The State : The ’94 Governor’s Race: The Wild Card and the Shadow Candidate

As Edmund G. (Jerry) Brown Jr. did in the 1992 Democratic presidential primary, state Sen. Tom Hayden is trying to hold Democrats hostage to a political reform agenda. And, as Brown did in ‘92, Hayden promises to bow out if the major Democratic candidates embrace his reforms. No wonder Hayden has been labeled the Jerry Brown of the ’94 gubernatorial campaign.

Two years ago, Brown carefully cultivated a populist, anti-Washington image. Hayden has carefully cultivated a populist, anti-Sacramento image. Both men are consummate “insider-outsiders,” using media savvy gained through years of political maneuvering to rail against a system that has never fully embraced them or their ideas.

The ’92 Democratic National Convention was abuzz with speculation over how Brown’s guerrilla antics would affect the party’s nominee, Bill Clinton. Would they push Clinton to the left in order to hold his party base? Or might they allow him to spotlight his move toward a moderate “third way”?

Today’s conventional wisdom holds that Hayden’s candidacy will likely hurt Kathleen Brown more than state Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi. At this point, front-runner Brown doesn’t need California’s political media to shake off its boredom and begin paying serious attention to the campaign.

But a Hayden candidacy could do that. Reporters like covering Hayden; they relish a livelier race. That’s good news for Garamendi, still lagging in fund-raising and name recognition. But better coverage can also help Kathleen Brown. The camera does love her.

In the late 1992 primaries, Jerry Brown’s “scorched earth” tactics forced Clinton to more clearly define his persona. Similarly, Hayden’s candidacy could help Kathleen Brown define herself--at a time when she is increasingly accused of “fuzziness.”

Of course, if being specific translates into sounding too liberal, Kathleen Brown could be in big trouble come the general election. But, again, 1992 is instructive. By pressing his reform agenda, Jerry Brown helped Clinton look more moderate. If Hayden remains in the race, Kathleen Brown will have to work harder and risk more in June, because she needs to win as Clinton did--without veering left or right. But if she survives the primary, that could make her a stronger candidate for November.

On the other hand, Kathleen Brown could panic and list to port. Indeed, Hayden, who plays the populist card more convincingly than Garamendi, could force both Brown and Garamendi to the left. The better to capture likely Democratic primary voters, perhaps--but not a comfortable position for the party’s nominee in a California general election.

Being Jerry Brown’s sister might have helped in the primary, if Kathleen could have quietly inherited the remnants of the “Brownies”--party activists whose enthusiasm helped keep Jerry Brown alive and pumping politically. He appealed to environmentalists, disaffected Democrats and younger, liberal activists--a nice primary base to have.

Hayden’s candidacy has precluded any stealth-liberal strategy. To hold supporters of Hayden’s strong stands on environmental issues and political reform, Kathleen Brown may be tempted to use her brother far more visibly than she would like. And that could prove to be heavy baggage in the fall.

The general electorate is more moderate than primary voters, and thus likely to be less tolerant of Jerry Brown. And with crime still a hot issue, Gov. Pete Wilson gleefully continues to tar Kathleen Brown with her brother’s liberal state Supreme Court appointments and opposition to the death penalty.

Then there is the matter of pre-primary debates. Hayden could certainly spice them up, because he’s scrappy and can give good sound-bite. No front-runner--particularly one whose momentum appears to have stalled--wants to face that kind of buzz-saw. But can Kathleen Brown afford to duck out? Not in this era of “teledemocracy.” Not when her opponents are panting to prove the lady is not tough enough for the rigors of campaigning, let alone governing.

So Kathleen Brown will probably have to participate in a few debates, and she could easily find herself overshadowed as Garamendi and Hayden policy-wonk it out. But that’s not necessarily harmful. Clinton, the ultimate policy wonk, often loses his audience when he abandons the rhetoric of the bully pulpit for technical jargon. Voters want leaders, not middle-level managers.

In 1992, Jerry Brown finally chose not to be an obstructionist. Hayden says he won’t be one, either. Indeed, if his candidacy ensures a spirited Democratic primary, it could boost Democratic chances in the nonpartisan race for superintendent of public instruction, the only statewide constitutional office that can be won outright in the primary.

Assemblywoman Delaine Eastin (D-Fremont), the front-runner, is supported by the Legislature’s Democratic leadership, teachers and women’s groups. Her strongest opponent is likely to be Maureen DiMarco, an apostate Democrat who has served the last three years as Wilson’s secretary of child development and education. A hotly contested gubernatorial primary on the Democratic side, coupled with what looks to be a lackluster Republican race, could conceivably produce a lopsided turnout that would give Eastin a June victory.

At the very least, Hayden, the wild card, and Brown, the shadow candidate, might bring to this election year the kind of unpredictability that makes California politics fun to watch. Countering a reporter’s characterization of his campaign as “whimsical,” Hayden retorted, “We need more whimsy in politics.”

On with the show!*