Anderson’s Removal Laid to Lack of Firm Fist : House: In a sign of today’s power politics, the veteran congressman was removed as chairman of the public works committee. He says he didn’t choose to ‘play the game.’

After parlaying two decades of dogged political toil into one of the U.S. House of Representatives’ most coveted positions in 1988, veteran Congressman Glenn M. Anderson of Harbor City was unceremoniously stripped of the prize this month in a rare vote of rejection by his colleagues.

Anderson’s undoing? As chairman of the House Public Works and Transportation Committee, he failed to wield power with the firm fist of his predecessors, opponents in his own Democratic Party said. He lost precious turf to other House committees and to the Senate. He failed to get things done during a period when voters are angry with Congress’ inability to solve problems.

“The word was getting around . . . that he couldn’t do the job,” said Rep. Norman Mineta (D-San Jose), who led the campaign to unseat Anderson from the chairmanship of the committee on Dec. 5. Others said Anderson’s abilities had so slipped in recent years that virtually all his comments had to be written out for him.

Since his first Congressional election in 1968, Anderson, once California’s lieutenant governor, had become renowned for his ability to land coveted federal projects for his South Bay-Long Beach constituents. The voters rewarded him with routine reelection to his 32nd Congressional District seat, including sending him back for a 12th two-year term on Nov. 5 with 65% of the vote.

But neither district loyalty nor his congressional seniority could save the Public Works post that Anderson won just 33 months ago. At age 77, Anderson became one of only three members to be stripped of their chairmanships in the last 15 years, losing by a vote of 150 to 100 in the House Democratic Caucus.

As Anderson tells it, his failing was being overly generous with the power that traditionally was concentrated in the chairmanship of the 50-member committee, the chief dispenser of pork-barrel federal projects. He said his decision to share power with his five subcommittee chairmen fostered a false perception of weakness.

Ironically, Anderson says his defeat may actually benefit his home district and California. As chairman, he said, “whenever I went to bat for California on any public works issue, some of my colleagues accused me of not having a national infrastructure perspective . . . I certainly cannot be accused of this anymore.”

Anderson may have been a genius over the years in winning local projects, but when it came to more complex issues and to the care and feeding of 49 political egos on his committee, he seemed out of his element. Interviews with those who know both Congress and Anderson paint a complex picture that offers lessons not just about Anderson, but also about the political system and the delicate power politics of Congress:

* Twenty years ago, the seniority system was so sacrosanct that Anderson probably could not have been budged from his chairmanship. Congress is protective of its own. The more powerful the member, the more protective others tend to be. Alcoholism, mental lapses and other questionable behavior were tolerated or overlooked. That is no longer so.

* The inability of a chairman to do the job can be overcome by a top-notch staff. But Washington sources were unanimous in saying Anderson’s staff was unresponsive, overly protective of Anderson, too deferential to committee Republicans and generally not up to the task.

* Newer members of Congress have become restive with older chairmen who cling to their posts by virtue of seniority and little else. One other chairman was dumped and several others faced unexpected challenges this year. On the other hand, seniority still ruled in the selection of their successors.

“It showed we want a meritocracy, not just a gerontocracy,” said Rep. David Skaggs, (D-Colo.), a public works committee member. “But that when there’s a contest among capable people, seniority does play a role.”

Said Rep. Peter A. DeFazio, (D-Ore.), a committee member who helped unseat Anderson and who will begin his third term at 43: “There’s a real concern about the public perception of Congress and the effectiveness of Congress. We want people to represent us who seem to be dynamic, to be getting things done nationally.”

Stories circulated in the Capitol that Anderson couldn’t be counted on to remember crucial information.

“The chairman was simply unable to operate without a script,” said one Democratic committee member. “In committee and particularly on the floor, this conveys to colleagues that you’re at their mercy.”

In an interview, Lee Anderson told The Times that her husband always has needed his memory jogged to some degree. “I’ve always had to stand beside him and whisper him things,” she said.

“He’s not 25 years old (and) he’s not 35 years old. . . . You always have a slowdown in memory, but that doesn’t affect his judgment. “

One supporter, Rep. Mel Levine (D-Santa Monica), said he went to Anderson time and again to get help for projects in his district and found him capable of delivering on his promises.

“In my experience, on the issues I worked with Glenn on, he was quite effective, focused and able to accomplish what he set out to accomplish,” Levine said. “I have seen him come through time and again on issues of significance to California.”

It is no coincidence that the deepened Los Angeles ship channel is named for Anderson. So is the Century Freeway, officially called the Glenn M. Anderson Freeway. The new federal building in Long Beach is expected to carry his name as well.

“There are only two ship channels that I know of that were ever named after a member of Congress: One is the Sam Houston Channel in Texas and the other is the Anderson Channel in Los Angeles. You can’t knock that,” Anderson said in answer to his critics.

In fact, Anderson managed to succeed in politics, beginning back in 1940 as mayor of Hawthorne, despite his soft-spoken, unaggressive and--many say--indecisive style. The best-remembered event of Anderson’s early career came in 1965 when as lieutenant governor to Edmund G. (Pat) Brown he hesitated in calling out the National Guard during the early stages of the Watts riots. The next year, Anderson was defeated in a try for a third term, but was elected to Congress two years later.

Anderson, however, found himself in deep water when running one of the premier committees of the U.S. Congress. In addition to the complaints that Anderson from time to time would forget a member’s name or give his staff too much authority, there was grumbling that he allowed his wife too much influence over him.

Said one Republican member: “With Anderson, the committee has been adrift for two years.”

Turf is power in Congress. And committee members’ biggest single complaint was that Anderson did not guard the public works committee’s turf.

They contend that Anderson constantly lost ground to the appropriations subcommittees that actually hand out the money for projects authorized by public works. More turf was lost to the Senate when competing versions of House and Senate bills dealing with committee subjects were reconciled in conference committees.

Within public works, Democrats complained that Anderson and his staff were too accommodating to minority Republicans. As an example, one House aide said it was traditional that a painting of the chairman hang in the committee’s hearing room. Members were astounded one day to find a picture of Rep. John P. Hammerschmidt of Arkansas, the ranking Republican member, on the wall.

“They never heard of such a situation,” the staff member said, and committee members were irate that Anderson had allowed it.

Another day, while the committee was conducting a session to put an important piece of legislation in final form, Democratic members were unable to get copies of the chairman’s proposed bill that were given to Republicans.

Some of the young members were furious and demanded a caucus of the committee Democrats, only to be told that the committee did not hold party caucuses. A shouting match ensued.

On Dec. 3, public works Democrats met privately and 26 of the 28 voted to seek Anderson’s ouster. Ironically, one of those who supported Anderson was Rep. Robert A. Roe, (D-N.J.), the chairman of the Science, Space and Technology Committee who was elected to replace him. Roe, who was second in seniority to Anderson at public works, thought “the challenge was premature,” an aide said.

The committee caucus presented Anderson with its decision Dec. 4 during a meeting in the Speaker’s dining room.

“It didn’t seem to bother him,” one Democratic member said. “He looked the same when he left the room as when he came in.”

Although his statement revealed bruised feelings, Anderson said he was not bitter:

“I must say that, I did feel a bit let down by those in whom I put so much trust. I chose not to play the game. I never have in my career and I don’t intend to start now.”

Times staff writer Bill Eaton in Washington contributed to this story.