Hart Dilemma: Difficult Balancing Act

What Gary Hart had to do Tuesday, many political professionals agreed, was a difficult balancing act: accept some responsibility for the torrent of questions about his relationship with a 29-year-old Miami actress, while defending his integrity and criticizing press scrutiny of his private life without seeming to be overly sensitive.

But while they agreed on the goal, elected officials and political insiders interviewed disagreed sharply over whether the man who has been the Democratic presidential front-runner made any progress in his speech Tuesday to the American Newspaper Publishers Assn. toward putting the mushrooming controversy behind him.

Rival campaigns maintained a strict “no comment” policy, although Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said during an appearance in Texas that close scrutiny “comes with the territory” for those who run for President.

Hart’s supporters mustered some optimism. “The presentation today I thought was good,” said Hart adviser and former Democratic National Committee Chairman Charles T. Manatt.

But others said they believed that Hart would be unable to convince the public he had not committed a severe indiscretion in escorting the woman during her weekend visit to Washington, even if they had no sexual relationship.

Hart is “dead meat, as we say in the trade,” said former Democratic Senate Campaign Committee director Leon Billings, a longtime Democratic activist. “There’s nothing he could have said in the speech that would have altered that.”

“I think his candidacy has been damaged beyond repair,” California Assembly Speaker Willie Brown told reporters Tuesday.

Most crucial of all now, many agreed, was the public reaction of Hart’s wife, Lee. She had been scheduled to travel with her husband to New York for the newspaper association meeting but canceled the trip Tuesday. A campaign spokesman said a sinus problem prevented her from traveling.

“A joint appearance with his wife is absolutely necessary,” said Rep. Dave R. Nagle (D-Iowa), the state’s former Democratic chairman. At the very least, a joint statement will be needed “tomorrow or Thursday,” Manatt said.

After Hart’s speech, in which he said he should have been more careful about appearances but insisted he had done nothing immoral, the opinion among political insiders ranged from only guardedly positive to strongly negative.

“I think this hurts him, I’m sorry to say,” said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles). In the last presidential election, the Westside political organization of Waxman and Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Panorama City), was one of Hart’s most important backers.

“He’s got himself in the position he’s got to prove himself innocent, and I don’t know how you prove yourself innocent when there are so many people going around saying otherwise,” Waxman said.

Professional politicians and consultants also suggested two factors that will be key for Hart over the next few weeks. First is the reaction of fund-raisers. May and June traditionally are the best months for fund-raising, and with Hart already having problems paying off debts from his last White House bid, any fund-raising lull at this point would be doubly damaging.

“Given there are a lot of Democratic candidates for President and a limited universe of contributors, it’s a contributor’s market. The smart money will probably hold off on committing to Hart right now. And that’s being conservative,” said one important Democratic fund-raiser in California, who declined to be identified. The Hart campaign has been expecting to raise 20% to 25% of its money in the state.

The second concern is the immediate impact that the charges against Hart will have in polls in states like Iowa and New Hampshire, the scene next February of the year’s first primary. A statewide poll published Sunday by the Des Moines Register showed Hart far in the lead, and any loss of ground could put the campaign in a downward spiral.

Manatt noted that before joining the campaign, he and other senior advisers had engaged in long discussions with Hart about the rumors of womanizing that had surrounded Hart’s 1984 White House bid and had sought “assurances” from Hart that the candidate would be cautious about his behavior. Now, with his conduct in question, Manatt said, Hart had to “take it right up front, be candid, deal with it in a forthright manner.”

But voters may be looking for a more detailed accounting, suggested Iowa Democratic Party Chairwoman Bonnie J. Campbell, who said she is neutral in the Democratic race. “He didn’t add too much to the dialogue today. I don’t think he said anything that would dispel the concerns that were raised,” she said.

Voters in Iowa, the state with the first national presidential caucus, are “waiting to see how they feel about” the episode, she said. “It would be premature to predict anything fatal.”

Contributing to this story were staff writers Robert Gillette and James Gerstenzang in Washington and John Balzar in Los Angeles.