GOP in Bitter Disarray on Bias Programs : Politics: Democrats seem to have reached a general accord. Republicans, on the contrary, find themselves deeply divided on issue.

WASHINGTON —  While Democrats appear to have reached some level of agreement on how to proceed on affirmative action, the Republicans are in disarray, acrimoniously arguing among themselves over how forcefully to oppose race-based federal policies.

Republican congressional leaders’ reluctance to introduce legislation attacking affirmative action programs is attributed by many to concern that steps to end such programs would make them appear racist and sexist. The specter of 1996 presidential politics also hovers over the debate.

In a sign that many party faithful see as a retreat, House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) has urged his colleagues--including Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), who is campaigning for his party’s presidential nomination on an anti-affirmative action platform--to delay introducing promised legislation until later this year. His critics accuse Gingrich of backing away from a politically sensitive issue but his aides say that he wants to craft legislation carefully and thoughtfully.

“We are a few months away from moving our affirmative action agenda,” said Tony Blankley, Gingrich’s chief spokesman. “We have conveyed our thoughts all around the party that it would be best to think through our policy and how best to communicate what that policy is.”

But that go-slow approach has angered some party activists who fear that the GOP is worrying too much about politics and too little about keeping faith with its anti-affirmative action rhetoric.

“I think that decision is symptomatic of a certain level of discomfort with the issue on the part of Republicans,” said Abigail Thurnstrom, a political science professor at Boston University who closely watches Republican congressional leaders. “This is not a subject--race--that they feel comfortable dealing with. It is not where they live.”

Thurnstrom said that Republican leaders are sensitive to charges of racism and sexism, making them cautious in their efforts to balance their anti-affirmative action legislation with policies that would provide opportunity for minorities and women without promoting group preferences.

“The message [anti-affirmative action leaders] are sending to the black and Latino communities is that we’re going to take something from you,” Thurnstrom said. “It is extremely important for the Republicans to say what they are going to do in place of affirmative action. That’s certainly the way Gingrich is thinking.”

But some party stalwarts, such as Linda Chavez, a conservative anti-affirmative action activist who chaired the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in the Ronald Reagan Administration, said that such talk is political doublespeak. “They’re a bunch of nervous nellies up there who have never been comfortable talking about race and hope that it goes away,” Chavez said. “They are basically getting cold feet.”

Chavez, who has argued for years against federal set-aside and affirmative action programs that benefit women and minorities, said that she is angry with her party’s leaders because they are “acting like Bill Clinton . . . by wanting to be on both sides of the affirmative action debate and wanting to avoid making anyone mad.”

“Republicans want to sound like they’re dismantling preference programs, but so far they aren’t doing very much. That’s pulling a Clinton.”

But Blankley disputed that view, arguing that the Republican Party has “an opportunity” to gain support among African American and Latino voters by making sure it has something to say about what it supports instead of only arguing against affirmative action.

“If we don’t express our full view on affirmative action, including the positive aspects of our policies, then we will miss out on this opportunity to reach the broader public,” Blankley said. “When we have our full program together, then all Republicans will have a better chance to get out before the country and deliver a more coordinated message of what we’re opposed to and what we are for.”

Gingrich, in fact, often rails against “preferences based on genetic codes” and promises sweeping legislation that would abolish affirmative action programs altogether.

Both Dole and Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Tex.), another GOP presidential hopeful, have spoken out against affirmative action but neither has introduced legislation nor given specific details of what they would do.

Last March, Dole announced that he would submit a bill which would ban racial and gender preferences in hiring, promoting and business contracting with the federal government, said Joyce Campbell of the majority leader’s office. She said that Dole remains opposed to government programs that give preferences to people based on race and gender and plans to introduce his bill next week.

Immediately after Clinton’s speech in support of affirmative action, Dole criticized the President on the Senate floor Wednesday but did not say when his legislation will be submitted.