As Ire Fades, Perot Group Is a Spotlight in Search of a Focus : Politics: United We Stand plans to issue score cards on midterm candidates. But with voter optimism on the rise, the Texas tycoon must find a rallying point.

“Both political parties are doing everything they can to see that you’ll go away,” Ross Perot told leaders of United We Stand, America, Inc. as they gathered for their first national strategy session. “But we are not going to go away. We’re going to grow.”

But one central question remained unanswered when the meeting concluded Sunday: Can the organization Perot founded a year ago find a message strong and clear enough to stir voters in this fall’s midterm election and fulfill the Texas billionaire’s bright hopes for its future?

It is a formidable challenge. But Perot and his followers demonstrated in 1992 that they can exceed conventional political expectations when they found a place on the ballot for his presidential candidacy and helped him get 20% of the vote.

United We Stand officials hope to match that achievement this year by following a blueprint released Sunday after three days of workshops and pep talks for the group’s 100 state chairmen and directors, two from each state.

Banned from directly endorsing candidates for office because of its tax-exempt status, United We Stand will instead concentrate on informing voters of the views of office-seekers on 11 issues: a proposed balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution, campaign-finance reform, health care reform, the line-item veto, term limits, budget reform, congressional accountability, welfare reform, foreign lobbyists, government waste and education.

But to have any real effect on voters, the organization must overcome a number of obstacles, including a noticeable improvement in the mood of the American public since Perot entered national politics in 1992.

Perot was able to exploit voter distress about the recession and frustration with the gridlock that froze the Democratic Congress and the Republican President. Now the economy is surging, and Capitol Hill and the White House are bustling with activity.

“Perot is good at stirring up people about the failure of government to solve problems,” Vanderbilt University political scientist Erwin Hargrove said. “But if the political system seems to be working and at least to be trying to address problems, he doesn’t have much to go on.”

Still another problem for United We Stand is Perot himself. While the tycoon is the group’s chief asset, providing not only the resources of his bank account but the celebrity of his name, the other side of the coin is that it still seems to be heavily influenced by Perot’s personal inclinations and quirks.

“Mr. Perot is like the weather,” said Russell Verney, a former Democratic Party state director who signed on with Perot to help develop issues. “It’s not safe to predict what he is going to do until after he does it.”

Some of the state leaders assembled here say that Perot’s control of the organization is exaggerated. “The reason it’s misunderstood is that people get their information from the media,” said Dan Miller, a Los Angeles real estate operator who is United We Stand’s state director for California.

Fair or not, the organization seems to be stuck with the public perception that Perot calls most of the shots. For that reason, its fortunes are heavily dependent on public perceptions of Perot, whose image took a battering after his performance last fall in a televised debate with Vice President Al Gore over the merits of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

“I think the NAFTA debate showed Perot’s weakness on facts and the pettiness of his personality,” said George Shipley, a Democratic political consultant from Texas.

He predicted that Perot will drift into the Republican Party, taking his followers with him, in an effort to win the 1996 GOP presidential nomination.

Some analysts speculate that Perot might seize upon the health care issue, as a substitute for NAFTA, to get juices flowing among the electorate.

At the weekend meeting, Perot cited health care as a high priority for United We Stand, derided Clinton’s plan and warmly praised Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), author of an alternative to the White House initiative.

But Perot’s inherent mistrust of any form of federal health care reform would have to be overcome before he would get behind any of the competing proposals now before Congress, including Cooper’s plan.

In addition, Cooper’s bill has been endorsed by the Business Roundtable, just the sort of economic power group Perot often inveighs against.

Another challenge for United We Stand, because it is limited to providing information about issues rather than nominating or endorsing candidates, is to find a niche for itself in a political system dominated by partisan loyalties and personality preferences.

The campaign battle plan for United We Stand “makes it sound something like the League of Women Voters,” said Micah L. Sifry, editor of the Perot Periodical, a quarterly newsletter devoted to news of Perot and his movement. “If you are going to have a League of Women Voters agenda, you may just wind up with nothing more than League of Women Voters clout.”

But United We Stand leaders say they can confound the skeptics by blazing a new trail. “We will follow our own pattern, making it as we go along,” said Connie Smith, a state director.

Meanwhile, the group decided to keep the size of its membership to itself, reportedly because a majority believed that whatever figure was released would detract attention from more serious concerns.

“We feel this is the number we should focus on,” said Kentucky Chairwoman Debi Berberich as she pointed to a chart pegging the national debt at $4,522,736,000,000. “United We Stand America will be present until that number is zero.”