GOP Faces Rugged Journey in Quest for White House

The ballots had scarcely been tallied in last month’s midterm elections before Republican Sens. Bob Dole of Kansas, Phil Gramm of Texas and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania were off to make new friends in Iowa, where the competition to become the next GOP standard-bearer doesn’t officially begin for 14 months.

The early burst of activity is easy to understand. The Republicans’ stunning sweep of Congress has boosted optimism about the party’s chances of recapturing the White House, making a GOP presidential nomination that much more desirable.

But as the glow from November’s triumph fades, party professionals soberly acknowledge that the path back to the Oval Office will not be an easy one. On the contrary, it is fraught with perils--many of a sort that Republicans have not had to face for half a century.

Before they took control of Congress, Republicans could concentrate simply on denouncing President Clinton’s government. Now they are responsible for half the government themselves. Said Charles Black, who will probably manage the presidential campaign of either Gramm or former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Jack Kemp: “Voters expect performance from us.”

GOP strategists acknowledge that those expectations may be difficult to meet for a host of reasons.

Furthermore, the 1996 presidential contenders face the biggest early crush of primaries and caucuses ever--a situation that is largely a result of states’ efforts to position themselves as powerbrokers. The shortened schedule creates a fund-raising burden that could obliterate the hopes of all but a few well-heeled candidates.

For the time being, Republicans like to dwell on the positive side of their election victory. By scoring a net gain of 10 governorships, the Republicans took command of 30 states, including eight of the nine largest.

“We have more depth at the state level than we have had since ‘64,” said Republican political consultant Eddie Mahe, a veteran of the last five presidential campaigns. “And that gives us more power to drive turnout on Election Day.”

Some also rejoice at the chance to shape the national political debate. “The Republicans in Congress now have the chance to adopt a positive agenda,” said Bill Phillips, a former GOP Senate staffer who is thinking about helping the efforts of either of two 1996 prospects--California Gov. Pete Wilson or former Defense Secretary Dick Cheney.

Nevertheless, finding the magic formula for the 1996 presidential campaign could turn out to be particularly hard for the Republicans because so much of the early action is going to take place on Capitol Hill.

“The merging of our congressional agenda, which is going to be aggressive, with our presidential campaign message could create some opportunities for real pain,” Mahe worried aloud in a recent interview.

While presidential candidates like to deal in sweeping generalizations, stressing themes rather than specifics, legislators make deals and cut corners--just the sort of maneuvers that can turn off potential constituents.

Moreover, in addition to the general tension between campaigning and legislation, the GOP must worry about a host of potential conflicts over specific issues that could spill over on the campaign trail from Congress--and vice versa.

For example, Senate Republican leader and prospective candidate Dole, who still harbors the traditional conservative concerns about holding down the federal budget deficit, has made it clear he is less enthusiastic than incoming House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) about enacting the House GOP’s “contract with America,” with its package of tax cuts.

The same issue also presents the potential for a clash in the Senate--and on the hustings--between Dole and Gramm, an influential Senate force and a formidable rival for GOP nominee.

A fight is already under way on immigration policy. It was touched off before last month’s elections by Kemp, who denounced Proposition 187, the successful California ballot measure, backed by Wilson, that cuts off public services to illegal immigrants. GOP pollster Frank Luntz predicts that the battle will be renewed in states troubled by illegal immigration, notably California, Texas and Florida.

Equally touchy and divisive are social issues, particularly school prayer and abortion. No sooner had Gingrich announced his intentions to push for adoption of a school prayer amendment to the Constitution than a number of Republican governors urged their colleagues in Congress to concentrate instead on the economic issues that produced the Republican landslide.

Even Michigan Gov. John Engler, a conservative on social issues, said: “If we don’t deal with economic issues, we’ll need more than prayer to solve our problems.”

Meanwhile, supporters of abortion rights are planning another effort at the 1996 Republican convention to modify or repeal the party’s platform plank favoring a constitutional ban on abortion. They are hoping to get help from such sympathetic governors as Wilson, Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey and William F. Weld of Massachusetts.

Among those expected to lead the charge on the other side is conservative commentator and former Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan White House aide Patrick J. Buchanan, who is weighing a 1996 follow-up to his 1992 challenge to President George Bush.

“Our position is that the platform should not be changed,” said his sister and likely campaign manager, Angela (Bay) Buchanan.

Whatever else they disagree on, most Republicans accept the notion that money will be the key to success in the nominating contest more than at any time in history. The reason: A number of big states have moved up their primary dates to the early part of the calendar. The move was begun by California and others--notably New York and Ohio--quickly followed suit.

The result is that by the end of March, 1996, voters in at least 25 states will have cast ballots for an estimated 1,150 delegates--well over half the 2,000 or so delegates who will choose the 1996 GOP nominee. By comparison, in 1992 only 17 states had selected 823 of 2,210 delegates by that time.

Republican strategists theorize that to compete effectively, a candidate must be able to raise $20 million by the end of January, 1995. That’s more money than the combined total raised by all the Democratic candidates by that date in 1992.

