All of L.A. Tries to Court the Democrats

Los Angeles’ most powerful and politically connected leaders set aside party and other differences last week to make their case for bringing the 2000 Democratic National Convention to town--a quest that has economic but mostly symbolic significance for a city eager to prove that it has rebounded from the depths of the early 1990s.

The litany of supporters who chipped in during an intense lobbying effort was enormous. Among them: Democratic insider and kingmaker William Wardlaw, billionaire Democrat Eli Broad, Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, executives from DreamWorks SKG, City Council President John Ferraro and, oddly, the city’s mayor, Richard Riordan, a lifelong Republican who nevertheless often enjoys the company of Democrats.

Riordan’s place near the head of the effort makes the campaign a bipartisan one and emphasizes the city’s appeal to the Democratic Party’s sense of itself--modern and moderate, with a coalition as ethnically diverse as Los Angeles and yet committed to the middle of the political spectrum.

Combined with the long absence of the national political conventions--the last visit was in 1960, when John F. Kennedy received the Democratic Party torch--that symbolic appeal to the Democrats at the millennium has left the city backers of the drive convinced that they are strong contenders for the event.

Courting Support in Washington

Addressing supporters of the convention campaign Thursday night, a giddy Riordan exclaimed: “New Orleans, Philadelphia and the rest, watch out. You ain’t got a chance.”

Although a final decision on the convention site is not expected until the fall, the Los Angeles delegation waged its first battle in Washington last week, rallying its own supporters at an elegant but sedate reception in northwest Washington and then hosting Democratic National Committee members at a rousing party at Union Station. That affair, complete with mariachis, Hollywood lights and piles of California food and wine, drew more than 300 committee members. They were shuttled to and from their hotels on charter buses and escorted into the room across a long strip of red carpet.

Guests at the party generally avoided questions about Los Angeles’ chances, saying that it was too soon to handicap a race that has barely begun. But several said they considered Los Angeles a serious contender.

Bill White, chairman of the Texas Democratic Party, chatted briefly with Riordan at the party and afterward said he liked Los Angeles’ odds.

“L.A. has a real advantage because California has been good to the Democratic Party and the Democratic Party remembers that,” he said. “Also, in California, you have a large group of independent people who are turned off by the radical right, which is such a big part of the Republican Party.”

Others were guarded in public but encouraging in private. One committee member, spotting Riordan on his plane back to Los Angeles, sidled up to him and confided: “I think you have a really good chance.”

So far, the convention campaign has focused on making it to the first level of the selection, convincing members of the Democratic National Committee that Los Angeles belongs on the short list of cities that deserve a visit by the site selection group.

Philadelphia a Strong Challenger

Other candidates for the convention are Denver, New Orleans, Boston, New York, Minneapolis, Miami and Philadelphia. Seattle and Charleston, S.C., both were seeking the nod, but were dropped by the committee last week.

Los Angeles officials are so confident of making the list of visited cities that they are looking past most of their seven competitors and instead focusing on the two believed to be their most serious challengers, Miami and Philadelphia.

There, the politics become more complicated. Miami has a strong convention and hotel base and could easily support the convention, but Jeb Bush, the former president’s son, is leading the race for governor there, and some Democrats are leery of hosting their gathering in a state so associated with such a Republican name. That’s especially true, insiders say, because Bush’s other son, Texas Gov. George W. Bush, may be a candidate for president in 2000.

In Philadelphia, by contrast, Mayor Ed Rendell is a friend of Vice President Al Gore, and Pennsylvania is traditionally thought of as a swing state where the extra push of a local convention might be enough to knock it into the Democratic column. Since Gore is expected to have the decisive vote in the ultimate selection, many observers believe that Philadelphia, for now at least, is the city to beat.

It does have weaknesses, however. Philadelphia is a much smaller city than Los Angeles, and the hordes of delegates, media members and others who flock to the national political conventions would tax its facilities much more seriously than Los Angeles’. Also, though Pennsylvania is an important state for the Democrats to carry, it’s no California.

The question some Democrats are asking, however, is whether they need to make a special effort to woo California or whether it can reliably be counted upon to vote for a Democratic candidate with or without the convention.

California has gone Democratic in the past two national elections, and that seems to have convinced some leading Democrats that it’s in the bag in 2000, but convention advocates note that two elections hardly make a trend.

In fact, the state has voted Republican in every presidential election except three during the past 40 years. During that time, only Barry Goldwater, George Bush (in 1992) and Bob Dole have failed to carry California for their party, and two of them lost to the same candidate--Bill Clinton.

“Democrats cannot take California for granted,” said Broad. “If the Democratic Party wants to be the party of the 21st century, Los Angeles is the place to go.”

The political bounce from the convention is assumed to be significant but is by no means certain. Dole, after all, was nominated in San Diego but was trounced by Clinton in California as well as the rest of the country. Still, Broad and others said that the host city and state will find it easier to energize activists and turn out Democrats at the polls. Broad estimated that it would be worth five points in the California election if the convention were in Los Angeles.

Then there is the other intangible but undeniable force at the center of any political decision: money. Los Angeles is not only the largest city in the largest state of the nation, it also is home to some of its richest and most politically connected donors.

Take Broad. Just recently, he hosted a fund-raiser at his home, a little gathering for a few Democratic Party backers. Teas and coffee meetings are common across the country, a time-tested way for candidates and party officials to raise a few hundred or thousand dollars. At Broad’s house, the take was $1.2 million, said to be the largest sum ever collected at a residential fund-raiser.

To prevail in the end, though, most observers believe it all comes down to one vote: the vice president’s. Gore intends to succeed Clinton in the White House, and he, more than any other person, will measure the political advantages and disadvantages of each city.

There, it may not be Broad and the other major donors who have the greatest sway, but rather Wardlaw, whose access to the White House is second to few. A canny political strategist who happens to be the husband of a respected, charismatic federal judge and also the best friend of L.A.’s mayor, Wardlaw has connections to spare and is sure to be called upon to lend his political advice when it comes to picking a convention site.

Wardlaw’s place in the Los Angeles effort this time, observers said, may help counter Gore’s friendship with Philadelphia’s mayor.

Ultimately, the unsurprising consensus is that Gore and the Democratic Party will pick the city that seems most likely to advance the presidential campaign of their candidate. And that’s where the Los Angeles boosters feel they will make and win their case.

Because once all the facilities are compared and hotel rooms added up, once the friendships are tallied and the luxury boxes accounted for, California will still offer one political plum that no other state can match: 54 electoral college votes.

“I think,” said Broad, “that that makes us a natural.”