• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Wednesday, October 1, 1997

Gephardt, Gore prepare for candidacy battle

ELECTIONS: Democratic hopefuls begin to play presidential politics

By Thomas Oliphant

The Boston Globe

On the surface, the appearances of House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt and Vice President Al Gore at last weekend's meeting of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) had all the trappings of a skirmish that could escalate into a battle for the Democratic presidential nomination in the year 2000.

As such, it was inevitably a battle of the bands, and to that extent it was no contest. It was Gephardt's Rolling Stones against Gore's Juilliard String Quartet.

But beneath the surface, that is what made the back-to-back appearances exactly what each man sought. And until someone (not necessarily Gephardt, by the way) or something (like the economy) beats him, Gore's underlying advantage was tangible.

Gephardt played the "Real Democrat," and Gore played the "New Democrat." So naturally, the DNC cheered the former and applauded the latter. But these elite Democrats are also politicians, each an automatic delegate to the national convention, and most of them are more likely to follow their heads than their hearts when the time comes.

Nonetheless, the Gore and Gephardt messages neatly drew some distinctions that are apt to remain as the interminable continuum called presidential politics flows.

Gore talked results, Gephardt talked values. Gore talked beyond his audience, Gephardt talked right at it. Gore's message anticipates a campaign of succession; Gephardt's message anticipates a call for a change.

Gore leaned as heavily as President Clinton did in his reelection campaign last year on the astonishing performance of the economy. But he was no less bashful about some of the equally astonishing social indicators of recent years - crime, welfare rolls and teenage pregnancy.

And he was every bit the vigorous vice president, selling the president's position on campaign finance reform with nary an apology for his own role in making the case for reform via last year's excesses.

And on the divisive topic of the day for Democrats - Clinton's request for "fast-track" authority to negotiate trade agreements that Congress can approve or reject but not amend - Gore was direct. Exports have led the economy's recovery, he said, and Clinton needs new authority to negotiate more deals to break down barriers to American products and services in emerging world markets. Clinton's record, he added, shows he can do it and still fight to keep repressive labor conditions and environmental degradation from being the developing world's trade weapons.

In contrast, Gephardt tends to slide past Clinton in preaching to a choir about core party values, above all concern for working families from the middle-class to the poor. This was one audience that didn't need reminding that he had stood against the welfare legislation Clinton signed, against the balanced budget and tax cut deal he struck with the Republican Congress, and against renewal of normal trading relations with China.

His first standing ovation came after a pledge to never stop pushing for universal health insurance. His second came after a pledge to fight "to the death" any attempts to siphon money from public education into government vouchers for use in private and religious schools.

But Gephardt saved most of his rhetoric for trade, which got the third standing ovation. Complete with a slide show of the greatly worsened conditions just south of the Mexican border, he argued the record shows that promises about voluntary improvement have been hollow.

At a minimum, he declared, fast-track authority must include a requirement that countries enforce their labor and environmental laws, and face trade sanctions if they do not.

The debate on trade has just been joined, and the specifics of the eventual legislation have yet to be negotiated. Gephardt's ovation, however, showed why it will take an immense presidential effort to get anywhere near the 75 Democratic votes in the House Clinton has targeted, and why at the moment he may not even have 20.

But as fodder for nascent presidential politics, the Gore and Gephardt messages shared a common, unstated theme - the condition of the economy, the most important backdrop once a campaign begins in earnest.

If current conditions, especially as regards jobs and income, continue through 1999, the economic expansion will be in record territory for the post-World War II era. Gore would still need to speak convincingly about the future, but an argument for continuity would have immense force, both substantively and politically.

Similarly, if the economy stalls out, the anxieties that harder times always unleash would come into play, from social policy to trade. Bill Clinton is living testimony to how a pitch for "change" can work at a time of job and income stagnation.

Gore and Gephardt are nothing like the pols Mike Dukakis beat a decade ago. Each has used the ensuing years well.

But each must still operate in a larger context, and unless the economy goes South the current trends give Gore the most running room. Only as Cassandra does Gephardt makes sense.... the Gore and Gephardt messages shared a common, unstated theme - the economy, the most important backdrop (of) a campaign ...