Sen. Bob Beers (R-Las Vegas) is one of the good guys. Let’s get that on the record and out of the way first.
But he and I have a decidedly different opinion when it comes to a certain aspect of his pet public policy proposal to limit government spending to the combined rate of population growth and inflation. The good senator campaigned on that issue almost exclusively last year, just as Jim Gibbons campaigned on opposing tax hikes.
The difference is, Gibbons stuck to his campaign promise and continued to oppose tax hikes during the legislative session. Sen. Beers, however, voted for a budget which WILDLY exceeds the population-growth-plus-inflation cap he himself campaigned on.
In his defense for campaigning one way and then voting another, Sen. Beers wrote yesterday in his blog:
“A single senator has no ability to change the size of a state’s budget. Blaming one for the budget being too large is like blaming the left tackle for the football team’s loss. It is the nature of legislatures to spend all available money. By not marginalizing myself with a token protest vote, I get a chair – a big seat, it turns out – at the table where I can make the spending we do more efficient and effective.”
Actually, if the left tackle misses a tackle allowing the opposing team’s fullback to score the winning touchdown, you absolutely CAN blame the left tackle for the team’s loss. Or to switch to a baseball analogy, just ask former Red Sox first baseman Bill Buckner whether one player can be blamed for a team’s loss.
That aside, this is a matter of choosing whether to be a “player” and an “insider,” or a consistent, principled conservative. Sen. Beers has opted for a seat at the table where he believes he can make government “more efficient and effective.” Which brings to mind this quote from Barry Goldwater:
“I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size.”
The fact is, the size of government with Sen. Beers “at the table” this session increased by some 21 PERCENT! Did your family’s budget increase by 21 percent this year?
Make no mistake, it is FAR better for Nevadans to have Sen. Beers in the Legislature than most others; however, it is undeniable that not only did the 2007 Legislature fail to REDUCE government’s size, it didn’t even limit its expansion to population-growth-plus-inflation (estimated at 13.5 percent).
I think Sen. Beers undermines his credibility on the issue of increased government spending when he, himself, continues to vote for the very same increases in government spending which he rails against. Sen. Beers, on the other hand, obviously thinks it’s better to be an inside player and doesn’t have any problem rationalizing the conflict between his public statements on the campaign trail and his actual votes. It’s an issue he and I will just have to agree to disagree on.
I’m still supporting his re-election to the Senate next year. Beers for Everybody!
Posted on June 5th, 2007 by Chuck Muth
Filed under: Nevada
I am a long time Beers supporter; however, I have to agree with you, though only in principle. I have never had the opportunity to sit in Bob’s seat, so I don’t have the perspective that he does. While it might seem that the maverick of yesteryear has become the conformist of today, I think it only fair to trust that the end can still be achieved, even if by altered means.
BTW: The left tackle and the opposing fullback would never be on the field at the same time — not in those positions.