Similarities between budget battles near, far

Wednesday, Feb. 11, 2009 | 2:01 a.m.

If the Beltway progression is any indication of the post-partisan era and if what happens in D.C. doesn’t stay in D.C., the lessons of the ongoing stimulus fight have ominous implications for the state capital budget battle to come.

The parallels are clear, as are the echoes from the The Great Tax Debate of 2003 in Carson City. It’s not just deja vu all over again; it’s more like Groundhog Day without the gratification of Bill Murray getting Andie McDowell at the end.

2009: Popular president proposes $800 billion-plus measure to stimulate the economy, naively hopes it will sail through both houses with huge majorities, then is stunned when supposed smooth sailing turns into a perfect storm of partisan opposition, leaving result in limbo.

2003: Popular governor proposes $800 million-plus measure to stimulate the economy, naively hopes it will sail through both houses with huge majorities, then is stunned ...

Barack Obama, meet Kenny Guinn. And now we will see if Obama gets what Guinn did — his tax plan, but radically altered after it was swallowed into the legislative vortex — and whether in this parallel universe the Legislature, which has taken on the additional burden of the executive branch because of a vacancy (in the most pejorative sense of the word), will also dissolve by June into the partisan deadlock that extended the 2003 wrangling through the summer.

Obama’s Achilles’ heel may not be Republicans such as Nevada’s John Ensign, who has railed about the spending in the stimulus package, but House Democrats who larded the original with so many easily assailable provisions. Nancy Pelosi may be a larger problem for the president than anyone else.

Similarly, Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford may find himself with a package of Assembly taxes that may be to the left of what he can get passed — that is, he has to worry that he can get two votes just as his D.C. counterpart, Harry Reid, had to do this week to get to a necessary supermajority. I am reminded, too, of 2003 in Carson City when the Mean or Fearless Fifteen, depending on your outlook, held up the Legislature through two special sessions.

In 2003 the frustration and anger came late; in 2009 it has arrived early and from a strange place. Witness Senate Minority Leader Bill Raggio’s furious letter Tuesday to GOP Assemblyman Ed Goedhart, whom he chastised for having a “closed mind” and for sending out an anti-tax news release instead of choosing to “be a man and come see me in person.”

It was a rare public outburst from Raggio, but illuminates his enduring frustration that began when he was challenged by right-winger Sharron Angle last year in a primary and essentially accused of being a liberal. For this to be happening so soon can have one of two effects: It can put wavering Senate Republicans on notice and make them less likely to vote for any tax package, thus jeopardizing Horsford’s quest for those two GOP votes. Or it could energize Republicans, as one GOP senator told me Tuesday, to “take back the party” from the libertarian, no-tax, no-way wing.

In 2003 that wing took flight thanks to then-Assemblyman Bob Beers, who became the ideological core of a rebellious lower house caucus and a hero of the anti-taxers. In 2009 the Beers mantle has been taken by Chuck Muth, who, much to Raggio’s consternation, may be ascending to the role of the loudest Republican voice in the state.

This is a remarkable feat, especially considering Muth isn’t even a Republican anymore, having left the party to register nonpartisan. But Muth, through ghostwriting for the likes of Goedhart and state GOP boss Sue Lowden, has become a force to be reckoned with and has been singled out for scorn by Raggio.

As Obama tries to hold his Democrats together and obtain a bipartisan solution out of a House-Senate conference committee, Buckley and Horsford must be concerned that the GOP civil war is not helpful. And that’s just what Muth and others want.

Worse, it’s only February and if the Muthians gain traction, they could enable and embolden the man who holds the job formerly known as governor, perhaps even pushing up Jim Gibbons’ numbers.

Obama is banking on polls that show Americans favor his approach, just as Buckley and Horsford are surely sanguine about surveys that indicate the Gibbons way does not have popular support. But whether it’s D.C. or Carson City, the first question that will be asked after final passage is whether the plan works, and the second will be about the political consequences thereof.

Or is it the other way around?

Discussion: 6 comments so far…

By jfnance32

2/11/09 at 2:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

"2003: Popular governor proposes $800 million-plus measure to stimulate the economy, naively hopes it will sail through both houses with huge majorities, then is stunned "

How is taking money from private sector and giving it to the government a means to "stimulate the economy"?

I understand it is a means to stimulate the growth of the government.
By renomuse

2/11/09 at 6:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Isn't Jim Nance really Chuck Muth, the ghost writer?

http://www.desertconservative.com/author...

2:27 am posting here. What trough does Jim suck at?
By KDR81

2/11/09 at 7:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

The Las Vegas City Life ghost writes for Barbara Buckley.

And given the fact that the state is facing a 1% decline in spending I think more people will start to realize that we aren't in a budget crisis and won't be so willing to raise taxes.
By E_lizabeth_Crum

2/11/09 at 3:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Nice column, John, though I think you were a little too nice to Raggio. Temper tantrums are unseemly at any age.

And if anyone didn't already know that Chuck - who has been much maligned for "leaving" the GOP - is often the voice of the GOP, they do now. (Good thing he doesn't mind being outed...)

KDR81: If Sebelius writes for Buckley, he is sure dumbing it down a lot. Steve's stuff is smart (and funny) even when he's wrong. Hers is just tedious.
By M_Williams

2/12/09 at 2:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

You are right on target John. This is the Nevada political machine. "Independent" Chuck Muth, Sue Lowden and Heidi Gansert all walked door-to-door for Raggio against Sharron Angle.

Last July, Republican Sen. Bill Raggio (R-Reno) stated "This is not the time to start talking about raising taxes. It is something that we can't even consider." Muth "the mouth" said July 27, 2008 "" I'm supporting my "godfather," Bill Raggio." Muth on February 5, 2009 tried to claim he was politically naive, "I have to admit, Sen. Raggio got me with that one" Silly me."

Muth, Lowden and Gansert are not "naive", they knew in 2003 that the "godfather" was sponsoring and voting for the largest tax increase in the history of Nevada.

(Word has it Raggio has rigged an appointment to his Senate seat for Gansert when he retires before the 2012 election. Also on good authority, Raggio contributes heavily to Muth. Lowden wants the Raggio machine for a run against Reid. John, you are usually the one who breaks this stuff first.)

It's just the same old "good-old-boys-and-girls, good-cop-bad-cop, smoke-and-mirrors" pretending to be our friends while making deals behind the scenes.
By lassen122

2/12/09 at 7:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Muth may be the loudest voice, but also the most antiquated voice for a party affiliation that has become a dinosaur in politics. Muth just rambles, and has no solutions, just complaints, like his "independent" party he so claims. It is because of Muth's bitter rhetoric, has driven his party to defeat, no wonder why the State turned blue, and now more registered dems than repubs. Muth is about as independent as Harry Reid claims he is.

If Muth keeps flapping his gums, his party will still be stuck in first gear, and even the Ralph Nader supporters will pass him up.