THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, April 4, 1995 TAG: 9504040359
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A1 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Interview
SOURCE: BY WARREN FISKE AND DALE EISMAN, STAFF WRITERS
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Long : 173 lines
It was the kind of scene U.S. Sen. John W. Warner lives for, staring across a conference table of the Senate Armed Services Committee at two Russian generals - going ``eyeball to eyeball,'' as he likes to say.
Why, the generals demanded through a translator, is NATO expanding when it is clear that the Russian military threat is only a ghost of the past? Why are congressional Republicans talking about toughening U.S. defenses?
Warner wrinkled his brow and, in a stentorian voice that seemed to come straight from Central Casting, reminded the generals that there is still a stockpile of devastating weapons and hard-line politicians in the former Soviet bloc. ``Given the instability of your country, our country cannot comment on the future of your political leadership,'' he said.
Minutes later, Warner, 68, was sprawled on a recliner in his office. He was nursing the flu, and the bombast was missing from his voice as he pondered a people he always has found more mystifying than the Russians: Virginia Republicans.
Many leaders of the state party want to oust Warner from the Senate next year, angered that their one-time standard-bearer has betrayed other GOP candidates. Warner is loath to reply.
``I'm really in the cross hairs with this,'' he said with exasperation. ``How do I respond without further agitating the situation?''
Depending on whom you talk to, there almost seem to be two John Warners these days. One is the influential Washington statesman who is a leading critic of President Clinton's defense policy, has pressured the administration to conduct a ``bottom-up review'' of the nation's intelligence apparatus and is known as the go-to guy when state politicians need results from Congress.
``He's respected by an awful lot of members (of Congress) for his knowledge and the way he handles himself,'' said Steve Shimberg, a Republican who is staff director of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, of which Warner is a member.
But in the inner circles of the Virginia Republican Party, Warner is described as a self-serving, modern-day Benedict Arnold. No amount of accolades from Washington can make GOP leaders forget that Warner refused to back Michael P. Farris for lieutenant governor in 1993 and openly opposed Oliver L. North for the U.S. Senate in 1994. Many blame Warner for the failures of both Republicans.
``We seek John Warner's defeat,'' said Peter Flaherty, chairman of the Conservative Campaign Fund in Fairfax, which has begun raising money for a ``Dump Warner'' effort next spring. ``We're talking about a very little man with very little character who has gone a long ways based on money, marriage and privilege.''
Warner, in a recent interview at his Senate office - decorated with hunting trophies, models of battleships and bright pictures of tulips painted by his own hand - had no trouble squaring the two images. ``It all comes down to conscience,'' he said. ``I was elected to the Senate to do what I feel is best for the country, the state and party and I have always put things in that order.''
Warner has never fully explained his reservations about Farris, a former Moral Majority organizer and an outspoken lawyer for evangelical concerns. Warner left no doubt about his distaste for North, branding the former Iran-Contra figure as unstable and untrustworthy. Warner strongly supported independent J. Marshall Coleman in the campaign.
``I can't yield my independence to a political party or anyone else,'' Warner said. ``If I can't be my own man, I can't feel good about my work.''
Warner is not wasting a lot of time this spring carrying his explanation to the party's leadership.
``A lot of these people never liked me because I had the audacity to challenge Dick Obenshain in 1978,'' he said, referring to his unsuccessful bid for the Senate nomination against the party's foremost conservative icon. Obenshain died in a plane crash that summer and the party settled on Warner - who would go on to win the first of his three terms - as its second choice.
But the senator is taking his case to the people. He received a standing ovation last month after speaking to Republicans in Shenandoah County. ``I'm not very happy about what Sen. Warner did, but after hearing his explanation, I accept it as being genuine,'' said Larry E. Vance, the local party chairman. ``I'm going to remain open-minded.''
Supporters say it is the party, not Warner, that has lost touch with the public. The GOP leadership has become increasingly conservative and dogmatic in recent years, allowing moderates such as Warner little room for dissension.
``I used to think party loyalty was everything,'' said Mary Vaughan Gibson, a past president of the Virginia Federation of Republican Women. ``But we're not the party we used to be. If the leadership was really concerned with loyalty, it would change the way it does business and stop being so divisive in approach.''
Only a few years ago, Warner used to wish for a tough campaign fight, saying it was a way ``to earn your stripes'' among colleagues. So popular was the senator that he ran for re-election with only token Democratic opposition in 1984 and none at all in 1990.
