Perot’s Army

“I’m not interested in politics or politicians.”

“Money is no object. I’ll spend a million dollars if I have to.”

— Spencer Tracy in State of the Union, 1948

HE WAS THE LAST BUSINESS titan — devoid of electoral experience but rich in patriotic fervor — to try to bankroll his way into the White House as a high- minded alternative to an unpopular President and the usual band of two- faced out-of-power politicians. In the Frank Capra classic, Tracy falls under the thumb of a cabal of back-room bosses before reclaiming his virtue in a dramatic radio address, in which he confesses, “I sold out my ideals to a gang of corrupt politicians.”

State of the Union eerily presages the aura of excitement that Ross Perot is bringing to the 1992 presidential race. Like Tracy in the movie, the billionaire Texas tycoon can be described as boasting “the rare combination of sincerity and drive that the common herd will go for. They think he’s one of them. He thinks he’s one of them.” But Perot scorns the two-party politics that tripped up Tracy and instead is mobilizing the energies of the little people — the John and Jane Does of the land — in a citizens’ crusade to collect the 800,000 signatures needed to put him on the ballot in all 50 states.

If his supporters succeed, the artfully reluctant billionaire promises to formally enter the race — and spend “whatever it takes.” Even though Perot so far has qualified only in Tennessee, he sounds like a man on the verge of the biggest gamble of his high-rolling career. “The numbers are there, the organizations are there, the leadership is there,” Perot said last week. “By June 1, it will be obvious — we’ll either be over the top or it won’t happen.”

The Perot petition coalition fuses spare-no-expense business sophistication with a giddy volunteer enthusiasm. Despite Perot’s pretense of an above-the- fray aloofness from the campaign, the nerve center is on the 11th floor of the same posh north Dallas office tower where his business headquarters is located. Here half a dozen Perot Group employees huddle behind the closed brown door of a war room. A wall map of Texas symbolizes the state’s role as the first major petition hurdle; by May 11, Perot needs the signatures of 54,000 voters who did not participate in this year’s presidential primaries.

Politics and the telephone have been inseparable for a century, but nothing can match the technological wizardry of Perot’s 800-number operation, which claims to have received 1.5 million calls since March 13. Incoming callers are sorted to give priority to those from states with the earliest petition deadlines. An MCI service named Caller Profile helps assemble demographic data on the volunteers who call in. Perot refuses to disclose what he is spending on this let-your-fingers-do-the-walking grass-roots operation. But Paul Weichselbaum, MCI’s Texas general manager, says it’s “a highly unusual system” whose “cost is not trivial.”

Typical of the folksy side of the Perot crusade is the storefront office that volunteers have just opened in a minimall in Irvine, Calif. A driving force here is Merrick Okamoto, 31, a stockbroker, never before involved in politics, who brought in his own television set and VCR so that the faithful can watch tapes of Perot’s TV appearances. “People who deny Perot’s popularity just don’t get it,” Okamoto explains. “This movement is about choice. People can’t stand another four years of gridlock.” Nearly 500 turned out for a Perot rally in Irvine — middle-class, middle-aged people, who shared both a veneer of affluence and a hunger for political meaning in their lives. California Perot chairman Bob Hayden, who took the unpaid job just four weeks ago, told the crowd, “We’re just like you; we’re not activists.”

The Perot phenomenon is too new, too untested and too unprecedented for any safe predictions. What does seem likely is that Perot will get on the ballot in all 50 states. Election laws are indeed a maze, but 1980 independent presidential candidate John Anderson managed to qualify everywhere even though he had far less money than Perot has. Anderson prompted a 1983 federal court decision that now makes it difficult for states to bar ballot access unreasonably. Thus, it is hard to believe that Perot — with the resources to hire the best election lawyers in the nation — will fail in his quest.

As it struggles to take shape, there is something both stirring and a trifle chilling about the Perot campaign. The hopeful sincerity of his newfound supporters is a reminder of the latent idealism in the American character. But there is also a whiff of danger in the ease with which this billionaire with a mission has harnessed television imagery, telephone technology and voter disaffection to create a volatile force in the 1992 campaign.

CHART: NOT AVAILABLE

CREDIT: From a telephone poll of 937 registered voters taken for TIME/CNN on April 9 by Yankelovich Clancy Shulman. Sampling error is plus or minus 3.2%.

CAPTION: If the election were held today, for whom would you vote?