Carter on the Offensive

As the election season begins, the President projects a tougher image

Lawns turning green. Flowers blooming. Daylight Saving Time returning. To 34 U.S. Senators, 435 members of the House and 35 Governors, these are not just signs of mid-Spring but reminders that the season for hard campaigning is again at hand. Indeed, from now until early October the nation's primary elections are occurring almost weekly. For many politicians, this is a time of great apprehension, when an answer to the big question is no longer to be delayed: Can they keep their jobs?

From a vastly different perspective, this is also a critical time for Jimmy Carter. The off-year elections often turn into a referendum of sorts on the performance of the man in the Oval Office, and Carter is heading into the political season in poor shape for the battle. A Louis Harris poll last week showed that his public-approval rating had fallen to 33% -worse than the lowest figures of Presidents Kennedy, Johnson and Ford, and a mere 7% better than Richard Nixon's Watergate low.

In part to check these dismal figures, Carter last week embarked on a campaign to seize some of the election-year clout that normally resides in the presidency. At a press conference, he forcefully refused to retreat from two legislative positions that are highly unpopular on Capitol Hill.

First, he insisted that his plans to sell advanced fighter aircraft to Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt were an inseparable package. Said he: "If the Congress should accept a portion and reject another, then my intent is to withdraw the sales proposal altogether." The strong stand riled congressional leaders, who felt they were being forced into a corner. At week's end Secretary of State Cyrus Vance soothed their feelings by promising that the Administration would no longer call the sale a "package" but would still press ahead with its plans to sell planes to all three countries (see WORLD).

Second, Carter adamantly rejected advice from congressional leaders that he postpone trying to reform taxes and seek only a tax cut. He deplored the "concentrated and unbelievable number of highly qualified, very intelligent, very effective lobbyists trying to induce the members of Congress to preserve special privileges for people who are so powerful and so influential."

The effort to create a more "presidential" image as a decisive leader stems from Carter's Camp David conference two weeks ago with top aides at which he frankly conceded that he had too often appeared "fuzzy." As one example, he cited the $50-per-person tax-rebate plan that he proposed last year and then abandoned in the face of widespread congressional opposition. Carter has apparently decided that if his programs are going to get battered in Congress anyway, he will look stronger politically if he goes down fighting.

On Capitol Hill, however, there was fear that he was heading for a clash with Congress that will neither help his programs nor prove politically popular. Said a House leader: "Congress is led by Democrats who want to see the President succeed. But he's a hard man to help." Agreed another key Congressman: "We don't need a confrontation. With a little diplomacy, a collision can be avoided."

White House aides accused many Democrats of taking a two-faced political attitude toward Carter. Protested a presidential adviser: "Some of those guys think they can vote against us whenever they like, can bad-mouth the President whenever they like, and still ask him to help them by attending fund raisers and campaigning for them." These aides insist that despite Carter's low ratings in the polls, the President's support will prove an asset to most Democrats seeking reelection. Argued one: "The voters continue to give him high marks personally. He's a good man, and he's a good campaigner."

Contending that more requests for Carter's vote-getting help are reaching the White House than he can accept, the President's advisers are employing a loyalty test as one means of deciding which candidates to aid. The results have been compiled in a large black notebook, with computer print-outs that detail the voting record of each Senate and House member. While those with poor records of support for Carter's programs are not ruled out of his campaign plans, they are assigned a low priority.

A unsigned White House memo outlining a more rigid version of this policy surfaced on Capitol Hill last week. Written by Valerie F. Pinson, who is one of Carter's emissaries to the House, the memo said only two categories of Congressmen were eligible for his campaign help:

"1) Those whose races are considered to be marginal and whose support for the Administration is at least 50%.

"2) Those whose Administration-support level has been in excess of 80%, regardless of the marginality of their races."

Many House Democrats were outraged by the memo, which they regarded as authorizing a semipurge list. Several called the White House to complain. "We are keeping score," admitted a presidential aide. "We are looking at people who help us that we can help. But it doesn't mean we aren't helping others." The aide said the memo was "not accurate" -and even if it had been, "it was dumb to write it down." Declared Pinson, after the memo was obtained by TIME: "It is out of date. We have re-evaluated our plans."

But do Democrats really want or need Jimmy Carter's help? Opinions vary. Exclaims Texas Congressman Jim Wright, Democratic House floor leader: "For heaven's sake! Of course, the President of the United States will be in demand -more invitations than he can accept."

The two major candidates in a hot Democratic Senate primary in New Jersey, former New York Knicks Basketball Star Bill Bradley and former State Treasurer Richard Leone, both say they would welcome the President's support in the fall campaign. A more moderate position is taken by Brian Corcoran, a former aide to Democratic Senator Henry Jackson and now a candidate for Congress from Washington State: "Carter is not really a liability, but you don't drop his name all that much. He is not unpopular, but neither is he a bell ringer."

