Pubdate: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 Source: Charlotte Observer (NC) Copyright: 1999 The Charlotte Observer Contact: http://www.charlotte.com/observer/ Author: Dan Balz, Washington Post BUSH SWIRLS IN NEW RULES Drug Question Tests Electorate A decade ago, the kind of turbulence that hit Texas Gov. George W. Bush's campaign this week might have threatened to knock a candidate out of the presidential race. For better or worse, President Clinton has changed the rules. Bush's campaign was brought to earth over the question of whether he ever used illegal drugs, and even some supporters believe he will be hurt by the events of this week. Whether the damage is serious or long-lasting was not clear Friday -- and the candidate quickly shifted back to his pre-turbulence posture of vowing not to answer questions on the issue. The episode revealed a Bush campaign that, however smoothly it was operating, could be knocked off stride by one ingenious and unanticipated question. But it also showed how a decade of scandal politics -- and the example of Clinton -- has taught politicians not to crumble when the first crisis hits their campaigns. There once was a familiar pattern when political scandal erupted: the media feeding frenzy, the campaign deathwatch and the inevitable scene in a hotel ballroom where a contrite or defiant candidate withdrew from the race. That was the way it played out in 1987 when Gary Hart was hit with allegations of marital infidelity. But after a 1992 campaign in which Clinton weathered scandals involving infidelity, the draft and smoking marijuana, and then the past year in which he survived the Monica Lewinsky affair, that old pattern has been replaced by something new. "You can keep your head down and plow through it," said Republican strategist Ralph Reed, a Bush adviser, "and after you have, you're a stronger candidate because people see you're not going to be knocked out by it." Bush took a calculated risk by reopening the issue of when, if ever, he used drugs. It is that the public will forgive mistakes of the distant past if it is convinced a politician has learned from them -- and will not repeat them? "I think that ultimately voters will have a sense that the governor has admitted to mistakes that were made in his youth and will fall into two camps," a Bush adviser said Friday. "Either they respect that position or they disagree with it, in which case they'll find another candidate. And we feel far more will agree than disagree." A poll for CNN and Time Magazine by Yankelovich Partners released Friday offers some reassurance to campaign officials that the risk is worth taking. The poll found that 84 percent of Americans said that if Bush used cocaine in his 20s, that should not disqualify him from serving as president. Bush also hopes to benefit from public backlash against the media. The poll for CNN and Time found that almost three in five (58 percent) of those surveyed said reporters should not be asking Bush questions about cocaine use. But Bush also has gambled that he can partly answer the question without definitively saying he did or didn't use drugs. What he did this week was effectively deny using drugs since 1974 (when he was 28) but then refuse to say whether he used them earlier in his life. The danger is that after a Clinton presidency replete with evasive answers to simple questions, Bush has created the impression with voters that he is being cute or coy rather than forthcoming. Ultimately, say some political analysts, Bush may be forced to offer a clear-cut answer to the drug question. Bush campaign officials say their candidate is taking a much different gamble by refusing to answer detailed questions about his past: Voters may assume he engaged in behavior that never occurred. But, they say, Bush feels strongly that he must draw the line on personal questions in order to help change the climate of politics. This week's furor over Bush and drugs marked the first real test of his campaign under stress. It happened suddenly and unexpectedly. On Wednesday, Bush had been peppered with questions from Texas reporters about why he would not respond to repeated questions about drug use. Bush, in forceful terms, accused reporters of succumbing to the game of forcing politicians to disprove unfounded rumors. Later in New Orleans, Dallas Morning News reporter Sam Attlesey told a campaign official he wanted to ask Bush a question privately. The question involved whether Bush would insist that appointees in a future administration of his would be required to answer standard FBI background questions about drug use and could he meet that standard. Bush concluded it was a legitimate question that demanded an answer. He later told the Dallas paper that he understood the question to be whether someone had used drugs within the last seven years. "I will be glad to answer that question and the answer is, `No,' " Bush said. But when Bush and his campaign team awoke the next day, the need to clarify his response was clear. "Once we saw the Morning News story, we realized it left the impression that it could be as recent as seven years," an adviser said. So Bush told reporters Thursday morning that he could have passed the 15-year test at the time of his father's administration, which began in 1989. By the day's end, Bush again closed the door on further questions about drugs, a stance his advisers say he is determined to maintain. - --- MAP posted-by: Thunder