MISSOURI INDEBTED TO RETIRING SENIOR SENATOR AND HIS LEGACY

John C. Danforth is the kind of individual most Americans would like to send to Washington to represent them. Unfortunately, most voters are denied the opportunity of sending a Jack Danforth to Congress and must settle for something far less, which may help explain why the country is in such a blankety-blank mess today. It also sheds light on why, when the senior U.S. senator announced he would not seek another term next year, the date became a kind of watershed in Missouri politics. Without really realizing it, a great many Missourians recognized in that announcement the end of an era, a kind of sad red-letter day that would be remembered for years to come.

That political swan song was typically Danforth, who made the usual curtsy to the privilege of public service and the honor of representing 5 million of his fellow citizens in the halls of Congress, and then the senator announced his return to more active work in his church and the legal profession. Danforth displayed, perhaps unwittingly, that he had another life besides politics and practiced something besides the art of getting re-elected. If you want to get a true perspective on a politician, try to imagine him doing anything but wheeling, dealing and electoral finagling.

We remember as if it were yesterday the day this Purina Mills descendant made the rounds of newspaper offices around the state, plugging his just-announced intention of becoming the next attorney general of the state. The last Republican to hold that office left Jefferson City in 1933 and the chances of another one occupying it in 1969 were slim to none. Back then Missourians weren't used to electing Republicans to anything except in a couple of hopeless congressional districts, and the candidacy of a wealthy, ordained minister-lawyer did little more than start an off-key chorus of derision and doubt. The best thing the young St. Louis Republican had going for him was the less-than-distinctive record of the Democratic incumbent.

That record, plus the slow recognition that there was more to Danforth than his distinctive background, led to a revitalization of the Republican Party in this state and the beginning of a long skein of GOP officeholders that was to continue right up to last November. This record of Republican dominance of state politics can be traced right to the doorstep of Jack Danforth. Like many who willingly or unwillingly assume the mantle of leadership, Danforth had his share of critics within his own party, some of whom were nastier than the Democrats tried to be. It is the price one pays for following democratic principles and trying to make them work.

To this day, the senator has dedicated opponents within the Republican Party, and they are an unusual lot to say the least. There are those who blame their leader for following his own conscience in representing the people, yet their criticism reveals their own unwillingness to follow the same path. When he is blamed for being too liberal by some in the GOP, he is really being faulted for honestly following principles that disregard partisanship and place personal integrity and public good ahead of everything else. When he is faulted for his uniqueness, the criticism most often comes from partisan opponents who look for the same quality in their own ranks.

Whether the issue is the Panama Canal treaty, the support of which earned Danforth the undying enmity of some, or the ill-advised flag amendment, our senior senator was ready and willing to buck the prevailing view of the moment and support the long-term benefit to the country. In recent times he has received much publicity for his sponsorship of one Clarence Thomas to the U.S. Supreme Court. His critics forget that it was Danforth who gave Thomas his first shot at public service, an opportunity to display some of the abilities that Danforth happened to believe would prove beneficial to the nation as a whole. Agree with him or not, Danforth again proved true to his convictions, honoring personal loyalty above political expediency.

Shortly after the Thomas hearings, we wrote a column commending Danforth for his willingness to put his personal neck on the line in pursuit of goals he deemed more important. We noted our own personal opposition to Thomas, but called on the senator to keep and pursue the same independence that caused him to serve as sponsor of the appointment. A few days later, a note from him said, "I am very grateful for your very kind words about me. Now, if only I can live up to them." The irony is that in this writer's view, Danforth has seldom, if ever, failed to live up to them - during nearly 20 years of service to the state and its citizens.

Missouri is indebted to its senior senator for proving public service can transcend pursuit of personal gain and glory.