L.A. Named Finalist for Democratic Convention

Los Angeles won unanimous approval as one of three finalists for the 2000 Democratic National Convention on Thursday and, in the opinion of many insiders, emerged as the clear front-runner to become the host city.

Los Angeles, which still is competing with Denver and Boston, was considered a strong contender even when Philadelphia was in the running. But when the Republican Party picked that city as the site for its 2000 gathering, Los Angeles emerged as the leading candidate.

Getting the convention is a matter of both political and practical significance. It would underline the key role that California, and particularly Los Angeles, is expected to play in the election of the next president. And it would bring more than $135 million to the local economy in the form of booked hotel rooms, expensive restaurant meals and the like.

From the start of their campaign to secure the convention, local backers have emphasized the dual advantage of Los Angeles--the downtown Staples arena, which is scheduled to be ready in time for the convention, and its political clout. On Thursday, those same backers welcomed the news of the committee vote and expressed confidence that Los Angeles would triumph over its two remaining rivals.

“On the political merits of this, no one comes close to Los Angeles,” said Bill Wardlaw, a powerful Democratic insider and Westside lawyer. He and other Los Angeles supporters repeat the number 54--the number of California’s electoral votes--over and over as they pitch Los Angeles for the convention. No other state has as many.

In addition, Wardlaw cited Los Angeles’ enormous diversity as a powerful incentive for the Democrats to bring their millenial gathering here. “It’s a microcosm of diversity in the country,” he said.

Others sounded similar sentiments.

“I feel very excited and very confident that the convention is going to come to L.A.,” Democratic state Chairman Art Torres said after the party convention site selection committee voted in Washington, D.C.

Some things still need to be negotiated. Torres said party officials want more assurances that Los Angeles will put up the money it promised to defray convention costs--a total of $35 million. Another problem is the diffusion of hotels. Some committee members were troubled by the idea of delegates being billeted in more than 230 hotels throughout the area, and would prefer a greater concentration of delegates in fewer hotels.

There also are less tangible concerns. Los Angeles is the home of Monica Lewinsky, and nearby is the Buddhist temple that has become embroiled in the Democratic fund-raising scandal. Some party regulars worry about bored camera crews wandering off to those embarrassing spots for their reports and might prefer a city not so associated with the darker moments of the Clinton presidency.

Nevertheless, few at the Washington gathering doubted that Los Angeles would win. Some speculated that Boston and Denver formally remain in the hunt mainly as bargaining ploys for the site selection committee--ways to pressure Los Angeles into working out the details the way party officials want them.

Both of the other contenders leave something to be desired as convention sites. Committee members fear that Boston doesn’t have enough hotel rooms. In fact, there was even talk of having to put up delegates in college dorms if the convention goes there.

And Massachusetts is one place where Democrats don’t think they need the extra boost from a convention in order to do well because even George McGovern carried the state in the GOP landslide in 1972.

*

Newton reported from Los Angeles, Shogan from Washington.