WASHINGTON WATCH: ASHCROFT, WHEAT SEEK TO LINK WITH MISSOURIANS

KANSAS CITY -- Alan Wheat has a difficult hill to climb if he is going to be the next senator from Missouri. Thursday's debate in Kansas City at the annual meeting of the Missouri Press Association did little to help him along the way. Not that he did a poor job, because he didn't. The popular congressman proved himself to be a polished candidate, well-informed on the main issues and eager to make his case. But it was former Gov. John Ashcroft who more clearly made the distinction of how he would better represent Missouri in the U.S. Senate.

Ashcroft accomplished this by presenting a comprehensive list of what he planned to do as senator, styling his points in phrases that stressed the commonality of his agenda with the majority of Missourians. For example: "Missourians want real welfare reform," said the Republican candidate, "not reform that expands and costs more, but reform that is spelled R-E-D-U-C-E."In contrast to Ashcroft's passionate litany of issues, Wheat's points often seemed narrow and unimaginative. Other than to blame without identification "the failed policies of the past," Wheat spent his entire opening remarks on the president's crime bill, stressing its toughness. Not mentioned were the more controversial elements of the bill. Ashcroft hit back hard, ticking off a series of votes Wheat had cast in the past two years against tough crime measures concerning the death penalty, truth-in-sentencing, crimes committed with a gun and drug trafficking. Wheat's touting of the crime bill as a significant accomplishment wilted in the glare.

Ashcroft maintained the offensive throughout most of the afternoon. His argument that he wanted "to go to Washington to represent the people of Missouri to Washington, not to represent Washington to the people of Missouri" contrasted with Wheat's constant defense of his actions on Capitol Hill. Other than the crime bill, which isn't the political boost in Missouri it is in New York City, Wheat rarely touted his own legislative achievements. Meanwhile, attempts by Wheat to call into question Ashcroft's record were more than off-set by the former governor's recitation of documentable accomplishments.

Indeed, what candidate in America wouldn't love to say, as Ashcroft did, that he not only balanced the budget each of the eight years he was in office, but he established a rainy day fund containing tens of millions of dollars? And that this was done with taxes being the same level on the last day of his administration as they were on the first.

But the most visible issue of the debate, one which underlines Wheat's precarious position, had to do with Haiti. Asked if he supported an invasion, Wheat drew serious and almost apologetically replied, "On this issue, I won't try to kid you, a mistake is being made. ... Even though I believe the president has forcefully made a case for action ... I don't believe the time has come to enter militarily into Haiti. ... He should come to the U.S. Congress first." It isn't an easy task for a politician to go against the president of his own party, especially with something so critical to the presidency. But if Wheat is to have any chance of gaining the support of the majority of Missouri voters, he knew he needed to make clear his separation from the president on this issue. The challenge for the congressman is to convince Missouri voters that he is closer to them than to the president on other issues as well. Although he tried to do that in Kansas City last Thursday, he didn't get very far. And John Ashcroft, standing confidently on his own record, didn't offer any help.

Jon K. Rust, a former editorial page editor of the Southeast Missourian, lives in Arlington, Va. He was in Kansas City for the Missouri Press Association meeting.