Politics
By ROBERT KIECKHEFER

The primaries; the ERA lobby

FOR YEARS, one political party or another has been trying to change the date of the Illinois primary election. The factions change because of changes in the dynamics of the elections process. One session, the Democrats might see an advantage in a later primary because of expected changes in the national economic picture. The next, the GOP might feel exactly the same way.

About the only factor that's not considered regularly is the convenience of the voter. But that's another story.

The latest person affected by the long timespan between the March primary and the November general election is Lt. Gov. Dave O'Neal, the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate seat being relinquished by Adlai E. Stevenson III.

O'Neal, of course, rode the legal problems plaguing Atty. Gen. William J. Scott to a rather stunning upset victory in the GOP Senate primary. Although he correctly pointed out he has a history of pulling upsets, O'Neal's only previous political experience was in St. Clair County, where he won election to the traditionally Democratic office of sheriff. But a county campaign and a statewide campaign are a lot different in terms of organization, fund-raising and media exposure.

One of the nicest things about upsets today is that they have a built-in turnaround factor. That is, a candidate who is labeled "underdog" but comes out on top wins a lot of attention and thus gets a big boost that he might otherwise not have had. If the primary election were held at a reasonable time, O'Neal could have expected the surprise nature of his win over Scott to have given him a generous boost in his uphill general election campaign against Secretary of State Alan J. Dixon. Because of the long hiatus between the primary and general election, however, a lot of the impact will be diluted.

That doesn't, of course, mean the campaign is hopeless. Daniel Walker successfully kept his name in front of the voters from the time of his upset win over Paul Simon in March 1972 until his general election win over Richard B. Ogilvie that November.

On the other hand, Walker had the services of some truly ace campaign strategists, including Victor de Grazia and Norton Kay, and a willingness to undertake a million-dollar debt. O'Neal may not be quite so blessed or quite so willing.

His early efforts, in fact, have been meager.

As Dixon's primary campaign opponents did, O'Neal has concentrated his efforts on drawing the secretary of state into debates. Apparently he hopes both to demonstrate he can handle himself in such a confrontation and to improve his name recognition.

Dixon hasn't agreed to anything, however, and while it's likely the two will debate, the early-season skirmishing hasn't exactly kept the contest in the forefront of voters' minds.

On debates

There was a little controversy, however, about the lieutenant governor's formal debate proposal to Dixon. Some of the reporters asked to serve on the debate panels later said they hadn't realized Dixon had not been consulted about the schedule, format or other details. Some apparently felt they had been used as part of a plot to pressure Dixon into debating.

When O'Neal aide Bill Greener contacted me and asked me to serve, he made it quite clear he was putting together a "proposed" debate schedule. He said, in fact, O'Neal wanted to present to Dixon a formal proposal to start negotiations from a set of specifics.

Greener also made it clear that O'Neal wanted to debate and that he intended to push for Dixon's acceptance.

If Dixon felt pressured, though, it was hard to tell. He merely said he thought it would be better to wait. The whole thing was conducted with reasonable courtesy and — at least for Illinois politics — a marked lack of rancor.

Another subject

It's almost incredible that the supporters of the Equal Rights Amendment don't realize they've become their own worst enemies.

Since 1972, they have pestered, threatened, browbeaten and generally bothered many lawmakers to the point they just don't want any more to do with the issue or its backers.

Others feel they have been badly imposed on by being forced to vote on ERA even when it's clear the votes aren't there to ratify it. The latest example was the recent campaign in the House — when representatives once again were forced to take a stand even though there did not appear to be a prayer to carry ERA in the Senate.

ERA forces have taken some steps in the right direction — trying to organize constituent groups and even the family members of reluctant legislators to put pressure on them. Those are avenues of approach which can yield returns.

But it's counterproductive to then turn around and continue the very pressure tactics which have kept Illinois out of the "ratified" column in the first place and which prompt some lawmakers to actually hide when they see the ERA forces coming.

Perhaps the problem is, in part, shifts within the ERA forces. Although many dedicated women and men have fought for Illinois ratification from the first, the movement lacks the year-to-year direction which its opponents enjoy. As a result, the movement may not realize just how much it hurts its own cause.

34/July 1980/Illinois Issues