Thursday, August 19, 2004
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

STEVE SEBELIUS: Bashing Beers

I should probably start by declaring a conflict of interest: A lot of people say Assemblyman Bob Beers looks a lot like me. But it's not right to penalize a candidate just because he's a good-looking fellow. So I'll write about Beers' efforts to unseat incumbent state Sen. Ray Rawson anyway.

Beers is a Republican; so is Rawson. But political party is hardly a shared bond in this race. That's because Rawson is an Establishment Republican who never broke from the caucus led by Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio, R-Reno, and Gov. Kenny Guinn in 2003.

Establishment Republicans backed a tax package that turned out to be the largest in state history, at $833 million. Beers is a Young Turk, although the self-effacing computer whiz might dispute the young part. He was a key part of the caucus that led the fight against taxes. And it was their differences over taxes that led Beers to decide to challenge Rawson. That odd dynamic has led to some odd campaigning.

First, Rawson sent out a letter claiming (falsely) that Beers had opposed putting a line in support of Nevada's anti-gay marriage amendment in the 2002 Republican platform; in fact, Beers included the line. As Rawson mails out positive pieces about himself, Beers has been targeted by a group calling itself the "Committee for Truth in Politics." Do I have to tell you, dear readers, that when you see the word "truth" on a flier, it's a good bet you're about to get hit with a load of bull? Allow me to demonstrate.

The first committee flier-- which included a smiling picture of me, er, Beers -- charged that Beers told a Leadership Las Vegas class that he would cut a subsidy for foster grandparents from the state budget. The money is paid to grandparents who raise their own grandchildren in the event the children's parents are killed or disabled, though I suspect most grandparents would take care of the kids for free. Besides, what's the charge? Beers wants to cut the budget? He can probably live with that.

A second committee flier depicts Beers as a black sheep, saying, "Bob Beers is closely tied to the ultra-liberal ACLU É and that's a baaaaaad thing for Nevada taxpayers." (Now you know why it wasn't called The Committee for Competency in Campaigns. I hope these guys got their money up front.) The mailer claims Beers donated $3,000 to the ACLU between 2001 and 2002, and reminds us that the ACLU celebrated the failure of the federal marriage amendment (which took place this year), protects pornography as "free speech" (why do I think the committee's definition of pornography could include the St. Pauli Girl?) and sues organizations such as the Boy Scouts (to which Beers' son belongs).

But Beers likes the Nevada ACLU because it came to his defense when the state Ethics Commission ridiculously tried to fine him for putting out a mailer that even commissioners admitted was true. And don't forget the group also defended would-be tax-axers when they were harassed at government buildings earlier this year.

Don't buy that Beers is an ultra-liberal? How about ultra-conservative, as in libertarian? That's the charge levied in the next committee flier, based on the fact that Beers was the keynote speaker at a recent Libertarian Party meeting. "Who supports legalized drugs? We do! Who supports pornography? We do! Who wants to open our nation's borders to one and all? We do!" the flier says, with quotes inside taken from the Libertarian Party Web site.

This flier also says that Beers proudly displays a Review-Journal editorial "that honors him and is titled 'The Libertarian,' " and the mailer repeats the lie that he tried to keep the gay marriage ban out of the Republican Party platform. Hey, you know what? I think I once saw Beers walk by the Sierra Club's offices. He's probably a tree-hugging environmentalist wacko, too! To the presses, Committee for Truth in Politics!

The next committee flier is my favorite. "Bob Beers has no respect for seniors," it declares. Inside, we learn that Beers was willing to cut prescription drug coverage (not that he actually did it, mind you, just that he was willing to) and that, once again, he thinks cutting grandparent subsidies for foster kids is a good idea. "Bob Beers has no respect for seniors," the flier concludes. "It is time for a change on Sept. 7."

Ahem. Beers is the challenger. That means calling for a change means calling for replacing Rawson with Beers.

My friend Gary Peck -- executive director of the aforementioned ultra-liberal ACLU -- likes to say that the antidote for bad speech is not censorship, it's good speech. So here goes, Gary: The Committee for Truth in Politics, whoever the cowards may be, are liars, charlatans and scoundrels, who aren't even smart enough to know the difference between a liberal and a libertarian, who could be bested in composition by Clark County fourth graders and whose capacity for deviousness is matched only by their intellectual dishonesty on a galactic scale.

Not to mention, if you really can judge a man by his enemies, Beers must not be that bad of a guy after all. You know, in addition to good-looking.

Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist. His columns run Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday. Reach him at 383-0283 or by e-mail at Ssebelius@reviewjournal.com.