NEW THIRD PARTY NOT THE SOLUTION TO DISENCHANTMENT

There are few people who aren't at least a little disenchanted with the state of politics in America today.

The popularity of campaign finance reform proposals, anti-establishment outsider politicians and throw-the-bums-out sentiment points to the public's dissatisfaction with our political system.

For many people, disgust with the established political order -- four decades of Democratic Party rule -- was as much responsible for giving Republicans control of the House and Senate in 1994 as was political ideology.

But a recent poll showed 54 percent of the public favors neither the leadership of the Democratic nor Republican party and desires a viable third-party candidate in next year's presidential contest. Whether the poll accurately reflects the public mood, it seems obvious many people have a bipartisan contempt for the status quo.

Voters impatiently demand the changes and dramatic cuts in government waste promised by the victors in last November's election, and for good reason. Consider the bitter debate raging in Washington over whether balancing the budget -- not next year, but in seven years -- will be too painful.

Thus the appeal of, and the media fascination with, independent presidential candidates. In 1992 there was Ross Perot. This year, Colin Powell has commanded the attention of political observers.

Apparently unable to abide the spotlight of attention shining elsewhere, Perot has thrust himself into the fray to say he will help form a third political party.

Perot's wouldn't really be a third party. Candidates from the Libertarian and other fringe parties have placed presidential candidates on the ballot for years. But those parties didn't have the erratic Texan's blessing.

Perot and his third-party advocates will start in California, where the deadline for qualifying a new party for the 1996 ballot expires this month, and plan to expand the effort to all the states. But a new party won't cure America's political ills. For one thing, a third party is a loser party.

That a third-party candidate has little chance to win the White House is the best indication that Powell won't go that route if he decides to run.

But like a losing baseball squad that upsets the team vying for a shot at the pennant, third-party or independent candidate can influence the outcome of elections. In 1992 President Bill Clinton won with a mere 43 percent of the vote, thanks to Perot.

Clinton's often ineffectual leadership is what results when a president is elected without the benefit of majority public support. Now imagine a third-party president without even the support of other party members in Congress.

Proponents contend that only someone without ties to the traditional two-party establishment is free to govern as a true outsider, with fresh ideas unfettered by the partisan party line. But a lack of fresh ideas isn't the problem. Since last year's Republican sweep, many reform proposals have come to the table only to be debated and either watered down or defeated.

There is nothing inherent to a third party that would change that. It is democracy. A major third party, although in vogue, could do little to improve the system. And, to the extent it splits voters and enables an unpopular candidate to win the presidency, it will weaken the system.

CHAMBER NAMES SPARTECH AREA'S INDUSTRY OF THE YEAR

AUTHOR RECALLS BROTHER IN FICTION