand for nothing, they will have nothing to stand for since so few will be in office.

Don't misunderstand: Although the unions and their allies are trying to eradicate TASC with technicalities, that doesn't mean they are legally incorrect. The "catalogue of falsities, misleading statements and omissions" cited in the lawsuit may be valid. And even the TASCers must acknowledge their initiative is at times abstruse and seemingly contradictory - they already had to refile twice because of language problems.

But this is a distraction, just as Rep. Jim Gibbons' stunt of asking Beers a list of questions before he finally, finally takes a position on TASC is a diversion. My guess is Gibbons will try to have it both ways: He'll be against TASC, mainly because of Beers. But he will reaffirm his commitment to restraining government growth, giving power back to the people and similar hollow shibboleths.

The real question here is simple, though, and is the one everyone is petrified to touch: Do you support an initiative that would limit government spending to population growth plus inflation - the concept, not the method?

That's the question every candidate should face and that's why I hope Beers, O'Connell and Co. get it right. I hope TASC gets on the ballot.

And then, I hope that rarest of political birds will soar - candidates with the courage to take a stand - and the public will be swayed to bring TASC crashing to Earth.

Jon Ralston hosts the news discussion program "Face to Face With Jon Ralston" on Las Vegas ONE and also publishes the daily e-mail newsletter "RalstonFlash.com." His column for the Las Vegas Sun appears Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. Ralston can be reached at 870-7997 or at ralston@vegas.com.