Levine Becomes Target of Protests Over U.S. Aid to Central America : El Salvador: Liberal congressmen are baffled by opposition. Activists say Levine is inaccessible and that the Democrats ‘vote like Republicans.’

Rep. Mel Levine says he can’t understand why he has become the target of high-pressure protests about U.S. aid to El Salvador.

“When I tell my colleagues in Washington about the trouble I have at home over this, they look at me, bewildered,” said the Santa Monica Democrat.

After all, Levine describes himself as an outspoken advocate for peace in Central America. And as chairman of the Democratic Caucus Task Force on Central and Latin America for the last three years, he says he has often taken a leading role in opposing Administration policies that would continue providing military aid to the Salvadoran government.

Opposition to this military aid for years has been a rallying point for about 30 Los Angeles-area activist organizations, most of them now united under the umbrella group called Days of Decision.

So why is it that this coalition is so angry with Levine, and to a lesser degree, with some of his liberal Westside colleagues in Congress?

Why, for instance, were musician Jackson Browne and 60 other protesters camped out in Levine’s office for more than five hours one day last month, demanding that the congressman publicly oppose continued military aid to El Salvador. Why were they demanding that he immediately hold a public town-hall meeting on the subject in his district?

And why have they targeted Levine and other Democrats in mass mailings to voters, in full-page national newspaper ads and in massive protest and lobbying efforts?

It all depends on whom you ask.

Levine and other members of the local congressional delegation do not have a definite answer. They say they are doing all they can to overhaul what they consider a misguided U.S. policy in Central America. They say the activists don’t understand a crucial part of their job as legislators--that they must operate within the constraints of the legislative process, where mediation and compromise often mean the difference between winning small victories and winning nothing at all.

Moreover, Levine says, the activists are deliberately distorting his record, and he has agreed to hold the town-hall meeting as a way to take the issue directly to his constituents. It is set for Friday from 7:30 to 9:30 p.m. at Lincoln Middle School, 1501 California Ave., Santa Monica.

To the dismay of the activists, Levine has refused to support legislation that would cut off the $85 million in U.S. military aid earmarked for El Salvador this year. He says he is withholding his support because an unconditional cutoff would lessen U.S. influence in bringing about reforms and could aggravate human rights violations in El Salvador--and because such a radical measure would never pass through Congress.

Levine notes that he sponsored legislation enacted in 1983 that prohibits the President from sending U.S. troops into combat in Honduras, Nicaragua or El Salvador without the approval of Congress.

And Levine was the House Democrats’ whip on a series of votes that ultimately succeeded in cutting off military aid to the Nicaraguan Contras, according to his administrative assistant, Bill Andresen.

“Nobody has been more outspoken against our policies in Central America than Mel,” said Andresen. “He has been one of the leaders in the House on this, and that is what is so frustrating to him.”

Levine, now in his fourth term, says he is confused and a bit angry about becoming a lightning rod for the wrath of the activists.

“It is baffling to me,” Levine said in a recent interview, “that a group whose objectives appear to be very similar to my own--bringing peace to Central America and El Salvador--would portray me and my colleagues as having a different position than they have.”

Levine says he is putting the final touches on compromise legislation that would considerably curtail aid to El Salvador, and place severe restrictions on it, but would also have a chance of getting signed into law.

Groups opposed to U.S. policy in Central America have been a fixture on the Westside political scene for years. But the slaying of six Jesuit priests in El Salvador last November, and the subsequent arrest of nine members of the Salvadoran army in connection with the killings, has galvanized grass-roots and religious organizations on the Westside and elsewhere, bringing a surge of protests and lobbying.

Leading the charge in Los Angeles has been the Days of Decision coalition, whose members have been particularly active in opposition to U.S. policy in El Salvador, where a decade-long civil war between the right-wing government and leftist rebels has left more than 60,000 people dead.

The local activists, who belong to such individual groups as the Interfaith Task Force on Central America, Pledge of Resistance, Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES), and Office of the Americas, say they find it hard to accept Levine’s contention that he is on their side.

In the words of one activist, Wayne Bauer, Levine is “wimping out” on an issue of local, national and international importance, and ignoring his constituents’ concerns.

“There has been a general frustration in the entire coalition because it has been very difficult to get a meeting with him on this issue,” said Bauer, an elected member of the Santa Monica Rent Control Board. “We feel that committing U.S. tax dollars to El Salvador is indefensible, that there is no way to justify having it go to the killing of priests and . . . innocent people. Our feeling is that Levine should be called on the carpet for this--he isn’t representing the district on this one.”

Levine’s prominence on the caucus and his seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee make him a primary target, but the activists say they also have had problems with other members of the Westside delegation.

“We have all these liberal Democrats on the Westside that vote like Republicans,” said activist Linda Lillow. “The only difference is the rhetoric.”

How can both sides be so far apart? Some observers say the dispute is a quintessential Westside political squabble, the kind that could occur only in an area where the political spectrum starts with liberal Democrat and heads leftward.

