Racial Lines Frame Fight for Democratic Chair

The charge is familiar: African Americans deliberately excluded from a rigged election. But it’s not the Florida presidential fight that’s drawing protests this time.

It’s the selection of a new Democratic Party chairman.

By moving to install Terry McAuliffe, a confidant of President Clinton and prodigious fund-raiser, top Democrats have angered many black leaders and other liberal activists who are heading opposition to the nascent Bush administration. And the move signals Clinton’s intention to continue to play a major role in party politics.

But for some, the chairmanship fight is simply a matter of respect. McAuliffe “was anointed without our participation,” said Rep. Maxine Waters of Los Angeles. “The time is over when [Democratic leaders] can disregard the tremendous role of the African American and progressive vote. . . . We’ve got to be a part of the decision-making.”

Prodded by Waters and others, former Atlanta Mayor Maynard Jackson, an African American, has launched an uphill fight to deny McAuliffe the chairmanship. A vote is set for Feb. 3, when about 450 members of the Democratic National Committee hold their annual meeting in Washington.

While many Democrats are delighted at Clinton’s continued involvement in the party, some close to Vice President Al Gore are angered by the president’s apparent behind-the-scenes maneuvering.

While McAuliffe seems all but assured of winning, Jackson and his backers bristle at the back-room selection process.

“This is still the party of the masses . . . not just a party of a few moneyed interests,” said Jackson, alluding to McAuliffe’s role as one of the most prolific fund-raisers in political history.

Jackson’s backers in the Congressional Black Caucus are blunter still, saying in a letter recently sent to party members: “As we work to remind all people of how the process was violated in Florida, it becomes even more important that we not allow individual rights to be trampled within our own party.”

McAuliffe responded tartly. “Don’t try to make this a racial thing, because it’s not,” he said in an interview, citing his support among African American officials across the country. As for being anointed, he said, “the second I decided I was going to run I spent every second on the telephone calling all 451 members of the DNC. . . . I worked for every vote I’ve gotten. If it was an anointment, I wouldn’t have done anything.”

A national party chairman can play a vital role, working to build the financial and campaign muscle candidates need to win office. For a party out of the White House, the job is even more critical, as the chairman becomes one of the leading voices articulating its principles and positions.

In past chairmanship fights, Democrats have waged heart-and-soul battles over ideology and the direction of a bitterly divided party. This time, there is a notable lack of recriminations and little in the way of political introspection, a measure of Democrats’ undimmed confidence. In contrast to the presidential blowouts of the 1980s, party leaders note, their candidate won the popular vote in November--for the third time running.

“You don’t get a sense of a complete meltdown . . . like you have to reevaluate everything we’ve ever done,” said Alice Travis Germond, a longtime Democratic activist who engaged in many a soul-searching session as a California party leader. “If anything, people are sort of energized.”

Jackson, 62, who runs an Atlanta securities firm, agreed the fight this time is more about process than philosophy. “It really goes more to how we manage the resources of our party,” he said.

The current Democratic chairman is Joe Andrew, the former chief of the Indiana party who was put in place by Gore two years ago. If Gore had won the White House, Andrew appeared ready to keep his job and McAuliffe, who played a key role in the successful Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, was set to become ambassador to Britain. “I was gone,” McAuliffe said. “My family and I were moving.”

That changed when George W. Bush finally claimed the White House. Within days, Andrew dropped out of the race and endorsed McAuliffe.

People familiar with the circumstances said Andrew essentially was shoved aside by Clinton and other McAuliffe supporters, including House Democratic Leader Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri and Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota. Andrew said simply, “When I was told the president had an interest in having someone who truly is his best friend [as party chief], it was a very easy decision” to bow out.

Gore signed on to McAuliffe’s candidacy when his ascension appeared inevitable, according to two people close to the vice president. They declined to be identified to avoid antagonizing McAuliffe.

“It’s almost like Clinton and his pals decided to continue their influence over the Democratic Party,” one former Gore campaign official said.

While the job might seem a comedown from his role as presidential buddy in chief, McAuliffe said the chairmanship would culminate a lifetime spent as a Democratic Party activist. If elected to the $145,000-a-year position, McAuliffe said he will work free.

McAuliffe, 43, made a fortune in real estate and business development. Bursting with genial enthusiasm--even Waters said her opposition is not personal--McAuliffe would nonetheless bring some heavy baggage to the job. Although he has never been accused of criminal wrongdoing, McAuliffe has been involved in several of the Clinton administration’s fund-raising controversies. Even some Democrats are uncomfortable with his aggressive money-raising tactics, a fact Jackson has tried to exploit by emphasizing his support for campaign finance reform.

“I believe I can hold Bush’s and the Republicans’ feet to the fire because I have credibility on this issue,” Jackson said.

But Democrats never seemed to mind spending the hundreds of millions of dollars McAuliffe generated. “One of the things we need to do over the next two years is make sure we have enough in our coffers to be competitive in congressional races across the land” in November 2002, said Rob Tully, chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party, who supports McAuliffe for chairman and welcomes Clinton as a top-dollar draw.

For nearly 40 years, blacks have been the Democrats’ most loyal constituency, which may explain why McAuliffe seems particularly sensitive to any suggestion of racial strife. (The late Ronald H. Brown, an African American, is widely viewed as one of the party’s most successful chairmen.) Even Waters says the chairmanship fight is not a “black-white” dispute. Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes, who is white, is co-chairman of Jackson’s campaign.

For his part, McAuliffe touts the endorsement of several prominent black officials, including Labor Secretary Alexis M. Herman and Mayors Dennis Archer of Detroit and Wellington Webb of Denver. Moreover, he promises one of his first steps as chairman will be to hold a series of hearings on alleged Republican “suppression efforts” aimed at depressing black voter turnout.

With the party in good financial shape, with relative philosophical harmony, few seem interested in the kind of knock-down fight that could do lasting damage. Bob Mulholland, a California committee member and a McAuliffe backer, said, “This organization is big enough and important enough that we have room for both Terry as the chair as well as Maynard.”