NEWS ANALYSIS : Stake in State’s Future Links Clinton, Feinstein : Politics: California’s importance improves her access to President, who is visiting L.A. to boost her campaign.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein and President Clinton share a powerful political bond: If California is in trouble, they are both in trouble.

Last year, when things were going badly in the Golden State, there seemed to be plenty for the two to disagree about. Feinstein (D-Calif.) harangued the new Administration for closing California military bases and for suggesting environmental sanctions against the state; she threatened to vote against the President’s budget unless there were changes and she opposed a landmark trade agreement.

But as Clinton arrives in Los Angeles today for a second visit to help Feinstein’s reelection campaign, there are signs of improvement in the California economy and, at the same time, relations between the two lawmakers are as good as ever. Clinton and Feinstein both played played major roles in getting congressional support for California’s Desert Protection Act and the assault weapons ban.

“They are in a situation right now that is the best of all worlds in politics, where you are both helping each other and nobody is dragging each other down,” said Susan Estrich, a USC law professor and former campaign manager for Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis. “Those are the rare moments when you can be embracing. . . . It helps her clout that the President of the United States has come in twice for her and it helps him to be in the state with the most popular politician in California.”

California’s high place on the White House priority list--due to its substantial impact on the national economy and on the 1996 presidential election--has helped give Feinstein extraordinary access to the President and the Administration for a freshman legislator.

She was the first rank-and-file member of Congress to talk privately with Clinton just days after he was inaugurated. And even though Democrats consider Feinstein a favorite for reelection, she is one of only four senators to benefit from a presidential campaign visit in this election cycle, and she is the only one to host Clinton twice.

Tonight, about 700 contributors, including many from Hollywood’s entertainment industry, will join Clinton and Feinstein in Beverly Hills for dinner and a performance by singers Ray Charles and Natalie Cole. Combined with another event in San Francisco last December, Clinton’s two visits are expected to generate about $1.4 million for Feinstein--more than 15% of her campaign’s total budget goal.

Feinstein believes her campaign will need a lot of money. The front-runner in the Republican primary, Rep. Michael Huffington (R-Santa Barbara), is a wealthy former Texas oilman who is spending his own money on a race that is sure to be one of the nation’s most expensive.

This week, the independent Field Poll reported that Huffington trails the incumbent by just 7 points, 48-41. Feinstein’s 26-point edge in an earlier Field Poll has shrunk as Huffington’s campaign has blitzed statewide television stations with about $4 million worth of commercials.

Huffington also led his closest Republican rival, ex-Rep. William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton), 37-21.

The poll shifted the perception of a contest that had seemed heavily lopsided in Feinstein’s favor. Coming just as the President arrives in Los Angeles, it also underscores the mutual reasons he and Feinstein have for this California visit--Clinton’s 12th since he was inaugurated.

“It’s the size of the state, the importance of the state in the national perspective and, obviously, the President holds her in high regard,” said Ken Klein, deputy executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

For her part, Feinstein is largely supportive of the President’s initiatives in Congress, where the Congressional Quarterly reports that she has backed Clinton with her votes 89% of the time. Still, she is far from his best supporter; 28 senators--half of the chamber’s Democrats--have voted even more consistently with the President.

“She is a priority for this Administration,” said Tom Epstein, the White House director for California affairs. “Sometimes, for us, it was a little uncomfortable when she would challenge the Administration publicly. But politically, it’s what she needed to do.”

Feinstein was under pressure to quickly prove herself when she arrived in Washington since she had barely 19 months until she would be tested on the California ballot.

When she first met Clinton in the Oval Office on Feb. 4, 1993, she recalled saying: “Mr. President, I must tell you California is in trouble and needs your help.” Feinstein later sent Clinton an eight-page outline for a “specific Administration-wide strategy for the California economy.”

The former San Francisco mayor said she received a commitment for help from the President, but at times it still appeared the senator and the Administration were headed in different directions.

The Administration targeted eight military bases for closure shortly after California’s unemployment rate hit a nine-year high of 10.1%. After state legislators wrestled with a $3-billion budget shortfall, Feinstein criticized a “Draconian” threat by federal environmental regulators to withhold $700 million in highway funds unless the state complied with strict clean air standards.

By summer, when the Administration unveiled its plan to fix the nation’s economic engine with a controversial $241-billion tax increase, Feinstein was well entrenched in the negotiations. She fought with the Administration to win tax breaks for California oil companies and real estate developers.

When the budget package finally passed by one vote, she and the Administration defended the tax increase by saying it was targeted largely at the richest Americans. Still, it is a vote Republicans want her to defend in the election.

Huffington said the budget vote was the deciding factor that led him to announce his Senate campaign, and last month, his commercials targeted the issue, saying: “In business, you learn that higher taxes destroy jobs. In government, they never learn that lesson.”

Feinstein said, however, she is ready to defend the vote. She also said she is confident voters will see that she and the White House have repeatedly demonstrated their dedication to California through earthquake relief, defense conversion funds, tougher immigration enforcement, targeted investment tax credits and the Desert Protection Act.

“I think my relationship with the White House has been super,” she said this week. “It’s impossible to agree on all things, but this is a President who knows domestic policy. . . . I am still pressing for more . . . but I think I’ve had a good response.”