STATE BENEFITED FROM ASHCROFT'S SERVICE

Over the past 50 years, Missouri has had only three Republican governors, and one of the interesting facts about this is that the first and last governors over the past half century were remarkably alike in their styles of governance and their personal habits. Forrest C. Donnell, a St. Louis lawyer who began serving his only term in the executive office 52 years ago, and John Ashcroft, a Springfield lawyer who finished his second term just the other day, could have been related, so similar were their political outlooks and philosophies.

We remain a great admirer of that lonely Republican who took the oath of office amidst a sea of Democrats 52 years ago after Democrats in the General Assembly did their very worst to award the office to the party hack who had earlier been defeated at the polls. Forrest Donnell found Jefferson City to be a lonely spot for a Republican chief executive who not only had a legislature of the opposite party but one that was openly contemptuous of all that he stood for.

We suspect that had he been old enough to have known him (Ashcroft was only two years old when Donnell was inaugurated), the man who left the governor's office a few days ago would have admired his predecessor as much as we do. They faced similar situations and challenges, often overcoming them in similar ways and to similar reactions.

John Ashcroft was hardly the most popular governor of Missouri, even though he won his last three statewide elections with nearly 62 percent of the vote. He was perceived, often correctly, as one who took his religion seriously and applied it to his political actions, an almost unheard of practice among successful practitioners of the art of getting elected to public office. A firm believer in the philosophy that government that taxes the least is the best government of all, he constantly applied that view to his official conduct, although like all humans he was not always consistent in his application. His concept of the least being the best produced certain practices that were anathema to legislators, many of whom believe they have a constitutional right to be coaxed by their governor even to support what is best for the state. John Ashcroft's unwillingness to play this game, in contrast to the second-term agenda of his GOP predecessor in the executive office, Kit Bond, produced an automatic gridlock in the Missouri Capitol. Such a gridlock did little to advance the cause of either group and certainly worked against the best interests of 5 million Missourians.

Ashcroft faced difficulties that would have boggled the minds of many of his predecessors. Finding 10 percent of the state's general revenue going to school districts in two cities under federal court orders, any governor is going to experience difficulty in funding programs that meet the needs of the state's neediest citizens. No one in Jefferson City has been able to devise a magic wand that produces half a billion dollars that federal judges are spending to correct past injustices. It remained for Ashcroft to accept not only the responsibility for meeting the federal court orders but to receive the blame for unfunded programs that were critically needed by society's neglected, afflicted and wounded. It was a mission impossible, and that Ashcroft succeeded as well as could be imagined was a remarkable feat unto itself.

The former governor did not, as he would freely admit, write a record without assistance. Despite the fact that he is one of the best politicians ever to enter Cole County, John ~Ashcroft was not without resources. Perhaps his greatest was a chief of staff, coaxed to our state from Illinois, that carried out his duties in an exceptional manner. Richard McClure should be named a state resource, and so should several other members of the executive staff.

This is not to say that, like all political humans, our former governor did not err. He did, even if errors were not always acknowledged. Missourians are committed to funding much of the cost of some purely civic undertakings of dubious value, including a domed football stadium with no team to play there, and some cost-cutting shortcuts that could prove financially disastrous to future generations. To avoid tax hikes, Ashcroft agreed to plans to rely on federal funding for such state programs as care for the mentally ill and mentally retarded, a decision that could someday create as great an impact on state budgets as desegregation. The widespread practice of leasing rather than building and owning major state buildings and other capital improvements is pound-foolish policy, adding to future liabilities of the state and its taxpayers.

The status quo of a growing, thriving and self-expanding bureaucracy failed to attract Ashcroft's attention, a regrettable oversight. The absence of a hands-on approach to the business being conducted by many of his departments was in direct contrast to the willingness of former Governor Bond, particularly during his first term, to exercise real leadership in the administration of public programs.

Despite this, John Ashcroft was able to exert a kind of moral leadership that has seldom, if ever, been seen in the state capital. His administration was virtually untouched by scandal of any sort or size, a remarkable eight-year achievement in anyone's record book. It is regrettable, but understandable, that this leadership was the object of considerable scorn, as well as humor, from his political enemies. Most Missourians, however, see nothing contemptible in conducting public business by using a yardstick of high moral standards.

Given the difference of their political philosophies, it is not surprising that some Missourians found their governor to be shamefully lacking in concern for the less fortunate. This overlooks John Ashcroft's personal compassion for the needy, while at the same time minimizing his strong belief that government is not always the best answer to society's worst problems. That he sought to attack these problems in less traditional ways should be noted, if not appreciated.

Missouri's budget has almost doubled during the eight years of the Ashcroft administration. This single fact refutes the argument he was a do-nothing chief executive. Indeed, the state has benefited greatly from his service and dedication.