Heckler in Chief

By LAURENCE I. BARRETT WASHINGTON

In general, Ross Perot declared last week, he wants Bill Clinton to succeed in a big way. "Nothing would please us more than to see his face on Mount Rushmore within six months." But would Perot support the Clinton budget resolution that's sweeping through Congress? Definitely not, because the measure in its current form, says Perot, is "another cloud going by in the sky."

Not since the campaign has the Texan's good-cop, bad-cop routine been so polished -- and so evident. With a combination of money and moxie, the man who finished in third place last November has displayed a remarkable ability to stay in the headlines. Leaders of both parties treat him with deference as they calculate whether he can maintain what insiders call the "Perot 19" -- the 19% of the electorate that voted for him last year -- as a durable political force.

The billionaire contrarian has bad-mouthed most of the particulars in Clinton's economic plan, especially the short-term stimulus package. The White House response has been muted because the Clinton camp wants neither to alienate Perot by bickering with him nor to puff up his ego by trying to address his complaints. But its tolerance of Perot's opinions is wearing thin. Last week George Stephanopoulos, Clinton's communication's director, called Perot "a good sound-biter" who lacks a cohesive program of his own. For now at least, Perot has assumed the role of opposition spokesman, in part because the Republicans were so slow to respond effectively to Clinton's program. The result, says Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster who worked for Perot last spring, is that he "has both parties scared because he maintains the ability to shake things up."

Perot has suffered almost no decline in popularity. In a TIME/CNN poll last week, 74% of those surveyed think Perot's presidential campaign was good for the U.S., while 51% think he should run for political office again, and 56% approve of the formation of his political group, United We Stand America. Perot hoped to improve those poll figures by airing a half-hour prime-time show on NBC last Sunday (price: $400,000) where he could deliver his familiar sermon against lobbyists representing foreign interests, the campaign financing system, profligate government spending and other targets.

To generate public response, he spent an additional $300,000 of his own money for "ballots" published in TV Guide. Viewers were encouraged to clip the 17-item ads and send them in for tabulation. Most of the questions, however, were phrased in biased fashion, virtually assuring the answers that support Perot's arguments. Those wishing to participate by phone were offered a 900 number. Computer wonks could use electronic bulletin boards.

Perot will marshal the responses to demonstrate that Americans want reforms more drastic than either the White House or Congress is considering. If Clinton has often cribbed from Perot's text about the deficit and other issues, Perot keeps raising the standard to demonstrate that Clinton is only a reformer manque.

In weekend rallies Perot has been holding in states where he ran well last November, he usually draws large, enthusiastic crowds. He artfully strokes the indignation of his overwhelmingly white, middle-class audiences. Like Ronald Reagan circa 1980, he provides endless examples of outrageous extravagance. Also like Reagan, he sometimes uses more fancy than fact. According to Perot, every federal employee can get "free college and graduate school all the way up to Ph.D. level." In fact, the program he cites is designed to train specialists in so-called shortage occupations. About 100 workers have participated since the scheme began in 1990. He also contends that federal employees ride free on Washington's subway while everyone else pays. Actually, the Metro system has deals with some public and private employers to subsidize workers' use of rapid transit. A majority of the roughly 50,000 riders who participate work in private enterprise.

When asked about 1996, Perot says that he would rather undergo major surgery without anesthesia than become a candidate. Yet he also said in January that he would run "if I have to," that is, if Clinton and the Congress fail to meet the country's needs as Perot defines them. With Perot steadily fiddling with the criteria, he gives himself two happy options. If the economy prospers and the deficit shrinks, he will doubtless claim credit for having forced Washington to face reality. If Clintonomics flops, Perot will have created the * rationale for an I-told-you-so candidacy. Meanwhile, he is having a ball in his self-created role as agent provocateur.

CHART: NOT AVAILABLE

CREDIT: From a telephone poll of 800 Americans taken for TIME/CNN on March 18 by Yankelovich Partners Inc. Sampling error is plus or minus 3.5%.

CAPTION: Would you like to see Perot use his national organization, United We Stand America, to do the following?

With reporting by Margaret Carlson/Washington