THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT 
              Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: Thursday, March 30, 1995               TAG: 9503300010
SECTION: FRONT                    PAGE: A14  EDITION: FINAL 
TYPE: Editorial 
                                             LENGTH: Short :   46 lines

CLINTON PROPOSES A NEW ROUND OF DOWNSIZING CUT COSTS TO CUT DEFICIT

The competition between President Clinton and Speaker Gingrich's forces in Congress to cut government is about to begin affecting Virginia.

Under Clinton's downsizing proposals, NASA would lose $8 billion in funding, 2,000 government jobs and as many as 10,000 jobs in the private sector. Even NASA Administrator Daniel S. Goldin concedes the agency needs to be streamlined. Whether Langley on the Peninsula will be affected is not yet known, but cuts there can't be ruled out.

Other programs slated for substantial reductions include the Interior Department, Small Business Administration and Federal Emergency Management Agency. In Northern Virginia, the state will be expected to take over maintenance of a pair of parkways that started as scenic trails but are now essentially commuter roads.

This practice of transferring responsibilities from the federal to state level is sure to grow in an era of belt-tightening. States will want to be wary of this game of fiscal musical chairs. It can easily turn into the downsizing version of unfunded mandates in which the feds look like heroes for cutting costs while the states wind up footing the bill.

A total of $13 billion is at stake in this round of proposed cuts, and the administration intends to use the savings to fulfill its tax-cut promise. Since the budget agenda is being set at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, these recommendations from Clinton may be dead on arrival. He offers them in lieu of proposed Republican cuts that he calls mean.

But lean times demand tough measures. Downsizing has to occur, and if the spending Clinton has identified is actually on obsolete programs or luxury items, the cuts should be made. The same can be said for Republican cuts. This doesn't have to be a case of either/or.

However, using savings from these or from Republican cuts to reduce taxes would be a mistake. To endure the pain of job losses and shrinking services is folly if the result is to pocket a momentary tax cut while continuing to borrow hundreds of billions a year. Cut the government by all means, but use the savings to cut the deficit. by CNB