Lack of Defining Issues Hampers Davis, Lungren

When gubernatorial nominees Gray Davis and Dan Lungren left the debate stage last week after their second scrappy battle, the reviews were bad enough to shutter any Broadway show.

“Shallow and sophomoric,” one critic wrote. “Downright embarrassing,” griped another. Particularly obnoxious, some complained, was the candidates’ snarling fixation on two issues--abortion and capital punishment--that the next governor can do little about, no matter who wins.

Bad reviews or not, it was entirely predictable.

The Republican attorney general and the Democratic lieutenant governor are caught in an issue void, bereft of the incendiary or groundbreaking matters that dominated past elections, such as illegal immigration or affirmative action or property tax reform.

The economy, everyone’s favorite focus in bad years, is humming along, which is great for the pocketbook but lousy for its political salience. El Nino aside, even nature has given California a rare year or two off from cataclysm, smoothing the state’s once-roiling psychic seas. So placid is the state’s political environment that candidates are increasingly jittery about whether voters will bother to show up in November.

And in that fair weather void, a few old standards--such as the death penalty and abortion--always surface. But political analysts defend their utility, insisting that--far from being useless props for finger-jabbing candidates--those issues are symbolic markers that voters use to define politicians largely unknown to them.

Other issues--such as water or growth--are so complicated or the candidates’ positions so murky that they are basically useless to voters at this stage of the election, analysts say.

“The whole thing is an amalgamation of symbolic issues right now,” Republican media consultant Don Sipple said of the governor’s race. “That’s the kind of year we’re in.”

The kind of year is largely out of the control of the candidates. While several hot-button initiatives appeared on the June ballot, none made November’s short list. The best-known of the looming initiatives is Proposition 5, which would govern gaming on Native American lands. Although it may set a spending record, analysts consider it far less likely to blossom into an issue that could affect other races.

Education is the acknowledged top issue this year, and the gubernatorial candidates have tried to use it to define each other and themselves. Davis has adopted a centrist Democrat approach, insisting on more accountability and acceding to the notion of teacher testing. Lungren favors vouchers and far more power for parents and local officials.

But in the zippy sound bites that dominate political rhetoric, each man has come across so far as more or less anti-status quo, supporting more charter schools and other tools meant to improve school performance, as much similar as they are different.

“The difficulty for the candidates is that it’s easy to blur their views on education. And on the economy--well, nobody’s for not growing the economy,” said Democratic consultant Darry Sragow. “There is legitimate debate about the role of vouchers and legitimate differences played out in the budget battle, but those are not easy distinctions to draw in 20-second sound bites. And there’s not a lot of ready symbolism there.”

Hence the ready symbolism of the old standards. Neither candidate could do much about abortion or the death penalty if elected, either because their desires would fly in the face of public opinion or because of restrictions on a governor’s power.

Yet analysts say that the candidates’ positions are sending important, if nuanced, messages.

“The argument that neither the death penalty or abortion are relevant is just not true,” said veteran GOP consultant Ron Smith. “We in society have sort of chosen the death penalty as a symbol of crime and abortion as a social issue. From that, the discussion gets into what each of them are about.

“What the voter is really looking for is what kind of a person is the candidate--a look into the soul of the candidate.”

With his support of the death penalty, Davis is signaling that he is no traditional Democrat, a sentiment he furthers with constant references to his service in Vietnam. Lungren is asserting that he is the more vociferous proponent, the better to assert mainstream credentials and deny Davis any traction on the issue.

Both are trying to send the message that they understand voters’ fears about crime and side with victims over perpetrators.

The symbolism of abortion is slightly more textured. Davis favors abortion rights--along with the majority of Californians--and insists that Lungren would turn back the clock on the rights of women, the state’s largest voter bloc. Lungren casts his opposition to abortion in religious terms, which voters in the past have deemed an acceptable reason to differ from the consensus.

But Lungren also takes pains to note how little he could do as governor to change the state’s abortion laws and voices sympathy for women considering the abortion option, thereby laying claim to a political attribute necessary for any successful California Republican--tolerance.

The bottom line for both men: I’m mainstream and comfortable; he’s extreme and scary. I’m like you; he’s not.

“It’s not about specific issue positions,” said Sragow--even, he says, when an anti-illegal immigration measure such as Proposition 187 or the tax-cutting Proposition 13 is on the ballot.

“[Instead] it’s about whether you understand the fear of property taxes rising, or the fear of illegal immigrants taking over jobs.”

GOP consultant Sipple concurs, noting that in post-election polling, voters who are asked why they sided with a particular candidate never cite a five-point program on some pressing issue.

“What you find a lot is, ‘I just like him better,’ or ‘I just trust him more,’ ” he said. “That basic decision is usually a personal quality. Issues have been the prism by which voters learn that quality.”

Political analysts suggest that neither man has clinched the sale in the debates. Stylistically, Lungren was seen as the winner of the first debate, on July 31 in San Diego, and Davis rebounded to take the second, last Tuesday in Fresno.

Both have occasionally appeared ill-mannered and boorish, but neither has made an egregious error. And even if someone had, few were watching. Which brings up another concern of analysts and candidates this year: When, exactly, will people start to tune in?

Already, representatives of both major political parties are predicting low voter turnout for November because of the bland state environment and the simultaneous distaste for the sexual spectacle in Washington. Since Republicans are more dependable voters, that could spell trouble for Davis, who holds a tenuous lead over Lungren in opinion polls--as well as for Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, who is essentially deadlocked with her GOP challenger, state Treasurer Matt Fong.

While events could certainly change dramatically before November, many believe that President Clinton’s troubles could affect the 1998 state races, much as the O.J. Simpson trial affected the 1994 contests--by draining attention away.

“Either people say, ‘I’m turning off the news, period, because I can’t stand it,’ or they say, ‘Hey, what’s the next juicy thing,’ ” said Smith. “State news will find it very difficult to break through.

“People have a lot of important things to consider,” he added.

And the election?

“It doesn’t seem to be on that list.”