Clinton signs budget, closes divisive session

The bitterly divided Congress that faced off over impeachment - and went on to squabble over everything from gun control to HMO reform - adjourned this month with a remarkably moderate budget deal.

At a ceremony in the White House Rose Garden yesterday, President Clinton signed the final $385 billion spending package to the cheers of members of Congress and his cabinet.

"I am proud to sign a bill I believe will give us a stronger, better America in the 21st Century," he said, tabling partisanship to congratulate both parties on overcoming division and adjourning amicably.

On Capitol Hill last week, each side claimed victory. Republicans touted increased funding for the Pentagon, an across-the-board spending cut at federal agencies and the return of control to local school districts. Democrats hailed the defeat of the GOP's $792 billion tax cut plan and the salvation of Social Security and Medicare.

But beneath the flurry of rhetoric, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle left town - and one of the most divisive sessions in recent memory - with striking proximity on fiscal issues.

"It was a pause from the fights of the year," said Marshall Wittman, who tracks Congress for the conservative Heritage Foundation in Washington. "That's as good as it gets when you have an executive and a legislative that loathe each other."

On an array of funding questions, from education to the environment, Democrats and Republicans met halfway, each side tempering - but ultimately adopting - the other's proposals.

Their final reconciliation illustrates how a year of scandal and stalemate in Washington - and an increasingly wary electorate - weakened party leaders politically and forced them to shelve lofty goals for clean compromise.

It also shows how a booming economy and federal budget surplus have made some semblance of compromise possible, by giving policymakers an unprecedented opportunity to avert hard choices and pursue once-exclusive goals concurrently.

"The parties feel the economy is so good that they can both spend more and still show a surplus," said Bill Frenzel, a scholar at the nonpartisan Brookings Institute in Washington who represented Minnesota in the House of Representatives for 20 years.

The final budget package, adopted overwhelmingly in the House and Senate and signed into law yesterday, reflects three fiscal approaches - budget cuts, increased spending and deficit reduction - that make for strange bedfellows.

The 13 bills totaling $609 billion that comprise the budget for the 2000 fiscal year - five of which were lumped together and cleared to close the session on Nov. 20 - provide a windfall of funds for each party's favorite projects.

Democrats secured $86 billion in discretionary spending and $229 billion in mandatory spending for Medicare and Medicaid programs and restored $12 billion that had been cut from the programs two years ago.

In a nod to environmentalists, Democrats also won passage of $470 million for government purchases of scenic or environmentally sensitive land that is threatened by development.

toward training teachers.

In legislation adopted earlier in the year, Republicans won a huge increase in defense spending, including a substantial pay raise for military personnel, and boosted government funding for scientific research.

Even as the booming economy allows the parties to rain cash on their favorite programs, a mentality of fiscal responsibility pervaded the budget negotiations.

"There was certainly more discipline than last year," said Don Wolfensberger, a scholar of Congress at the nonpartisan Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington. "The temptation to spend is there, and still there was a little more restraint this time around, which is pretty remarkable."

To fund the $7 billion in new spending, Congress approved, among other things, a plan - pushed by conservative advocates of fiscal discipline in Congress - to cut spending across the board, instead of dipping into the trillion-dollar federal surplus.

Republicans had initially proposed a 1.3 percent cut, but that plan fizzled. Lawmakers later agreed on 0.38 percent across the board, excluding military personnel, with savings of $1.3 billion for next year. The deal gives the president flexibility in distributing the cuts.

Policymakers on both sides sang their own praises for increasing spending without depleting the surplus, which would have drained funds from the Social Security program and delayed payments on the national debt.

But Wittman said conservatives had abandoned their commitment to slowing the growth of the federal treasury.

"The economy is growing much quicker than the government," he said, tempting both parties to spend on new government programs. "The dilemma for conservatives is, How do you restrain spending in an era of surplus?"

As the budget battles drew to a close, everyone seemed to agree that the vibrant economy had altered the political landscape, allowing the parties to compromise and each pursue targeted spending increases.

But compromise was more than a convenient possibility at the session's end. After months of bitter, partisan warfare on Capitol Hill, beginning with impeachment, compromise had become a political necessity, as the public grew wary of what it perceived to be a divisive, impotent Congress.

With the exception of a bipartisan bill to repeal restrictive Depression-era banking laws, the 106th Congress - popularly dubbed "the do-nothing Congress" - bickered on issue after issue, stalling legislation indefinitely or killing it altogether.

"I think the well has been poisoned," Frenzel said. "The Congress and the president used to work more amicably," he recalled, looking back on his years in the capital.

Earlier in the year, after a spate of school shootings across the country, both chambers took up gun control. With partisanship in high gear, lawmakers offered only modest proposals and adopted incremental reforms. The legislation never cleared the conference between House members and Senators to synthesize the two versions.

On health care reform, with divisive rhetoric and mud-slinging on display, the House and Senate made headway in the effort to protect the rights of patients using managed care providers. But once again, two different versions of the legislation died in conference.

A Republican plan for a $792 billion tax cut shared a similar fate. The House and Senate never resolved differences between their two plans and GOP leaders were unable to rally support to override a presidential veto.

In a break with tradition, the Senate took up campaign finance reform and prepared for thorough debate and a simple up-or-down vote. But all hopes of passage were shattered by a threatened filibuster, which stalled debate and doomed the legislation.

And in a stinging defeat for Clinton, the Senate last month voted down the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty, which would have outlawed nuclear testing by signatories. The bill died strictly along party lines, even as a majority of Senators sought to delay a vote.

An array of polling data shows the American public frustrated by the Congress's inefficacy. As the election season unfolds, with each party desperately seeking a majority in both chambers in 2001, leaders recognize that their public images needed honing.

"They want to show that they worked out their differences," Wolfensberger said. "Everybody wants to say they brought home the bacon."

At yesterday's ceremony, Clinton challenged Congress to overcome internal divisions for the American people.

"In the weeks and months ahead," he said, "we can achieve these vital goals if we keep in mind that the disagreements we have are far less important than our shared values and our shared responsibility for the future."

And so the session that began with a vigorous debate over "high crimes and misdemeanors" and "our sacred honor" ended rather quietly yesterday, with the customary hand-shaking and back-slapping that follows a worthy accomplishment in Washington.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

11-30-99