United We Stand: a thousand points of might - Ross Perot's political organization

It is the great imponderable of American electoral politics: what role will the Perot movement play in state and local elections over the next three years?

Since Ross Perot resumed his offensive against the political establishment this spring, the national media have presumed that all of his actions are geared toward one goal: furthering his alleged 1996 presidential campaign. They usually dismiss the possibility that his United We Stand organization may attempt to sway elections next year, insisting that to do so would require an expenditure of Perot political capital -- something they contend he is hoarding for his own use.

In fact, Campaigns & Elections has learned that UWS will indeed be actively involved in 1994 campaigns, choosing from a variety of strategies on a case-by-case basis. Perhaps even more significantly, people close to Perot do not expect him to be a candidate in 1996, though he will probably keep his intentions secret until that year--perhaps as late as the close of the Democratic National Convention in August.

The Great White Shirt Way

According to the news hounds continually nipping at Perot's heels, the local UWS legions are on the verge of breaking ranks over the organization's top-down centralized control. It is true many of the rank and file are chomping at the bit to get involved in state and local races, only to be reined in by the Dallas brass, acting on Perot's instructions. But defections have been relatively few; most of those cited by the press are former coordinators that Dallas leveraged out of the way, either because they refused to follow directions or their experience profile was deemed inappropriate.

"The complainers are few and fit into two categories," contends Russell Verney, a top official at the UWS national office. "Either they are ambitious wannabee politicians who see this movement as their ticket to power, or they are people who got a taste for hands-on campaigning last year and are craving more of the same."

Executive director of the New Hampshire Democratic Party before joining Perot's campaign-in-waiting last September, Verney is the closest thing Perot has to a professional political advisor. Only two people serve with the billionaire on the UWS board: counsel/son-in-law Clay Mulford and business advisor Mike Poss. Both were largely apolitical when dragged in by Perot to run the reincarnated campaign last fall. Today, Poss resolutely sticks to being a number-crunching organizer; Mulford has become a savvy political negotiator who is slowly beginning to enjoy the process.

UWS Executive Director Darcy Anderson oversees the day-to-day operations with a staff composed primarily of armed service veterans culled from the real estate company headed by Ross Perot Jr. Derisively termed "the white-shirts" by local organizers they have whipped into line, they brought little political experience into their new assignment and proved excessively abrasive in their first contacts with the grassroots. Today, the "nationals" are more diplomatic with volunteers, but budding hardball operatives when dealing with politicians, interest groups, and even the press.

When the right wing Manchester Union-Leader wanted an exclusive one-on-one with Perot recently, they were told no dice: A recent UWS candidate forum in the state had gone uncovered by the paper, though it had sent a reporter to a simultaneous, unrelated event in the same hotel. Access, the scribes were pointedly reminded, is a two-way street.

Down to Brass Tactics

An exception to the current close-to-the-vest strategy came in early June when -- three days before the runoff in Texas' special U.S. Senate election -- Perot held a news conference to announce that the state UWS chapter had been polled and 84 percent had backed GOP challenger Kay Bailey Hutchison. Then leading the polls by nearly 20 points, Hutchison eventually won by 35, and Perot has been quick to claim credit for the last-minute movement.

Media pundits have been more than skeptical about this alleged show of strength, pointing out that the victory had already been iced and that Perot himself had denied the announcement constituted an endorsement. If such lukewarm help will be offered only after recipients prove they don't need it, commentators have scoffed, then Perot/UWS will indeed be an irrelevancy on the state and local scene.

But Verney insists the Texas model might be utilized in close races, and promises other approaches toward influencing elections will be employed, depending upon the local situation:

1) The Report Card - Members of Congress (and perhaps other elected officials) will be rated according to the precision with which their voting records match up with UWS objectives. UWS members will be mailed copies of their representatives' report cards.

2) The Dress-down - At issue forums hosted by UWS during the campaign, the state or local coordinator will note those instances where the incumbent's record has been at variance with the group's agenda. If those incumbents are present, an explanation will be requested.

3) The Bandwagon Boost - Having repeatedly savaged PACs in his public pronouncements, Perot is practically precluded from forming one. Verney insists, however, that UWS will be making at least de-facto endorsements in many races next year, usually in the final week of the campaign. This is complicated by tight IRS and FEC rules in these areas. How United We Stand or a related entity can undertake purely political activities is an open issue.

