Las Vegas Gleaner

When lawyers for the power company attack

Here's a cute cartoon courtesy of the Jim Gibson for Governor campaign, slamming his opponent Dina Titus for taking $2,000 in campaign contributions from Enron several years ago. Did you know that Dina Titus has an accent? Accents are soo funny, and so easy to make fun of.

Curiously, the cartoon doesn't mention that not only did Titus take Enron's money. As Titus explained Friday, she also voted against bills Enron dearly wanted to see passed -- one to deregulate Nevada's electricity market, and one to let big customers like mines and casinos opt out of the regulated system and shop for cheaper power from wholesalers (leaving everybody else to foot the bill for the regulated system's upkeep, by the way). She shrugged off the cartoon as "science fiction" -- it's a parody of Star Wars.

Anyway, the cartoon is pretty darn slick, and we're guessing, just guessing, mind, that it actually cost more money to make the cartoon than the $2,000 Titus took from Enron. But so what -- a couple thousand bucks would be chicken-feed to Jim Gibson even if his campaign warchest wasn't bulging with a quarter million dollars from developers who got favorable treatment from the Henderson mayor within mere weeks of contributing to his gubernatorial campaign. After all, in 2002, a couple years after Titus took $2,000 from Enron, Gibson took 263 times that much money from another energy corporation whose incompetence ended up costing consumers millions -- Nevada Power Co.

Gibson never really has explained exactly what the contract work was that he did for Nevada Power and that was worth so much money. But in fairness, it's not as if Nevada Power at the time was boasting some track record of spending their money wisely. When Enron and other power wholesalers were manipulating California's power market, and claiming that an energy "crisis" was being caused by supply and demand, Nevada Power and it's corporate parent, Sierra Pacific, were naively and stupidly buying the wholesalers' story hook line and sinker, basically apologizing for the profiteers. About the same time, the power company, enamored with fashionable extremist free-market ideology, s'pose, was all excited about replicating California's electricity deregulation fiasco in Nevada. Sierra Pacific had even attempted to sell its power plants to the same corporate profiteers that were gouging California. And it was only intervention from federal regulators that stopped Sierra Pacific -- effectively saving the company from itself -- from buying Portland General Electric at a price that included a ridiculously bloated premium. From who, you ask? From Enron.

So when Nevada Power ambled along in 2002 and asked Jim Gibson if he would do some contract work for them, he would have been a fool not to gouge them for whatever he could, to get while the getting was good, as it were.

It just goes to show, Titus should have become a fancy high-dollar lawyer for a giant if incompetent energy corporation instead of a mere educator, then she'd be rolling in dough, too. Of course, that would have required going over to the dark side.

Ensign's new logo

As somebody noted in a comment this week, the Jack Carter campaign has been having some graphic design fun:

We lifted this from Sarah's blog, which since launching late last month is turning into a tasty little roundup of blogland items, and not just those that mention her dad.

Bush to help Porter run from Bush

Just the other day, a national AP story headlined "GOP flee from Bush, but not his money" quoted Nevada's own Rep. Jon Porter: “I believe the president has his agenda, his focus. I have mine. I will always run on mine."

And Bush's money.

Bush is coming to Las Vegas April 24 to raise cash for Tom DeLay's man in Nevada, reports the RGJ's Anjeanette Damon on her blog.

It'll be $500 for lunch, $2,100 for lunch and a picture with the Strong Leader.

Porter's campaign manager, like Republican apparatchiks nationwide, will be the first to tell you that the last thing he wants is a nationalized election. So long as the congressional elections aren't about war, Republican incompetence, corporate cronyism, corruption, a candidate's spiritual and financial proximity to Tom DeLay, or a referendum on Bush's arrogant disregard for sanity and sense, Republicans will be free to wage the type of campaign that they wage best: Sleazy televised destruction of the opponent's character.

