WASHINGTON -- It is fair to say that former Vice President Dan Quayle had little or no chance of winning the Republican presidential nomination next year. He has never lived down the reputation he acquired in 1988 as an intellectual lightweight.
But it is also accurate to say that Quayle's decision against running does leave enough of a vacuum to alter the shape of the campaign for the nomination -- and probably to the benefit of Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas.
Quayle's strength, such as it was, was concentrated among conservatives for whom social issues -- meaning "family values" -- have been the most important in sorting out the candidates. And Gramm has a far better connection to those Republicans than either of his two most formidable rivals already in the field, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole and former Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander.
Nor do most of the other potential Republican candidates have any demonstrated appeal to these voters. Govs. Pete Wilson of California and William Weld of Massachusetts both support abortion rights. So does Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana has always been considered a moderate conservative far more interested in making government work than in social issues.
There are, of course, other Republicans who might lay some claim to the "family values" constituency. One obviously is commentator Patrick J. Buchanan, who exploited those issues in his campaign against then-President George Bush in 1992. But no one in the political community believes Buchanan can compete on even terms with a Dole or a Gramm.
More intriguing is the possibility that the opening created by Quayle's withdrawal might lure Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich into the contest at some point. The Georgia Republican yields to no one in the party on social issues, but he would have to wait until late in the year to signal any interest in the presidency lest such a display of ambition compromise his efforts to pass his "Contract with America" legislative program.
Gramm's position with the Quayle constituency is clearest in the early success he has enjoyed in lining up Southern Republican leaders behind his candidacy. These endorsements are no substitute for success in the Iowa caucuses or New Hampshire primary a year from now, but they do give the Texas Republican an important base of support if he survives those early tests.
Alexander's position is compromised by two factors. One is the suspicion among some conservatives that his hard line on the right now is a contrived attempt to live down the reputation he had acquired as governor and secretary of education in the Bush administration as a relatively moderate Republican. Another is the fact that although Alexander opposes abortion, he also opposes government interference in the issue at any level.
Dole has always paid lip service to the agenda of the cultural conservatives in his party. But the Kansas Republican has always been seen as more interested in making government work effectively than in stressing social issues such as abortion and prayer in the schools.
In the most recent opinion polls conducted among Republicans, Dole has been the clear leader followed by Quayle. The most recent CNN survey found, for example, Dole at 38 percent, Quayle at 17 and everyone else in single digits.
The CNN poll also found that there were roughly as many Republicans who viewed Quayle unfavorably as those who viewed him favorably. This was the political reality confronting the former vice president and potential contributors to his campaign -- the fact that all his efforts to live down his reputation have paid limited dividends.
The continued narrowing of the Republican field is being attributed largely to the problem of raising the money needed for a campaign.
But Republicans still see President Clinton as a remarkably vulnerable incumbent next year. So it would not be surprising if there are not several other candidates willing to compete. And that would have been the case whether or not Quayle had decided to make the race.