Will the real Republican please stand up?

Nevada state Treasurer Kate Marshall hasn't exactly signed the Americans for Tax Reform anti-tax pledge, but she might as well have.

In her advertising in the 2nd Congressional District special election, Marshall slams her opponent, ex-state Sen. Mark Amodei, for his sponsorship in 2003 of a hefty tax package. At the time, it was the largest proposed tax increase in state history, and parts of his plan ended up becoming law.

Marshall says she's against taxes, at least until the recession abates. "The middle class is being taxed up the wazoo," Marshall says.

And not just the middle class, either: Asked if she'd allow the expiry of tax cuts put into place by George W. Bush (and continued by President Barack Obama) on people earning more than $250,000, Marshall says, "No, not during such a down economy. And of course I would vote accordingly in Congress."

Of course. Because a recession is certainly no time to ask millionaires and billionaires to accept a couple percentage points of increase in the top bracket of their income taxes.

By the way, it should be noted Marshall is a Democrat, and Amodei is a Republican. Because you certainly won't learn that watching her TV ads, or listening to her stance on taxes.

It's impossible to say how Marshall would have voted in the contentious 2003 session on taxes. Then-Gov. Kenny Guinn had proposed (after much study) a gross receipts tax on business, the first time in state history non-casino businesses would have paid anything on their incomes. That idea was unpopular in the Legislature, and Amodei's competing proposal was designed to short circuit the idea in favor of a bevy of other levies, including a tax on business payrolls.

But neither Guinn's plan nor Amodei's was approved by the end of the session. Two special sessions and a state Supreme Court lawsuit later, schools couldn't hire new teachers and were worrying about whether they'd be able to open their doors in the fall.

It would be nice to think Marshall would have done what Amodei did, which was to vote for a package of taxes totaling about $830 million, resolving a fiscal and constitutional crisis and allowing the state to function.

But who knows? Perhaps -- as her ad implies -- she would have stood with the so-called Mean 15 Republican Assembly members who just said no (including Sharron Angle, then holding what quite possibly will be the last elected job she'll ever have).

Although Marshall adamantly denies she's changed her views to position herself as a more viable candidate in the 2nd Congressional District, it's clear why she's emphasizing taxes in her campaign. The district currently has nearly 31,000 more Republicans than Democrats, and has never elected a Democrat.

Former Regents Jill Derby and Nancy Price tried to unseat the former incumbent, now-U.S. Sen. Dean Heller, and never got close. Marshall must figure the winning bet is to cast herself as a more conservative candidate, and keep the references to her political party to a minimum.

It didn't have to be that way, of course. Marshall could have worn her party registration proudly, and underscored traditional Democratic issues where Amodei is weak.

For example, she could have taken his pledge (at the end of a ridiculously over-the-top ad depicting a Chinese invasion/foreclosure of the U.S. Capitol) that he'd never raise the debt ceiling as an opportunity. She could simply ask: How much does Amodei want to cut Social Security and Medicare, inevitable consequences of reining in federal spending without a debt cap? She could have further promised to preserve those programs, created by Democrats as a salve against the vagaries of a more-or-less free market.

She could have promised to work toward a more fair system of taxation where everybody pays something, but noted the rich are necessarily going to pay more. If anybody called her a socialist, she could have replied that progressive taxation has been as American as apple pie for decades.

She could, at the very least, have quoted Chief Justice Holmes and said taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society.

Instead, by running as a Republican, she forces a choice between a Democrat who talks a conservative game and a Republican who will vote like one, at least until he's safely re-elected in 2012. And in any contest between an actual Republican and a faux Republican, the actual Republican usually wins.

That is, unless Marshall really believes in the Republican anti-tax rhetoric she's advancing, in which case, does it really matter to Nevada voters who wins the special election?

Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist and author of the blog SlashPolitics.com. Follow him on Twitter at www.Twitter.com/SteveSebelius or reach him at 387-5276 or SSebelius@reviewjournal.com.