Little help here?

Who's looking out for Southern Nevada in the Legislature?

Believe it or not, plenty of lawmakers from Northern Nevada.

That's the surprising finding of The 2001 Southern Nevada Legislative Scorecard, compiled by UNLV political science professor David Damore. He concludes some Southern Nevada lawmakers aren't voting in the best interests of their constituents.

As a result, long-standing funding disparities that see more prosperous Southern Nevada subsidize the more sparsely populated North in an intrastate redistribution of wealth scheme persist.

Damore selected 10 bills from the 2011 Legislature -- everything from a move to amend the state constitution to increase taxes on mining to authorization for a toll road to get around Boulder City to developing regulations for Internet poker to extending a sales tax to build a third "straw" to Lake Mead to an extension of a package of temporary taxes to balance the budget. A yes vote was ranked as pro-Southern Nevada, while a no vote was ranked as anti.

(I've posted the entire scorecard on my blog, at www.SlashPolitics.com.)

The results? While plenty of Southern Nevada lawmakers scored perfect 100s, so did a lot of their Northern Nevada colleagues, including Assembly members Teresa Benitez-Thompson and David Bobzien, both D-Reno; Debbie Smith, D-Sparks; and state Sen. Sheila Leslie, D-Reno.

Meanwhile, among lawmakers least supportive of Southern Nevada were Assembly members John Hambrick and Richard McArthur, R-Las Vegas, Cresent Hardy, R-Mesquite, state Sens. Barbara Cegavske and Elizabeth Halseth, both R-Las Vegas, and Sen. Michael Roberson, R-Henderson.

And lest you think the registered nonpartisan Damore is picking on Republicans, consider that Assembly members Mark Sherwood, Scott Hammond, Lynn Stewart and Melissa Woodbury -- Southern Nevada Republicans all -- earned scores ranging from 70 to 80, as did state Sen. Joe Hardy, R-Boulder City, who pulled a 70.

By contrast, Roberson earned a 30, Cegavske a 20 and Halseth a 10, one of the lowest scores in the survey.

"In short, these comparisons strongly suggest that support for Southern Nevada interests is not a function of partisanship, but rather reflect differences in how these legislators perceive their constituencies and these constituencies' needs," Damore wrote.

Overall, Damore says the majority of Southern Nevada lawmakers vote with their constituents, which he defines as a score of 70 or better. "Unfortunately, as long as some Southern Nevada legislators do not, the region will continue to be treated as second-class," he wrote.

Roberson rejected the ideas behind the scorecard, saying his constituents are happy with the job he's done. "I don't think it makes sense for any of us to play one part of the state against the other," he said. "We're all Nevadans."

Besides, he called it a "false premise" to presume raising (or, in this case, extending) taxes on Southern Nevada residents is acting in their interests. "David Damore has apparently decided that to be an effective senator for Southern Nevada you need to tax the people of Southern Nevada, and I vehemently disagree with that," Roberson said.

But Damore maintains he's not saying that at all: All he's saying is that Southern Nevada, with 73 percent of the population, generating between 80 and 85 percent of the state's revenue, is getting only 66 percent of those resources. Southern Nevada lawmakers should be about the business of fixing that disparity.

"This isn't about the size of the pie. It's about ingredients and the slicing of it," he says. "The status quo takes money from us and redistributes it."

While Roberson agrees that disparities exist, he defends his record. "Does anyone really think that Sheila Leslie cares more about Southern Nevada than Michael Roberson?" he asks.

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 (702) 387-5276 or ssebelius@reviewjournal.com.