Reagan’s Stump Value Held Diminished : Iran Scandal Seen Hurting GOP and, Especially, Bush

WASHINGTON — The Iran- contra scandal is shaping up as a crucial factor in the 1988 presidential race, to the detriment of Republican candidates generally and Vice President George Bush in particular.

Bush, the front-runner, has suffered the most, political experts agree. In denying any responsibility for the scandal, he has said that he was not involved in the Administration’s decisions to sell arms to Iran and divert some of the profits to Nicaragua’s rebels. That is an embarrassing stance for a candidate who has had a lifetime of experience at the highest levels of government and claims to have a key role in the Administration.

And, no matter who becomes the Republican nominee, some political analysts of both parties believe that the Iran-contra scandal could damage his chances in next year’s election. Although the congressional hearings ended last week, indictments are likely in coming months, with trials to ensue during the presidential campaign.

By weakening President Reagan, the scandal has already cost Republican candidates one of their principal themes--a promise to continue the “Reagan Revolution.” And it has diminished the value of the President as a campaigner for the Republican nominee.

“Reagan is becoming less and less of a factor,” said Republican political consultant John D. Deardourff. The scandal, he said, “permanently damaged the reputation of the White House and underscored the call for new leadership at the top.”

Reagan will try to put the best face on his predicament with a long-promised speech today at 5 p.m. PDT. During the congressional hearings, the President had deferred comment with a promise that he would respond in a speech after the hearings were over.

Aides now say the speech will focus on the President’s agenda for his last 17 months in office--an arms control agreement, his Nicaraguan peace plan, his “economic bill of rights” and the nomination of Robert H. Bork to the Supreme Court. But many political analysts expect the speech to have little impact on the 1988 political situation.

Bush, who has said little about the Iran-contra scandal, declared in a Washington Post interview last week that the congressional hearings had vindicated him.

‘Denied Information’

The hearings, he said, showed that he had been “denied information” by other Administration officials on the Iran arms sales and the diversion of profits to the contras. Polls show Americans believe he did know of the diversion as it was occurring, and Bush blamed the congressional committees for fostering the public’s “distorted view” that “I was lying.”

Political observers here, including some of Bush’s own supporters, were shocked that he attacked the committees and that he claimed he had been vindicated when he had not been accused of anything.

“It was really unfortunate,” said Mitchell E. Daniels Jr., Reagan’s former assistant for political affairs. “The Bush people certainly didn’t think it helped him any. One thing the hearings demonstrated was that pleading non-involvement is not a satisfactory answer.”

Of all the Republican candidates, Deardourff said, Bush has suffered the most from the scandal. “Even though he pleads ignorance,” he said, “that cuts both ways because he claimed to have a vital role to play in the Administration.”

Ahead in Polls

Bob Teeter, a Bush political consultant, still hopes Bush will emerge from the scandal largely unscathed. “I’m pleased where Bush is right now,” he said. “He’s ahead 40(%) to 18(%) in the polls, and historically you can’t find many Republicans in that shape at this stage who didn’t get nominated.”

But Teeter admitted: “I don’t know of many elections where we’ve had less feel about the public mood. Four or five big things are going to be happening--the budget fights, the Bork nomination fight, the trade bill, Central America, arms control. Whether the President comes out of this all right or comes out still limping will affect Bush, because he is affected by Reagan one way or the other.”

Bush’s opponents for the Republican nomination are already taking shots at him. Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), who has been running second to Bush in the GOP race, said the Iran-contra affair raised doubts about the vice president’s competence. “When your strength is foreign policy,” Dole declared, “you could ask questions.”

The Iran-contra scandal could help Dole’s quest for the Republican presidential nomination if it predisposes GOP voters to look for a nominee with strong managerial qualifications. One of Dole’s selling points is his ability to move legislation through the Senate. By contrast, Rep. Jack Kemp of New York, probably Bush’s next most serious challenger, is running on his conservative ideology, not his management skills.

But, no matter who emerges as the Republican presidential nominee, many political analysts believe the Iran-contra scandal will work against him in the November election.

Some Republicans dispute this view. “I don’t see any negatives as far as our candidates are concerned,” said GOP Chairman Frank J. Fahrenkopf Jr. “Of course, there will be indictments and trials next year, and there’s no question the Democrats will try to make it an issue. But it shouldn’t affect how the vote goes.”

And Lee Atwater, Bush’s campaign director, said: “I don’t see it having any effect on the presidential campaign in the primaries or in the general election. Voters are already tired of it. The hearings burned the whole thing out.”

Reagan ‘Scuffed Up’

Other Republicans are less sanguine. John P. Sears, a veteran political consultant who worked briefly with Reagan’s 1980 campaign, said the President has been so “scuffed up” by the Iran-contra scandal that his effectiveness as a campaigner has been diminished.

Richard B. Wirthlin, the White House pollster who is working on former Nevada Sen. Paul Laxalt’s presidential campaign, conceded that the congressional hearings “were quite bruising as far as the President is concerned.”

But, as a party, Wirthlin said, Republicans trail Democrats by only 7 percentage points when voters are asked which party they identify with. The gap had expanded to 11 points during the Iran-contra hearings, he said.

“The most interesting poll I have seen,” Wirthlin added, “was one by the Los Angeles Times, which showed that 43% of the people blamed Congress for the Iran-contra affair and only 30% blamed the President.” The poll, published on July 15, was taken in the middle of the nationally televised testimony of former White House aide Oliver L. North.

Democrats Optimistic

Democrats, by contrast, are almost uniformly confident that the scandal will give them a boost next November.

“The biggest impact,” said Greg Schneiders, a consultant working on former Arizona Gov. Bruce Babbitt’s campaign for the Democratic nomination, “is that Reagan has been removed from the asset column of the Republicans.”

Before the scandal, Schneiders said, Republican candidates “had a single theme with some variations: ‘I’m the logical, rightful heir to the Reagan Revolution.’ Now they’re not talking about extending the Republican revolution.

“Meanwhile, the Democrats seem to have found their voice. They’re not running against Reagan but saying: ‘Let’s head off into new directions.’ ”

Former Democratic Chairman Robert S. Strauss, although calling it unlikely that the Iran-contra affair would be “a cutting issue” in next year’s election, added: “People are going to be looking at governing and will want someone who understands governing. And, in that sense, Iran-contra has weakened the Republican crowd dramatically.”

Strauss warned that Reagan will still be a Republican asset next year in raising funds and drawing crowds.

And Christopher Bowman, the Republican Party’s political director, promised: “We fully intend to use the President in the campaign. He is still perceived as a strong leader, and our polling shows his personal popularity remains extremely high.”

Peter Hart, a Democratic consultant, said Republicans have “taken two of their strongest points--controlling government spending and making America stand tall--and turned those into either neutrals or liabilities.” But he warned that Democrats must still prove themselves in those two areas.

Democratic Chairman Paul G. Kirk Jr. predicted that his party’s presidential nominee could score points on the campaign trail simply by reminding audiences that the present Administration sold arms to “the arch-terrorist,” Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

But Claibourne Darden, a neutral Atlanta-based political consultant, warned that the issue could backfire on Democrats in the South. “It’s a patriotic-type issue,” he said, “and, if the Democrats don’t handle it right, their opponents can accuse them of not being patriotic.”