JEFFERSON CITY • In the Missouri Capitol, "Ford" has become a four-letter word.

"This is not about rewarding one company," state Rep. Jerry Nolte, R-Gladstone, told fellow House members last week as they were debating the Ford bill that Nolte is sponsoring. Nolte was careful not to mention the four letters that have become the center of attention in the special session called by Gov. Jay Nixon: F-O-R-D.

For Nolte and other lawmakers pushing the bill, they put on their best dodge anytime a lawmaker or reporter refers to the economic incentive package as the "Ford bill."

"This is not just about Ford," said Rep. Sam Komo, D-House Springs.

"This is about more than just Ford," echoed Missouri economic development director David Kerr.

Indeed, the session is also about a pension bill that would require future state employees to invest in their own retirement accounts, thus saving the state enough money to pay for the Ford incentives, which would amount to about $100 million over 10 years.

And there are the other companies that would qualify for an additional $50 million in automobile manufacturing incentives, most of which, of course, are suppliers of Ford.

So when lawmakers say the bill is more than just a Ford bill, they're telling the truth.

But they're also pointing out the political absurdity of the argument.

The reason they don't like reporters or their colleagues calling the bill the "Ford bill" is the same reason why some of their colleagues are opposing it.

Rep. Bryan Pratt, R-Blue Springs, for instance, calls the Ford bill a "bailout."

In the political environment of 2010, "bailout" might be the most toxic political word of all. Angry voters upset with rising deficits and government mandates are frustrated with a government that found enough money to save Wall Street giants from collapsing while regular folks lost their jobs, their homes and their pensions.

The last thing voters want to vote for, pollsters will tell you confidently, is any politician who supports a bailout of any kind.

Thus it was that Pratt, the speaker pro tem of the House, was removed from a key House committee because he refused to pledge his allegiance to the Ford bill.

Pratt, it should be noted, is running for state Senate.

In the Senate, the bill is stuck in the committee run by Sen. Chuck Purgason, R-Caulfield, who also called it a "bailout."

Purgason, it should be noted, is running for the U.S. Senate.

Also opposing the bill in the Senate is Sen. Jack Goodman, R-Mount Vernon, who pointed out in a committee hearing that Ford posted recent profits of well over $2 billion.

"I think, right now, we in the government are sitting here picking winners and losers," said Goodman, who, for good measure, also invoked the infamous corporate bailout phraseology.

And yes, it should be noted, Goodman is running for U.S. Congress.

So therein lies the problem facing Missouri lawmakers.

From Democrat Nixon to Republican leaders of both chambers, they want to keep Ford from leaving the Show-Me State. The only way they think they can accomplish that task is to throw a bundle of money at the latest corporate denizen to hold the state over a barrel.

"That's the issue," said Rep. Tim Flook, R-Liberty. Flook isn't running for re-election, so he can tell it like it is. "Where is Ford going to do this massive investment? Is it going to be Missouri or somewhere else?"

Long before the special session, even late last fall, before the regular session, Flook was talking up the Ford bill, trying to bring attention to the possibility that Missouri was about to lose yet another automobile manufacturing plant, following the loss of plants in Hazelwood and Fenton.

Shortly after Flook filed his bill, Nixon and Kerr flew to Michigan to meet with leaders from Ford and pitch them on the idea that Missouri was a good place for them to reinvest in the automobile of the future.

The bill died in a skeptical Senate. And unless Nixon and others can pull some magic out of their sleeves, it seems destined to die there again, in a session marked by politicians eyeing an Aug. 3 primary with bailout-weary voters.

"In short, it ain't a bailout," Flook almost pleaded to a crowded hearing room last week.

Quite a few lawmakers, however, are betting voters see it differently.