By Blaine Harden
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, April 24, 2006

BILLINGS, Mont. -- The Republican primary debate was over, and three challengers had barely laid a glove on Sen. Conrad Burns.

No one mentioned the $150,000 he accepted from lobbyist Jack Abramoff and later returned. No one brought up the $3 million federal grant secured by a wealthy Indian tribe -- and Abramoff client -- after Burns pressured the Interior Department. No one quoted Abramoff telling Vanity Fair that he and his clients had received "every appropriation we wanted" from a subcommittee chaired by Burns.

Only one question during Friday's debate even mentioned Abramoff, whose web of illegal lobbying has spawned the largest congressional scandal in years. And Burns pugnaciously dismissed it, saying, "If you want to know something about the Abramoff deal, you got to ask the Democrats."

Polls here suggest that Burns, 71, a three-term incumbent who has been targeted by the Democrats as one of the most beatable Republicans in the Senate, may be bouncing back from the pounding he took late last year after the publication of several articles detailing his ties to Abramoff.

For a while after the stories broke, Burns essentially hunkered down, offering little response to the allegations while his political fortunes flagged. Republican strategists in Washington believe Burns stayed silent for too long. In the past three months, however, his campaign has spent heavily on radio and television ads that attack Democrats for attacking him. In a current ad, Burns tells Montana voters that "the daily partisan assault is an assault on you and what you stand for."

After the debate, Burns was asked about the new poll numbers, which show him tied with or narrowly trailing his two most likely Democratic opponents. He is expected to win handily in the Republican primary.

"Never lose faith in the people," he said with a tight smile.

Would he answer any questions about Abramoff?

"No!" Burns said, with a tight smile.

For all his bravado, Burns remains in trouble, especially in a state that generally tilts to the Republicans. But his experience also suggests the challenge that Democrats around the country will have in turning this year's scandals into tangible gains at the polls.

On morning of the debate that barely mentioned Abramoff, in a Denny's out on the interstate south of Billings, Rick and Alice Hill of Miles City, Mont., were eating pancakes and discussing politicians who may or may not be crooks.

"As far as this Abramoff deal goes, don't you think all of these lobbyists expect something in return for the money they give the politicians, be it Burns or whatever?" asked Rick Hill, 62, a retired railroad conductor who said he is a Democrat, that he voted for Burns before and that he will probably do so again.

When he heard last fall that Burns had taken money from and done favors for Abramoff, Hill said he laughed out loud. "They all do it," he said. "They all take the money."

There is a perception among political analysts, based on recent polls, that sizable numbers of Republicans, independents and conservative Democrats have swallowed the disturbing news about Burns and Abramoff, but no longer have indigestion.

"When scandal hits, voters do grade politicians on a curve," said Scott Rasmussen, whose national polling firm has done monthly polls this year on the Senate race here. He says that Burns's favorable ratings pushed back up to 50 percent in mid-April, and his unfavorable ratings fell to 47 percent, reversing the pattern of previous polls.

"We have to be a little bit careful that scandal is going to shock people," he said.

There is no doubt, however, that the Abramoff scandal has knocked Burns off the silky path to reelection he was on early last fall, when he had double-digit leads over likely Democratic challengers.

"Absolutely, the Burns campaign is in trouble because of what happened," said Craig Harris, a professor of political science at Montana State University in Billings, where for 15 years he has run a statewide political poll.

"The key to Burns's survival is that there be nothing new out of the Justice Department," Harris said. "Then all this will be old news. But if there are indictments of staffers, then it could be all over for Burns."

A federal task force investigating congressional corruption is looking into actions by Burns and members of his staff, according to people involved in the probe. In the absence of more bad news, Harris said, many Montanans may be inclined to give Burns a wink and a nod, in part, because he is skilled at bringing home federal dollars and his office has a reputation for good constituent relations.

"At some point in Montana, there is a dislike of outsiders and the national press telling us what to think," Harris said. "The thinking is he is a son of a gun, but he is our son of a gun and he can bring home the bacon."

The two leading Democrats challenging Burns disagree, saying that he has brought disgrace to the Senate, embarrassed Montana and lost touch with voters.

"The events that have been reported involving Burns and his staff and Jack Abramoff make this Montana Senate seat the poster child for everything that is wrong in Washington," said John Morrison, who is serving his second term as Montana auditor.

Morrison, 44, is the Democratic candidate for senator with the highest statewide name recognition and the most campaign money. He also has a narrow lead over Burns in recent polls.

But his candidacy has had to absorb a bombshell in the past month. A report in the Billings Gazette disclosed that Morrison had a two-month affair in 1998 with a woman who later married a Montana businessman investigated by his office.

To conduct that 2001 securities fraud investigation, Morrison said in an interview, he hired an outside attorney and told people in his office about the affair and the possible conflict of interest. The auditor's office settled with the businessman and ordered him to refund money to investors, although he never did, according to the Billings Gazette. The businessman was later convicted on federal charges and is now in prison.

"The case was handled in our office completely appropriately," Morrison said. "I don't think it is going to hurt our campaign at all." As for the affair, Morrison, who is married with two daughters, said, "Cathy and I are stronger in our marriage than we have ever been. Voters do not require that the people they elect to political office have had perfect marriages."

If he wins the Democratic primary, Morrison said his affair and the fallout it had on a criminal investigation would "not at all" compromise his credibility in attacking ethical lapses in the relationship between Burns and Abramoff.

"I was faced with a complex situation, and I did the right thing for the people of Montana," Morrison said. "Conrad Burns was faced with an easy situation, and he did the wrong thing by trading votes for money."

Others are not so sure.

Harris, the political analyst at Montana State, said news of the affair "will make Morrison's task much more difficult."

In the Denny's near the interstate, Hill, the retired railroad man, said Morrison would become "a pot calling the kettle black."

So far, Burns has said nothing about the affair, but it seems certain to come up, if Morrison and Burns win their respective primaries. The National Republican Senatorial Committee, which distributes money to candidates, will not be shy about publicizing the affair, said Brian Nick, spokesman for the committee.

"Morrison has got his own ethical baggage," Nick said. "So his attempt to level criticism at Burns or anybody else is really going to fall on deaf ears."

The likely beneficiary of Morrison's problems is state Sen. Jon Tester, a broad-shouldered, soft-spoken farmer from Big Sandy, Mont., who is also president of the Montana Senate. He has struggled to raise money in his first statewide race -- even though the rock band Pearl Jam performed at a fundraiser for him (bassist Jeff Ament is a friend from Big Sandy) -- but that problem would likely disappear if he won the primary.

"Morrison is better-spoken, younger, cuter, but there is nothing bad out there about Tester," Harris said. "Tester is a smart, thoughtful guy and a dirt farmer. He will play well with a lot of Montanans."

In an interview, Tester, 49, declined to comment on Morrison's affair, saying only "that is up to the voters to decide." He said he would defeat Morrison because of "my leadership and my profile as a family farmer. Farmers tend to be in vogue right now."

Tester was referring to Gov. Brian Schweitzer, a farmer himself and a garrulous Democrat who is by far the most popular politician in the state, with 70 percent approval ratings. Schweitzer narrowly lost to Burns in the 2000 Senate race, and the two men are not friends.

If Tester wins the nomination and runs against Burns, he says that Schweitzer is "going to be very, very helpful."