Lots of daylight between Dean Heller and Mitt Romney

Well, now Mitt Romney’s done it: He’s lost U.S. Sen. Dean Heller.

Heller, who is locked in an ultra-tight race with Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., rushed to assure voters that he disagrees strongly with Romney’s remarks about “the 47 percent.”

(During a May 17, $50,000-a-plate fundraiser in Florida, Romney boldly declared, “There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what, who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to take care of them.” He added: “And so my job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them to that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”)

Heller told reporters he sees things differently.

According to the Huffington Post, Heller explained, “I had five brothers and sisters. My dad was an auto mechanic. My mom was a cafeteria school cook. So I have a different view of the world. I believe that the federal government has certain responsibilities. I also believe in a safety net for individuals that [sic] need the help, so that’s why I would respectfully disagree with the comments that he [Romney] made.”

Heller said his auto mechanic father was once briefly out of work after back surgery and had to rely on that very safety net.

Democrats were a bit skeptical of Heller’s remark, and they’ve got evidence to back up their suspicions.

For example, in 2010 Heller also said he supported the “safety net” right before he questioned whether a part of it was “creating hobos.”

From the Elko Daily Free Press, which covered a Heller speech: “ ’I believe there should be a federal safety net,’ Heller said, but he questioned the wisdom of extending unemployment benefits yet again to a total of 24 months, which Congress is doing. ‘Is the government now creating hobos?’ ” he asked.

Interesting question.

Heller asked another interesting question back in 2009, according to the Nevada Appeal. During a Carson City Rotary Club meeting, he asked the crowd if anyone had taken advantage of the so-called Cash for Clunkers program, a stimulus-bill idea to get older gas guzzlers off the road in favor of more fuel efficient vehicles. One man raised his hand.

“Congratulations,” Heller said. “Everybody else in the room paid for your car.”

The unidentified constituent walked out, telling Heller, “I have better things to do that be insulted by a man who hasn’t learned anything. I’ll never vote for you again.”

Heller, apparently still having not learned anything, told the Appeal, “I know I embarrassed someone and I apologize for that, but I don’t think everybody has a right to own a new car.”

The part of the stimulus bill that establishes a right for everybody to own a new car eludes research.

But let’s not be too swift to judge Heller. Notwithstanding his “hobos” comment, and notwithstanding his firm vote against the stimulus, then-Rep. Heller nonetheless introduced a bill to extend expiring unemployment benefits in 2010, bucking his party in the process. He argued that unspent stimulus money should be used to avoid increasing deficits and debt even further, but his appeals fell on deaf ears. He easily could have done what most of the rest of the Republicans did and turn his back on those in need of a safety net. But instead, he voted for the final bill along with Berkley and then-Rep. Dina Titus.

“While I believe that this legislation should have been paid for, I cannot vote against the unemployment extension when so many Nevadans are struggling to get by,” he said.

Now, some may argue Heller’s good deed then – and his step back from Romney now – is all about politics, and that interpretation is tempting. But it’s also possible that Heller’s experience, as the child of an auto mechanic and as a Nevadan, has actually helped him to learn something after all: A philosophy is great, but when people are suffering, and the government can help, then philosophy must yield to the public good.

Perhaps where Romney sees a country half-filled with greedy, entitled tax eaters, Heller sees one filled with people such as his father, who through no fault of his own fell on hard times. Where Romney sees votes bought and paid for with welfare money, perhaps Heller sees hardworking people whose job search has come up empty.

Is the safety net abused? Of course it is. But is that abuse an excuse to unravel it? Of course not.

Perhaps if Heller really sees that, other Republicans can, too – and not just the ones facing tough races in November.

Whether it’s politics or experience, however, one thing is clear: At least on this issue, Mitt Romney has lost Dean Heller. How many others did he lose?

Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist and author of the blog SlashPolitics.com. Follow him on Twitter (@SteveSebelius) or reach him at (702) 387-5276 or ssebelius@reviewjournal.com.