Rochester Review/Spring 1991

By Thomas Fitzpatrick

Whether they're

moving through

governmental marble

halls or listening to

the electorate at the

pancake breakfast at

the VFW: ProfessorFenno studies hispoliticians the way

Jane Goodall studies

her primates-upclose and in theirnatural habitats.

12

"T· k · k · k"1C ••• 11C ... 11C •

Richard Fenno could almosthear the pulsating insistenceof the completed manuscriptsitting in his desk drawer inHarkness Hall. The Roches­

ter political scientist didn't think thathe had hold of the kind of politicalplastique which once hurled wouldradically alter the electoral landscape,but he sure had the answer to the hot­test political question of the summerof 1988.

George Bush had just selected theobscure junior senator from Indianato be his running mate. Dan Quaylewas the man of the hour. And thejournalistic pack was in full yelp. Thequestion was, frankly and desperately,"Who he?"

Fenno knew.Almost alone (as it proved) among

the pundits, political scientists, andreporters who are drawn mothlike tothe shimmer of the Second GreatestAmerican Pastime, Fenno had studiedQuayle. As part of his lO-year proj­ect-which analyzes how senators pur­sue legislative careers and which aimsto relate their lawmaking to their cam­paigns in their home states - Fennohad picked Quayle as typical of acorps of young, ideologically right­wing, pre-Reagan Reaganauts who hadachieved some electoral success by run­ning against Washington, Congress,and government bureaucracy in thelate 1970s.

Fenno had observed the underdogQuayle campaigning for the Senate in1980, watched the upset victory overthe nationally known Democratic in­cumbent Birch Bayh, and followed theupstart Hoosier back to D.C.

The Republicans, hooking on toRonald Reagan's presidential coattails,had captured the role of majorityparty in the Senate, and Quayle had aclear choice: Hew to the role of per­petual outside-the-beltway kvetcher(see the career of Jesse Helms), or takeon legislative responsibility - the nutsand bolts of governing. Fenno watchedQuayle opting for the latter.

Spurred by the troublesome andpersistent unemployment statistics innorthern Indiana, Quayle turned prag­matist, asserted what Fenno calls an"instrumental independence," andshowed a willingness to use govern­ment to accomplish something. TheComprehensive Employment andTraining Act (as "CETA," it had longbeen a red flag to conservative Repub­licans) was about to expire in Septem­ber of 1982, and a policy windowopened before Quayle - as chairmanof the Labor and Human ResourcesSubcommittee on Employment andProductivity. Windy and Claghornishthough Quayle's title may seem (inWashington it is axiomatic that thesignificance of your job is in inverseproportion to the number of wowsernouns and adjectives tacked to it), itgave him a wonderful opportunity toshow his stuff.

Fenno observed Quayle doingexactly that. He forged theJoint Training Partnership Act(JTPA) as a replacement forCETA, struck up an unlikely

alliance with the ranking DemocratEdward Kennedy of Massachusetts,steered the legislation through the La­bor and Human Resources Committee,encountered initial resistance from theprickly chairman, Utah's Orrin Hatch,but brought him aboard in the end,and held off the active hostility of theAdministration's Labor Department.

Rochester Review/Spring 1991

So successful was Quayle, and soattractive the final legislation, in fact,that the Reagan administration decid­ed to co-opt JTPA completely, andfailed to invite Quayle to the bill­signing ceremony. But it was "the mostimportant new piece of sociallegisla­tion in the 97th Congress," Fennowrote later, and besides helping outthousands of laid-off workers likethose around Gary, Indiana, it "gavedefinition to the career of an otherwiseunknown U.S. senator."

That was the story ticking away inFenno's desk drawer when the Quaylemedia frenzy erupted six years later. InWatching Politicians, a 1990 book ofessays, Fenno went on to tell, entertain­ingly and wryly, what happened then.He was, of course, delighted that hehad died and gone to political-scienceheaven (or, in his phrase "won the lot­tery"). The subject of his completedmanuscript had been struck by nation­al political lightning - but, what shouldhe do with his special knowledge?Rush to print? Buy a pundit's cap andcall up John McLaughlin? Hire anagent and try to get on "Good Morn­ing, America"?

Fenno says that he resolved to main­tain academic diffidence. Surely, withthousands of journalists on the Quayletrail, attention would be paid to hisSenate career, to the legislative talentshe developed in pushing through thejob-training act. Fenno believed hecould weigh in later with concrete datato support a balanced view of the vice­presidential candidate. As the worldknows now, nothing of the sort hap­pened.

