Illinois Primary Results Spur Fear in Congress Incumbents : Politics: Several current lawmakers are defeated. The outcome is seen as evidence of voter sentiment against those who now hold office.

A sense of foreboding swept Capitol Hill on Wednesday in the wake of the Illinois primary, in which several members of Congress were defeated in what may become the most serious wave of anti-incumbent sentiment since the post-Watergate election of 1974.

The House bad-check scandal, special-interest funding of elections and the Senate Judiciary Committee’s rough questioning of Anita Faye Hill during the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas were being blamed for stirring up the animosity that defeated Sen. Alan J. Dixon (D-Ill.) and others in Illinois.

Members of Congress greeted the Illinois results as a warning that even incumbents with huge campaign treasuries may be vulnerable in the 1992 elections--especially those who are challenged by women, minorities or other candidates who portray themselves as Washington “outsiders.”

Anita Dunn, aide to Sen. Bill Bradley (D-N.J.), said the Illinois results, combined with the defeat of Rep. Beverly B. Byron (D-Md.) in the Maryland primary two weeks ago, have convinced skeptics on Capitol Hill that the much-debated anti-incumbent mood is real.

“There is a lot of hand-wringing in Russell, Dirksen and Hart today,” said lobbyist Anthony T. Podesta, referring to the names of the Senate office buildings in Washington. “This year, the worst place to be running from is the 202 area code.”

Even before ballots were cast in Illinois, many analysts were predicting that an anti-incumbent mood, combined with an unusually high number of voluntary retirements and the impact of redistricting, could produce an even bigger congressional turnover than occurred in 1974, when voters elected 92 new members to the House and 11 new members to the Senate.

Dixon, a career politician thought to be popular in Illinois, was defeated in a three-way Democratic primary race by Carol Moseley Braun, the Chicago recorder of deeds, who would be the first black Democrat elected to the Senate if she wins in November. Braun benefited not only from her own “outsider” image, but also from about $4 million in negative television advertising directed at Dixon by the other candidate in the race, Albert Hofeld.

On Wednesday, Braun told reporters that her triumph was “a victory for all those who thought their franchise had been stolen away by money and power and influence.”

Braun, who decided to run in reaction to the Thomas hearings, received 83% of the black vote; white women voted more heavily for her than did white men.

Ellen Malcolm, president of EMILY’s List, a political action committee that assists women candidates, said many female voters in Illinois supported Braun because they were upset by the all-male Senate Judiciary Committee’s harsh questioning of Hill, who accused Thomas of sexual harassment.

“It galvanized women to vote for her,” said Podesta, who served as an unpaid adviser to Braun. “It was the bolt of energy that started all of this.”

Braun, however, downplayed the role of the Thomas hearings in her victory, saying women and minorities voted heavily for her because they realized that the Senate is “a closed boys club” with only two women members and no minorities.

In addition to Braun, several other Illinois candidates--including two incumbents who were running against other incumbents--appear to have benefited from the anti-Washington mood:

--Bobby Rush, a Chicago alderman who once served as defense minister of the Black Panther party, defeated Rep. Charles A. Hayes (D-Ill.) in a contest that was heavily influenced by the House check scandal. Hayes, who had allegedly had 716 overdrafts at the House bank, was described by Rush as “a captive of the perks and privileges of Congress.”

--Rep. Glenn Poshard (D-Ill.) defeated another Democratic incumbent, Terry L. Bruce, in a race in which one of the main issues was Bruce’s dependence on special-interest money. Poshard and Bruce were forced to run against each other as a result of redistricting. Poshard renounced PAC contributions and raised only about $100,000; Bruce spent about $600,000, much of it from PACs.

--In another redistricting matchup between two incumbents, Rep. William O. Lipinski (D-Ill.) defeated a more prominent Democratic incumbent, Marty Russo, in a race in which special-interest contributions also were a big issue. One of Lipinski’s ads detailed PAC contributions to Russo and asked: “He is for sale, are you?”

Only one Illinois incumbent who had been vulnerable, Republican Rep. Philip M. Crane, survived the balloting on Tuesday. And although Rep. Gus Savage (D-Ill.) also lost, his defeat was attributed more to his own quixotic personality than to the anti-incumbent sentiment.

A few experts challenged the conventional wisdom that Dixon’s defeat resulted from a general anti-incumbent mood. Michael L. Mezey, DePaul University political scientist, said Dixon was defeated primarily by Hofeld’s negative advertising and the three-way nature of the race.

“One on one against either of them,” Mezey said, “Dixon would have won hands down.”

In the November election, Braun will face a well-funded former Ronald Reagan White House official, Rich Williamson. Podesta indicated that Braun plans to run as an outsider against Williamson.

Recent polls indicate that women and minority candidates may benefit more than white male candidates from the anti-incumbent mood because they are naturally seen as outsiders. As a result, Malcolm said, two incumbent GOP senators--Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Alfonse M. D’Amato of New York--should view Braun’s victory as a warning. Both may be challenged by Democratic women candidates in November.