MISSOURI WATCH: THE HOUSE THAT BOB (GRIFFIN) BUILT

No political figure in Missouri has received more media attention in recent weeks than the embattled speaker of the Missouri House of Representatives, the Honorable Bob F. Griffin of Cameron. Depending on your viewpoint and political persuasion, the Northwest Missouri Democrat is either an historic leader who has written an exceptional legislative record for the past quarter of a century or the personal personification of political lust, power and corruption.

Strangely, there seems to be no middle-ground consensus on the representative from the 6th District, at least publicly. Off the record, his friends will admit that Griffin at times can be too partisan, and his enemies will admit that he has often been an effective force in securing important legislation that benefits the state. Both his defenders and opponents will pass judgments on his honesty and integrity without a scintilla of evidence, rendering their views either invalid or irrelevant.

After 25 years of legislative service, 14 of which have been spent as the chief presiding officer of the "people's branch of government," Griffin remains something of a mystery, even to those who know him and have confidence in his ability to carry out the constitutional duties of his office.

To understand any official in public life, it is first essential that one knows the environment in which the individual works. Second guessing, a right that every citizen automatically assumes is guaranteed by the Constitution, has as its first requirement the need to understand the demands of the job, the pressures that are a part of the duties and the overall objectives of the participants. High-profile jobs, such as governor or attorney general, are often governed as much by precedent, legal responsibilities and undisclosed facts as by the personalities themselves. A governor is often confronted with a desire to improve the lives of his constituents and a state treasury that has no extra revenue, while a legislator must often decide whether to support a small group of friends who have contributed to his electoral success or a much larger constituency that has never supported him at the polls.

To understand at least some part of Bob Griffin's record as speaker, it is necessary to know something about the group he leads and the problems attached to the responsibilities of leadership. The Missouri House of Representatives is an ungainly entity composed of 163 men and women representing two political faiths, a wide variety of interests and geographical areas as diverse as the United States as a whole, and its membership in terms of economics, education, occupation and religious beliefs is polyglot, to say the least.

In a word, the House is unruly and sometimes ungovernable, yet during the four and one-half months that it can remain in session, it must at least consider, if only to ignore, some 1,200 bills and several thousand amendments to these measures. The natural inclination of any governing body this large is to delay, diversify, debate and, finally, deliver. If this process is to be applied to the 250 to 300 measures finally agreed to and passed, the time required is enormous, which means there must be decorum, dedication and some degree of responsibility. The latter is sometimes difficult to detect in a legislative body that is nearly five times larger than its sister institution on the other side of the Capitol, the Missouri Senate.

The House is too large, one of the largest in the country when compared to those with equal responsibilities, and progress of any kind is difficult, sometimes next to impossible. While the Senate has a single twelve-member appropriations committee, the House has a 27-member budget committee and five appropriations subcommittees with 93 members. To find consensus on the next year's budget requires seven votes in the Senate, 47 in the House. Putting it another way: permitting each senator to comment for 15 minutes on next year's budget figures would require 8.5 hours, while giving each member of the House the same period of time for comments and amendments would require 41 hours.

Griffin has not been re-elected session after session because he was popular but because he has been effective, which is certainly not the path to popularity among one's peers. This isn't the only reason the Cameron Democrat has been able to win re-election, for certainly he has been able to utilize the considerable powers of his office to thwart opposition, both from within his own party and from the opposition party. Whether Democrat or Republican, the power of office is a part of the retention of power. Griffin's ability, some of it gained from the practice of his profession, to build consensus within a legislative body that is often unwieldy and sometimes even intractable has stood him well in moving the House toward some remarkable, even historic legislation over the past decade.

Just as power often corrupts, tenure brings its own problems, one of which is the human temptation of manipulation. The leader learns the art of manipulation and those being led suspect they are being manipulated. When the two collide, there is often trouble, and that rhymes with bubble, which almost burst the other day as the House started electing its new leadership. Several years ago Griffin issued press releases denouncing this column after an especially heavy barrage of criticism, but much of that is history with little relevance to more recent events. Part of the resolution of that once-vicious conflict was Griffin's continued support of worthwhile legislation. This, coupled with the -constitutional right of presumed innocence, makes it difficult to judge harshly the attempt by the speaker to pursue the difficult job of managing the House, despite the belief that his political future is less than secure. The speaker should be judged on his record, flaws and all. That's what Newt's mother told me, and it wasn't in confidence.

Jack Stapleton is a Southeast Missourian columnist who keeps tabs on Jefferson City.