Burst of Official Inaction Has Come on the Heels of ‘Million Man March’ : Race: President declared that stirring rally of black men deserved ‘follow-up,’ but has taken no new steps. ‘It’s pretty much business as usual,’ one congressman laments.

More than a month after the “Million Man March” filled the capital’s streets and the nation’s consciousness, official Washington has quietly backed away from proposals that would have given political leaders new roles in promoting racial reconciliation.

After declaring “we owe the country a follow-up,” President Clinton has so far shown no sign that he intends to embark on new initiatives to address issues raised by the march. He has cooled to proposals for a White House conference or independent commission on race, and aides suggest that he plans to basically continue his earlier approach of occasional speeches on racial questions.

In Congress, where various members had called for a new approach after the Oct. 16 gathering on the Washington Mall, talk on the issue has been almost entirely drowned by rising commotion over the 1996 budget. “There was a lot of interest; I don’t know if it’s still there,” said Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa), one of six members who called for a study commission on race issues.

The march was far more about individual behavior than government action, as Clinton himself said at the time. But absent high-level emphasis on the questions raised by the gathering, public discussion could default to the left and right fringes of the political spectrum.

Nation of Islam minister Louis Farrakhan, who has urged blacks to separate themselves from white-dominated institutions, has seen his popularity rise since the march, at least in the black community. For example, he was invited to an upcoming top-level meeting of black leadership in Baltimore.

“The message we all took from the march was: We need to be trying something different,” said one liberal House Democrat, acknowledging his frustration. Yet, while politicians ought to be at least trying to provoke discussion, in this member’s view, “it’s been pretty much business as usual around here.”

In a news conference three days after the march, Clinton said the White House was “turning our attention very carefully to what should be done to follow up. I think we owe the country a follow-up, and I’m going to do my best to do it right.”

White House sources indicated at the time that Clinton was giving serious thought to a blue-ribbon race relations commission and a White House conference on urban problems, a notion pressed by the Rev. Jesse Jackson. But since then Clinton has signaled his displeasure with the commission idea, which, as he told a group of black columnists, might end up doing no more than postponing action.

There are other reasons Clinton does not want to further increase his emphasis on racial issues. While Clinton got a good reaction from a speech on race relations on the day of the march, polls show that public reaction to a higher-profile role on the issue is decidedly divided; it will persuade some swing white voters that the Democratic Party is still a captive of its historic constituency groups.

“The politics are very mixed,” one adviser said.

Though he stood up for affirmative action this year, Clinton has been circumspect about taking too prominent a role on racial issues. His widely praised remarks on the day of the march came only after commentators from the left and the right assailed him for remaining largely mum about the explosive issues raised by the march and the O.J. Simpson trial.

Moreover, the White House now feels that it has made good strides in strengthening ties to black voters this year, as it planned. In addition to his backing of affirmative action, with some reforms, Clinton appears to be siding with black Americans’ interests in resisting GOP budget plans as well. And he has pleased black voters for his stands on some labor issues, such as striker replacement.

Clinton advisers said several of the most prominent proposals for greater official involvement had serious difficulties.

It would be tricky to choose members of a commission who would have credibility. And it would be difficult to avoid antagonizing some people who thought they deserved a place on such a panel.

For example, “can you imagine trying to pick the right African Americans for a group like this?” an adviser said. “It would be one huge headache.”

An even larger problem, he said, would lie in the expectations that such a commission could produce a worthwhile remedy for deep-seated racial tensions, a remedy that has not already been proposed by the many previous commissions charged with exploring racial problems.

Aides said Clinton may still schedule appearances to showcase the efforts of groups that have tried to overcome racial prejudice. But they insisted that his past approach on race issues has been more than sufficient.

David Bositis, an analyst with the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a liberal think tank that focuses on minority issues, predicted Clinton will do little in reaction to the march.

The President, he said, has been recently walking a “fine line” in trying to stay on the right side of both conservative and traditional Democratic groups.

“He was well received this month by the [moderate to conservative] Democratic Leadership Council, and he’s been getting much the same reaction from more traditional Democratic groups,” Bositis said. “I don’t think he needs to respond to [the march] at all.”