And that's why Bush is coming to Las Vegas. He won't be here to "campaign" for Porter. Oh, we could be wrong, but we're guessing there will be no balloon-festooned placard-adorned rally in front of adoring throngs and TV cameras with Bush forcefully asking Nevadans to return Jon Porter to Congress so he can help Bush implement whatever it is Bush will be claiming as his top priority on April 24. SurveyUSA's poll had Bush's approval rating in Nevada at 37 percent in March. That sounds about right, because AP-Ipsos has Bush at 36 percent nationally, and Nevada is among the most purple of purple states. We double-dog dare Bush-Porter to hold a public rally.

No, it'll be Bush, Porter and a few hundred of their closest friends quietly eating a very expensive lunch, at the Venetian, of course (which is not in Porter's congressional district, by the way), to raise, oh, a half-million, maybe even a million, for one reason and one reason only: so Jon Porter can afford to saturate the airwaves with attack ads on Tessa Hafen.

in other words, Porter will use the money Bush raises to divert voters' attention from Porter's steadfast support of Bush's miserable policies. Though shunned on the GOP campaign trail, Bush is crucial on the GOP fundraising trail. Bush needs to raise lots of money for Republicans, so Republicans can divert voters' attention from Bush.

Carter on Goodman

Democratic Senate candidate Jack Carter did an interview with MYDD Thursday in which, among other things, he was asked if he thought Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman would get in the race, setting up a Democratic primary. Said Carter: "On a scale from 1 to 10, I'd say a 2." Sounds about right.

And Carter also said this:

Oscar... he may beat me, I don't know. But I don't expect him to beat me, because I think that Oscar will have a difficult time outside of Las Vegas. His current policy as mayor is that he doesn't even go outside of Las Vegas to give speeches. So he would have trouble even in Henderson. We've got all of Northern Nevada that I've got a very good organization in already, and I think from a political standpoint that I would beat Oscar.

Maybe that will bring Goodman into the race.

Hart numbers

Among the Peter Hart polling numbers that Jon Ralston flashed Wednesday afternoon, the ones that jumped right out of the computer screen here at Gleaner HQ were the results showing Democrat Jill Derby within striking distance in CD2:

CD2
GOP primary:
Dawn Gibbons               34
Dean Heller                   25
Sharron Angle               12

General:
Gibbons                         37
Jill Derby                        33

Heller                             43
Derby                             25

Angle                             32
Derby                             28

There's Jill, within a point of poll's 3-point margin of error against two of the three GOP candidates, including the current favorite. This seems to underscore that much of the conventional wisdom -- a Democrat has no chance in Nevada's rural heartland district -- has underestimated the impact of Republicans nominating a flawed candidate. See "Letting optimism run wild in NV CD2."

The other numbers that were pretty surprising were in the governor's race -- not the dead heat between Gibbons and Gibson in a general election; there's too much confusion over their names for any head-to-head polling to mean anything at this point (See "Gibson...er, Gibbons...wait, the other guy..."). But what's up in the GOP primary?

Jim Gibbons 55
Bob Beers   14
Lorraine Hunt    12

Lorraine at 12 is understandable. Lorraine at 2 would be understandable. But Gibbons over 50 in a three-way? And Beers at a lowly 14? Maybe Beers should start telling everybody about his Tax and Spending Control ballot initiative. The rest of the gubes:

Dem primary:
Dina Titus   41
Jim Gibson  30

General:

Gibson  37
Gibbons 37

Titus   34
Gibbons 42

Titus            38
Beers            29

Gibson                        46
Beers                        25

Now, presumably, all of us will be forced to endure more cries about how Jim Gibson is the "electable" one. He probably is. Electable. But watching Titus take out the Republican is going to be a lot more fun.

Finally, the Senate race:

Ensign  47      
Goodman 38

Ensign  49
Carter  32

There's no getting around it -- a race between the Hair-Do and the Town Drunk would be sight to behold.

