As Speaker, Foley Plans to Quell Partisan Fights

WASHINGTON —  Even before Jim Wright officially steps down as Speaker of the House this week, his likely successor, Majority Leader Thomas S. Foley of Washington, is already laying plans to quell the partisan warfare that led to Wright’s downfall.

Foley, 60, who is virtually certain to be chosen as the nation’s highest-ranking Democrat when the party caucus meets Tuesday, is viewed by members of both parties as a leader whose congenial personality and keen intellect make him better suited than Wright to oversee the House during an era of political turmoil.

Sees Bitterness

In an interview, Foley expressed confidence that a new Democratic leadership team can successfully defuse the bitterness that has developed between Republicans and Democrats in the House during the furor over Wright’s alleged financial misconduct.

“I think we need to work very seriously at restoring a sense of comity and confidence between members of the two parties,” Foley said. “This is going to be done only because both parties want it, at least the vast majority of both parties want it.”

As Speaker, Foley’s strategy to restore order in the House would be four-fold:

--To show more courtesy than his predecessor toward the Republican minority, which complained bitterly that its rights were denied by Wright’s high-handed style of leadership.

--To dissuade his fellow Democrats from seeking revenge against Republicans--particularly Assistant Minority Leader Newt Gingrich of Georgia--who brought Wright down.

--To develop a bipartisan proposal for rewriting House rules that govern ethical conduct, making them both more stringent and less ambiguous.

--To refocus attention on such pressing national problems as reducing the budget deficit, improving education, aiding the underclass, limiting health care costs, raising the minimum wage, providing child care, renewing the Clean Air Act and bailing out the savings and loan industry.

Foley said his efforts will succeed primarily because most House members are fed up with the partisan battling over personal ethics, which has not only brought about the resignations of Wright and Rep. Tony Coelho (D-Merced) in the last 10 days but also most recently touched Rep. William H. Gray III (D-Pa.), the leading contender to replace Coelho as assistant majority leader.

“Members on both sides don’t seek election and come to Congress for the purpose of deciding ethical questions or engaging in ethical disputes,” he said. “That’s not what they want to do. In fact, if I’ve heard one thing more than anything in recent weeks it is--usually with some expletives--’I didn’t get elected to get involved in this kind of thing.’ ”

Nevertheless, Foley, who in 25 years as a congressman has developed a reputation as a conciliator, does not underestimate the difficulty of the task facing him.

“There are people on our side who are very bitter about what they regard as the crucifixion of Jim Wright,” he acknowledged. “There are Republicans that think they’ve been unfairly accused of that and the Democratic majority is guilty of creating a system in which they didn’t have an opportunity to present issues or, indeed, a fair chance at becoming a majority. Somehow we’ve got to take care of both extremes.”

In Wright’s farewell address last Wednesday, the retiring Speaker apologized to House Republicans for what they viewed as the excesses of his 2 1/2 years at the helm. It is widely believed that Gingrich would not have brought charges of misconduct against Wright if he had been more generous in allowing Republicans to offer more amendments to legislation.

Although Foley emphasized that he does not share Republican criticism of Wright, whom he staunchly defended throughout the yearlong investigation, he clearly understands why the GOP is complaining and would feel an obligation as Speaker to resolve those complaints.

“I don’t happen to believe that this has been a long series of oppressive violations of the rules or torturing of the rules by Democrats,” he said, “but I recognize that many Republicans feel that way. And I also recognize that there have been cases where we have overreached, if not violating the rules, at least pushing them.”

Oct. 29, 1987, has long been cited by Republicans as Wright’s “day of infamy”--the day he adjourned the House after narrowly losing a key vote and then quickly called the chamber back into session, brought up a similar bill and eked out a one-vote victory by pressuring a fellow Texas Democrat, Rep. Jim Chapman, to vote his way.

“If we could do that day over, I’d be the happiest person in the world,” Foley said.

But Foley rejected Republican charges that the Democrats have created “an incumbency machine” that has kept the Republicans in the House minority for the last 35 years. He noted that 93% of House seats have turned over since he was elected in 1964.

As Speaker, Foley pledged to protect the rights of Republicans.

“There’s a need to establish a sense here that we can have debate, we can have disputes, they can even be charged with emotion and with conviction, and still have a sense that after everything is decided, the rules were fair,” he said.

In addition, Foley would press ahead with a bipartisan effort that is already under way to reform House rules. Rep. Vic Fazio (D-Sacramento), who co-chairs the rules task force with Rep. Lynn Martin (R-Ill.), said last week he hopes the panel will produce a proposal for revamping House rules by September.

Foley thinks the effort will heal partisan differences over how the current rules should be interpreted. “There is no reason to have partisan divisions over ethical procedure,” he said.

Nevertheless, even though he disagrees with Democrats who want to avenge Wright’s ouster, he indicated that he would not favor granting “amnesty” to members currently facing ethics charges. That includes Gingrich, who, like Wright, has been accused of developing a scheme to disguise personal contributions from wealthy supporters as book royalties.

Like many colleagues, Foley is looking forward to refocusing the attention of the House away from ethics and onto policy. But he conceded there is little opportunity for the current Congress to establish the impressive legislative record of the 100th Congress, which adjourned last year.

“That Congress, with all credit to Jim Wright’s leadership, faced, addressed and resolved literally dozens of legislative issues, including major ones--environmental issues, resources issues, civil rights issues, drug enforcement issues, welfare reform issues and trade issues,” he said.

“It tended to exhaust or fulfill the existing capacity for consensus or resolution. What you have left in this Congress is the residue of that agenda, which is by definition more difficult, more intractable, farther from resolution.”

In this category he listed the budget deficit, clean air legislation, child care, the minimum wage, federal health benefits, education and the savings and loan industry.

“This Congress is struggling with the hard, unfinished business of the country,” he said. “This Congress is going to be more managerial in dealing with some of these problems than initiating.”

While most House members praise Foley’s ability to develop bipartisan consensus on difficult issues, his critics claim he is more of a conciliator than a leader. As a result, he is often criticized for bringing no clear Democratic agenda to his new job.

But Foley, insisting he is more than “a facilitator,” argued forcefully that he can do little to alter the heavy agenda of difficult issues already facing Congress.

“It’s not a Tom Foley agenda, it’s not even a Democratic agenda,” he said. “What we do has to be within what a Republican presidency and a Democratic Congress can agree to. We’re going to need to find common solutions. Neither side is going to be able to dominate this agenda.”