Iran and the GOP.

IRAN AND THE GOP

THE HOUSE-SENATE committee investigatingthe Iran affair convenes on May 5, ending more than two months of relative Washington reticence on the controversy. Even optimistic Reaganites admit that this revelationless reprieve has been the eye of the storm. Much has already been said about how Iran affects key players, like the President himself and the various 1988 GOP candidates, notably George Bush. But what about Iran's "macro" political impact? How does it affect the Republican Party in general?

"Unfortunately," says a pollster forthe White House, "the news is horrible. We see lowered enthusiasm for the GOP across the board, with Iran the controlling factor. April '87 is centuries away from October '86." The loss of support for the GOP is already disturbingly reflected in the widening party-identification gap--the number of voters adrift between the two parties--with most undecideds now leaning Democratic. White males especially are moving leftward.

Iran has harmed the GOP in twodistinct areas: the reduced ability of the party to designate national candidates for 1988, and the hurried shift away from the Reagan agenda among Republicans. "Reagan is still personally beloved," says a GOP think-tanker here. "But he's lost his authority as well as his magic. Before Iran, Reagan would have been able to call the shot on who the GOP nominee would be. Now, everyone's on his own." A Republican consultant points to another downside item: "Iran has so weakened the Reagan coalition that it's now going to be hard for the GOP to recruit quality Senate and House candidates."

Effects of the Iran affair are alsoapparent in the overall substance of the GOP election agenda. "Before Iran," notes an aide to Richard Gephardt, "the main message of Republican candidates was 'Consolidate and go forward with the Reagan agenda.' Now it's more of a Kennedyesque 'Get the country back on track.'" The drift away from the Reagan agenda has already been shown by Congress's over-rides of the President's clean-water-bill and highway-bill vetoes, two votes that might well have gone the other way if not for Iran. A Senate aide describes the mood on the Hill by reporting this vignette: Two senators--one a Democrat, one a rank-and-file Republica--recently met to talk about how to develop a "post-Reagan housing policy."

As for presidential style, "you canbet no candidate's going to advocate 'removed management,'" says an election consultant here. "You're going to see a change in leadership styles, an emphasis on substance and detail. This year, watch for the charisma of substance." All of which suggests, pundits agree, that few are going to be wrapping themselves around Ronald Reagan in 1988. What was once the great GOP campaign asset now looks value-neutral.

The Iran night is not all dark forthe GOP, however, Republicans have been forced to define their own personae, rather than simply ride on Reagan's. "Frankly, I'm a bit worried that Iran may turn out to be a veiled blessing for the GOP," acknowledges a liberal here. "For six years, it was practically Reagan alone who constituted the GOP, and as long as Americans viewed him so admiringly, so idealistically, the party seemed bound to fail them when he moved on. Now Republicans can establish themselves as individuals and rebuild the party in the process." Even a depressed Republican pollster admits that "at least Iran has forced everyone to look beyond the Reagan era, to look ahead to a new GOP."

BEYOND THIS marginal boon fromthe Iran debacle, a more solid source of hope is the arithmetic of Republican performances in postwar presidential races. In the last four quadrennial elections, 23 states (the West plus Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Virginia, New Jersey, Vermont, and New Hampshire) have consistently gone Republican, giving the GOP a steady 202 electoral votes as a base from which to go for the required 270. The Democrats, on the other hand, start with a base of about fifty and have a tough time building to 270, failing to break four hundred for any presidential candidate since Johnson beat Goldwater. The magnitude of the 1972, 1980, and 1984 Republican victories obscured the significance of this 150-plus Electroal College advantage, but even in contests where the popular vote is much closer, the GOP will still have a very significant Electoral College boost. While some polls suggest that the GOP base is diminishing, the vast difference in numbers will probably withstand any immediate Iran-induced erosion. What's more, Texas and Florida, two important states for the GOP in the 1988 Electroal College calculus, have been competitive for the GOP at all levels since 1980.

So, notwithstanding the current Republicandoldrums, there's reason to be sanguine that the blow dealt by Iran will not be deadly.