Cranston’s Good-Guy Image Lost Forever? : Politics: California’s senior senator goes on the offensive to chase away the dark cloud of the Lincoln S&L; scandal. But oh those elderly witnesses.

Alan Cranston, in an effort to limit political damage, is frantically trying to distance himself from the Lincoln Savings and Loan scandal. If he fails, his U.S. Senate career could be over.

The Democratic majority whip denies that he personally sought to delay action by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board against the thrift during a meeting he and three other senators held with the nation’s top S&L; regulator in April, 1987. In a letter last May to one of the senators who attended the meeting, Edwin Gray, the former regulator, complained that the presence of the four senators was “tantamount to an attempt to subvert the regulatory process.”

All of the senators have received campaign contributions from Lincoln’s owner, Charles Keating Jr. Of the $1.3 million handed out by the Arizona millionaire, Cranston got nearly $900,000.

In a new press advisory designed to blunt growing criticism of his role in the Lincoln scandal, Cranston cites Gray’s recent testimony before a House committee to bolster the senator’s contention that he only wanted the S&L; regulators to speed up their prolonged audit of Lincoln. But the advisory omits reference to a second meeting, held a week later, that Cranston and four others senators had with federal regulators. Nor does it mention that Cranston pressed federal and California regulators until the thrift was seized last April to allow Keating to put it up for sale.

In any case, in June, 1987, Cranston solicited and received $100,000 from Keating, the first installment on $850,000 the senator would get for his pet registration projects.

The senator sees nothing illegal or unethical in all this, saying he would do the same for any constituent in need of help.

Keating’s view is not so altruistic. When asked if his huge donations to the five senators might have influenced them to go to bat for Lincoln, Keating replied, “I certainly hope so.”

A federal grand jury in Los Angeles is now reviewing criminal allegations against Keating. And the Senate Ethics Committee has taken the unusual step of hiring a special counsel to determine if a formal probe of the actions of the “Keating five” is warranted.

Cranston’s worse problem, however, may be the political fallout from the sale of $250 million in worthless junk bonds through Lincoln. A class-action suit has been filed by 23,000 investors, including many elderly people who lost their life savings. In emotional testimony before Congress, three elderly Southern Californian women claimed that they had been duped into buying the bonds and that Cranston, their one-time hero, was to blame. One witness, who lost $25,000, said that if Cranston had “not stopped the regulators in 1987, we would not have been caught (without any money).”

Cranston insists that he knew nothing about the bond sales until last spring, when Lincoln was seized. But the seniors’ testimony provides any potential Cranston opponent with ready-made negative TV ads.

That’s bad news for Cranston. In politics, perceptions do count.

There’s an unwritten image rule in politics: Candidates with big negatives seldom win.

In 1982, incumbent GOP Sen. S.I. Hayakawa got the message and retired. Democratic Senate candidate Jerry Brown didn’t, and lost to Republican Pete Wilson.

Lt. Gov. Mike Curb tried to reduce his huge negatives in the 1982 gubernatorial primary. He spent, as his manager Ken Rietz recalls, a million dollars a point to drop them under 30%--still not enough to beat Atty. Gen. George Deukmejian.

Which brings us to state insurance commissioner Roxani Gillespie’s problem if she decides to seek the newly elective post. Still struggling to implement Proposition 103 more than a year after voters approved it, Gillespie’s negatives have reached 48% in the most recent California Poll.

L.A. whispers. Jesse Jackson includes a segment on voluntarism--a key theme of the Ronald Reagan’s presidency--in the pilot he tapes later this week for his new TV show, “Voices of America,” to air next September. . . . Legislative Democrats have amassed a $750,000 war chest to fight two reapportionment initiatives that have the GOP seal of approval. The measures will be submitted for signature qualification in December for the June ballot.