THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, October 23, 1996 TAG: 9610230010
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A15 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Interview
SERIES: COMMONWEALTH CONVERSATION
One of a series of interviews with Virginia's political leaders
conducted by Pilot editorial writer Margaret Edds. Thomas is secretary
of administration to George Allen. He was Allen's campaign manager in
1993 and is a former director of the Virginia Society for Human Life.<
LENGTH: 201 lines
What are the major trends in Virginia politics in the 1990s?
As far as partisan considerations, Virginia's become even more balanced between the two parties with the Republican Party catching up to where the Democrat Party was. Along with that, there's a trend for more fundamental changes in government. And there's a very great desire for more decision making to be done locally.
Is there anything unique in Virginia about this trend, or is Virginia very much in step with the rest of the country?
My perception is that as far as what people want and think and feel, it's very much the same as other areas of the country, particularly the Southern states. As far as what gets done about it, we're behind the times.
Why?
Part of it is because the Democrat leadership in Virginia is, older's not the right word, they've been around longer than the Democrat leadership in other Southern states. And the longer you've been around, the more comfortable you are with things as they have been.
Are there other reasons?
Virginia's different from many other states in that we have a much higher portion of our population who either works for some level of government, including the military, or is related to someone who does.
Does that affect partisan politics?
Yes it does to the extent that it affects how people view government.
You're saying they're a little less willing to do away with government?
They're more cautious about it.
What were the key factors in Allen's decisive 1993 gubernatorial win?
Foremost among them is George Allen, his personality which attracts people and deflects criticism. People find it hard to believe something bad about him. Second, his commitment to principle, because when he believes something is the right thing to do, he's going to do it.
Third would be that he worked harder. He had to, because we had really no money to speak of until the end. Mary Sue Terry took it for granted, really until the end of the summer. And, finally, I think important to many, many people was that he articulated a vision for some fundamental changes in Virginia.
Was the disarray of Democrats a major factor as well?
It was something we tried to exploit. We talked quite a bit about Terry's feuds with (Doug) Wilder and those every once in awhile broke out in the open in a big way. We'd essentially say to people, is this what you want?
Was Terry an inept candidate?
Her campaign certainly was. She gives you the impression of someone who'd prepared for that particular campaign for 20 years. So I was very surprised. . she got.
What we expected and what we were preparing for was that she'd define George Allen in June at a time when we could not respond. She could have put a particular perspective on it, and told people what she wanted them to believe about who he was. They didn't do that. They didn't do anything.
Finally when they started going after him in mid-to-late August, they went on gun control which we didn't feel was a good issue. . . . There are more legitimate things to deal with crime.
One of the traditional ways to defeat women candidates is to focus on crime. Is that why you made crime an issue?
No. We discussed how you run against someone who's a woman. We took a good look at the (Texas) Ann Richards race and the (California) Feinstein-Wilson race. We essentially decided to ignore gender and treat her as an elected official running on her record.
How much of a setback was it to the Republican Party to lose the U.S. Senate election in 1994 and to fail to pick up a majority in either house of the legislature in 1995?
Well, '94 could (be a setback) were Chuck Robb effective for the Democrats, but he's not. He's not like he was when he was governor. If he was someone who could attract money, help build the party and all that, I think he'd be dangerous. But he's not and he's not going to be.
The '95 election, if you look at how people voted, they voted very heavily for Republicans, much more so than ever before.
What is the influence of the Christian Right within the Virginia Republican Party at this point in time?
Certainly it's very important to the Republican Party. Having new people who want to do something to change their government and consequently are willing to be active is critical. Also, political activists who are getting involved because of their Christian beliefs are easier to organize because you know where to find people. It's the same as how the Democrats for years have organized African-American voters through the churches.
Has the growth of the Republican Party been slowed by its internal conflicts?
Very minor, it really is. Some people see ghosts where none exist. . . . Most of the clashes that take place are old vs. new, not conservative vs. moderate.
Is there any liability in Republican candidates being associated with Pat Robertson?
No, I don't think so. For years and years, Republicans have automatically called the Democrat nominee liberal. That may be something you do to activate your base. So the Democrats may do that (criticize Robertson) to fire up their own folks, but it doesn't hold sway with the general public.
How do you regard the evolution of the Christian Coalition toward greater moderation?
I think by and large it's been handled very deftly. You have to build coalitions in order to reach that critical majority that gets someone elected or to pass a piece of legislation. To do that you have to focus on things that appeal to the broadest range of people.