Journalists badgered the registrarat DePauw University, and somehowfound out that Quayle had been amediocre student. His family connec­tions were probed, and credited withgetting him into law school and later

Just plain Dick Fenno in Washington and outon the hustings, at home on the River Campushe holds the double designation of William R.Kenan, Jr. Professor of Political Science andDistinguished Professor of Arts and Science.

into the National Guard during theVietnam conflict. His two terms as con­gressman were characterized as "incon­sequential," and Quayle himself char­acterized as not only an airhead buta "wethead" - more interested in theCongressional gym and showers after­wards than in legislation: Indiana votershad sent not Mr. Smith to Washington,but Bertie Wooster. With the exceptionof a column by Richard Cohen, and asurprising defense of Quayle by TedKennedy during the campaign, virtual­ly nothing about Quayle's Senate lifereached the electorate, and at least halfof the Quayle story was missed.

Fenno's manuscript had it, though,and briefly put the tale is dramatic and

edifying: A callow, 29-year-old politi­cian, taken seriously not even by thegraybeards of his own party, demon­strates a gift for campaigning, winselection to Congress, is frustrated andbored by being in the seemingly per­manent minority there, scores an upsetwin and moves to the Senate, there toachieve a cunning and significant legis­lative triumph. It is a tale of develop­ment and growth, in flexibility andsmarts - in short, The Making of aSenator, the title of Fenno's Quaylemanuscript when it appeared in bookform in 1989 after the election.

Fenno is sensitive to the differencebetween journalism and political sci­ence. Perhaps by definition, the formerinevitably concentrates on "the short­term, the personal, and so often onthe negative," while the academic dis­cipline focuses on "the long-term, theinstitutional, the positive." News covershow things fall apart, while politicalscientists are concerned with how thingswork. Understanding that, Fenno isyet critical of journalism, because,"somewhere along the line, the publiclife of public officials must be taken in­to account. Is the real key to an assess­ment of Dan Quayle to be found atDePauw's Office of the Registrar, or inthe committee rooms and on the floorof the United States Senate?

Maybe Lloyd Bentsen wasright, that Dan Quaylewas "no John F. Kennedy"(who, by the way, was rou­tinely characterized by the

pre-1960 press as a playboy-senatorwhose rich daddy bought him the seat,and who was more interested in carous­ing in Washington nightspots than at­tending to Senate business), but canQuayle be summed up by this headlinein the Washington Post: "From Polit-

13

Rochester Review/Spring 1991

meant that this researcher had to bemore than just an academic fly-on-the­wall. If there was an envelope to bestuffed, Fenno pitched in; if a phonehad to be manned Fenno was willingto limber his index finger and spin arotary dial. In every case he graduallywon the confidence of advance men,staffers, "The Man Who... " his ownself- and became privy to their frankestimations of the lay of the politicallandscape.

Home Style's observation of politi­cians in their own habitats won Fennothe Woodrow Wilson FoundationAward and the D. H. Hardeman Prize,and has become a classic text of polit­ical science at a time when the disci­pline is becoming more abstract, intentupon modeling and statistical evalua­tion. Fenno's way is qualitative, de­pending upon the sharp and savvyability of the researcher in the field totake note of words and deeds, and thesometimes shaky relationship betweenthe two.

describes his method. For over a quar­ter of a century he has been both soak­ing up the details and atmospherics ofgoverning and poking into the minutiaeof campaigning, much in the manner,as one fellow academician put it, ofwhat "Jane Goodall has done with herno less distinctive population of pri­mates. "

The result has been an impressive se­ries of volumes, beginning with 1978'sHome Style: House Members in TheirDistricts. For that book, Fenno formu­lated his method of "participant obser­vation" and hit his stride at the sametime. He picked a handful of congress­men and resolved to learn by lookingover their shoulders as the politiciansthemselves drew thematic and concretelinks between what voters were tellingthem and what they were expected toaccomplish for them in D.C.

Members of the House of Repre­sentatives must go to the voters everytwo years, so those who do not havean effective "home style" soon findthemselves like the parrot in theMonty Python sketch - "ex." That lentan immediacy to Fenno's study, but toget these congressmen to trust himenough not only to talk to him but toallow him to tag along on campaigns A

nd how these pols do talk!Like Warren G. Harding orEarl Long they can still blo­viate (which Gore Vidal hasdefined as the ability "to

r:::z:;::-';~:<s.!~~~~~:::::-:::T~~;:--'t"7:~~V.lJr-------i1=------Q~-----'""""'E'"~--"""

ical Pretty Boy to Running Mate"?After a reading of Fenno's book, theanswer is, clearly, no.

