Backing for Bush Snagged in GOP Intraparty Fight

A simple-sounding proposal that the California Republican Party officially endorse President Bush this weekend for reelection has thrown the party into a dither that threatens to provide another embarrassment for the President.

On the surface, such an effort in behalf of a sitting GOP President would seem to be simple and automatic--a “no-brainer” in the vernacular of political junkies, even considering the insurgent challenge of commentator Pat Buchanan. There is little doubt that a majority of California Republicans support a second term for Bush despite his shallow ties to the Golden State GOP.

“I am willing to bet a good chunk of change that the majority of the delegates are for the President,” said Bill Lacy, a consultant who is managing Palm Springs Mayor Sonny Bono’s campaign for the Senate and who ran the Bush campaign in California four years ago.

Even so, the outcome of the scheduled endorsement vote Sunday appears to be in the balance as an estimated 2,000 delegates and others gather in Burlingame today for the semiannual convention of the Republican State Central Committee, the party’s official governing body.

Not even Ronald Reagan, the most revered leader in contemporary California Republican history, was anointed with a state party endorsement when he ran for governor or President. But insiders said Friday that the effort to endorse Bush was more of a chess move in an intraparty power struggle than an attempt to help the President.

“It’s very Byzantine,” said one major player in the ongoing struggle for control of party affairs between the conservative right and the moderate wing of the party led by Gov. Pete Wilson. Like most GOP officials interviewed about the Bush endorsement ploy, this conservative declined to be quoted by name.

Aside from the endorsement maneuver, the highlight of the convention is expected to be tonight’s twin-bill debate among Republicans running for the two U.S. Senate seats at stake in California.

The first slate features contestants for the Republican nomination for the regular six-year seat being vacated by retiring Sen. Alan Cranston, a Democrat. They are moderate Rep. Tom Campbell of Stanford, conservative television commentator Bruce Herschensohn of Los Angeles, and Bono. Campbell and Herschensohn already have debated several times, once with Bono.

The nightcap event pits the two major candidates for the two-year seat against each other for the first time: incumbent Sen. John Seymour of Anaheim, appointed by Gov. Pete Wilson, and Rep. William E. Dannemeyer, one of the most conservative Republicans in Congress. Also in the race are government professor William B. (Bill) Allen of Claremont, and Jim Trinity, a retired Glendale dentist.

The debate, staged as a 500-seat fund-raising event, quickly is becoming a forum for the campaigns to one-up each other. The room had to be expanded as campaigns gobbled up tickets in hopes of having the biggest rooting section. By Thursday, an estimated 1,500 seats had been reserved, one source said.

The Bush endorsement proposal originated with June Dignan, wife of state party Chairman Jim Dignan of Modesto, several months ago, when Bush was expected to be renominated without substantial opposition.

For a party to endorse its national leader for another term would seem to be routine. But not in California. For decades, state law originating in the Progressive Era barred the party apparatus from taking sides in a primary campaign. The law was overturned in the 1980s, but the party retained its own ban on pre-primary endorsements.

A source familiar with the intricacies of the party debate said the endorsement was, at least in part, a ploy by conservatives to get more clout in the selection of California’s 201-member delegation to the Republican National Convention in Houston this summer.

Traditionally, the White House and Bush campaign handpick the delegation, rewarding faithful supporters and generous contributors. As Bush campaign chairman in California, Wilson would have a major role in that process.

Conservatives such as Dignan, fearful of being shut out of that process, have sought to get the state party structure involved as a way of increasing their numbers in the delegation, and their clout at the convention. Such an effort was easily defeated at the fall convention in Anaheim.

The endorsement plan posed a dilemma for the Bush and Wilson camps. They hardly could oppose an endorsement of Bush. But to support it might trap them into making concessions to the conservatives, sources said.

A further complication is that the party rules must be changed before any endorsement attempt is put before the delegations and a rules change requires a two-thirds vote of convention delegates--something that is difficult to achieve for anything but a motherhood resolution.

A clear majority of delegates might want to support Bush, but they would not even get to vote for an endorsement if the rules change fell short. That alone could be read as an embarrassment to the President, even if it is only a vote on procedure.

“It’s tough to get two-thirds,” said the leader of one conservative faction. “It could be extremely embarrassing for the President. It’s never been done.”

This leader said he would vote for the endorsement, but declined to predict how the battle would end. Several other officials noted that many Bush supporters would be reluctant to back the rules change because of the tradition and precedent involved.

“As of two weeks ago, the vote was there,” he said. “Then came New Hampshire and now South Dakota (where Bush did not do as well as expected) and the votes aren’t there.”