When Vice President Dan Quayle said he`d stand by his daughter if she got pregnant and decided on abortion, he did more than precipitate another headache for the Republican ticket.
Suddenly, Corinne Quayle, 13, became the latest symbolic focus of one of the most emotional debates in recent political history-as well as yet another political child thrust into the national spotlight. While the children of politicians have always been public property to a certain extent, this year children seem to be particularly prominent components of the campaign, as candidates stake claim to as much ”family values” turf as possible.
In contrast to her father`s reaction, Corinne`s mother closed the
”choice” window that her husband seemed to have opened a crack. ”If she becomes pregnant,” said Marilyn Quayle, ”she`ll take the child to term.”
How Corinne Quayle feels about her parents` comments and her own forced entry into a national fracas may never be known; she and her two brothers have been shielded from public exposure since their dad was elected four years ago. Barbara Bjorklund, a Ft. Lauderdale child development expert, could only speculate. ”If I were that little girl, I think I`d be embarrassed to death,” Bjorklund said. ”Mid-adolescence is when peer pressure is the strongest. It`s an age when they think everybody is staring at them already.” Politicians` children have long been visible in campaigns and administrations, sometimes through events beyond their control, sometimes through their own actions.
”John-John” Kennedy`s salute to his father`s casket remains the most poignant memory of a national heartbreak.
Jimmy Carter caused a stir by acknowledging that he discussed nuclear proliferation with his adolescent daughter, Amy.
Harry Truman publicly visited presidential wrath on a music critic who failed to appreciate daughter Margaret`s soprano.
There`s no way political children can be hidden, said Democratic strategist David Garth. ”When you make speeches like Gore and Clinton did (at the Democratic National Convention), you are by definition entering them for public consideration. They`ll have to take the knocks as well as the applause. ”In the modern era of American politics, kids are always dragged in one way or another. It`s one reason not to run for office.”
Personalization or exploitation? In some cases, it`s a close call.
In his acceptance speech, vice presidential nominee Al Gore held the Democratic conventioneers spellbound with his then-6-year-old son`s long fight for life after being hit by a car in front of his family three years ago.
Democratic political consultant Rob Schroth said Gore kept just within the bounds of good taste. He called the speech ”about five degrees from going too far.”
More Top Picks What Is The 20 20 20 Rule And Does It Actually Work
Traditionally, candidates` kids appear on the podium at the end of the acceptance speeches, but that`s about it, he said. ”Children should not be exploited as a way to persuade voters,” Schroth said.
He thinks the Clintons ”have done a remarkable job of keeping Chelsea out of the limelight. She had her `coming-out party` at the convention and will slip into the background now,” he said.
”You would think people would work hard to protect their children,”
said former Reagan strategist Lyn Nofziger. ”The Reagans never brought their kids into it when he was (California) governor, to their credit. Neither did the Nixons or the Johnsons.”
Peter Hay, who wrote ”All the Presidents` Ladies, Anecdotes of the Women Behind the Men in the White House,” thinks one of the most memorable moments involving a first child occurred when Betty Ford told a television interviewer she wouldn`t be surprised if daughter Susan had an affair.
He also pointed out that there was much national speculation during Ronald Reagan`s first campaign that son Ron was gay.
Garth, the Democratic strategist, said he`s no ”Quayle fan,” but pointed out that it wasn`t the vice president who dragged his daughter into the current debate, but interviewer Larry King.
He and other political strategists agreed that it all could have been avoided if Quayle had remembered a cardinal rule of campaigning: ”His mistake was not saying, `That`s an ”if” question, and I don`t answer those.` But politicians think they have an obligation to answer questions,” Nofziger said.