Differences dominate GOP primary for Senate
By ROBERT J. McCLORY

Challenger Tom Corcoran has made incumbent Charles H. Percy's support of the president the central issue in the Republican U.S. Senate primary. His vigorous attack seems to be gaining attention, but Percy can add to the strong position of the incumbent a plausible record of support for Reagan.

Tom CorcoranCharles H. Percy

THE YEAR was 1966 and the battle for a U.S. Senate seat from Illinois pitted a popular, articulate, white-haired, 74-year-old incumbent who was considered unbeatable against a brash, 48-year-old, conservative "boy wonder" from the business world who had never won a political election. Throughout the campaign the underdog hit hard and often at the "irresponsible" liberalism of the older man. And in the end, he scored an upset victory. Charles H. Percy became Illinois' new senator, ending veteran Paul H. Douglas' three terms in the Capitol.

History sometimes has a way of coming full circle. The year is 1984 and the battle for a U.S. Senate seat pits a popular, articulate, gray-haired, 64-year-old incumbent generally considered unbeatable against a brash, 44-year-old conservative whose name wasn't even recognized by 69 percent of the members of his own party in Illinois last July. Throughout the campaign, the upstart is hitting hard at the "excessive" liberalism of the older man. And he really thinks he can win. This time it is Tom Corcoran, a four-term U.S. representative from Ottawa, who is in the underdog role, and it is Charles H. Percy himself who is fighting to extend his senatorial career beyond the three terms he has already served in the Capitol.

To be sure, there are differences. The Percy-Douglas battle was in the general election itself. The Corcoran-Percy confrontation is in the March 20 Republican primary, with the winner to face a Democratic candidate in November. And while Sen. Douglas was a self-proclaimed, New Deal liberal in every sense of the word, Percy is far from that, having always tried to portray himself as a moderate middle-of-the-roader.

But times have changed, and so, without having moved very far from his original political philosophy, Illinois' senior senator finds himself being branded beneath Corcoran's red, white and blue campaign logo as anti-business, weak on military defense spending, soft toward communism and indifferent to the economic needs of his own state: in short, an embarrassment to President Ronald Reagan and, as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, an albatross around the administration's neck. A 30-second Corcoran television commercial ends with the pithy slogan: "Defeat Percy before he defeats Reagan!"

Percy is not accustomed to primary fights — he has never had one before — but he got a good scare in the 1978 general election from unknown Democrat Alex Seith, so he is not sitting back waiting for Tom Corcoran to self-destruct. He is maintaining a statewide campaign schedule almost as vigorous as that of his aggressive opponent. There have been several head-on debates, and although Percy would rather concentrate on his own achievements, he and his staff respond regularly to Corcoran's highly publicized barbs.

The tone of the Corcoran thrust was set when he declared his candidacy last June (five months before Percy announced). Standing on the steps of the historic Reddick mansion in Ottawa, he charged that Percy "marches to a different drummer than most Illinois

Republicans," boasts a voting record similar to that of Ted Kennedy, and has, in fact, supported the Republican position during his 18 years in office only 42.8 percent of the time. As a result, he concluded, "the Republican party is being allowed to disintegrate and the president is being obstructed." Since then he has hammered relentlessly at Percy's liberalism, while repeatedly vowing his own 100 percent loyalty to Reagan. Frequently cited is a list of Percy's "13 worst votes," which includes his vote against Reagan's original 1984 budget proposal, his opposition to the Trident submarine program, his approval of a $75 million loan to "communists in Nicaragua," his opposition to capital punishment, his vote to "give away the Panama Canal" — and even Percy's support for a new gymnasium in Washington "exclusively for senators' use."

As new issues arise, Corcoran is quick to follow up with swift jabs. After the Grenada invasion, for instance, he charged, "Responsibility for the spread of communism in our back yard must be shared by Percy." And when the Rev. Jesse Jackson returned from Syria in early January with a

The much debated question in this primary is whom Ronald Reagan, in his heart of hearts, is really rooting for: Percy or Corcoran

downed U.S. flier, Corcoran accused Percy (who had congratulated Jackson, as did President Reagan) of "assisting a Democratic candidate for president" and "complicating what the administration is trying to do in Lebanon."

The strident barrage against Percy is in vivid contrast with Corcoran's almost simpering personal veneration of the president. Last November, while campaigning in Dixon, where Reagan spent his youth, Corcoran posed by the banks of the Rock River and told a crowd that Mr. Reagan's service as a lifeguard there was a precursor to his rescue of Americans from Grenada.

