Last Wednesday, as a measure that would have ended affirmative action in American universities failed in the House of Representatives, it seemed that Harvard might be the 300-pound gorilla of the higher education lobby.

According to lobbyists, President Neil L. Rudenstine's lobbying against the measure drew national significance from Harvard's "intellectual and moral authority." The measure, known as the Riggs Amendment, seemed to have been buried by Harvard's academic prestige translated into political power.

But one week later, it seems that "intellectual authority" fades in a real world where all politics is local.

Harvard's prestige does mean that many in Washington accord its faculty and administrators the respect of expert witnesses on higher education and other subjects. It often even opens doors for Harvard lobbyists--seen by many as among the best in the business.

But Harvard's real political pull seems not to extend far beyond Massachusetts delegates and Capitol Hill alumni. To win on a national stage, it must work through alliances with other schools, each putting pressure on their own representatives.

And its leadership of these higher education alliances is hardly automatic--on some issues, the world's richest university is just another face in the crowd.

The Issues

Harvard is at once research laboratory, vast library system, teaching university, enormous landholder and not-for-profit billionaire. Its four full-time lobbyists have their hands full just staying abreast of how Congressional decisions will impact such a vast institution.

Recent Congressional battles have included fights over research and humanitiesfunding, federal student aid, copyright law, bondtaxes and, last week, diversity in admissions.

Victories for Harvard's interests include thecontinued growth of funding from the NationalInstitutes of Health (currently around half of theUniversity's federal paycheck), as well as fromthe National Endowments for the Arts andHumanities.

All of these were expected to take a big hitafter the 1994 "Republican Revolution," but fundlevels have continued to creep upward, accordingto Vice President for Government, Community andPublic Affairs James H. Rowe III '73.

And the Higher Education Act, approved by theHouse last week, sealed in law a number oftriumphs for the Harvard lobby.

Interest rates on federal student loans willdrop, voluntary early-retirement incentives arenow perfectly legal, and most importantly, thebill keeps Byerly Hall firmly behind affirmativeaction.

Another win was the repeal of a cap on theamount of tax-free bonds that a university couldfloat to raise funds. The cap's removal will makeit cheaper for Harvard to fund ongoingconstruction.

Still up in the air is a law attempting tostrictly apply copyright laws to the "electronicarena," which Harvard opposes out of fear that itwill hamper the expansion of on-line research andcommunication.

This continuing debate aside, for the mostpart, Harvard seems to have batted 1000 inside theBeltway. But the secret of this success lies inthe nature of the higher education lobby: Harvardcan't win in Washington without nationwidesupport.