Democratic political consultant Kam Kuwata says there is a drawback to representing such a left-leaning district: “With the left, there is greater disappointment when you’re not with them. They’ll say: ‘If you’re with me 99% of the time, I’m going to make damn sure I yell at you the other 1% of the time.’ ”

“Being a liberal in a district more liberal than the mainstream gets you elected to Congress,” added Bill Zimmerman, a veteran Westside consultant who also is active in a group that sends medical supplies to El Salvador. “But once you get there, you have to participate in coalitions . . . to get legislation through, which moves you to the right at the same time your constituents want you to move to the left.”

One veteran of many of these fights, Rabbi Allen Freehling, says he is used to mediating disputes and mending the fences between the liberal lawmakers and their antagonists at the grass-roots level.

“What you have to acknowledge,” Freehling said, “is that the extremists at either end of the spectrum are at the cutting edge, and make things happen.”

“They are campaigning, persuading, and sometimes irritating, and the person in the center is then motivated to take a step forward,” he said. “If it weren’t for these activists, there would not be social change.”

Cynthia Anderson, legislative coordinator for the Interfaith Task Force, says the local Democrats make a lot of noise about supporting an aid cutoff. But when it really comes down to it, she says, they are too afraid to be on the losing end of an issue.

The reason Levine and other liberals are the targets of the pressure campaigns, she says, is that without them the battle is lost even before it starts.

“If someone with such a safe seat like Levine can’t exercise leadership,” she said, “then how can we win?”

She acknowledges that it is Levine’s key roles in foreign policy that make him a target of the pressure campaigns.

As Levine’s Friday town-hall meeting approaches, the activists are mobilizing. They say they are marshaling hundreds of vocal opponents of U.S. policy in Central America to attend the forum, if not to change Levine’s mind, then to at least embarrass him and make a statement.

The effort is the culmination of months of activity, during which the activists claim to have begun turning the tide in their efforts to goad Westside Democrats into being more outspoken about U.S. policy in Central America.

They say they have garnered a steady stream of support at the grass-roots level--enough for massive rallies nine weeks in a row at the federal building in West Los Angeles. They also have protested at the offices of another area Democrat they say is wavering on the question of Salvadoran aid--Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Panorama City).

Other Democrats, most notably Reps. Anthony C. Beilenson and Julian C. Dixon of Los Angeles, also have been the subjects of protest actions, lobbying campaigns and other tactics recently.

As evidence of their recent momentum, the activists point to decisions by Beilenson and Dixon in the last few weeks to support legislation to cut off aid to El Salvador.

“We have targeted four guys,” Anderson said, “and two of them have turned around.” She says Levine and Berman will be pressured until they too change their positions.

Even Levine seems to be budging, the activists say. His agreement to hold the public meeting is a substantial step, they say, given what they describe as his past dealings with the groups.

“The fact that Congressman Levine has conceded--and believe me the meeting itself is a concession--is the culmination of six years of lobbying, letter writing and public protests to force him to state his position publicly,” Anderson said.

The lawmakers, perhaps predictably, have a different view of the situation.

“Why pick on Westside liberal congressmen?” Beilenson asked. “All you do is offend your friends, and you don’t pick up any additional votes. The bottom line is, their tactics are counterproductive.”

Beilenson acknowledged that he recently threw his support behind legislation favored by the activists. But he insists that he has been consistent in his opposition to U.S. policy in Central America, and that, if anything, his decision was made in spite of the tactics of the activists.

“They tend to lose friends rather than gain them,” Beilenson said. “They are offensive, and spend most of their time targeting people who are basically supportive and friendly, instead of doing the difficult and important and necessary work of trying to change the minds of people who don’t agree with them.”

Dixon, likewise, says his position has been consistent and that he, too, is confused about the tactics of the activists. “It’s one of those things where we can’t get the most modest proposals going (through Congress), and they focus on the most extreme. They must have some strategy there, but I don’t know what it is.”

Some of the tactics have rubbed the lawmakers the wrong way.

In Levine’s case, the activists have sent letters to all of his constituents, urging them to pressure the congressman. They have protested over the phone and in person. They even took out full page ads in the New York Times and Daily Variety, a Hollywood trade magazine, late last year asking him and some fellow Democrats to reconsider their positions.

What’s more, they have conducted at least three “congressional walk-ins” at Levine’s offices in the past year or so, in which as many as 60 constituents walk in, deliver a signed statement opposing his position, and then speak to the staff about why they oppose U.S. military aid.

They do this every four minutes, from the minute the office opens until it closes. “It ties up the office for the day and makes him deal with this,” Anderson said.

The activists say they suspect Levine is cautious because he is widely regarded as a potential U.S. Senate candidate in 1992, and because he has ambitions of rising within the Democratic leadership.

“He is a power broker,” said Anderson, “but to rise in the House he’ll have to toe the party line, so he is following the dictates of party leadership rather than following the dictates of his constituency.”

Levine denies this, saying he is doing only what he thinks is prudent.

While visiting his district last week, he conferred with Freehling and others about Central American policy--but did not meet with Anderson or any of the other activists affiliated with Days of Decision.

“It’s fascinating, isn’t it?” asked Lillow, a Days of Decision organizer. “They don’t want to give us any credit for moving them or their constituents.”

“What they don’t grasp,” she said of Levine and his colleagues, “is how much momentum we have generated in creating U.S. policy in Central America and making it an issue they must come to grips with. Do they have such enormous egos that they have to take credit for everything?”