Stockman the Survivor

In November, 1981, few would have predicted that by now David A. Stockman would have set the longevity record for the directorship of the Office of Management and Budget. Back in 1981 the energetic young star of the Reagan Administration became more than a bit tarnished because of--for Washington--some stunning revelations in an Atlantic Monthly article about Stockman’s candid and unguarded views on the budget and supply-side economics.

Among other things, Stockman said that the Reagan tax-cut plan was a Trojan horse for lowering tax rates for the wealthiest. That was painfully close to saying that the emperor has no clothes. Some nodded knowingly, but the furor raged.

Stockman offered his resignation. While President Reagan asked him to remain on the team, most Washington insiders believed then that Stockman’s credibility was so severely damaged that he would not last long after the next budget went to Congress.

This was one case where Reagan was well served by reluctance to fire an aide who had embarrassed the Administration. Stockman has become the star survivor of the Reagan White House in spite of the most recent controversy over his criticism of federal military retirement and farm subsidies. Last week the President said that he could “understand the fellow blowing his cool,” and said, with some prodding, that he wanted Stockman to remain on the job.

But it is quite possible that Stockman, at age 38, will soon retire his trophy of OMB longevity on his own. Stockman has worked nonstop at OMB for four years, and the Stockmans are expecting a child soon. He will have no difficulty landing a more comfortable job at a much higher salary, should he choose.

“You can’t stay on indefinitely,” Stockman said in a recent interview. “It’s a heavily taxing job, not just in the hours or the intensity of the work but also in what we might call the human-relations dimension.” The problem at OMB is that you are constantly telling people no--particularly people who don’t like to take no for an answer.

So how did Stockman survive? Through his intellect, ability and knowledge of both his subject and the system, according to Stockman loyalists and some critics. “They know,” one source said of Stockman’s former colleagues in Congress, “that they can deal with Stockman. He’s a good negotiator, and he sticks with his word.” Even with the taint of the Atlantic article, the Administration had no one who could do the job as well.

One attribute that separates Stockman from most of his Administration colleagues is his proclivity for candor even when his own conservative views do not precisely match the White House line. Another is that he is truly interested in the process of government and governing. The Atlantic Monthly fuss was over one or two brief passages in a lengthy discussion of how and why things happen the way they do in Washington. Taken as a whole, the article provided rare insight into the workings of an Administration that has a reluctance to explain itself about anything.

One can quarrel with Stockman’s budget-cutting priorities. We frequently do. But even Stockman’s political foes have to admire the effective and loyal job that he has done in behalf of the Administration in charting the domestic front of the Reagan Revolution.