INSIGHTS

ONE WAY to establish yourself as a winner in politics is to identify a loser and then go out and beat him. Ronald Reagan has done this to perfection with the somewhat paunchy, now somewhat punchy, Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill. O’Neill stands up to the President on budget cuts, and the President knocks him down. O’Neill demands a rematch on tax cuts, and again down he goes. Reagan wins, O’Neill loses and, as usual, the nation follows the leader.

It is a demonstration worth watching for our neophyte mayor, Jack Evans, who as of this writing, has just completed his first 100 days in office. If mayoralities were judged as beauty contests, it is fair to say that Mayor Evans would walk off hands down with the “Mr. Congeniality” prize. It remains to be seen whether he can take the top title.

Long before Evans declared his candidacy, he began practicing the politics of inclusion. He talked to dozens of people in a series of ungodly early breakfast sessions (ours took place at 7 a.m. at a Denny’s on Northwest Highway) and asked about their concerns for the city and whether they thought he might be the man to address those concerns. We thought he was then and we still do now, but we are beginning to scratch our heads.

Evans was aware that he could easily be labeled the “establishment” or “downtown” candidate since he had risen to the presidency of the massive Cullum Companies, which own, among other things, the Tom Thumb Supermarkets and Page Drug stores. But Evans quickly pointed out that he was not of establishment birth, but the son of a small-town grocer who had to stay open late and get up early in order to pay the bills, the son of a father who instilled in his children the values of honesty first, followed closely by hard work second. Those values have stayed with Jack Evans.

By age 58, he was a rich man of the working class who had amassed personal wealth and political capital; the race was a walk.

In the campaign, Evans wasn’t challenged politically or financially, and it also seemed as if he weren’t challenging himself cerebrally. His campaign appearances were punctuated with platitudes toward everything from motherhood to mass transit, and his positions were disturbingly devoid of detail.

Nevertheless, so successful was Evans in exercising the politics of accommodation that he was able to count among his supporters such unlikely bedfellows as black activist Al “The Lip” Lipscomb and Lipscomb’s constant nemesis, former mayor Robert Folsom.

Such stuff is fine fodder for political campaigns and helpful in building political coalitions during the early months in office, but if Evans possesses a fatal political flaw, it is his apparent desire to be all things to all people, to be liked, as opposed to respected, by everyone. Fellowship is an ingredient in politics, but it should not be confused with leadership.

Two examples, both of which turned out badly for the mayor, will illustrate this point:

First, there is the gay imbroglio. After turning down an invitation to march in the “gay pride” parade in Oak Lawn, Mayor Evans agreed to address a town hall meeting attended mainly by gays. After an outcry of condemnation, Evans spent the next several days redefining, denying, and possibly prevaricating in an effort to diminish the damage done by his own best intentions.

The second example occurred after A.C. Moser, the head of the city’s Boaro of Tax Equalization, spearheaded a tax reform measure that would have reduced business taxes on personal property by 15 per cent. While such a move would have been politically unpopular, a good case could be made that Moser, who has giver selflessly to Dallas, was correct.

Evans, apparently armed with a menta public opinion poll on the issue, went to a receptive press and condemned his old pa and the position the board had taken Under the mayor’s prodding, the boare reversed itself and since has been sued by a number of businesses claiming their as sessments are unconstitutional. There is a good chance they will win their suit and, a of this writing, the setting of the city’s ta; rate is in question while the courts con sider the issue. It seems to be one mon case of the mayor’s being more interests in being popular than in being prudent.

This leads to a question: Where is tin toughness we know Evans exhibited dur ing his rise to the top of the Cullum Com panies? Surely he has had to fire subor dinates, to argue unpopular issues, to assuage sensitive board members, and to say no, loudly and firmly, when everyon else was saying yes.

While Evans’ political style may have been well-suited to running for office, i will not serve him well in running the city The danger in playing “conciliation poli tics” is that there will never be enougl money in the budget to buy the goodwil of all the constituent groups. Eventuall the mayor will be expected to follow up his handshakes with handouts, and he will b-unable to delive.

In the next few years, as Dallas evolve from a thriving metropolis to a truly inter national city, we will face a number of dif-ficult decisions in terms of the allocatios of our necessarily limited resources. A this juncture we need a tough and vision ary decisionmaker to help direct us.

While the verdict is far from in on ou new mayor’s tenure, the question remain whether his apparent need for approva will supersede our city’s need for stron leadership. Jack Evans has already prove he is a master mender of political fences What remains to be seen is whether he also a master builder of great cities.