The Hart poll was reportedly paid for by the gambling industry, and Ralston is threatening to dribble out more findings in the hours and days ahead through his various media venues -- presumably there are some CD3 numbers showing how Tessa Hafen matches up against Tom DeLay's man in Nevada, Jon Porter, and unless we're mistaken, they will be the first numbers, or at least publicized ones, since Hafen announced her candidacy. So watch for that.

You go, Bob

The Republican primary for governor continues to amuse.

Bob Beers' lawyer has sent a letter (pdf) responding to Jim Gibbons' lawyer about that April Fool's release Beers sent out under Gibbons' letterhead  -- and which was dutifully aired as news by a Reno TV station. Beers offers to make a clarification -- if Gibbons is "willing to acknowledge to the public your comprehension handicap." Beers' letter may be signed by his lawyer, but we're guessing Beers wrote most of it, or at least the fun parts, of which there are plenty.

If you want, and if you haven't, you can check out the original letter (via INP) from Gibbons' lawyers. It is every bit as humorless as the decision to send it in the first place was ridiculous.

Beers obviously is loving this -- his letter all but begs Gibbons to keep the issue alive: "Mr. Beers welcomes any investigation into the matter and would relish a public report on the findings at its conclusion."

Sure, it's easy to dismiss all this as ranking among the most absurd, tawdry and inconsequential spats in the history of gubernatorial campaigns waged in this or any other state. But the GOP squabble -- specifically the ludicrously overplayed sense of indignation dripping from Gibbons' response -- actually gets right to the heart of why Jim Gibbons can't win the governor's race.

As we've said before, that race, like most races, is going to be decided by swing voters. Undecided until late in the game, they are, by definition, not so much interested in who's conservative and who's liberal. If undecided voters were interested in that, they wouldn't be undecided voters. No, they tend to vote for the candidate who they find most likable. Jim Gibbons' stupid decision to whine about Beers' April Fool's release doesn't make Gibbons look likable. Priggish, yes. Anal, perhaps. But not likable. Jim Gibbons is failing miserably in that most important of political skills, the ability to make people want to have a beer with you. Nobody wants to have a beer with Jim Gibbons.

Keep it up Bob, and we'll buy you a beer.

Daily Glean: A troubled president for our troubled times

Bush authorized Scooter to leak classified information to slime Joe Wilson. From the NYSun:

A former White House aide under indictment for obstructing a leak probe, I. Lewis Libby, testified to a grand jury that he gave information from a closely-guarded 'National Intelligence Estimate' on Iraq to a New York Times reporter in 2003 with the specific permission of President Bush, according to a new court filing from the special prosecutor in the case.

The court papers from the prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, do not suggest that Mr. Bush violated any law or rule. However, the new disclosure could be awkward for the president because it places him, for the first time, directly in a chain of events that led to a meeting where prosecutors contend the identity of a CIA employee, Valerie Plame, was provided to a reporter.

Say, that would be awkward -- especially given the many, many times Bush has expressed dumbfounded concern and a yearning to know how that darn leak might have happened in the first place. Like that time in September 2003 when Bush said, “There’s just too many leaks, and if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is.” Or that time the next month, when Bush said, “I’d like to know if somebody in my White House did leak sensitive information.”  (ThinkProgress)

Quoting Fitzgerald's filing, the NYSun story continues:

"Defendant testified that he was specifically authorized in advance of the meeting to disclose the key judgments of the classified NIE to [Judy] Miller on that occasion because it was thought that the NIE was 'pretty definitive' against what Ambassador Wilson had said and that the vice president thought that it was 'very important' for the key judgments of the NIE to come out," Mr. Fitzgerald wrote.

Mr. Libby is said to have testified that "at first" he rebuffed Mr. Cheney's suggestion to release the information because the estimate was classified. However, according to the vice presidential aide, Mr. Cheney subsequently said he got permission for the release directly from Mr. Bush. "Defendant testified that the vice president later advised him that the president had authorized defendant to disclose the relevant portions of the NIE," the prosecution filing said.

