ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, October 3, 1996 TAG: 9610030015
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-9 EDITION: METRO
COLUMN: Ray L. Garland
SOURCE: RAY L. GARLAND
TRACKING the work of Congress is a task of dubious value. When it comes to the House of Representatives, the public's attitude seems to be: All members are worthless except our own.
Ten Virginia congressmen are seeking another term, and all seem a safe bet to get it. There will be one change, in the Southside 5th District where L.F. Payne is retiring to run for lieutenant governor. The existing delegation is divided between six Democrats: Owen Picket, Norman Sisisky, Robert Scott, James Moran, Rick Boucher and Payne; and five Republicans: Herb Bateman, Bob Goodlatte, Tom Bliley, Frank Wolf and Tom Davis.
Only three times in modern American history - 1933, 1965 and 1995 - has a House majority united behind a sweeping legislative program. The difference between past and present is the presidency. In 1933 and 1965, large Democratic majorities in Congress were in perfect harmony with the president's program. This Congress, with rather small Republican majorities, was trying to enact its program mainly over the objections of President Clinton. Rarely could they muster enough votes to break Democratic filibusters in the Senate or leap the even higher hurdle of a presidential veto.
Still, few congressional majorities in history have tried so hard - and at such political risk - to achieve the goals on which they sought election. While there were conspicuous failures on issues that stood little chance in the first place, such as constitutional amendments imposing term limits and a balanced budget, which required a two-thirds majority, there were more than a few successes.
Most fiscal issues divided along party lines, with all Democrats from Virginia opposing the final version of Republican budget resolutions. These are adopted fairly early in the year to establish a broad outline of where money will come from and where it will go. When it came to individual spending bills, there was some support among Virginia Democrats to reduce outlays from levels requested by the president. But even after Clinton's vetoes, we saw the first actual decrease in non-entitlement spending since 1981-82.
When it came to slowing the growth in Medicare spending by $270 billion over seven years, all Democrats in the Virginia delegation said no. When that was reduced to $158 billion, they still said no. In fact, they voted for no cuts at all. And when given a chance to support Clinton's budget for fiscal '97 as presented, they were equally opposed. But Scott, Sisisky, Payne and Moran did support a budget proposal that would have reduced automatic cost-of-living increases for Social Security and other federal entitlements.
On the question of amending the Constitution to require a two-thirds vote in both houses to raise taxes, which needed 280 votes but got only 243, the GOP's Bateman joined all six Democrats in opposition. While I don't believe the line-item veto will do much to control spending, Republicans honored their promise to place it on the books.
The only tax cut attracting significant Democratic support was the rather silly proposal repealing the increase of 4.3 cents a gallon on motor fuel that Clinton put through his first year - but only until Jan. 1, 1997, unless made permanent. This passed the House 301 to 108, with Pickett, Scott, Payne, Moran and Wolf voting no. It got nowhere in the Senate.
Ending the federal entitlement for welfare and giving the states wide discretion to structure their own programs was one of the more momentous issues of this Congress. Last year, the GOP's tough welfare-reform measure attracted some Democratic votes, but none in Virginia, and nowhere near enough to override Clinton's veto. This year, a somewhat milder bill still drew opposition from Scott, Sisisky, Moran and Boucher.
On the question of repealing the ban on certain semi-automatic weapons, which passed the House but failed in the Senate, Bateman and Davis joined only Scott and Moran among Democrats in voting no. One of the most bitterly fought issues was the proposed ban on late-term abortions, where the baby is partially delivered before being terminated. Pickett, Scott and Boucher consistently opposed any limitation on this procedure. On the bill denying federal recognition for marriages between persons of the same sex, only Scott and Moran voted no.
Two GOP measures that attracted strong Democratic support dealt with efforts to reduce litigation. The bill dealing with product liability limited punitive damages to $250,000 and required suits to be filed within 15 years of an alleged injury. Only Scott and Pickett voted no, but Clinton's veto was sustained. Only Scott voted against the bill curbing class-action suits by shareholders and allowing sanctions against lawyers filing "frivolous" cases. This was one of the few bills to become law over the president's strong objection.
Federal price supports for wheat, corn and dairy products have bordered on scandal for many years. They were necessary, I believe, to sustain American agriculture during decades of downsizing, but reform was long overdue. On the vote phasing out dairy supports over five years, only Boucher and Wolf voted no. But all the Virginians, except Wolf and Davis, wanted continued subsidies for cotton and peanuts, and they were on the prevailing side. In the final vote on the GOP's "freedom-to-farm" bill, only Moran voted no.
The delegation did unite to support the president on a foreign-policy issue. When it came to prohibiting the use of federal funds to deploy U.S. ground forces in Bosnia without the consent of Congress, which failed by only eight votes, all Virginians voted no.
Proving once again that it's only in the year after an election that Congress tackles the truly difficult, the GOP leadership was anxious in recent weeks to give a high-flying president most of what he wants. It was just as well. Having done a lot, and bravely tried to do even more, they may just get by a fickle and inattentive electorate and return with a small majority.
Ray L. Garland is a Roanoke Times columnist.
LENGTH: Long : 101 linesby CNB