What are the major trends in Virginia politics in the 1990s?
As far as partisan considerations, Virginia's become even more balanced between the two parties with the Republican Party catching up to where the Democrat Party was. Along with that, there's a trend for more fundamental changes in government. And there's a very great desire for more decision making to be done locally.
Is there anything unique in Virginia about this trend, or is Virginia very much in step with the rest of the country?
My perception is that as far as what people want and think and feel, it's very much the same as other areas of the country, particularly the Southern states. As far as what gets done about it, we're behind the times.
Why?
Part of it is because the Democrat leadership in Virginia is, older's not the right word, they've been around longer than the Democrat leadership in other Southern states. And the longer you've been around, the more comfortable you are with things as they have been.
Are there other reasons?
Virginia's different from many other states in that we have a much higher portion of our population who either works for some level of government, including the military, or is related to someone who does.
Does that affect partisan politics?
Yes it does, to the extent that it affects how people view government.
You're saying they're a little less willing to do away with government?
They're more cautious about it.
What were the key factors in Allen's decisive 1993 gubernatorial win?
Foremost among them is George Allen, his personality which attracts people and deflects criticism. People find it hard to believe something bad about him. Second, his commitment to principle, because when he believes something is the right thing to do, he's going to do it.
Third would be that he worked harder. He had to, because we had really no money to speak of until the end. Mary Sue Terry took it for granted, really until the end of the summer. And, finally, I think important to many, many people was that he articulated a vision for some fundamental changes in Virginia.
Was the disarray of Democrats a major factor as well?
It was something we tried to exploit. We talked quite a bit about Terry's feuds with (Doug) Wilder and those every once in awhile broke out in the open in a big way. We'd essentially say to people, is this what you want?
Was Terry an inept candidate?
Her campaign certainly was. She gives you the impression of someone who'd prepared for that particular campaign for 20 years. So I was very surprised. . she got.
What we expected and what we were preparing for was that she'd define George Allen in June at a time when we could not respond. She could have put a particular perspective on it, and told people what she wanted them to believe about who he was. They didn't do that. They didn't do anything.
Finally when they started going after him in mid-to-late August, they went on gun control which we didn't feel was a good issue. . . . There are more legitimate things to deal with crime.
One of the traditional ways to defeat women candidates is to focus on crime. Is that why you made crime an issue?
No. We discussed how you run against someone who's a woman. We took a good look at the (Texas) Ann Richards race and the (California) Feinstein-Wilson race. We essentially decided to ignore gender and treat her as an elected official running on her record.
How much of a setback was it to the Republican Party to lose the U.S. Senate election in 1994 and to fail to pick up a majority in either house of the legislature in 1995?
Well, '94 could (be a setback) were Chuck Robb effective for the Democrats, but he's not. He's not like he was when he was governor. If he was someone who could attract money, help build the party and all that, I think he'd be dangerous. But he's not and he's not going to be.
The '95 election, if you look at how people voted, they voted very heavily for Republicans, much more so than ever before.
What is the influence of the Christian Right within the Virginia Republican Party at this point in time?
Certainly it's very important to the Republican Party. Having new people who want to do something to change their government and consequently are willing to be active is critical. Also, political activists who are getting involved because of their Christian beliefs are easier to organize because you know where to find people. It's the same as how the Democrats for years have organized African-American voters through the churches.
Has the growth of the Republican Party been slowed by its internal conflicts?
Very minor, it really is. Some people see ghosts where none exist. . . . Most of the clashes that take place are old vs. new, not conservative vs. moderate.
Is there any liability in Republican candidates being associated with Pat Robertson?
No, I don't think so. For years and years, Republicans have automatically called the Democrat nominee liberal. That may be something you do to activate your base. So the Democrats may do that (criticize Robertson) to fire up their own folks, but it doesn't hold sway with the general public.
How do you regard the evolution of the Christian Coalition toward greater moderation?
I think by and large it's been handled very deftly. You have to build coalitions in order to reach that critical majority that gets someone elected or to pass a piece of legislation. To do that you have to focus on things that appeal to the broadest range of people. MEMO: These interviews by Margaret Edds were conducted for a book about
Southern politics in the 1990s. The Virginia chapter is being written by
Dr. Thomas Morris, president of Emory & Henry College, and Ms. Edds.
KEYWORDS: INTERVIEWS GOVERNMENT by CNB