"It took the same kind of commitment to bring our citizens home from that Cuban-occupied island as it did for Ronald Reagan to protect lives here years ago," he said.

If elected, he says in his speeches, "My chief purpose in the Senate will be to advance Ronald Reagan's vision of America's future."

Tom Corcoran

When he is not before a microphone or on camera, Tom Corcoran does not seem so contentious. Seated in the downtown Chicago law office of a friend, he removes his suit coat and answers questions in a relaxed, unpretentious way. Corcoran is a handsome, well-groomed man — one of those people who never has a hair out of place and is never at a loss for words. He is a third-generation Irish Catholic whose great-grandparents fled to America during the great Potato Famine in the mid-1800s and found prosperity as farmers in the Midwest. On the family farm in Ottawa, he learned at an early age, he said, the satisfaction of hard work and the importance of "not accepting handouts from the government or anyone else."

While his personal values stem from his family roots, says Corcoran, his political ideas are essentially from the school of the late Sen. Everett M. Dirksen. In his early 20s, Corcoran served as a volunteer for Dirksen's campaign before landing his first paid staff position with former state Rep. W. Russell Arrington. He attended the University of Notre Dame where his appetite for conservative politics and economics was whetted by Father Stanley Perry, then head of the school's political science department. Later, at the University of Chicago, Corcoran's convictions were filled out under economist Milton Friedman.

All of which, he says, explains why he is a Republican and a conservative. He is against the Equal Rights Amendment, gun control legislation and public funding of abortions for the poor. He would like to see abortion banned through a constitutional amendment. He would also favor an amendment to enforce a balanced federal budget. He battled against the restructuring of AT&T on the theory that the realignment would cost thousands of jobs in his congressional district. And he insists the U.S. needs to expand its nuclear armaments "after 15 years of neglect" and get the Soviets back to the bargaining table "after the balance has been restored." Although he, his wife and five children are Catholic, Corcoran disagrees with the sentiments of the American bishops in their letter last May on limiting the arms race, "When they speak on matters of theology and religion I listen to them," he says.

But Corcoran wants it understood that he is no enemy of a responsible welfare system and no advocate of unlimited license to big corporations. "If the liberals helped the poor and stopped at that, I'd be in complete agreement," he says. "But their tendency is to help everyone, deserving or not, even big business and big money. At bottom, what they really want is to run the private enterprise system. Liberals have a rapacious appetite."

As an example, he cites the synthetic fuels program approved by Congress during the Carter administration. "It mainly subsidizes large corporations will cost millions to Illinois taxpayers and will return practically nothing to the state in jobs. Besides, we won't need synthetic fuels for at least 10 years. Of course, Sen. Percy was one of those who voted for the program."

During his seven years in the House of Representatives, Corcoran says he grew more and more alarmed over Percy's drift into naked liberalism. And so, against the advice of many of his esteemed peers in the party, he threw his hat in the ring. "Percy is a man who attached himself to the liberal, Rockefeller wing of the Republican party as the avenue to national prominence," explains Corcoran. "His aim was to be president. In pursuing that goal, he paid too much attention to the liberal press."

In Corcoran's estimation, Charles Percy is unsalvageable, and if the GOP doesn't dump him in March, a Democrat may very well do it in November: "It should be clear to everyone why so many Democrats are running this time They know Percy is vulnerable."

The much debated question in this primary is whom Ronald Reagan, in his heart of hearts, is really rooting for: Percy or Corcoran. Officially, the president has stated his neutrality, and Corcoran sees that as an indication of

14/March 1984/Illinois Issues

his sentiments. "If Sen. Howard Baker, for example, were being opposed in Tennessee, do you think Ronald Reagan would remain neutral?" he asks rhetorically. "Of course not. He'd be down there fighting for his man."

Corcoran doesn't take it badly that Reagan attended a Percy fundraiser in January 1983 at a Chicago hotel and snubbed his own affair going on at the same hotel at the same time two floors below. Nor does he show bitterness that Republican notables haven't given him much overt assistance. "The general practice is to support incumbents," he says, "and while Percy is not a good Republican, he is part of the party leadership."

As for the snub, he notes, "The president had made a commitment to Percy a long time before. Afterwards, he called me and explained why he couldn't have attended."

