Perot says he wants to “clean out the barn,” and he has promised to bring in “world-class” experts from both parties. Among the names of people speculated about are New York financier Felix Rohatyn and former U.N. ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick, hardly outsiders. Perot has identified the government-business cooperation represented by the Japanese MITI as a possible model for improving American competitiveness.
If Perot were elected, the earthquake would be so large that dramatic legislation would likely result, probably on the budget first. Some members could even be expected to desert their parties and declare themselves Perot independents, giving him a base of support on Capitol Hill. From the start, his nationalist rhetoric and plain-spoken TV appeal would help him go over the heads of the politicians directly to the people.
Perot has no regard for yes men and lots of impatience with stolid bureaucrats. Like FDR and JFK, he also has a history of circumventing the chain of command and reaching down to listen to lots of different voices, regardless of rank. “If you’re good, he expects you to argue with him,” recalls a former Perot executive. “But you’d better argue with new information. Don’t try to argue with him twice on the same basis. He’ll throw you out of his office.” Perot can sometimes listen too much credulously buying dubious stories from conspiracy mongers. His two attempts to overhaul organizations from the outside-a brokerage house in the 1970s and General Motors in the 19808-were both unsuccessful, though in the GM case he wasn’t in as strong a position as he would be as president.
Are business skills transferable to government? They might be, but there is little evidence for it in the history of the American presidency. Some good business people have been successful in government; others have not. Jimmy Carter was a good businessman who couldn’t manage the presidency; Harry Truman was a failed entrepreneur who could.
If you place a high value on this, watch Perot closely. He has already said that during wartime, he would lie to protect the lives of troops. What constitutes a state of war for Perot? We don’t really know. Perot says that if confronted with Iran-contra, he would have confessed it quickly to get it behind him. But he has no history of confessing error publicly. In fact, he usually adopts the Big Deny technique when challenged.
Perot says he would concentrate on domestic affairs. His record in Texas is mixed: good on education, where he pushed through much-needed legislation raising standards; less good on drugs, where he naively believed tougher sentencing would make drug dealers move away (they just filled the jails). When foreign issues arise, his passion for things military and paramilitary will likely come to the fore. That doesn’t mean he would get us into a war; he opposed the gulfwar. Instead, he supported sending a hit team to kill Saddam. Everything in his record suggests that sooner or later Perot would indulge his longstanding fascination with covert operations.
Perot says that he and Congress would “dance like Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers.” At first, the shock of his presidency would be so great that he could likely bend Congress to his will. His stubbornness has probably been exaggerated. “When the [Texas) education community began to balk, he realized he had to compromise,” says George Christian, an aide to LBJ. “But he succeeded in getting a good bill.” Over the long haul, will Perot be able to stroke and cajole and suffer fools on Capitol Hill to move his program? Unclear.
Perot would try to run his presidency with the military precision of his own companies. But like Dwight Eisenhower, who bemoaned the difference between the army and the presidency, he may find that when he gives an order, no one would carry it out. Around the White House, expect more than the usual gossip about who is sleeping with whom. Security considerations-an obsession of Perot-would take on more importance. POW/MIA families would be featured at many events, and Perot would probably eat sometimes with staffers, just as he does at his own company cafeteria.
From aiding POWs to buying a Wall Street firm to running for president, Perot has downplayed his own interests, claiming that he merely acts at the request of someone else-Richard Nixon, the U.S. government, now “the people.” Invoking them at every opportunity would be the animating idea of a Perot presidency.
