CARSON CITY — Oh, Senator Raggio. Don’t you know there’s no such think as enough political ink?

The Democrats sure do: Two amendments to the highway funding bill, Assembly Bill 595, designed to make Republicans take unpopular stands with scant justification did just that today. The GOP found itself coming out against direct democracy and in favor of tax breaks for golf courses. The only things missing were cigars, Scotch and a back room.

Of course, Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus knew full well that the amendments would fail. That was hardly the point. She was creating an issue that may crop up in election campaigns 18 months hence.

Having said that, the amendments were not bad ones. The first — authored by Titus — would have asked voters whether they wanted to “equalize” diesel fuel taxes (currently at 27.75 cents per gallon) with regular gas taxes (currently at 33.8 cents per gallon). In other words, should big trucks pay as much as regular people do?

“This amendment is the ultimate compromise,” Titus said, of the nonbinding ballot question. “We bring this amendment because the biggest users and abusers of Nevada’s highway system — large commercial trucks — skirt all responsibility for our growing problem of highway overcrowding and traffic congestion.”

And, of course, Titus couldn’t resist a few other shots, too. Among them:

• How can Gov. Jim Gibbons — who has pledged not to increase taxes — sign off on a diversion of a car rental tax, which companies currently keep to pay auto registration fees but under AB 595 will have to fork over to the state? (Under an initiative written and qualified by Gibbons, anything that increases revenue to the state must get the two-thirds vote required for tax increases.) If Gibbons threatened to veto the education budget to avert a scheduled increase in the modified business tax because he called it a tax hike, which he did, how can he support the car rental scheme? Titus asked.

 “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet,” Titus said, sarcasm dripping from her Shakespeare.

• Trucks cause more wear and tear on roads than cars, take up more physical space, are harder to maneuver and break and thus less safe, but they’ll pay nothing more under the transportation plan, which is borne by car rental companies, the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority and local governments.

“Clearly, trucks cause a disproportionate share of damage to America’s highways and do not pay their fair share,” Titus said. “Why should big trucks pay less than passenger cars?”

• Senate Republicans voted to allow Washoe County voters to put school taxes on the ballot, not to mention taxes in Nye, Lyon and Churchill counties to raise taxes for various projects. So why not let all Nevada voters give an up or down vote to “equalizing” diesel fuel taxes and regular gas taxes?

As you might imagine, Republicans had answers.

Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee Chairman Dennis Nolan — who earlier acknowledged that the trucking industry isn’t just under the gun but has “a cannon” aimed at it when it comes to highway funding in future sessions — said he agreed with most of what Titus said.

But he said there were “technical problems” with the amendment because truckers pay taxes differently than do regular motorists. A ballot question on the subject would be a legal nightmare to devise and confusing to voters, he said.

Moreover, equalization of the two taxes would raise diesel fuel tax as high as 9 cents per gallon, which was much higher than any proposal discussed in the debate over highway funding during this session, Nolan said. And of course, no Republican argument against the diesel fuel tax is complete without this gem: “We know this is going to be a pass through from retailers and wholesalers.”

In fact, Nolan said, if the amendment passes, it could preclude the Legislature from looking at other, more reasonable taxes that would also affecting the trucking industry, such as increasing fees for commercial drivers licenses. And if it failed, it could be because voters thought they were being asked about raising their own gas taxes.

(Nolan didn’t discuss the possibility that voters, being smart enough to figure out what they were being asked, could say no because they oppose raising the diesel fuel tax!)

“I personally will commit to working with the minority leader or anybody else in the interim or next session to get at this,” Nolan summed.

Before any more people could jump in, Raggio called for a vote. And one was held, strictly along party lines, with all 11 Republicans voting not to put the question on the ballot and all 10 Democrats voting to ask voters.

That prompted Titus to really get a dig in: “Apparently, I have a lot more confidence in the people of Nevada than those who opposed the amendment,” she said. (And the fact that she has any confidence in the people of Nevada, after a majority chose Gibbons over her for governor in 2006, is really saying something!)

That line brought some Republican protests.

State Sen. Warren Hardy said he didn’t vote no because he didn’t want the voters to decide; he voted know because the Legislature is up to the task and should only ask voters when lawmakers have failed to act. Since the Legislature has approved more than $2.2 billion for roads this session, it hasn’t failed to act.

State Sen. Mark Amodei noted that state taxes on gas comprise 17.65 cents per gallon and for diesel, 27 cents per gallon. Should regular gas taxes be raised, he said? Besides, “this is a job this Legislature is up to,” in an open process during the 2009 Legislature.

(A word here: At the end of the day, Republicans said no to putting a non-binding placebo on a ballot, at virtually no cost to the state. This equals coming out against hearing the will of the voters on an important public policy question. And even if this was political theater, it was theater in which they played the role of villains. Not only that, but it can be spun with a more evil twist: They know the public — being fickle, cheap bastards who have been ironically conditioned by 40 years of Republican rhetoric to expect public works for free — will overwhelmingly support taxing the trucking industry and thus create momentum for a higher levy. And since Republicans like business and trucking is a business, they won’t like that. But we would never say that.)

Another amendment — requested by state Sen. Terry Care — would simply stipulate that property taxes raised by the road-building plan in Clark County would only be used in Clark County. It passed easily on a voice vote.

But Care wasn’t so lucky the second time around, when his amendment to repeal the 2005 Legislature’s 11th hour giveaway in tax breaks to golf courses went down in flames. Care argued the approval of the tax breaks took place with little debate in the closing days of the last session. “In my opinion, this is a break that never should have been,” he said.

Nolan said the amendment may have been legally germane (it definitely was) but it wasn’t really related to highway funding. Plus, “it imperils a bill that we’ve all worked very hard on,” he said.

Plus, Nolan said, an amendment at this late date would trigger a conference committee, which would put the policy of funding transportation in the hands of six lawmakers. (Yes, you read that right: Not only did Nolan come out against asking voters about taxes, he doesn’t even want to ask six lawmakers about the issue!)

Amodei and state Sen. Bob Beers both worried that eliminating the tax break would impact residents in golf course communities, where property taxes for the courses are rolled into the price of homes.

Again, Raggio called for the vote (he’s such a killjoy!) and again, it failed, this time with only seven Democrats in favor and a bipartisan mix of 14 senators against.

With only the single innocuous amendment added, the transportation plan now goes back to the Senate, where it’s expected to be quickly approved, and then to the Assembly. There’s virtually no chance it will be defeated, since the Assembly approved the original version 40-2.