COLUMN RIGHT/ JAMES P. PINKERTON : Is there Room for Ross in West Wing? : His post-election appearances make inquiring minds wonder: Just what does Perot want?

A year ago, Ross Perot began his campaign with his if-the-volunteers-want-me appearance on “Larry King Live.” This evening, he tops off a round of rallies and a medley of talk shows as Jay Leno’s guest on “The Tonight Show.” Beyond the obvious question--when will he do Letterman?--lies an even bigger one: What does Perot want?

He’s already fulfilled one wish, destroying George Bush. Candidate Clinton must have enjoyed watching Perot torpedo Bush last year. After all, the nonpartisan Perot was much more credible attacking Bush for the deficit or Iraq-gate than any Democrat could have been. Now, it’s President Clinton’s turn. Perot’s Will Rogers-style gibes at Clinton’s attorneys-general follies are drawing blood. More ominously, Perot’s support for a balanced-budget amendment threatens to undercut, if not actually nullify, Clinton’s “investment” agenda.

Specific issues aside, Perot has a broad and true message: Washington is out of sync with the country. Does anyone think that the middle class wanted their new President to fill up his Cabinet with yuppies who have more experience dealing with domestics and chauffeurs than they do with nurses and auto workers? Does anyone think that this Congress will pass meaningful ethics or campaign-finance-reform legislation?

Perot’s sweeping critique of Washington’s “arrogance” poses tough questions to the Beltway culture. One such question comes from business guru Peter Drucker: “If we weren’t doing it now, would we start?” In other words, are the structures of the government, from the schools to welfare to the military, the best we can possibly do? If we can do better, what are the obstacles to real reform? Official Washington could find the answer in a mirror, which is exactly Perot’s point. Perot may seem simplistic, but he plays well in Peoria; especially as Clinton seems to have lost his “reinventing government” zest about the time he went to Pamela Harriman’s Georgetown mansion for cocktails.

Sen. Bob Krueger (D-Tex.) expressed the fundamental problem--that government is incompetent--in crisp Perotian terms: “If the government were a store, nobody would buy here. If it were an airline, nobody would fly it.”

A recent Business Week article described “The Virtual Corporation,” the new phenomenon of “temporary networks of companies that come together quickly to exploit fast-changing opportunities.” Global competition forces change. Virtual corporations “could well be the model for the American business organization in the years ahead.” What about government organization? With the current crew, the prospects of applying these profound lessons to Washington are nil. Perot, with his business background and his blunt desire to “get under the hood” and fix things, has reformist credibility no politician can dream of.

So what does Perot want? The average billionaire lives a life of quiet desperation. With every material need satisfied, he has to find something to do. Some buy tabloid newspapers; others, baseball teams. Perot clearly relishes his “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” role. And what if lightning were to strike? Perot must be haunted by an exit poll from last November which showed that a stunning 36% of the voters would have voted for him if they had thought he could have won. With that share of the vote in a three-way race in 1996, Perot could indeed win.

But Doug Bailey, a veteran Republican who foresaw Perot’s rise last year, isn’t sure that Perot actually wants to be President. “I think he really wants to be the First Kibitzer,” Bailey said in an interview. Perot is likely to keep his presidential options open till the last minute. That means 3 1/2 years of “will he or won’t he?” stories, with accompanying heartburn for both parties. The Republicans would love to march in Perot’s populist parade, but Perot understands that his aura would be smudged if he consorted with either party. Clinton can try to co-opt some of Perot’s juice with White House perk purges and call-in shows, but he lacks Perot’s earthy urgency.

Clinton used the wrong system of quotas when he staffed his Administration without a single one of the 19 million Perot voters. Now, he would be wise to call Perot in to the Oval Office for a humble-pie session. And if Clinton’s troubles continue, don’t be surprised if he reaches under the hood of his own Administration and offers Perot a “policy czar” appointment well before the next election.