MISSOURI COMMENTARY: CLINTON'S CHOICES: ACCOMODATE OR STICK BY HIS GUNS ON PROGRAMS

As the post-election Republican euphoria and the Democratic shock begin to abate just a little bit, both parties will begin to face up to the political realities of the next two years.

The GOP will have to decide whether it wants to veer off to the far right or pursue a more centrist conservatism.

Speaker-in-waiting Newt Gingrich is a talented political operator. He is entitled to credit as the architect of the Republican resurgence in the House of Representatives. He is the hero of the 1994 elections and is the second or third most powerful man in the country -- depending on how you want to rank the chairman of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan.

Gingrich smiles enigmatically when interviewers ask is he is still the old bomb thrower. The ultimate, real-life answer to that question will determine the nature of the political climate for the next two years.

Bomb throwers like confrontational and divisive issues. Republican bomb throwers like Pat Buchanan want to emphasize prayer in school, abortion, gays in the military, immigration and term limits as the front-and-center issues of the day.

When Gingrich described school prayer as the priority item on the legislative agenda, he was throwing a bone to the bomb throwers. The 1994 elections were not influenced one whit by the prayer-in-school issue. The prayer crowd was 100 percent enthusiastically Republican whether the issue was mentioned or not. Yet Gingrich in his post-election euphoria made it a major goal. One has to wonder. Do we have a new Gingrich or the same old bomb thrower?

It is now clear that the Republican powers in the House are having "second thoughts" on the term limit issue. Dick Armey (R-Texas), the incoming Majority Leader, says they were only needed when Democrats were in control. Gingrich says they must be prospective only so as to apply to him in 2014 when he will be 71 years of age. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee where constitutional amendments originate, is cool to term limits.

Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.) and the Republican governors and governors-elect view the notion of leading off with prayer in school or term limits as the squandering of precious time and political opportunity. Some liken it to President Bill Clinton's misstep when he started his presidency on the issue of gays in the military. That issue threw Clinton off balance, beclouded his political message and wrecked the timing of his legislative program.

Dole, the pragmatist, wants to work on items that he thinks can pass: welfare reform, abolishing some federal agencies, tax cuts (especially on capital gains), shrinking the budget, and reducing mandates on states. He wants to respond directly to the themes that worked in the 1994 congressional campaign.

The Republican governors by and large share the Dole agenda with one added proviso. They claim they can do things like welfare better and cheaper, but don't expect them to pick up the tab for any new services. The Republican governors believe in state's rights and state actions, but state not fiscal responsibility. Somehow, they would like lots of federal revenue to be spent as they wish - the second coming of revenue sharing.

As for the Democrats, Clinton recognizes that he was resoundingly repudiated at the polls, although he may not want to admit to it in such blunt terms.

Fundamentally, Clinton has two ways to go.

"Accommodating Clinton." Bend over backwards and try to agree with Gingrich and Dole. Sign most anything they send him. Explain that although the legislation isn't really everything he might desire, nevertheless it is better than two years of gridlock and stalemate.

"Battling Clinton." Send up some reasonable proposals on welfare reform, a vastly scaled-back health care plan, campaign spending, lobby reform, and other measures. Be willing to make some compromise, but make it clear you will stick by your guns and not chicken out.

As columnist David Broder puts it, "A president who had a hard time defining himself when his own party was in power may have better luck defining himself in contradistinction to a conservative agenda, some of whose elements have the capacity to antagonize and activate strong Democratic constituencies."

The worst fear for many Democrats is that Clinton will try to be both the "great accommodator" and the "great battler" -- simultaneously.

~Tom Eagleton is a former U.S. senator from Missouri and is a columnist for the Pulitzer Publishing Co.