Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, April 13, 1994 TAG: 9404140022
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A9 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: PAUL GOLDMAN
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
This question may soon haunt the leadership of Virginia's Democratic and Republican parties. To paraphrase Bob Dylan's most famous protest song: How many times can you turn your head and pretend you just don't see? To date, the titular head of each party - Gov. George Allen and Lt. Gov. Don Beyer - have been politically blind to the obvious.
Both are good and decent men. But their lack of vision symbolizes a collective abdication of moral leadership that is unprecedented in political circles at least since the days of segregation. Has the ostrich replaced the cardinal as the symbol of Virginia?
1994 is, therefore, shaping up as a potentially watershed year. There is still time for level heads to prevail. But right now, the political establishment of both parties seems determined to accept, if not endorse, a standard of immorality, lawlessness and calculated untruthfulness never before condoned in a major party nominee.
A moment of reflection will reveal how Allen, Beyer and other party leaders may have voluntarily put their heads in an ever-tightening noose. For openers, take the GOP's dilemma with Oliver North.
If he gets the nomination, the spotlight - both in Virginia and nationally - will shine directly on Allen. What will the new governor, already being mentioned as a potential national player, do? On the surface, he appears to have three choices: Refuse to endorse North, completely endorse North, or endorse North with reservations.
In reality, Allen has only one choice, assuming he adheres to his present See-No-Evil, Hear-No-Evil posture. As titular head of the GOP, Allen cannot remain silent and then, once the nomination process is completed, publicly undercut his party's nominee.
When it comes to party leadership, the rules are clear: If Allen has a problem with North, then he should make his views known prior to the nomination, or hold his peace until after the election. This rule serves an evident purpose: By speaking early, Allen puts everyone on notice as to where he stands and what he will do should North get nominated. Should the party faithful reject the governor's advice, then neither they nor the nominee can later cry foul.
By staying silent, the governor seemingly gets the worst of all worlds. First, he will be forced to completely endorse North, and effectively condone everything the Iran-Contra figure did. Secondly, it forces Allen to help elect someone who does not have his or the GOP's best interest at heart. Finally, the nomination of North probably guarantees an independent candidacy backed by many responsible Republicans both in Virginia and nationally. This could badly split the Virginia GOP for a generation.
On the Democratic side, the possibility of a Robb nomination poses even greater risks for Beyer and his party's leadership. The revelation that Robb used the power and allure of his public office to get sexual favors from women young enough to be his daughter has denuded him of any moral character. He has become a symbol of what has gone wrong with America, and his presence in public office casts a dark shadow over the Virginia Democratic Party.
At least most of his culpable aides have pleaded guilty to their criminal transgressions, and have resigned from the Senate payroll. But Robb stays on, blind to his failings, and aided by a party leadership that doesn't appear to know right from wrong.
Like the governor, Beyer seems to be determined to ride full speed into a box canyon. If North and Robb are nominated, there will almost surely be at least one, possibly two, major independent candidacies. The immorality, lawlessness and calculated untruthfulness of North and Robb will be at the center of the election debate.
This leaves Beyer and the Democrats with the following choices: If Robb should win the nomination but lose in the fall, they will have wasted their political capital. They will have condoned, in the eyes of the public, all of Robb's actions. The public doesn't want Robb or North. Should either one win, the overwhelming majority that voted against the winner is going to blame someone.
Logic suggests the people will take out their wrath on the winning party. After all, one cannot beat a dead horse, or a losing candidate.
If Robb wins, the public will be reminded of the Democrat's moral failure for six more years. Robb's albatross will be hung around the neck of the Democrats in General Assembly elections of 1995 and the governor's race in 1997; it was in 1993. If North wins, turnabout will be fair play. Democrats will hang him around the necks of the GOP for the next six years.
Thus, by backing Robb, it would appear that Beyer joins Allen in adopting a no-win position.
What should both men do? A better strategy - if not morally, at least politically - would be for the governor and the lieutenant governor to put some immediate distance between themselves and their party's respective frontrunners. Admittedly, this might hurt Robb and North during the nomination process. But it is in the best interests of both political parties to protect their strongest assets. This is especially true for the Democrats.
A loss by North and Robb in the nomination process would save the governor and lieutenant governor from their inaction. Perhaps this is their secret wish. But their silence could easily turn it into a political death wish.
Paul Goldman is former state Democratic Party chairman and a political adviser to former Gov. Douglas Wilder.
Keywords:
POLITICS
by CNB