This must be what Sen. John Ensign is prattling on about when he says Bush is "the right president for the right time."

In other news...

• Big beltway newspaper runs a piece on Las Vegas casino operators in Macao. "The proclivity of Asian people to gamble is pretty staggering," says MGM Mirage honcho Terry Lanni. "People borrow from loan sharks and gamble with it" (Post). Not that there's any of that type of behavior going on in the U.S. Yet another reason why over there, it's gambling, and over here, it's gaming.
• Connecticut GOP Rep. Christopher Shays is getting hammered for his support of the war on every step of his reelection campaign trail. Wish that was happening to Republicans 'round here. Post
• Aggressive campaigning in the Democratic primary for governor prompts hand-wringing -- it will hurt them in the fall, they won't be able to unite, Republicans will dredge up attacks made in the primary to unload on the nominee, the usual (Sun). Psst ... the well-funded Republican nominee is going to run a mean and dirty attack campaign. No matter what the Democrats do in the primary.

Miniglean

• Behold, the Dina Titus energy plan, in which the Democratic candidate for governor not unreasonably compares her "long record of support for renewable energy" with that of her opponent, Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson. The mayor, Titus informs us, "is known as the half-million dollar man for the $527,000 he was paid by Nevada Power Company to help it fight a public takeover while utility rates were going through the roof in 2002."  The Titus plan has eight points, but the part we like best is the overall acknowledgment that the governor gets to appoint the Public Utilities Commission -- the folks who determine just how nasty the electricity and natural gas monopolies get to be when they're gouging you. More, along with all eight points, after the jump.
• Behold the Jim Gibson "support a state medical waiver program that will allow commercial drivers with certain medical conditions to retain their commercial driver’s licenses" plan. Umm. OK.
• Behold the Gleaner's call for these stinkin' political campaigns to put their releases and statements up on their websites when they e-mail them out so we can link to 'em, ferchrissake. How hard can it be?
• Behold the Citizens Against Government Waste annual Pig Book, published each year to garner the Citizens Against Government Waste one (count 'em, 1) news cycle's worth of aw-shucks-can-you-believe-it-folksy journalism. $80 million funneled to NV universities for energy and water research and stuff made the book. So that's pork. Also $100,000 for a boxing club in Henderson. "The first rule of Boxing Club is not to earmark money for Boxing Club," write the people at Citizens Against Government Waste. Oh! We get it. Like that movie! Hilarious. But come on. Just two lousy items in a whole big pig book, and one of those for about as much money as a local elected official might bag during lunch with Mike Galardi? Nevada can do better than that.

Hair-Do health care

In the latest display of Ensign-Bush Cuddlefest 2006, the Hair-Do says he'll be the guy to carry the administration's water on the sole but nonetheless lame health care idea that Bush touts, health savings accounts.

HSAs would allow people who don't have and can't afford health care to save the money they still wouldn't have to buy the health care that they still wouldn't be able to afford. And it's all tax-free! Bush was in Connecticut Wednesday pretending that someone, somewhere thinks HSAs constitute a meaningful contribution to health care reform. Reports Reuters:

Democrats generally oppose HSAs, and prominent Republicans including Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley of Iowa have said that passing what amounts to a $60 billion, five-year tax cut is unlikely this year.

Sen. John Ensign of Nevada, speaking on behalf of a Senate Republican health task force, said he still would unveil a HSA bill shortly.

Oh goody. A senator from a state that perennially has among the highest percentage of people without health insurance vows to champion a plan that not only does absolutely nothing to make health insurance more accessible or affordable, but that also happens to be dead on arrival in Congress.

Oh, we almost forgot the other pillar of Ensign's health care policy program, medical malpractice legislation. The Hair-Do may not care if you can afford health insurance, but he's deeply and profoundly alarmed at the prospect of doctors paying higher rates for their malpractice coverage.