Fenno's scholarly method does re­semble journalism, however, in that heis willing to put in the legendary "legwork" of the trade. Since the early1970s, Fenno has studied senators andmembers of Congress, and not onlyfrom the vantage point of the give-and­take and the quid pro quos of the legis­lative life; he has also continued the ex­amination by following them on thehustings back home.

Ibegan with a study of the powerof the purse, how politics playsout as Congress goes about ap­propriating funds," Fenno recalls."That led me to realize that the

real work and real life of these politi­cians goes on not on the floor but incommittees and subcommittees. Abook followed from that realization,and then it gradually came to me thatwhat they do in these committees isvitally connected to how they perceivetheir home districts and states. That'swhen I started hanging around withpoliticians in earnest."

Not only "hanging around," but also"soaking and poking" is how Fenno

15

Fenno and the vice president-whom he discovered before Bush did.

Rochester Review/Spring 1991

speak impromptu with incoherent pas­sion"). In private moments with Fennothey can turn a jaundiced eye on theirown constituents: "This is Wallacecountry," a congressman says aboutone corner of his district. "You can tella Wallaceite because he has a pickuptruck, a hound dog, and a gun. He'llgive you his dog and his pickup truck,but he won't give up his gun."

They can even show an anarchicand zany streak. "Staffer: Whatare you going to say at the nextmeeting? Congressman: I'mgoing to ask somebody to give

me a haircut. Or, I could walk in andhang from the chandelier. No, I guessI'll walk in, undress, and say, 'Anyquestions?' "

Fenno does not believe that politicalscientists should "leave the journalistsin charge of anecdotes," particularlyif they are linked, as they almost invar­iably are, to public-policy outcomes.That congressman who watches the"Wallaceites" in their pickups streamdown a road in his district might windup voting one way or another on guncontrol, but you know he is not goingto be unmindful of back-home conse­quences whichever way he goes. ForFenno, as for fellow scholar RaymondWolfinger, "The plural of anecdote isdata. "

Fenno manages to combine narrativeskill with a lucid and diverting prosestyle to make his books absolutely ac­cessible to the general reader: "Some­one mentioned the morning hour ofhandshaking, howdying, and hijinkswith 20 people in a small countrystore." Ron Shelton could have put thatsentence into a character's mouth inthe screenplay of Blaze. And it wouldbe wise of the would-be politician, theparty chairperson, and the politicalconsultant to take Fenno's works as anongoing political handbook for ourtimes.

If you think of yourself as a candi­date, or are casting about for one toencourage or hook onto, better payheed to Fenno's three requirements fora successful politician. Before ideology,wisdom, or breadth of perspective, apolitician needs: (1) "incredible stam­ina" -the energy to get up at 5:30 forthe factory gate and keep going past

16

the last evening confab for a peek atthe 11 o'clock news; (2) "sheer com­petitiveness" - it's not enough to wantto win, you must"hate to lose"; and(3) "the ability to keep from takinghimself too seriously."

This last may be the most importantof the three. As Fenno observes, onCapitol Hill "each House memberseems to be a king or queen in his orher empire - isolated from everydaylife, fawned over by a staff, pamperedby Capitol Hill employees, soughtafter by all manner of supplicants." Ifpublic officials do not have a sense ofhumor to remind themselves of theirown ordinariness, voters have a way ofsupplying the lack thereof at electiontime.

If one is to follow these extraordi­nary creatures around, it may be said,these three qualities are also requiredof the political scientist. After thecampaigning politician dropped off inhis Holiday Inn bed, after all, Fennowas still at it, transcribing his notes ofthe day, and preparing to keep pace withthe entourage when the sun came up.

He will never see 60 again, butcompact, rail-thin, Fennocrackles with the controlledintensity of a playmakingguard, and the metaphor is to

the point. He has written that a "par­ticipant observer" on a campaign mustbe able to "move without the ball,"and perhaps as a reminder to keep thatfaculty honed, he has a team pictureof the 1984 Boston Celtics nailed tohis office wall.

As for a sense of humor, well, dur­ing his undergraduate days at Amherst

(Class of 1948) and graduate studyat Harvard (doctorate, 1956), Fennobreathed the same Massachusetts airas did such legendary pols as EddieBoland, Tip O'Neill, and LarryO'Brien, none of whom could everbe accused of long-faced solemnity.Across from the Celtics on Fenno'swall there's a reproduction of the fa­mous Jamie Wyeth portrait of JFK,neck craned at a quizzical angle, thatironic smile starting to form on thelips - the one that hinted, "We 'states­men,' we're all just a bit absurd aroundthe edges, aren't we?"

