Some in GOP See No Excuse for ‘No Comment’

WASHINGTON —  It’s not easy to leave House Speaker Newt Gingrich speechless. But Bill Clinton’s current troubles have done just that.

“I have no comment at all on that entire zone,” the usually voluble Gingrich says about the president’s alleged relationship with a former White House intern. “And we’ll cheerfully repeat that phrase as often as y’all want to ask the question.”

But that rigid code of silence is becoming increasingly awkward for the Republican Party, which finds itself far more conflicted about how to act in the current climate than does the president’s own party.

Operating in full damage-control mode, most Democrats, at least for now, are following a coordinated battle plan of rallying around Clinton and focusing with Prussian discipline on their party’s policy aims.

Republicans are having a much tougher time responding to the furor. Many are confused and anxious about how to talk about the alleged Clinton affaire without inflicting political damage on themselves--especially if, as many expect, independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr eventually dumps the whole thing into the collective laps of the House Judiciary Committee.

Although most GOP lawmakers are staying mum for now, a restless band of social conservatives is arguing that silence is inappropriate for a party that pretends to be the guardian of family values.

“A lot of social conservatives feel that our party would be more upset if he cheated on his taxes than if he cheated on his wife,” said Rep. Mark E. Souder (R-Ind.). “That says something about the split between social conservatives and economic conservatives in our party.”

Their ambivalence has created a striking climate change on Capitol Hill, where many Republicans who got to Washington by talking about family values are suddenly tongue-tied on the subject. Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.), a conservative icon because of his staunch opposition to abortion, tiptoes around the subjects of adultery and lying. House GOP leaders abruptly cut off a press conference on the year’s legislative agenda as soon as they are asked about Clinton’s troubles.

*

The loudest Republican voices on the delicate subject of Clinton’s behavior are not those whom the public is used to hearing--Gingrich, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and other party leaders--but backbenchers, outsiders and potential GOP presidential candidates.

“Leaders are always teachers,” said Sen. John Ashcroft (R-Mo.), a presidential aspirant who was one of the first Republicans to break ranks with the GOP hands-off strategy. “When we are silent, we forfeit the opportunity to shape the culture.”

At a time when Republicans ought to be sitting pretty while the opposition party leader is under siege, they are instead wading through a mix of emotions ranging from frustration to bafflement to high anxiety. GOP lawmakers are slack-jawed in the face of the president’s sky-high approval ratings. And they are jittery at the prospect of having to confront the issue directly if it ends up before the House Judiciary Committee, the panel that conducts an initial review of potential impeachment proceedings.

“It’s not a real appealing prospect,” said Michele Davis, spokeswoman for House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas). “As soon as it lands on us, it’s a political hot potato. Now, it’s just facts coming out.”

That’s part of the reason most Republicans are lying low for now. If Republicans criticize Clinton, they fear, it will look like partisan piling-on, and it will lend credence to First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton’s claim that the whole controversy is fueled by a “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

“The overarching strategy for the Republican Party needs to be to not appear they are trying to make political capital,” said GOP political consultant Ralph Reed. “All that does is further energize the Democratic base.”

Other conservatives fear the GOP risks alienating its own base in an election year if it is not more openly critical of Clinton’s alleged behavior.

“There is deep frustration and disappointment that there’s not more moral leadership,” said Gary Bauer, a conservative activist who heads the Family Research Council. “The reluctance to speak on this by politicians is a reflection of their fear to not look judgmental in an age that has elevated tolerance above all other values.”

Bauer said the reluctance may also reflect a fear by politicians that, when it comes to throwing stones over infidelity, the Washington establishment is one big glass house.

Allegations of sexual exploits by lawmakers have always clogged Congress’ gossip networks and Ethics Committee dockets, even derailing the careers of lawmakers from Bob Packwood to John Tower. Gingrich himself is no stranger to controversy: Allegations that he was involved in extramarital affairs in the 1970s have surfaced in various publications over the years.

“There are a lot of folks in this town whose own lives will not stand up under scrutiny,” Bauer said.

Gingrich spokeswoman Christina Martin declined direct comment on the allegations about the speaker’s sex life. But she said they had nothing to do with Gingrich’s response to Clinton’s troubles.

“The intentional silence is very easy to explain,” Martin said. “As the constitutional officer to whom any evidence of wrongdoing may be delivered, the speaker must remain above the fray. This is solely the White House’s headache. Not ours. Not now.”

But it is not just a handful of conservatives who are increasingly uneasy about keeping quiet.

“The practical politics argue in favor of a measured response,” said Rep. Rick Lazio, a moderate Republican from New York. “But I personally am offended. There is a part of me that thinks our responsibility and obligation is to make a moral statement.”

Republicans will no longer have the luxury of withholding judgment if Starr forces the issue by reporting incriminating evidence to the House Judiciary Committee. The independent counsel law requires him to do so if he finds “substantial and credible information” about offenses that offer grounds for impeachment.

For now, only a handful of Republicans are endorsing the idea of impeachment proceedings. Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.), a conservative backbencher, has collected only 20 co-sponsors for a resolution calling for an impeachment investigation.

Unless Starr produces irrefutable evidence that Clinton perjured himself or encouraged Lewinsky to lie under oath, most Republicans say, impeachment won’t happen. It certainly won’t happen if Clinton’s approval ratings remain stratospheric.

Some Republicans argue that it would run counter to their political interest to impeach Clinton anyway. “The No. 1 thing you hear from Republicans is that they would like Clinton to stay here weakened,” said Souder.