Senators Reject ‘Symbolic’ Cut in Own Salaries

Members of the Senate topped off a week of strenuous debate on how to reduce the federal deficit Friday by refusing, on a 49-49 vote, to cut their own salaries 10%.

The senators, in a raucous session, turned down a surprise move by Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) to cut their pay and that of House members, all of whom get $75,100 annually. House Speaker Thomas P. (Tip) O’Neill Jr. (D-Mass.) and the Republican and Democratic leaders of both bodies are paid more.

“If ever an amendment needed no lengthy discussion, this is it,” Helms said, making the only comment about the move heard before the vote. “I hear across this country that the burden of reducing the deficit must be shared by all. This simply asks members of Congress to share in this burden.”

In terms of deficit reduction, the amendment was largely symbolic. It would cut only about $4 million per year from the budget, which is more than $200 billion in the red.

Medicaid Funds Restored

Earlier in the day, the Senate approved, 93 to 6, an amendment from Finance Committee Chairman Bob Packwood (R-Ore.) that would restore about $2.6 billion of the Medicaid and Medicare cuts included in President Reagan’s compromise budget. It was a small defeat for the President, but it was intended to head off a Democratic move to restore much more money to the two programs.

Packwood said he believed the White House would agree to the small changes.

Reagan suffered two major defeats earlier in the week when the Senate agreed to restore full cost-of-living payments to Social Security and other recipients of government checks and to limit military spending increases to the level of inflation.

All of the votes are preliminary and are likely to be changed before the budget is eventually approved. The Reagan budget was aimed at cutting $52 billion from the deficit in fiscal 1986, but the week’s actions brought that total down to about $45 billion.

Many senators who voted against the cut in their own pay apparently sensed the relative insignificance of the vote and many seemed to observers to be less than serious.

Some of the wealthiest senators, including Sens. John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) voted against cutting their pay. But other rich senators, like Sen. John Heinz (R-Pa.), heir to the Heinz ketchup fortune, voted for it.

Rockefeller’s vote brought howls of laughter from Sen. Alan J. Dixon (D-Ill.) who leaped to shake the West Virginia multimillionaire’s hand.

“I love it,” Dixon roared, his face turning scarlet, “He voted no!” Dixon also voted against the pay cut.

Shortly after the vote, the Senate recessed for the weekend, allowing many of the senators time to attend the Kentucky Derby on Saturday.

Helms asked the members to “think about this over the weekend. Here we are asking everyone to accept cuts and when it comes to our own compensation we have a 49-49 tie.”

After the Medicare vote, Packwood explained that with no changes in current law, the monthly premiums that Medicare recipients pay for doctor’s care, now $15.50, would go to $19.40 in 1988. The Reagan budget would have lifted them to about $25, and his compromise would set them at $22.88.

Democrats, led by Kennedy, vowed to fight another day.

“I intend to vote in favor of the proposal as inadequate as it is,” Kennedy said. “With the hope we will have another chance to vote on the Medicare proposal.”

In Bonn, West Germany, where Reagan is attending the economic summit, the attention of the President and Administration officials was on the Senate vote Thursday that would allow defense spending to grow only with inflation next year instead of the 3% after inflation that Reagan wanted.

White House aides said they were confident they could turn that vote around later.

“It’s not that severe but it is an irresponsible act,” Reagan said of the vote. “We’ve already made the reductions that we could make in military spending without reducing our ability to maintain the security we must have.”