NEWS ANALYSIS : GOP Scrambling to Minimize Damage in Likely Defeat of Term Limits Proposal

If, as seems likely, congressional term limits go down to defeat in the GOP-controlled Congress, Republicans are likely to incur the wrath of the same surly electorate that put them in control of Capitol Hill last fall.

And this time, it will be difficult for Republicans to blame Democrats for the demise of the term limits proposal because so many senior members of their own party--including members of the GOP leadership--oppose it.

Republicans face the grim prospect of ending their vaunted “first 100 days” without passing the most popular elements of their “contract with America”--term limits and the balanced-budget amendment. Surveys have shown that both constitutional changes enjoy widespread support among anti-government voters who were crucial to the outcome of the 1994 elections.

What’s more, the defeat of term limits, the cornerstone of GOP claims for transforming the way Washington works, could expose Republicans to criticism that they have reformed everything in the Capitol but the basis of their own political power.

“If we fail to pass it, unless we deliver all of the Republicans, we will carry the burden of failing,” said GOP pollster Eddie Mahe. “People of both parties who oppose it will find (next year’s political campaign) to be a very unpleasant experience.”

To be sure, the political fallout could dissipate by the time voters go to the polls in 1996. And term limits might be overshadowed by congressional action on other issues that hit voters closer to home, such as welfare reform, taxes and spending cuts. Many Republicans are hoping that, even if term limits are rejected, the GOP will get political credit for at least bringing the issue to a House vote for the first time--which is, strictly speaking, all they promised in their “contract with America.”

But term limits, along with the balanced-budget amendment, are litmus test issues for a crucial bloc of voters--the anti-government voters who tended to back the 1992 candidacy of Ross Perot. Some Republicans fear a term limits defeat will increase public cynicism about politicians, drive those swing voters away from the GOP and improve the climate for a third party.

“What people voted for on Nov. 8 was a change in the way Congress does business,” said freshman Rep. Marshall (Mark) Sanford (R-S.C.). “If we don’t do something about term limits, it raises the specter of a third party.”

Faced with those political risks, Republicans are scrambling to limit the damage from the near-inevitable defeat of the amendment. House GOP leaders this week averted what was sure to be a resounding defeat of term limits by postponing a scheduled vote for at least two weeks. They are using the extra time to regroup and to find a legislative formula that will get maximum Republican support.

GOP leaders tentatively agreed Friday to a strategy that would allow the House to vote on three GOP alternatives. One would limit House members to six years, another would impose a 12-year limit and a third would set a 12-year ceiling but allow states to set stricter limits if they choose. All would restrict senators to 12 years in office.

Under the arrangement, Democrats would be allowed to offer a fourth alternative. Because the measure is a constitutional amendment, a two-thirds majority--290 votes in the House--is needed for approval.

The issue had a special place in the GOP’s campaign manifesto. Term limits not only are wildly popular. They are also one of the simplest issues in the contract and an emblem of voters’ impatience with the Washington Establishment. Other issues in the contract, such as regulatory reform, product liability and limits on federal mandates to the states, are more complex and generate less grass-roots passion, analysts say.

Term limits are “the most visible reform aspect of the contract, and a ‘no’ vote on term limits that gets pinned on Republicans is certainly going to have an impact on our standing with Perot voters,” said Glen Bolger, another Republican pollster. “Republicans have to be able to make the case that it’s the Democrats that are keeping it from passing.”

That could be a tough case to make. Unlike other items on their legislative agenda, the term limits issue divides the party deeply. Term limit opponents include such influential party members as Majority Whip Tom DeLay of Texas, Republican Conference Chairman John A. Boehner of Ohio and Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.), chairman of the committee that drafted the measure.

Republican resistance to term limits is the latest and most important example of the difficulties that GOP reformers have confronted when their revolutionary impulses threatened the powers of incumbency. When they met late last year to organize for the new Congress, House Republicans quashed freshman proposals to cut such cherished perquisites as personal staff and taxpayer-financed mailings. Efforts to restructure the jurisdiction of House committees ran into similar opposition from chairmen whose turf was threatened.

Some House leaders are working hard to dispel the impression that Republicans are not doing all they can to pass term limits. They are using a two-week delay to let term limits lobbying groups increase pressure on members. But opinions on the subject appear to be relatively solid, so it is not clear how much will change.

Many Republicans dismiss the idea that the party will pay a political price for the rejection of term limits. They contend that the GOP promised no more than to bring term limits to a vote on the House floor. They probably will spend much of the next two weeks leading up to the vote to make sure the public understands that.