Clinton’s ‘New Democrat’ Agenda Reopens Racial Divisions : President’s ideas on crime and welfare don’t sit well with blacks in Congress. Liberals’ dissatisfaction may be rising.

The old racial divides within the Democratic coalition are resurfacing as President Clinton pursues his “new Democrat” agenda on crime, welfare and other domestic matters.

On an array of racially charged issues, tensions are sharpening between the Administration and black leaders. Crime tops the list of disputes, with the Congressional Black Caucus and the Rev. Jesse Jackson intensifying their efforts to derail tough anti-crime legislation that Clinton has urged Congress to complete quickly.

But rifts are looming on other issues as well, including the pressure on domestic spending imposed by the budget deal the Administration pushed through Congress last summer and Clinton’s expected proposal to require all welfare recipients to work after two years on the rolls. In floor speeches last week, several black representatives pointedly proposed that if the government is going to halt aid to poor women after two years, it should apply the same limit to other recipients of federal subsidies, like farmers and victims of hurricanes, floods and earthquakes.

Like the battle with organized labor last fall over the North American Free Trade Agreement, the divisions between the President and black leaders reflect the strains in Clinton’s effort to synthesize an appeal that attracts moderates without alienating the party’s base. Although the Democratic left still supports much of Clinton’s agenda--particularly his push for universal health coverage--the black leadership’s dissent on crime and welfare may represent a cutting edge of rising dissatisfaction among liberals about the Administration’s direction.

“Clinton has shown a consistent flexibility when pressured,” one source close to Jackson said. “So if people go back to the streets and escalate the pressure, he will bend to where the pressure comes.”

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles), a leader in the black caucus and an early Clinton supporter during the 1992 campaign, said: “Everybody is anxious to get along with the President. But when I endorsed him, I knew it wouldn’t be a love-fest. I want to handle (differences) as diplomatically as possible, but I have to be true to my philosophy and my constituency, and I think that speaks to where the black caucus is now.”

So far, these rumblings on the left show no sign of changing Clinton’s direction: In his State of the Union Address last month, he reaffirmed his support for the two-year welfare limit and endorsed the “three strikes” provision that would impose life imprisonment without parole on criminals convicted of three violent felonies--a measure staunchly opposed by the black caucus and other liberals. But the pressure is certain to rise as the crime and welfare issues move forward in the House.

“This is going to be a real test,” one of Clinton’s centrist advisers says. “This could very well be the crunch.”

Although Clinton’s relations with Jackson and some other black leaders were uneven during his campaign, as President he has almost entirely avoided direct confrontations. The only exception occurred last summer, when black leaders fumed at Clinton’s decision to withdraw the nomination of C. Lani Guinier for the Justice Department’s top civil rights job.

Clinton only filled that crucial job last week, with the appointment of Boston attorney Deval Patrick, after opposition from the black caucus doomed his second nominee, John Payton. Other key civil rights jobs in the Administration, including the chairmanship at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, remain unfilled--a delay that has angered many black leaders.

But the sharpest divisions between Clinton and the black political leadership are opening not on civil rights but crime. In some ways, the dialogue in the black community about crime is moving toward Clinton’s stress on values and individual responsibility: Jackson in particular has escalated his denunciation of black-on-black crime. Black legislators also broadly support Clinton’s call for more police and tighter gun control.

But black leaders simultaneously are amplifying their criticism of the anti-crime legislation the Senate passed last fall. Civil rights groups and black legislators maintain that the Senate bill’s emphasis on prison construction and toughened sentences will be ineffective and is likely to “disproportionately” penalize African Americans, as Rep. Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) put it.

Rep. Craig Washington (D-Tex.) has put forward an alternative crime bill that runs entirely against the current in the Senate: His legislation would eliminate all mandatory minimum sentences (which civil rights groups maintain are applied disproportionately against blacks and Latinos), expand drug treatment for prisoners and fund social programs like Head Start and midnight sports leagues in troubled neighborhoods rather than spend $3 billion on new prisons, as the Senate bill proposes. Hearings on the legislation are scheduled for later this month, and although it has little chance of passage, it is likely to influence House deliberations.

Gingerly, some Clinton advisers and legislative allies have suggested that in resisting his blend of prevention and punishment, the black congressional leaders may be out of touch with their own constituents.

In fact, polls show that the view of blacks and whites on crime overlap substantially--although they diverge in important respects as well.

A recent Los Angeles Times survey showed that blacks are more optimistic than whites that prisoners can be rehabilitated, more worried that a crackdown on criminals might produce increased discrimination against minorities and somewhat more likely to tilt the balance in spending toward prevention rather than punishment.

But blacks do not differ significantly from whites in their support for stiffened penalties on criminals: In the recent Times Poll, 71% of blacks said juveniles who commit crimes should be treated as adults, and more than two-thirds supported the “three strikes” provision; three in five blacks support the death penalty, other surveys indicate.

On welfare reform, the politics are equally complicated. Most of the black caucus already appears leery of Clinton’s evolving welfare reform initiative: Many of them signed a letter organized by House liberals last fall criticizing the time limit and other expected key elements of his plan. In a floor speech last week, Rep. Major R. Owens (D-N.Y.), said that, if poor women were to be cut off government aid after two years, “I want to spread that principle so that every American who gets any kind of assistance, any subsidy--and I am not talking about Social Security--should have a limitation of two years.”

As on crime, some Clinton supporters suggest that the black legislators may be taking more doctrinaire positions on welfare reform than their constituents.

In polling, whites are more likely than blacks to blame welfare dependency on lack of individual initiative; African Americans primarily point the finger at jobs. But across the racial divide, views on policy options largely converge. Recent surveys have found that blacks, like whites, overwhelmingly support a two-year time limit on welfare, as long as recipients are offered public service.

“I think the politics of either/or on crime and welfare reform does a disservice to both blacks and whites,” says Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster who has conducted recent surveys on both issues. “Whites don’t only believe in getting tough and blacks don’t only believe in giving a helping hand. It’s possible for intelligent human beings to hold both ideas in their heads at the same time. And in fact most people--black and white--do.”

If Clinton is to avoid a racial split in the Democratic Party over welfare and crime, he may first have to convince black leaders that his agenda embodies compassion as well as toughness--and then convince them they should accept that balance as well.

How Do Views Differ by Race?

Blacks generally agree with Clinton welfare proposals and support “three strikes” crime legislation even though many think that tougher crime laws would discriminate against minorities.

On welfare reform: That all able-bodied welfare recipients be required to get a job after two years of training or lose their benefits.

Whites Blacks Favor 90% 73% Oppose 7% 26% Don’t know 3% 1%

*

On “three strikes”: Proposals would require that any criminal convicted of three violent felonies be imprisoned for life without the possibility of parole.

Whites Blacks Favor 81% 67% Oppose 15% 28% Don’t know 4% 5%

*

On tougher crime measures: If anti-crime laws and prison sentences become stricter, would they cause increased discrimination against minority groups or will they be enforced equitably for all racial groups?

Whites Blacks Will discriminate 18% 43% Enforced equitably 71% 44% Don’t know 11% 13%