Based on the judgments of party professionals, which are weighted heavily by their view of a candidate’s ability to raise funds, here’s a brief, early look at the strengths and weaknesses of the GOP’s prospects for the White House:

The Front-Runners

BOB DOLE: As the GOP’s senior national elected official, the 71-year-old Kansan can make news and get attention almost at will. He already has two presidential campaigns under his belt and has proved he can raise the funds that he would need in 1996 if, as is widely expected, he decides to run.

But Dole’s role in the Senate could turn out to be as much of a burden as a boost by draining time and energy he would need for the campaign trail. Moreover, Dole has yet to demonstrate that he can extend his vision beyond the limits of the Senate chamber to build a presidential base of support. “The better a senator you are, the worse you are at projecting the national leadership you need as President,” said one adviser, David Keene.

PHIL GRAMM: No one, except possibly Dole, will be better fixed financially than Gramm for a presidential campaign. He has clearly telegraphed his intention to enter the race, perhaps in a month or two. No one is considered better organized intellectually and politically for meeting the challenges of the campaign trail than the 52-year-old ex-Democrat, who has dedicated his career to cutting taxes and spending.

Gramm jokes that he may be too homely to be President. But his critics, and even some of his admirers, say his real problem is his bloodless style. “It is unclear that he can inspire any kind of emotional response from voters,” said one sometime adviser.

The Second Tier

LAMAR ALEXANDER: By hustling for grass-roots support and appealing to the public’s anti-Washington mood with the slogan: “Cut their pay and send them home,” the former Tennessee governor has probably taken better advantage of the past two years than any of his rivals.

But the 51-year-old Alexander remains a relative unknown, and, although no one doubts that he will run, many Republicans doubt he will be able to raise enough money. Some also wonder whether, beyond his catchy slogan, Alexander has much to say.

DICK CHENEY: As former defense secretary, former House whip and former Gerald R. Ford White House chief of staff, the 51-year-old Cheney has impressive credentials. No one in the field is more respected for his intellect, integrity and political savvy.

But Cheney has never run for office outside his home state of Wyoming and would probably have trouble raising money in a large field. Some say his cerebral style is too dull for the presidential campaign trail.

JACK KEMP: The 59-year-old Kemp can claim a national base of support, and his inclusive view of conservatism offers the broadest potential appeal of any Republican.

But even his admirers complain that he has spent the last two years seemingly adrift and that he lacks focus.

“My guess is that he either won’t run, or if he does, will make up his mind too late,” said one supporter of Kemp’s 1988 bid for the GOP nomination.

DAN QUAYLE: Unless his recovery from his recent pulmonary embolism turns out to be more complicated than his doctors predict, Quayle is expected to run. “Nothing else interests him, including making money,” one former aide said.

The 47-year-old former vice president’s assets are high name recognition and the theme of family values that he helped introduce to national politics. But most professionals say that it will take him more than one presidential campaign to overcome the lightweight image he acquired as Bush’s understudy.

PETE WILSON: By winning reelection to the governorship of the nation’s most populous state, the 61-year-old made himself a potential factor in 1996. Apart from his presumed ability to deliver his state’s 54 electoral votes, Wilson also has a reputation for pragmatic governance that his admirers claim would match the public mood.

But others contend that given his problems at home, including having to deal with Democratic Lt. Gov. Gray Davis, Wilson would be well-advised to stick to his stated intention not to run.

Even this list is not complete. Others who are considering the run range from such long shots as Buchanan on the right to Specter. Although Buchanan, 55, still has a base of support from his 1992 campaign against Bush, his critics say his views on trade, foreign policy and social issues are too extreme and his style too abrasive.

As for the 64-year-old Specter, who is considering making a run as an economic conservative and a moderate on social issues, most analysts say he would have a hard time surmounting his liberal image. They believe Weld, 49, another long shot with moderate views on social issues, would have a better chance, should he decide to run.

Still another possibility is former Secretary of State James A. Baker III. But critics note that Baker, 64, has never won elective office and that his recent experience has been limited to foreign affairs. Whichever candidate ultimately captures the nomination, he will hope to have learned a lesson from history.

The last time the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress in advance of a presidential election was in 1946. But they were unable to capitalize on what should have been a golden opportunity to seize the White House.

Not only did President Harry S. Truman retain the presidency by upsetting GOP standard-bearer Thomas E. Dewey, but Democrats took back the Senate and House.

Dewey biographer Richard Norton Smith wrote that one reason Truman won was because he “skillfully exploited the chronic split within GOP ranks” between hard-line conservative congressional leaders who wanted to undo government activism and the party’s moderates, led by Dewey.

Smith, now director of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, and other analysts say they believe that the Republicans could fall into a similar pitfall in the 1996 campaign if they misread the mandate that gave them their new power in Washington.

“I don’t think there is a universal condemnation of government” in the election returns, Smith said.

Rather, the lesson to be drawn from the vote, he said, “is that the race is on to formulate a new approach to government--one that is sympathetic to people and reflects the values of taxpayers.”