Despite the intense effort to wrap himself in Reagan's mantle, Corcoran has on occasion differed with the president. In 1982, for example, he opposed a $100 billion tax increase proposed by the administration, calling it a "reversal of conservative principles." More recently, he criticized Reagan's plan to increase the U.S. contribution to the International Monetary Fund. The money, he said, was little more than a bailout for big banks which had made imprudent loans. When quizzed about his stand last August, Corcoran told a reporter, "I have never held myself as a rubber stamp for the Reagan administration." Yet his strategy appears to be geared toward convincing Illinois voters that he is, if not a rubber stamp, at least a highly reasonable facsimile of Mr. Reagan and everything he stands for.

Charles Percy

As Charles Percy comes striding into his office at the Federal Building in downtown Chicago, he is fairly bursting with purposefulness. He has just come from a luncheon across the street, and he is scheduled to make a campaign appearance on the city's north side in 45 minutes. But he is happy to talk about his plans and prospects for a while.

In person, Percy's diminutive stature (he is 5'7") seems somehow inappropriate for a man who comments so often and with such authority on large issues. And the hearing aid in his ear likewise looks out of character for a one-time boy wonder. But there is no discernible diminishment of energy; rather, an almost youthful vitality permeates the man.

At 64, Percy is the archetypical politician. It is not necessary to interview him. He talks easily and smoothly about his latest accomplishment, whom he has conferred with today in high places and the decisions of international import he is pondering. He does it all without a hint of embarrassment or self-consciousness — as if he has come to accept totally all the accumulated hyperbole of 18 years of news releases from congressional offices and campaign headquarters. Sen. Charles Percy is not about to let someone snatch all this away — not when he is enjoying his job so much.

It has not always been so. In the beginning, back in 1958, the sky was the limit for the young dynamo from the Bell and Howell Corp. as he sat in the Oval Office with then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower and discussed the future of the GOP. Ike offered the 34-year-old super achiever an assistant secretary post. But Percy declined the offer, saying he wanted to make it in politics, as he had already done in private industry, from the ground up.

As his new career blossomed eight years later, it was clear that Percy's ultimate aim was to return to that Oval Office, not as a visitor, but as the occupant. He worked hard and effectively. His name surfaced as a presidential contender, but something always stood in his way. When Richard Nixon departed in 1974, Percy waited to be courted by the party leaders; they never came knocking at his door. After Jimmy Carter's 1976 election, Percy's career seemed to take a nosedive. There were jokes in Washington gossip columns about his hearing problems. Many political pundits wrote him off as frustrated, bitter and over-the-hill. In 1977 Chicago magazine published about the man a lengthy article with the flavor of an obituary. It was entitled "The Last Harrumph." That image endured almost until election day, 1980, when Percy emerged from his trance in the nick of time to snatch victory away from the pesky Seith.

With the election of Mr. Reagan and his own new national prominence as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Percy's star has risen again. He has obviously come to terms with the fact that he will not be president, and so he is devoting himself to congressional business with characteristic dedication.

Is he, as Corcoran insists, an obstacle to the Reagan game plan?

"There's not a grain of truth to it," says Percy. "The record is clear. Since Mr. Reagan took office, I have supported his position 80 percent of the time according to the Congressional Record. Mr. Corcoran has supported him 77 percent of the time."

There is no doubt that in the closing months of 1983 Percy deftly and successfully carried several potential hot potatoes on behalf of Reagan. For example, he was the one who persuaded the Senate to pass a White House-drafted resolution condemning the Soviets for their attack on the Korean airliner, while more militant factions in Congress were screaming for stiff sanctions. Similarly, Percy was the leader in getting the Senate to approve the compromise drawn up by the administration to permit U.S. Marines to remain in Lebanon. And Percy along with other moderates presented to Reagan the "build-down" approach to nuclear disarmament, which was subsequently adopted as the administration policy.

Why then hasn't Ronald Reagan explicitly endorsed him?

"The president always maintains neutrality," says Percy with a wave of his hand. "And I like his brand of neutrality. He comes to my dinner, where we raised $800,000. He sends his Air Force jet to pick me up for breakfast meetings. He authorized the use of his quotes in my campaign literature. He confers with me regularly on world issues."

March 1984/Illinois Issues/15

But not always. Last summer Percy let it be known that he was incensed when the president sent troops to Central America "on maneuvers" without consulting him or other congressional leaders. "He should let us know as a matter of principle," Percy fumed at the time. "Advise and consent of the Senate means just that, advise!" Corcoran naturally tried to widen that dispute into a permanent rupture, but Percy says that tactic will not work.