These days, Warner shows a seriousness of purpose that suggests a man on a mission against his own party. Much to the dismay of Republican honchos, he plans to invoke a little-used state law to insist on a primary election next spring. GOP leaders had been hoping to hold a convention, where the wrath of several thousand party insiders could be enough to unseat Warner. The issue could wind up in court.
Former President George Bush is coming to Richmond April 10 to speak at a fund-raiser for Warner. A coalition of influential state businessmen and moderate Republican politicians - including former U.S. Rep. Caldwell Butler of Roanoke - are backing the re-election drive.
Warner's only announced Republican opponent - former federal budget chief James C. Miller III - is struggling to pay off a $70,000 debt left over from an unsuccessful bid to win the GOP Senate nomination in 1994. Two professional fund-raisers who worked for Miller last year are now signed on with Warner's campaign.
Warner is betting that the average Republican voter in next year's primary will not care about his rifts with the state party. Miller disagrees, saying that the senator's dubious party loyalty poses an important character question.
``It shows a pattern of behavior, an arrogance,'' Miller said. ``The man is out of touch. He's been in the Senate for 18 years and doesn't have a lot to show for it.''
The comments gall Warner. Only a few weeks earlier, Miller, on behalf of a conservative public interest group he represents, presented Warner with a plaque for a perfect voting record on the economy. Farris, who says he will ``do everything I possibly can'' to unseat the senator, recently wrote Warner a letter lauding his votes on children's issues. And even the Christian Coalition, which has long criticized Warner for being distant to evangelicals, credits the senator with supporting their positions 71 percent of the time.
``I'm a good guy to beat up on,'' Warner said. ``But they can't attack my voting record because not a damn one of them can do better.''
Miller and other critics also suggest that there is a lack of respect for Warner in the Senate. They note, for example, that he was defeated last year in his bid to become chairman of the Senate Rules Committee by a 39-13 vote of the Republican caucus. Warner dismisses the setback, saying that the winner - Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska - had longer continuous service on the panel.
Warner also was embarrassed this winter by news stories suggesting that he conspired behind the scenes to grab the chairmanship of the Senate Armed Services Committee from 92-year-old Strom Thurmond of South Carolina. Although he has tacitly acknowledged differences with Thurmond, Warner strongly denies plotting against the chairman.
Warner winces at suggestions that colleagues may find him tiresome. Few things delight him as much as his chummy relations with senators on both sides of the aisle. And there is much to suggest that the rancor in Virginia has not spread to Washington.
Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, sought Warner last fall to sign a letter lamenting Clinton administration cuts in military spending. They identified $8 billion worth of ``pork barrel'' projects in the defense budget that they argued should be spent on troop preparedness.
Thurmond was among seven Republican Senate stalwarts who co-hosted a $1,000-a-plate fund-raiser for Warner in Washington last month. Also attending were Senate Majority Leader Robert Dole of Kansas and party whip Trent Lott of Mississippi. So was Sen. Connie Mack, a firebrand freshman from Florida who has argued for sanctions against Republican senators who break ranks and vote against elements of the ``Contract With America.''
Also pulling for Warner is the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which helped organize the luncheon. ``We will work overtime to assure that the senator's re-elected,'' said Gordon Hensley, a spokesman for the panel. New York Sen. Alphonse D'Amato, the committee's chairman, ``has made it clear that Sen. Warner's re-election is a top priority,'' Hensley added.
Some Senate staff members privately suggest that Warner's snub of North actually may have helped his standing in Washington. For years, said one Democratic staffer, the rap on Warner was ``that he was a courtesy machine'' more enamored with the gentlemanly traditions of the Senate than the work at hand. In bucking North, Warner demonstrated ``a principled core, a line which you cannot push,'' the Democrat argued.
Many Virginia Republicans say the whole bitter episode could have been avoided if Warner simply had sat out the 1993 and 1994 elections and kept his concerns about Farris and North to himself.
``All he had to do is keep his mouth shut,'' said Gary Byler, a Virginia Beach activist who, despite personal concerns about the senator's loyalty, said he will support him.
Warner shakes his head vigorously at the suggestion.
``I don't have time to respond to every criticism,'' he said impatiently. ``What's done is done. You have the record. I have no regrets.''
KEYWORDS: PROFILE JOHN WARNER by CNB