Waxman May Enter Race for No. 3 Post of House Whip

With House Democrats possibly facing a complete overhaul of their leadership team this week, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles) said Monday that he may jump into the contest for the No. 3 post of majority whip.

The current whip, Rep. Tony Coelho (D-Merced), announced Friday that he is resigning from Congress rather than go through a prolonged ethics inquiry into a $100,000 junk bond investment.

Waxman, an influential leader on health and environmental issues, said that he is getting a “favorable response” to the idea of joining what is now a three-way race for whip and will make up his mind within a few days.

Cites Geographical Balance

The Californian, a liberal from the largest state delegation in the House, argued that he would give “ideological and geographical balance” to a prospective new House Democratic leadership team headed by moderates from Washington state and Missouri.

With House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.) expected to resign, possibly Wednesday, in an ethics scandal over his finances, Rep. Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.) is regarded as certain to move into the job. Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) is considered likely to succeed Foley as majority leader.

Waxman, explaining his contention that he would provide geographical balance as whip, said in an interview: “Although Washington state is on the same coast as California, no one thinks of them as the same. California is unique.”

When reminded that Southern Democrats are insisting that their region continue to be represented in the leadership after Wright’s departure, Waxman asserted that Gephardt could fill the role because “Missouri is, in some sense, Southern.”

Big State Delegation

In any case, Waxman said, it is important for California to hold onto a leadership post because its 27 Democrats make up more than one-tenth of the House total of 260.

Already seeking the whip post are Reps. Beryl Anthony Jr. (D-Ark.), David E. Bonior (D-Mich.) and William H. Gray III (D-Pa.).

Coelho, who became whip in 1986, faces a preliminary criminal investigation by the Justice Department concerning the purchase of a $100,000 junk bond, underwritten by Drexel Burnham Lambert Inc., with the help of a $50,000 loan from Columbia Savings & Loan Assn.

If he runs for whip, Waxman may run into questions about his own involvement with Drexel, which is facing federal charges of securities fraud.

Earlier this year, a Drexel representative enlisted Waxman to write to the Securities and Exchange Commission, demanding that the agency abandon efforts to force Drexel to move its high-yield junk bond department from Beverly Hills to the firm’s headquarters in New York.

Signing the letter with Waxman were six other Los Angeles area congressmen, including House Ethics Committee Chairman Julian C. Dixon (D-Los Angeles).

Senators Also Sent Letters

California Sens. Alan Cranston and Pete Wilson wrote similar letters--Cranston at the request of Coelho, who had been contacted by Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley.

Waxman, who received $5,000 in speech honorariums and $500 in campaign contributions from Drexel in 1987, said Monday that he did not expect the letter to create problems because “I was only helping constituents” who work at the Beverly Hills office.

In 1978, Waxman captured the chairmanship of the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on health and the environment in a brilliant but controversial election coup. Opponents charged that Waxman had bought the plum post by making campaign contributions to colleagues from a personal political action committee financed by special interests.

Waxman acknowledged Monday that the contributions “did help me because the people I gave to at that particular time would not have returned to office if they had not had that support.”

Like other ambitious House members, Waxman still contributes to numerous Democratic candidates from his personal PAC--a fund that is separate from his campaign committee. As in 1978, the PAC contributions could provide crucial support for Waxman if he decides to run for whip.

In commenting on the ethics uproar that has distracted Congress from most other business, Waxman said that “we need to get an ethics bill passed that clarifies some of the loopholes that seem to be in the law. We have to try to restore some of the public confidence in government.”

He supported ethics investigations into “legitimate problems,” noting the Wright case specifically, but deplored indications that both Democrats and Republicans may seek further partisan inquiries.

“The House has a lot of important issues to fight about, but not this (ethics) on a partisan basis,” he said.