"The Heifer" Takes Some Hits

By Barrett Seaman/Washington

When Howard Henry Baker arrived at the White House last March, he brought with him a reputation as the great conciliator. Moderates expected his skills as a consensus builder to work legislative magic, easing Ronald Reagan into the new realities of a Democratic Congress. Conservatives feared that his instincts as a pragmatist would blur the President's ideological vision.

Baker has indeed shown that his style is one that avoids confrontation. He helped steer Reagan into a Central American "peace plan" partnership with House Speaker Jim Wright. He engineered the strategy of selling Robert Bork to Congress as a distinguished moderate rather than a centurion of right-wing values. And he prepared the ground for the President's reluctant compromise on a budget plan. Had such strategies proved successful, Baker's conservative critics might have forgiven him. But given the results, even some of his fans are wondering if he is the wrong man for the times.

Baker is noticeably tired these days and losing his long war against weight -- aides refer to him affectionately as "the Heifer." But despite recent rumors, he is not looking for a way out of the White House. Nor is the President or Nancy, whose approval is requisite, listening to conservative calls for his ouster. Baker says he loves the job, particularly the chance to work closely with Reagan. "My greatest peril," he quips, "is that I will run out of good stories before he does." Besides swapping yarns, the two men share remarkable self-assurance and poise.

What they do not share, however, is political style. Confrontation brought Reagan to power. As his rhetoric on Bork, the budget and Central America demonstrates, he remains most comfortable when he is taking his opponents head on. As Senate majority leader, Baker successfully yinned to Reagan's yang in crucial legislative battles. But as Baker has unhappily discovered, the White House is very different from the Senate. Says his longtime aide James Cannon: "In the Senate, they fight with boxing gloves; in the White House, they fight with guns and knives." More important, he has had difficulty blending into an Administration heavy with ideologues to whom fighting is often more important than winning.

But if Howard Baker is not the best chief of staff for Ronald Reagan right now, then who is? Except for the far right, the consensus around Washington is . . . Howard Baker. Despite legislative setbacks, he managed the Reagan White House through its toughest period. He helped Reagan survive the Iran-contra affair. And he worked to keep arms-control talks with the Soviets on track.

As Reagan's political power inevitably fades, he has two choices: rallying his right-wing disciples for a few flaming defeats that will polarize the political landscape for 1988, or building the coalitions necessary to preserve his legacy. Baker's goal of carving a niche for Reagan as a national political teacher during his final year requires that the President have a secure platform from which to lecture. Baker must show that his nonconfrontational approach can produce results that will prevent the White House from becoming nothing more than a stagnant pond for lame ducks.