Yet one senior congressional Democrat does view Carter as a liability: "I'm 50% more popular than Jimmy Carter in my home town in terms of job approval. No, I don't want him in my district." Certainly candidates in oil-and natural gas-producing states will not invite Carter to visit them because his energy plan is unpopular. Similarly, people in tobacco-growing states are angry at HEW Secretary Joseph Califano's anti-smoking pitches.

For the most part, however, the candidates in the primaries have not had to take a stand on how they feel about Carter. Their elections turn mainly on local issues and personalities, as is demonstrated by four of the most lively primary contests being held this month:

North Carolina (May 2). The main issue is the ultra-conservatism of Republican Senator Jesse Helms, 56, a former Democrat whose outspoken views have brought him surprising national prominence for a first-term Senator. While he has no primary opposition, no less than eight Democrats figure Helms is so vulnerable that they are fighting for the chance to oppose him. The leading contender is Luther Hodges Jr., 41, son of a popular former Governor and John Kennedy's Secretary of Commerce. A former bank executive, the younger Hodges insists that the Senate needs more members with business backgrounds. "I'm not the best economist anyone's ever seen," he says, "but I'm sure as hell the best that could get elected."

Texas (May 6). Both parties are engaged in close contests to determine their candidates for Governor. Incumbent Democrat Dolph Briscoe is running on his record of holding down taxes and state spending, yet even some of his supporters concede that he has been a passive, uninspiring leader. Briscoe faces a stiff challenge for his party's nomination from Attorney General John Hill, 54, a scrappy, consumer-oriented official and a flamboyant former trial lawyer who claims that Briscoe spends too much time relaxing on his 165,000-acre ranch at Catarina.

On the Republican side, arrogant, abrasive William P. Clements, 60, the second-ranking official in the Defense Department under Presidents Nixon and Ford and the founder of Sedco Inc., one of the world's largest oil-drilling companies, has already spent more than a million dollars on his primary campaign. Clements hurls insults freely and boasts: "I'm what the free-enterprise system is all about." When Clements' leading opponent, former State Legislator Ray Hutchison, 45, gallantly promised to contribute 1% of his wealth to Clements' November campaign if the oilman wins the primary, Clements snapped: "Well, you know, Ray, 1% of zero is zero."

Pennsylvania (May 16). One key issue in the race for Governor is the record of corruption charged against some 60 Democratic legislators and officials in the two-term administration of Democrat Milton J. Shapp, who by law cannot seek reelection. Five Republicans are eager to run against the Democrats, including upstart

David Marston, the former U.S. Attorney whose badly handled firing by the Carter Administration brought him to national attention. Marston at the moment is running even with two other candidates, former Assistant U.S. Attorney General Richard L. Thornburgh and former District Attorney Arlen Spector.

The Democratic candidate will be former State Treasurer Robert Casey, Lieutenant Governor Ernest P. Kline or former Pittsburgh Mayor Peter Flaherty, who served briefly as Deputy Attorney General in the Carter Administration. Flaherty is running as both the most experienced candidate (says he of his opponents: "Not one of them has ever run a major unit of government") and as the "people's" candidate. Last week he held a fund-raising dinner at a Horn and Hardart cafeteria -at $7.50 a plate.

Nebraska (May 9). A popular two-term Governor, Democrat J. James Exon, is vacating his office to run for the Senate, giving the Republicans a chance to seize control of the statehouse. Until six months ago, conservative Congressman Charles Thone, 54, seemed a cinch to win the G.O.P. nomination. But a late entrant, Stan Juelfs, 49, a millionaire rancher and oilman, has created a sensation by spending more than $300,000 in a TV and travel blitz. Issues are virtually non-existent in the contest. Instead, it centers on whether lavish spending can win a nomination in the rural state.

While Carter does not loom large in these spring campaigns, he will inject himself into the bubbling political ferment this week as he heads west on a 2 1/2-day outing, billed mainly as a nonpolitical trip. He will make a speech on solar energy in Denver to mark "Sun Day," address the Los Angeles Bar Association, hold a regional press conference and meet with local leaders in Portland and attend a town meeting in Spokane. Only three political events are on his schedule: a fund-raising dinner for Democratic Senator Floyd Haskell of Colorado, a reception for Colorado Congressman Timothy Wirth and a private chat aboard Air Force One with California Congressman Mark Hannaford. None of the three now face primary opposition; all have backed Carter programs at least 50% of the time in Congress.

Popular or not, the President still packs some punch as a drawing card. This was discovered by Spokane Mayor Ron Bair when he ruled that only residents of his city could attend Carter's town meeting there this week. Outraged suburbanites barraged the mayor and other officials for being excluded from what one angry protester described to Washington Congressman Tom Foley as "the privilege of seeing the President of the United States." The unexpected outburst caused the mayor to change his mind and allot 30% of the seats to people living outside Spokane.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.