THE INVESTIGATION OF JIM WRIGHT : Ethics Chief ‘Gets the Job Done’ : Dixon Admired for Subdued Approach

Ever since he was elected to the House in 1978, Rep. Julian C. Dixon (D-Los Angeles) has shunned the spotlight in favor of working calmly and patiently inside the system to get things done.

“Julian doesn’t make a lot of speeches, he just gets the job done better than most,” said Rep. Charles A. Hayes (D-Ill.). “He knows how to work the system very productively.”

This subdued but persistent approach has served Dixon well during his House career, but never more than during his chairmanship of the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and its investigation of Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex).

Dixon, who has strong ties to the Democratic leadership, has more at stake in the investigation than any other panel member. Republicans were ready to pounce at the first sign of a partisan tilt toward Wright, and Democrats watched closely to see if he treated the Speaker too harshly.

Praise From Both Parties

Amid these pressures, Dixon has won praise from both sides for his evenhanded leadership and refusal to milk the volatile issue for its media potential.

Indeed, reporters seeking even minor details about the inquiry--such as the length of the panel’s forthcoming report on the Speaker--have been rebuffed by Dixon, who maintained quiet control over committee activities. Although the 12-member committee labored on the Wright inquiry for 10 months, leaks on its deliberations were nonexistent until the final days.

“I think he’s been a credit to the committee, no question about that,” Rep. Michael Bilirakis (R-Fla.) said. “You can only say good things about his performance so far.”

Privately, some Democrats have worried that the committee may have lost control of the investigation, given the sharply critical findings compiled by special counsel Richard J. Phelan. But others say that the Wright case posed a unique test of key House ethical questions and that the leadership of Dixon, who voted against bringing formal charges against the Speaker, was appropriate.

“I don’t think the committee has gotten away from him at all,” Rep. Tim Valentine (D-N.C.) said. “The presence of a special counsel has given it a totally different dimension, and this has been more than just a squabble among some members of the House. It’s been a very tough job for the chairman, I’m sure.”

It is not the first time that Dixon, 54, has taken on a thankless political task. For the past seven years, he has chaired the Appropriations Committee’s subcommittee on the District of Columbia, another post that requires hard work and generates few political rewards in a home district thousands of miles away.

“I was asking Julian the other day how he winds up with all these great assignments,” Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) joked. “He certainly has been the good soldier.”

Dixon, formerly a member of the California Assembly, is a strong ally of the Waxman-Berman Democratic political machine. He is a past chairman of the Black Congressional Caucus and has spoken out on issues ranging from civil rights to South Africa.

Metro Rail Compromises

Representing a racially diverse district that is south of Hollywood and stretches to downtown Los Angeles, he has also helped engineer compromises on the funding and construction of the Los Angeles Metro Rail system. Much of Dixon’s influence stems from his membership on the powerful House Appropriations Committee, where he sits with four other Californians.

Although he has gained more visibility from his work on the Wright inquiry than any other issue, Dixon has wearied of the ethics assignment and expects to be relieved of his chairmanship when the Wright matter is settled.

“He’ll be missed,” a conservative Republican member said. “For a job that no one else really wants to take on, he’s done it well.”