TIME: Almanac 1993/TIME Almanac 1993.iso/time/122490/1224105.000

Text File | 1992-08-28 | 8.3 KB | 167 lines

                                                                                NATION, Page 21

Testing the Waters on Race


Republicans seek to exploit the quota issue but pull back -- for
now -- as Bennett pulls out

By LAURENCE I. BARRETT -- Reported by Michael Duffy/Washington
and Joseph J. Kane/Atlanta


    Rarely had a consensus congealed so fast among politicians
and pundits. In late November it became an insiders' article
of faith that George Bush and his party would create a powerful
1992 campaign issue from the resentment of white voters toward
programs that seem to benefit minorities unfairly. The main
dealer of that racial card was William Bennett, an articulate
critic of affirmative-action schemes and Bush's choice to be
the new Republican Party chairman. But after a stiff internal
debate, the Administration put that strategy on hold. Then
Bennett astonished Washington last week with word that he would
not become G.O.P. chief after all, ostensibly because of
competing professional commitments. Compounding the confusion,
the White House professed surprise when a mid-level Education
Department official ruled that most college scholarships could
no longer be reserved for minority students.

    What accounted for this latest display of Oval Office policy
juggling? One ingredient is the ongoing conflict between the
"kinder, gentler" President Bush, outwardly sympathetic to
society's disadvantaged, and the ruthless Candidate Bush,
willing to exploit atavistic emotions to gain votes. Another
factor is the slippery nature of racial politics, so easy to
unleash but so difficult to control. For example, the Education
Department's ruling on minority scholarships, which caused
consternation in both the White House and the college community,
apparently sprouted from a subordinate's overzealous attempt
to follow the instincts of Candidate Bush. That misjudgment was
understandable, given the atmosphere encouraged by Bennett and
other conservatives in the President's entourage.

    The Bush Administration's latest attempt to flog the race
issue began with the debate over the Civil Rights Act of 1990.
Passed last October by congressional Democrats, with the help
of some Republicans, the measure was designed to make it easier
for women and minorities to combat job discrimination. The
bill's supporters insisted its main effect would be to offset
damage done to earlier practices by a series of Supreme Court
decisions. Bush said he supported that goal but argued that the
bill's specific provisions would pressure employers to adopt
quotas as a means of avoiding litigation. His position gained
traction even though the bill explicitly said nothing in it
"shall be construed to require or encourage quotas." When
compromise efforts failed, Bush on Oct. 22 vetoed the bill,
calling it a "destructive force."

    The controversy seeped into the midterm election campaign.
In North Carolina, Republican Senator Jesse Helms blatantly
played on the insecurity of white voters fearful of
unemployment in recessionary times. He won re-election against
a strong challenge from black candidate Harvey Gantt.

    Enter Bill Bennett, academician, Education Secretary in the
Reagan Administration, ex-head of Bush's antidrug program. Like
Bush, Bennett had stumped for Helms. In his first statements
as the designated G.O.P. chairman, Bennett defended Helms'
campaign strategy as "perfectly legitimate." He also criticized
affirmative-action programs generally. After all, he had
co-authored a 1979 book called Counting by Race, which argued,
"Quite simply, numerical equality is an unworthy means for a
people dedicated to the proposition that all men are created
equal."

    Bennett then signaled his eagerness to engage the Democrats
on the issue if they pressed anew for the civil rights bill.
They will; Senator Edward Kennedy and the other leading
sponsors plan to reintroduce the measure early in 1991. Bennett
was accurately assumed to be speaking for the White House. Thus
the near universal belief that the Bush forces were sculpting
a new version of Willie Horton, the black killer used in 1988
as a symbol of liberals' softness on crime.

    The Horton ploy worked as well as it did because Michael
Dukakis responded feebly. Determined to fight back this time,
the Democrats began rhetorical carpet bombing a month ago.
Virginia Governor Douglas Wilder sent Bush an open letter
admonishing him to practice "moral leadership." The ideal of
equal opportunity, Wilder said in a message that got wide
attention, "is not a political football to be used by our
President to appease the Jesse Helmses of this country." House
majority leader Richard Gephardt, a possible candidate for the
Democratic presidential nomination, placed the Republicans on
"a new trail of racial resentment and recrimination blazed by
David Duke, then trod successfully by Jesse Helms and now given
a tarnished patina of intellectual respectability by William
Bennett."

    Bush's more moderate advisers, already queasy about
Bennett's approach, argued inside the White House that the
President's image would suffer. "This is a powder keg," said
an official privately. "Somebody is going to read racism into
every word you say on this subject. You don't want to do this."
While the racial card appeals to some blue-collar and rural
whites, it obviously offends many blacks. It also conflicts
with the two-year effort by Bush and the departing G.O.P.
chairman, Lee Atwater, to woo black voters. Further, the
moderate faction agrees with political scientist Larry Sabato
of the University of Virginia, who says that "some upscale
white suburban voters can easily be repulsed by the Helms
approach."

    By last Monday, Bennett was saying his earlier remarks had
been "overinterpreted." White House aides tried to revise
recent history by implying that Bennett had overstated his
brief. No decision had been made about politicking on quotas
in the future, they maintained. Bennett's withdrawal from the
chairmanship was not immediately related to the issue. The main
cause was the belated realization by Bennett and White House
counsel Boyden Gray that conflicts of interest would be a far
more serious problem than earlier thought.

    Bennett, eager to enhance his net worth, has a lucrative
contract to write two books and a long list of high-paying
speaking engagements for business audiences. As a recent
incumbent of high federal office, Bennett could face
restrictions on activities that might be construed as lobbying.
To take plump fees from private industry while enjoying regular
access to the Oval Office could easily create the appearance of
impropriety. Though the party chairmanship pays $125,000 a year,
Bennett said, "I didn't take a vow of poverty."

    Still, Bennett was already experiencing friction with his
nominal ally, chief of staff John Sununu, over fiscal policy.
And the flap over affirmative action indicated that Bennett and
the White House might have difficulty collaborating on touchy
subjects. In the short run, Bennett's exit, together with the
White House's new wariness, will probably cool the racial
issue, at least at the national level.

    Whether the temperature stays low until the next election
is uncertain. One way to help diminish racial anxiety is to
show that the government is doing something for workers
regardless of ethnic balance. Gephardt and Georgia Senator Sam
Nunn have introduced low-budget legislation that would set up
a national apprenticeship program. The scheme would serve
secondary school students and recent graduates who are not
applying for college. But the civil rights bill will not
disappear either as a legislative or political issue. When it
is debated again, its conservative opponents will doubtless
depict it in stark terms: hard quotas, black vs. white. This
time out, the measure's supporters will have to make a better
case for their position -- that the bill affects women as well
as racial groups and that its goal is to create opportunities,
not to achieve fixed numerical outcomes.

    But even if the debate starts off rationally at the top,
some of the G.O.P.'s ideologues may push Bush to politicize it
in racial terms. Given the candidate's history of making
elasticity an art form, he may bend in their direction again.