By Lisa Mascaro

Fri, Mar 21, 2008 (2 a.m.)

Washington — As the foreclosure crisis in Southern Nevada deepened last fall, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson proposed a way to help. Local housing agencies should be allowed to get into the refinancing business, giving homeowners another avenue for relief, Paulson said.

Republican staff members on the House Ways and Means Committee brought Paulson’s idea to Nevada Republican Rep. Jon Porter, whose district is among those hardest hit by the mortgage meltdown in a state that leads the nation in the rate of foreclosures. Porter jumped at the idea.

The bill represents perhaps the most substantial legislative undertaking the congressman has attempted since coming to Washington in 2003. A legislative victory on an issue so important to Nevada also would be an accomplishment Porter could trumpet just as he begins a difficult reelection campaign this fall. The campaign literature would write itself: Porter helps fix mortgage mess. Congressman helps Nevadans keep their homes.

Unfortunately, nothing in politics is so tidy.

It turns out, while Porter and his staff were working on their bill, Senate staff members were doing the same. The bill is now included in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s housing package, a multipronged effort to stem the mortgage crisis.

Normally, two Nevadans working on an issue dear to their state would seem to be a good thing.

But not with these two. There is no love lost between Reid, the patriarch of Nevada Democrats and the leader of his party in Washington, and Porter, a comparative upstart congressman. Reid’s press secretary ran against Porter in 2006, and almost won. Reid has already hosted a breakfast fundraiser for Porter’s latest challenger.

So now Porter, whose bill has had little traction in the House, can benefit if the plan is included in Reid’s housing package. Will the two bury their differences for the legislation?

Eric Herzik, chairman of the political science department at UNR, expects both men to set their differences aside to pass the bill.

“If either one was to play politics with the other, just to poke you in the eye, they’re putting Nevada at risk,” Herzik said. “In this case, the importance of the issue to Nevada trumps this personal gotcha.”

The proposal under consideration is modest compared with some being floated for fixing the mortgage mess. Under the bill, state and local housing authorities could use bonds to refinance mortgages. Currently, local offices can raise bond funding for mortgages only to help buyers get into a home.

The idea is to give households another option for restructuring their payments — especially those that may be rising out of reach as adjustable-rate mortgages reset.

The bill would allow up to $15 billion in bonding nationwide over three years. Nevada would get about $150 million of that. Lon DeWeese, chief financial officer at the Nevada Housing Division, estimates that as many as 750 Nevada mortgages could be refinanced under the program.

“This type of program will not solve the foreclosure process or the volume in Nevada by itself ... but it’s a good first step,” DeWeese said from Carson City.

While Porter first ran for Congress as a moderate, his votes over the years put him largely in step with President Bush’s agenda.

During the past election, his opponent criticized him as a rubber stamp.

Porter has publicly distanced himself from Bush on a few key issues this past year. As he faces reelection this fall, Democrats now outnumber Republicans in his suburban district by hefty margins.

The congressman’s bill is consistent with his earlier economic positions, and the bill is not a bailout for the industry, his spokesman said. No taxpayer dollars are at stake.

Porter has dedicated one staffer in his office to focus solely on housing and is hosting a mortgage seminar March 29 at the University of Southern Nevada in Henderson.

Porter knows the only way his bill will advance is through a bipartisan effort. He and Reid “are going to do everything we can to help Nevadans, and we’re going to do it together.”

Reid welcomes Porter’s interest in the issue, quipping in February that perhaps Porter can bring Republicans onboard. “Maybe he can get the White House to go along,” Reid said.

“This is one of those issues that really should transcend politics,” said Reid spokesman Jon Summers. “There are very real issues involved here, very real people involved.”

As Porter tackles an issue of importance to the state, Herzik said the congressman is positioning himself as a maturing legislator.

“Arguably this is the most significant piece of legislation he has tried to push through,” the professor said. “It shows that it takes time to get any kind of clout in the House — he could never have done this two years ago.”

But even if Porter does end up being able to claim a victory on this one, it may be limited.

Because Porter’s reelection is always such a tight race, Herzik imagines it wouldn’t be long before another piece of campaign literature was produced, this one coming from Porter’s opponent, downplaying the congressman’s prowess.

Democrats on the campaign trail “will immediately say he was a back bench player,” Herzik said. “Porter could write the damn bill — they would still say it.”