NEWS ANALYSIS : Affirmative Action Raises Wilson Profile : Politics: The governor gets much-needed attention from his foes in presidential campaign after UC adopts policy change. But some experts question the long-term gains.

Like a pop-up target in a shooting gallery, Gov. Pete Wilson finally scored enough points in his presidential campaign last week to become worthy of a few shots from his opponents.

Hours after Wilson won a political victory by persuading the University of California Board of Regents to drop race and ethnicity as a factor in hiring and admissions, a stinging document branding the governor as a hypocrite for signing 21 affirmative action bills was loaded into fax machines at the White House.

By Sunday a week ago, the attack had reached prominent newspaper pundits and morning talk show guests. “Gov. Wilson has a problem because Gov. Wilson signed into law 21 bills on affirmative action and is now opposed,” former Republican Education Secretary William Bennett said on NBC’s “Meet The Press.”

Instead of anger, Wilson’s campaign delighted in the blast of national attention particularly because it pitted the governor against President Clinton. And in a television interview last Monday, Wilson blamed White House adviser George Stephanopolous for leaking the information to one of his Republican critics.

“I think Bill Bennett needs to do his homework and not have George Stephanopolous do it for him,” the governor charged on CNN.

Stephanopolous said he did not provide the information to Bennett, but he was unaware how Wilson’s staff obtained a copy of the Democrat-prepared attack with a cover sheet faxed from his office. “I’ve never distributed anything to Bill Bennett,” Stephanopolous said.

These are the days Wilson’s campaign has been waiting for. For months it has been left to wallow in obscurity because of a series of setbacks, controversies and bad luck. Finally, Wilson enjoyed a politically therapeutic spotlight that portrayed him nationwide as the conservative point man challenging the forces of Clinton and Jesse Jackson. (Jackson later announced a bid to recall Wilson, which requires obtaining the signatures of more than 1 million registered voters.)

As a result, Wilson fund-raisers last week predicted a resurgence in their slumping effort to raise campaign money. And in key states such as Iowa and New Hampshire, organizers said the week could pay off in places where voters know very little about the California governor.

“It was a good introduction,” said Wilson campaign manager George Gorton. “We’ve made no secret that we plan to campaign on his accomplishments.”

As the spotlight faded through the week, however, Wilson’s gains were balanced against the political uncertainty about the highly charged debate over affirmative action. Several political observers described Wilson’s experience as a short-term gain but a long-term question mark.

“To the extent that it gives him the presence today and energizes his people, that’s a plus,” said GOP strategist Sal Russo. “Could it be a negative? It’s too early to tell.”

Wilson’s staff produced a report on the 21 controversial bills in which they explained, one by one, why they believe the measures do not represent an inconsistency with the governor’s stand against affirmative action.

In some cases, Wilson signed bills that contained only an obscure connection to the issue.

Aside from the 21 bills in Sacramento, however, affirmative action already counted as an issue that Wilson has championed from both sides. As mayor of San Diego in the 1970s, Wilson approved a five-year guideline for minority hiring goals as well as a rule that imposed ethnic employment as a criteria for choosing the city’s major contractors.

The contrast with Wilson’s current crusade against the evils of affirmative action has led his critics to charge that he is only using the issue to further his political ambition.

“I believe that this issue will taint Wilson and hurt him more than it helps him,” said Paul Begala, a Clinton political adviser. “Gov. Wilson seems to think the worst thing you can be labeled is a moderate or a liberal. I think the worst thing you can be labeled is a hypocrite.”

Wilson’s supporters said last week it is too early to tell how much of a boost the recent attention will give Wilson in the early presidential contests of Iowa and New Hampshire. In both states, local officials said affirmative action has only received scant attention largely because the population of Iowa and New Hampshire is at least 97% white.

But Wilson strategists said they expect the issue to gain more attention in those states as the presidential candidates are called on to address an increasingly vital national debate. Wilson’s team also believes that even for those not directly affected by affirmative action, the issue will help shape opinions about the governor’s political philosophy and his record.

Gorton said affirmative action will be one of the five major issues to which Wilson will stake his presidential campaign. The others are illegal immigration, government spending, welfare and crime.

The campaign hopes that those issues--each accompanied by specific accomplishments they will attribute to Wilson--can drive home a secondary message that unlike the governor’s major opponents, he is a chief executive who does not work in Washington.

Political observers say, however, that affirmative action is still a volatile issue that could come to overwhelm the others on Wilson’s list. Coming on the heels of Wilson’s support for Proposition 187 last year--the California ballot measure that sought to halt public benefits for illegal immigrants--they said Wilson risks a controversial national reputation as the candidate of angry white males.

As an example of the danger, some pointed to the unsolicited endorsement Wilson received last week from a white supremacist leader attending the annual Aryan World Congress in Idaho.

“If the Aryan Brotherhood is hearing that Pete Wilson is the white power candidate that means there are some average, normal black people who are hearing the same thing,” said Russo. “I don’t think Wilson is trying to send that message. But . . . we [Republicans] don’t want to send that message to them.”

The incendiary potential of a debate over race relations has also caused several leading GOP leaders to express their support for affirmative action or to urge that fellow Republicans follow caution.

Some of the moderate Republicans whom Wilson has solicited to help his presidential campaign have endorsed affirmative action programs, namely Massachusetts Gov. William Weld, New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman and New York Mayor Rudolph Guiliani. Wilson has appeared at news conferences for his presidential campaign with all three Republicans, although only Weld has endorsed the California governor.

Some observers warned that GOP women who might be influenced by Wilson’s support for abortion rights could also be troubled by his position on affirmative action.

“He is the hope of the Republican presidential candidates for those women who want to vote for somebody they perceive to represent their best interests,” said Mary Crisp, chairwoman of the National Republican Coalition for Choice. “And Gov. Wilson has been there. But this affirmative action policy of his certainly makes women look twice.”

Among conservatives, Bennett, who crossed swords with Wilson by opposing Proposition 187, criticized the governor’s actions on affirmative action. And former U.S. housing Secretary Jack Kemp joined House Speaker Newt Gingrich in urging GOP opponents of affirmative action to balance their criticism with a positive alternative.

One reason for caution is that recent public polls on affirmative action have identified a complex and possibly evolving mosaic of opinions on the balance between race relations and jobs in America.

A nationwide poll released Wednesday by CNN/USA Today/Gallup found two-thirds of Americans believe that affirmative action has been good for the country and only a quarter believe it should be eliminated. More than two-thirds also agreed with President Clinton’s position that affirmative action programs do not have to discriminate against whites.

A recent poll by the Los Angeles Times found similar feelings in California. At the same time, however, most respondents agreed with Wilson that university enrollment should be based on merit instead of race. And by a margin of more than 2 to 1, Californians endorsed an initiative to end racial preference programs that is proposed for the 1996 ballot.

Last week, at the University of California regents meeting, Wilson witnessed the heartfelt feelings evoked by the discussion of affirmative action. During the course of their 13-hour meeting, several regents from various minority groups told poignant life stories of their experiences with discrimination from which they drew opposite conclusions about the merits of affirmative action.