"It's true I don't work for the president," he says. "I work for the people who elected me. But Mr. Reagan and I are working together to reduce taxes and interest rates and to slow down the growth of government spending." Percy has a ready supply of "Dear Chuck" letters in which Reagan thanks him for supporting one or another of his initiatives. And a campaign brochure carries this glowing quote from the president concerning Percy: "The combination of his background and leadership position has produced a senator who is at once a major American statesman and an outstanding salesman for Illinois."

Percy talks glibly about the people and organizations he is "constantly in touch with" in his efforts to revitalize Illinois and upgrade its economy. "I think first of all we have to attune the Illinois economy for the future," he says. "That means attracting high technology industry. And we have the labor and the educational institutions to meet those needs. I'm convinced Illinois should be getting more of the defense budget. What we're getting now — .3 percent of the research and development budget and only 1.5 percent of the defense contracts — just isn't enough. ..."

He continues at a rapid-fire rate, mentioning steps he will take to stop the imbalance, how Illinois could expand its exports, what a more equitable distribution of revenue sharing money could achieve, the status of various federal contracts. As a matter of fact, he explains, it is his tireless concern for Illinois which explains Corcoran's oft-quoted charge that Percy has voted the Republican party line only 42.8 percent of the time in the Senate.

"That may be true," he says, "but you're talking about a Senate that has been dominated by a coalition of interests from the South and Southwest. I'm certainly not going to vote in favor of the Sun Belt and against my regional interests. And I'm not voting for special benefits for Mississippi, Texas or California to the detriment of the Northeast or Midwest."

Is he physically up to the tension of another six years?

"I had a physical at Henrotin Hospital [in Chicago]," he says, "and they found I was in the condition of a man in his early 30s. I swim every day, I can play six sets of tennis, I jump rope. In fact, jumping rope is the most time-efficient form of exercise. You can get the equivalent of 36 holes of golf in 10 minutes."

His aides are moving nervously around the office, checking their watches. "I have to get moving," he says apologetically. "I have a long way to go."

The winner?

On the surface, Percy figures to be an easy primary winner. In a statewide Gallup Poll last fall, he was rated as a very effective or fairly effective legislator by 67 percent of those interviewed. He showed no apparent areas of weakness in a demographic analysis, garnering substantial approval from blacks and whites, rich and poor, men and women. By contrast, only 5 percent of those contacted had ever heard of Tom Corcoran. Percy's name and seniority have served to deter more than a few ultraconservative Republican leaders in the state from coming out for Corcoran — even though they prefer his politics.

There is nothing, however, to deter Corcoran boosters from working quietly in their own areas to bring about an upset. There are substantial indications that this is happening. Corcoran's name recognition has skyrocketed since December — abetted by his controversial attacks on virtually everything Percy does or says. And Corcoran claims to be well on his way toward reaching his $1.5 million election budget (compared to Percy's $3 million) — an indication that some affluent sources are chipping in.

Political analysts predict the batlle will be fought most fiercely in DuPage Kane, Lake and suburban Cook counties, where 40 percent of the state's Republican votes were cast in the last primary. Corcoran is blitzing that area with television ads pointing out Percy's record on matters like gun control, abortion and retaliation against the Russians. DuPage and Kane counties, both hotbeds of conservative sentiment, may well turn out to be Corcoran territory, but the challenger would need a landslide there to offset Percy's expected domination of suburban Lake and Cook counties. Corcoran is making little effort to stir up Chicago voters since they are traditionally Democrats, although he expects to get some help from the same white ethnic Chicagoans who backed Bernard Epton for mayor last year.

There is complacency on neither side, especially in an era when political upsets seem more the rule than the exception. Yet a Corcoran primary victory would be a stunning surprise by any measure.

As the challenger moves around the state, he must be reminded at times of the old days at the University of Notre Dame when he tried out for the baseball team. He was, he says, a "pretty good" hitter, rapping out an occasional single or double. The problem was that the batter behind him inevitably blasted the ball to the far reaches of the campus. His name was Carl Yastrzemski. Corcoran didn't make the team, and he believes the contrast between himself and Yaz hurt his chances. Regardless of the sport, it's not easy to contend with a big leaguer.

Robert J. McClory is author of The Man Who Beat Clout City, contributor to Chicago magazine, Chicago Reader, The National Catholic Reporter and former city editor of the Chicago Daily Defender.

16/March 1984/Illinois Issues