4) The Commando Raid - Early in the process -- perhaps even before the full field of candidates in the race is clear -- a squad of UWS operatives will resign from the organization and form an independent campaign unit. Although this group could align itself directly with a candidate (and possibly even recruit one), it will more often be employed as an independent expenditure effort aimed at particularly offensive incumbents.

Third Party H-Bomb

There has been much sentiment at the grassroots of the Perot organization for transforming UWS into a viable political party. Perot has not completely ruled out the possibility, though he appears committed to a different course for the next four years.

Leaping into the vacuum, a distinguished group of radical centrists met in Washington, D.C. shortly after the November election to map out the development of a Perot-style "Independence Party." Among those involved: Former congressman John Anderson (R-IL), himself a former independent candidate for president; independent Connecticut Governor (and former Republican U.S. Senator) Lowell Weicker; American Political Science Association President Theodore Lowi; media pollster Gordon Black; and former congressman Cecil Heftel (D-HI), a communications mogul worth a reputed $300 million who offered a challenge pledge of $500,000 for the effort if Perot would ante up a donation proportionate to his net worth.

Four years ago, retired Tampa salesman Jack Gargan touched off the current term-limit frenzy by investing his life savings into a series of full-page newspaper ads that blared "I'm mad as hell!" and urged readers to join his "Throw the Hypocritical Rascals Out (THRO)." With the term limit movement under full steam after winning all 15 of its statewide referenda last fall, he came to consider the Independence Party as his next vehicle of action:

"I met with Perot in February when I was trying to decide," Gargan relates. "I didn't want to be working at cross-purposes with him, so I asked if he might be starting a third party. He told me, 'No, we have nothing like that planned at this time.' Still, he gave me the impression he'd like to see a third choice in those races where neither major party candidate seemed to get the message."

Gargan threw in with the Independence Party and is now running for governor of Florida under its banner. He may get some direct competition for the Perot vote, however, from former Orlando mayor Bill Frederick -- a Democrat from a Republican area who is making noises about running as an independent. Unconfirmed reports say ex-Perot communications director Jim Squires -- who has maintained good relations with UWS -- would run a Frederick independent effort.

The situation in Florida may not be particularly remarkable. A survey of statewide races developing across the country reveals a number of well-known and/or well-financed candidates entering the gates with independent colors. Among the possibilities are at least three sitting governors: Independent incumbents Weicker and Walter Hickel (AK) running for re-election, and Doug Wilder (D-VA), who is aiming for the U.S. Senate. Ex-Minnesota Governor Rudy Perpich (D) is expected to attempt a comeback as an independent next year, and Cong. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is running strong in polling matches against U.S. Sen. Jim Jeffords (R).

"If ten or so independents win statewide races next year," Russ Verney concedes, "|United We Stand~ may have little choice but to form a third party." Until then, they will be content to let others carry the new-party ball.

August Surprise?

And what about The Man himself? Few in politics doubt Perot is in fact already running for president again, but the manner in which such a bid would ultimately be made has been the object of intense speculation. The prospect of a Perot campaign for the Republican nomination has been gaining increased circulation of late, particularly after a June 24 Perot media event in front of the U.S. Capitol turned into GOP pep rally. There, under the guise of delivering 2.5 million anti-spending petitions, the Texan praised a long list of Republican solons, several of whom seized the occasion to fire off partisan speeches.

Despite appearances, UWS sources indicate there is no chance Perot will run for a major party nomination in 1996. That stems partly from Perot's instinct that holding the middle ground in a three-way race, mounted on an anti-establishment platform, will be much more advantageous than carrying a major party banner into the political climate of three years hence. (It is also for this reason that Perot will use his populist opposition to NAFTA as an ideological counter-balance to his alliance of convenience with GOP elitists against new spending.)

But then, those close to Perot do not expect him to make the race at all. They are convinced he really meant it when he resisted the draft movement of early last year, based on his expressed conviction that he was "not suited to the office." Still, do not expect this enigmatic entrepreneur to fold until the last possible moment, forestalling any independent effort that might then be contemplated by another credible figure. As altruistic as this latest Perot enterprise might be, the creator didn't build it for some ambitious politician.

COPYRIGHT 1993 Campaigns & Elections, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group