Meantime, in reality-based health care news, the Massachusetts legislature this week passed a bill designed to provide universal health care coverage to every living breathing Massachusettsian, or Massachusettsite, or whatever those darned liberals call themselves. Coverage would be free for people making up to 100 percent of the poverty line, and there's a sliding scale after that. People would be forced to buy it, or get fined up to $1,000 a year. Bidness would pay a little to help fund it -- $295 per employee per year -- and the state thinks the subsidies required to keep premiums low, especially for low-income folks will be offset a fair piece because the state won't be paying all the money it's doling out now to provide health care to the uninsured.

The Progressive Leadership Action Network, the relatively new outfit that is trying to popularize progressive ideas at the state level because, you know, Republicans like John Ensign control Congress, are praising the MA plan, cautiously. They warn that the penalties levied on individuals who don't sign up are pretty stiff, while the requirements from big bidness are pretty paltry.

Or, as they put it over at TPM: "It may be good public policy for the government to PROVIDE coverage for all its citizens -- the traditional single payer approach -- but it's pretty regressive to IMPOSE the mandate on individuals  without providing full funding to cover them."

Eh, we still like extending Medicare to the whole damned population. But the MA plan, if it works out, is progress, s'pose. It is orders of magnitude more ambitious than the modest proposals floated by Nevada Democrats last month. And it certainly beats the hell out of the Ensign-Bush non-plan.

County Dem chair professes love for all

This came in over the transom Wednesday morning, and given the spirited debate that breaks out in the comment threads 'round here on occasion, we'd probably run it even if they weren't an advertiser.

Statement From Clark County Democratic Party Chairwoman Liz Foley Regarding The Democratic Candidates For Governor

Yesterday it came to my attention that delegates to the 2006 Nevada State Democratic Convention had received calls insinuating my support or endorsement of Dina Titus in the Democratic primary for Governor.
I want to state unequivocally that I am not supporting one Democratic candidate over the other in any primary.
I believe that both Mayor Jim Gibson and State Senator Dina Titus are great Democrats with unique and positive visions for Nevada.
It is important that before and after this primary all Democrats remain unified in our common values. We must also recognize the diversity of ideas within our party because it is one of our greatest strengths.
This primary for Governor will be a positive experience for the Democratic Party. Public discourse and a fair and professional debate of ideas can only enhance our candidate's ability to win the general election.
Mayor Gibson and State Senator Titus are fine examples of Democratic leaders and I look forward to working to elect the winner of this primary as Nevada's next Governor.

Well, hold on to your hats, but this is not -- gasp! -- the first time we've heard of grumblings, from supporters of both sides, mind, about party officials in Nevada being too close to one campaign or another. Nor is this the first year we've ever heard such complaints, and nor is Nevada the first state in which we've heard them. And yes, on occasion, over the years, some of those complaints  might have been legitimate.

We have no idea if any of this year's complaints in Nevada are legitimate. Probably the closest thing we've seen to party-level favoritism this cycle was that crazy-ass letter Harry Reid and friends posted on the state party's website last October, which was a thinly, very thinly, veiled attempt to make Dina Titus hush.

But make no mistake; being a party official or a party staffer at any level, county, state or federal, is always a tough job when there's a primary going on. Every care must be taken to give the appearance that you're not doing anything that favors one candidate over another. And the best way to avoid that appearance, of course, is to not do anything that favors one candidate over another. And then somebody will grumble anyway.

Here at the Gleaner, of course, we're decidedly unofficial, completely unencumbered by restrictions and generally pro-Dina. But in keeping with the spirit of declarations, and for the record, we'll take this opportunity to reproduce the first lines people see if they click the "About the Gleaner" link at left: "The Gleaner is not the arm of any government, corporation, organization, institution, political party or campaign. As any fool can see, the Gleaner speaks for nobody."