Fenno himself has never been a can­didate for public office, "nor will I everbe." He is registered with no politicalparty, and how he himself votes is hisown business. It is difficult enough toretain a scholarly neutrality in the"we-them" atmosphere of a campaign,and, just as a politician cannot affordto get too far out in front of his con­stituents, Fenno has to stay clear of theideological vanguard and cast a coldeye on Republican and Democrat alike.

But neutrality is a neat trick in theseconditions, and often it is neither pos­sible nor desirable. "When I have in­vested time in politicians, of course Iwant them to win," he cheerfully ad­mits. "It does my projects no good tohave to keep scrapping research becauseI have chosen people fated to be one­termers."

Sometimes the academic participant­observer steps over the line. One ofthe House members (identified only ascongressmen "A," "B," "C," and "D")chosen for Home Style was BarberConable, now president of the WorldBank, then the representative from

Rochester's own 30th District (and inbetween, Fenno's colleague as a profes­sor in the College of Arts and Science'sDepartment of Political Science). Hisresearch on Conable complete, Fennoin 1974 sensed that the congressmanwas so deeply immersed in House bus­iness that he failed to appreciate theDemocratic challenge to his seat by apopular vice mayor of Rochester. Aftera brief deliberation on scholarly de­tachment, Fenno telephoned Washing­ton with this message: "Barber, you'rein trouble. You get your tail up hereand start campaigning now." Conabledropped everything, caught the shuttle,and took root in Rochester and envi­rons for the rest of the campaign. Hewon, "in the fight of my life," with 57percent of the vote.

Idid it partly for the sake of the re­search," Fenno says, but equallyso, one suspects, for his regard forthe man. Conable is one of thetwo congressmen, the other being

current Speaker of the House TomFoley, whom Fenno regards as "the bestof the breed." At any rate, Fenno'srelationship with Conable deepenedinto friendship, and that meant theend of this congressman as a researchsubject.

Something of the same occurredwith Dan Quayle. With the manu­script tucked away in 1988, Fenno un­abashedly if privately rooted for theBush-Quayle ticket. Research is a com­petitive game as much as politics, andFenno was not at all reluctant to claim"timely credit" for having picked theright horse. And indeed, why shouldhe not?

(After he published, in 1990, whatmany consider his masterwork, ThePresidential Odyssey of John Glenn,he encountered some resistance fromone of those organizations that buysbooks for public libraries, whichdoubted that readers "would be inter­ested in a losing campaign." Since,as Fenno has written, "running forpresident is a fairly common senatorialactivity," something could conceivablybe learned from the story of a man,who in his own words, "wanted to runfor president in the worst way, andthat's how I went about it.")

After the election of the Bush­Quayle ticket, Fenno scouted out pub­lishers, most of whom wanted him totart up his book by including juicy de-

tails of the private, off-guard Quayle,and pontifications about how Fennoexpected him to perform as vice presi­dent. But Fenno refuses to be either apolitical tout or a pundit - he knowswhat he knows by watching politiciansin real life, either moving through mar­bled governmental halls or listening tothe electorate at the pancake breakfastin the VFW hall. The CongressionalQuarterly Press agreed to take TheMaking of a Senator just as it hadbeen the night Bush startled Fennoand the nation by the choice ofQuayle.

Fenno did not get interviewed byJoan Lunden, but David Broder("the one columnist politicalscientists read") wrote a longand laudatory review in the

Washington Post, and Fenno got insome appearances on C-Span andother media outlets. On one of these,a New York radio call-in show, Fennoshowed the wit and competitivenessthat makes him a natural for politics.The host put it to him: "Professor,isn't it opportunistic of you, coming

Rochester Review/Spring 1991

out with this book on Quayle now?"Fenno grinned back a one-word ans­wer: "Yep." The interviewer laughed,and was so bowled over by Fenno'shonesty that he went on: "Did youhear that, audience? The professoradmits he's opportunistic. That's great.I want everybody to go out and buyhis book."

That's good advice for anyone whowants to understand our institutions,and the politicians who make them go.lf we believe, with Thomas Jefferson,that democracy is impossible withouteducated citizens, we could do worsethan clearing some shelf space for TheFederalist on one end and the works ofRichard Fenno on the other. It wouldbe a start toward understanding theseinteresting political times. Like it ornot, as John Kennedy suggested, welive in them.

Although he is an admirer of RichardFenno, freelancer Thomas Fitzpatrick con­fesses that his favorite work ofpoliticalscience remains Plunkitt of Tammany Hall.

17