Governor Pondering Race as Favorite Son

Dipping his toe into the roily waters of national politics for the first time, Gov. George Deukmejian said Wednesday he is thinking about running as a “favorite son” presidential candidate in the 1988 California primary.

“There are some people who even think that I, well, you know . . .” the governor told reporters with a big, blushing smile, not allowing himself to add the unspoken words: “actually should become a real presidential candidate.”

When reporters asked whether he was, indeed, contemplating a serious bid for the presidency, the Republican governor quickly responded: “No, no, no way. . . . Even if I were entertaining those thoughts, which I am not, but even if I were, you know, because of the situation here with a lieutenant governor of a different party, there is no way. . . . “

Deukmejian was referring to the fact that Lt. Gov. Leo T. McCarthy is a Democrat. And if the governor were to be elected to national office, the lieutenant governor automatically would succeed him and control of state government would be turned over to the opposition party. That, of course, did not stop former Gov. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., a Democrat, from running for President in 1980 when Republican Mike Curb was lieutenant governor.

It has been the specter of Brown campaigning around the country for President in 1976 and 1980, and soiling his once-bright political career in the process, that previously has motivated Deukmejian to cautiously avoid even leaving an impression that he might harbor national ambitions.But the governor obviously has been feeling his oats recently because of a massive 23-point reelection victory last November and his first serious venture into foreign policy, a weeklong trade and investment mission to Japan last month.

The main push for a “favorite son” candidacy, gubernatorial aides say, has come from state Republican Chairman Clare Burgener of San Diego--a former congressman and former legislative colleague of Deukmejian--and Assemblyman Bill Leonard (R-Redlands), a novice in national politics.

Their argument is that if Deukmejian were to win the California primary as a favorite son--presumably after scaring off all of the really serious presidential candidates with his home-state popularity--he and the state’s delegation could wield a lot of clout at the Republican National Convention. Deukmejian, after being placed nominally into nomination himself, would be in a position then to hand over the convention’s largest delegation to a real candidate of his choice. This process, in theory, also would keep the California GOP from becoming severely splintered during a presidential primary hotly contested by the serious candidates.

“I am considering it . . . I haven’t made a decision,” Deukmejian said.

“People (feel that) with the fact President Reagan will not be running for reelection, there likely will be a rather large field of candidates. This could potentially be divisive within the party ranks and within the state. It could also be extremely expensive, with a tremendous amount of fund raising for all of the various presidential candidates. The people who have approached me feel it would be very helpful to avoid this. And I don’t know that it is, but if it’s possible, they feel I should head up a delegation.”

Some of Deukmejian’s political advisers, however, are leery of a favorite-son candidacy.

One has counseled that Deukmejian should run as a favorite son only if he seriously is thinking about running for President, either in 1988 or later. Reagan was a favorite son in 1968, but he also was a serious presidential candidate. Another adviser has pointed out that Brown, the last governor to run in a California presidential primary, in 1980, picked up only 4% of the vote and was deeply embarrassed.

“You can get your fingers burned,” said the adviser, who asked not to be identified. “By (California’s primary in) June, the nomination either will be decided and a favorite-son candidacy will be meaningless--or the nomination still will be open and these guys (who are serious candidates) will be clawing and scratching. They play hardball. The stakes in presidential politics are so high that the rules of civility don’t necessarily apply.”

This adviser doubted that Deukmejian could keep the serious candidates from competing in California if the state’s delegates still were crucial to winning the presidential nomination. But the governor indicated at his press conference that he thought he might be able to ward off competitors.

Asked why a voter would give up the opportunity to choose a serious presidential candidate at the ballot box in favor of siding with a favorite son in order to give him and the state party more political clout, Deukmejian said: “The voter is not giving up anything if certain candidates decide that they are not going to be candidates in California. Then the voter wouldn’t have an opportunity to cast a vote for them.”

But while Deukmejian seemed to be warming up to the idea of stepping into the pool of presidential participants, he poured cold water on an effort by many leading California Democrats to move up the date of the state’s primary to make it more meaningful to the national nominating process. In recent presidential elections, the nominations of both parties already had been all-but decided by the time California’s June primary rolled around.

It would be a waste of taxpayer money to hold separate primaries for presidential and state candidates, he said. And if the legislative and congressional primaries were lumped in with the presidential contests in March or April, he said, it would result in general election campaigns that were too long. “If people are bored by the general election now, just think what it would be like to go from April until November,” he argued.

Since the governor would have to sign any bill that changed the date of the presidential primary, his negative reaction to the idea would seem to quash it, at least for now.

Deukmejian also said he does not like another idea suggested recently by Democrats: allowing independents--those registered “declined to state”--to vote in party primaries. But, according to a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, each party can decide for itself who votes in its primary. So Deukmejian’s objections would have no bearing on Democrats.

“If somebody wants to register to be a member of a party and decide who the nominees are, fine,” Deukmejian said. “But if they don’t, then why should people who are not party members decide who the nominees are going to be.”

Democratic leaders argue that it would be a way of increasing voter participation. Deukmejian said, “It’s a free country. If they want to vote, fine. They can register and they can vote. If they don’t want to, nobody is going to force them to do so.”

Deukmejian got a quick lesson Wednesday on what becoming a player in national politics would do to his state Capitol political agenda: He would have a much harder time controlling it.

The governor opened the press conference by reading a statement denouncing state Supt. of Public Instruction Bill Honig for “whining and complaining” about the education budget and waging “a disinformation campaign.” This clearly was the subject that Deukmejkian wanted to talk about. But reporters, focusing in on politics, did not get around to asking him about education for another 35 minutes. And then the exchange was relatively brief.