THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Thursday, September 8, 1994 TAG: 9409080516
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY WARREN FISKE, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: RICHMOND LENGTH: Medium: 93 lines
U.S. Sen. Charles S. Robb on Wednesday stood by his dramatic pledge to ``take food away from widows and orphans'' if it would help lower the national deficit.
The controversial declaration - uttered in a televised debate Tuesday night between Virginia's four candidates for the U.S. Senate - is almost certain to become a staple in the attack ads of his opponents this fall. But it also sets the stage for debate between Democrat Robb and Republican Oliver L. North on whether the deficit can be slashed without inflicting substantial pain on taxpayers.
``If it took a somewhat outrageous statement to make the point,'' Robb said, ``maybe that's worth it.''
Robb argues that Congress has only two realistic choices to end the $202 billion budget imbalance: cut spending on popular entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, or raise taxes. ``I'm prepared to do both,'' he said.
North, while assailing the deficit as an ``albatross Congress has tied around the necks of our children,'' is promising to reduce taxes, increase defense spending and protect entitlements. He can do all that, he vows, and still balance the budget if Congress changes the way it does business.
North says the solution lies in passage of a balanced-budget amendment that would force Congress to make hard choices; term limitations that would embolden officials to make unpopular cuts without fear of endangering their political futures; a presidential line-item veto; and eliminating perks and pork.
Independents J. Marshall Coleman and L. Douglas Wilder are also pledging to erase the deficit without a tax increase, although neither has identified specific programs to cut. Joined by North, they have assailed Robb for voting to increase taxes in 1990 and 1993.
Robb said his opponents are pandering to voters by offering ``painless solutions. . . You can't always tell people, `Yes, I'll spend more money on programs you like,' then, when it comes time to pay for it say, `Sure, we'll pay for it by cutting your taxes.' ''
He said proposals listed in North's 54-point ``Agenda for Change'' would actually increase the deficit by almost $400 billion.
North calls for giving people a break on income taxes by increasing their personal exemptions. He supports reviving tax-exempt Individual Retirement Accounts for all citizens and offering tuition tax credits for families who send their children to private schools or educate them at home. Despite the loss of those revenues, North also wants to increase military spending to levels of the mid-1980s - about a $50 billion-a-year boost in spending.
As for budget cuts, North proposes not paying congressmen for days they are not in session, ending reserved free parking for them at Washington airports, limiting mailings to constituents and ending federal funding for abortions and the National Endowment for the Arts.
Robb said North's cuts translate to ``just pennies'' saved. For example, if congressional salaries were slashed in half, it would translate to about $37 million in savings - a fraction of the $202 billion deficit. Elimination of federal funding for the NEA would save $173 million annually - less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the deficit.
North's plan is silent on any cuts to entitlement programs, which amount to 50 percent of the spending in the nation's $1.4 trillion annual budget. At Tuesday's debate, North said he opposes any reduction in benefits to individuals from the two largest entitlements - Social Security and Medicare. Wilder and Coleman also expressed skepticism about such a solution.
Robb, however, insisted deep and painful cuts will have to be made to popular entitlements if spending is to be seriously reduced. He endorses ``means testing,'' which would tie the benefits individuals receive to their income.
Would he really cut payments to widows and orphans? ``I'll put everything on the table,'' he said. ``If you're going to solve the deficit challenge, you've got to be willing to look at the entire thing.''
Independent analysts agree with Robb that tough cuts to entitlements must be made if spending is to be significantly reduced. ``Unfortunately, it's difficult for politicians to talk about overhauling Social Security and Medicare without suffering political consequences,'' said Fred Bucher, a spokesman for the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan group promoting a balanced budget by the end of the century.
Robb acknowledged that his support for higher taxes and entitlement cuts is a questionable strategy for winning elections. He said he is trying to frame himself as a politician who is not afraid to make tough decisions.
In the meantime, his opponents are having a field day with Robb's controversial quote. North declined a challenge from Robb on Wednesday to engage in a one-on-one debate. ``We're too busy putting together a widows-and-orphans coalition to set up more debates with Robb,'' chuckled Mark Merritt, a spokesman for North. MEMO: Staff writer David Poole contributed to this report.
KEYWORDS: SENATE RACE CANDIDATES DEBATE by CNB