Puts Spending Curbs, Bork on Agenda : Reagan Goals Certain to Stir Political Battles

President Reagan, vowing that the rest of his presidency will not be marked by “dust and cobwebs,” spelled out in his nationally televised speech Wednesday a familiar but hotly controversial agenda that is certain to embroil him in political combat during his final 17 months in office.

In attempting to shift the public’s focus from the Iran- contra affair to the nation’s unfinished business, Reagan boiled down his hopes for the future to five points--arms control, democracy for Nicaragua, peace and stability for the Persian Gulf and the rest of the Middle East, curbs on federal spending and confirmation of Robert H. Bork to the Supreme Court.

Although he was sometimes conciliatory in his language, he gave little indication that he was prepared to compromise with his opponents, most of them in Congress, on any of the issues.

Fight to Win Points

Ironically, Reagan may find that it will be less difficult to reach an arms control agreement with Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev than it will be to win his points in Congress on the Bork nomination, federal budgets and aid to the Nicaraguan contras.

Reagan said U.S. and Soviet negotiators were “making real progress” in their talks in Geneva on a treaty to eliminate all short- and medium-range nuclear missiles worldwide. The negotiations may yet hit a snag, of course, but Reagan and Gorbachev already have agreed on the overall outline of such a pact and both Washington and Moscow seem to be determined to succeed.

Reagan gave no hint about how the two sides might break the remaining impasses, such as the Soviet demand for removal of the U.S.-controlled nuclear warheads for 73 aging West German short-range missiles, but he seemed confident that an agreement would be reached in time to give him a showpiece victory in foreign policy.

“I am optimistic we’ll soon witness a first in world history--the sight of two countries actually destroying nuclear weapons in their arsenals,” Reagan said.

He was careful to avoid any phrasing that might offend Gorbachev. In recent speeches, Reagan has scoffed at Gorbachev’s glasnost , or openness policy, and has challenged the Soviet leader to prove his intentions by tearing down the Berlin Wall. But there was no talk of rolling back Communism Wednesday.

‘A New Relationship’

“I say to General Secretary Gorbachev, both our nations could begin a new relationship by signing comprehensive agreements to reduce nuclear and conventional weapons,” Reagan said. “What we seek in our relationship with the Soviet Union is peace and stability.”

Some of Reagan’s conservative backers may have strong doubts both about the potential arms control pact and about the President’s conciliatory words toward Moscow, but it seems likely that the agreement would be popular with much of the public. And it surely would be applauded by Democrats in Congress.

Much of the Reagan agenda, however, was a prescription for controversy. There can be little doubt that the fights it will generate will keep Reagan from fading away, the traditional fate of political lame ducks.

Reagan was ambiguous in describing his determination to foster democracy in Nicaragua. But he hinted strongly that he would not abandon his support for the anti-government contras despite strong opposition to additional funding for the rebels from congressional Democrats.

The President said he welcomed the regional peace plan adopted last week by the presidents of Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica and Guatemala. The pact calls for free elections, national reconciliation and press freedom throughout the region but it specifically bans outside military support for rebel groups like the U.S.-backed contras in Nicaragua and Soviet and Cuban-supported insurgents in El Salvador.

Won’t ‘Abandon’ Fighters

Reagan simply ignored the proposal’s restrictions on U.S. support for the contras and declared: “We have never been willing to abandon those who are fighting for democracy and freedom.”

However, he did not reveal his strategy for obtaining funding for the contras. It seems clear that as long as the Central American presidents’ plan has any chance for success, Congress will be reluctant to vote additional aid.

Perhaps the most controversial point on Reagan’s agenda was the one he listed first--Senate confirmation of Bork for the Supreme Court.

“His nomination is being opposed by some because he practices judicial restraint,” Reagan said. “Judge Bork would be an important intellectual addition to the court, and I will fight for him because I believe in what he stands for.”

Reagan called for the Senate to “consider Judge Bork’s qualifications and then vote yes or no, up or down” as soon as it returns from its summer recess next month.

Filibuster Threatened

It seems unlikely that the Senate will comply, however. The Judiciary Committee, which will first review the nomination, is not scheduled to begin hearings until Sept. 15, and Senate Majority Leader Robert C. Byrd said earlier this month that because of gridlock on other legislation, the full Senate would “not be ready” to begin its debate on Bork for some time after the committee finishes its work. Moreover, some opponents have threatened a filibuster once the debate begins.

In an apparent effort to respond to critics who say Bork’s views are extremist, Reagan said the Supreme Court has never reversed a single one of the more than 100 majority opinions that Bork wrote as a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia.

Critics say that argument is true but somewhat misleading. Fewer than 10 cases in which Bork was involved have been reviewed by the Supreme Court and, although the high court did not reverse any cases in which Bork was in the majority, it did disagree with Bork by upholding some decisions in which Bork had dissented.

In the only other domestic issue on his five-point priority list, Reagan renewed his call for a constitutional amendment to require a balanced federal budget. In an attempt to overcome Congress’ long-held opposition to the plan, Reagan displayed both a carrot and a stick, offering to be more flexible on the budget if Congress goes along and threatening the lawmakers with the prospect of an unpredictable constitutional convention if they continue to balk.

“If Congress agrees to schedule an up or down vote this year on our balanced-budget amendment, then I will agree to negotiate on every spending item in the budget,” Reagan said. “If Congress continues to oppose the wishes of the people by avoiding a vote on our balanced-budget amendment, the call for a constitutional convention will grow louder. The prospect for a constitutional convention is only two states away from approval, and, one way or another, the will of the people always prevails.”

Little Support in Congress

It is unlikely that Reagan’s offer will be enough to convince the lawmakers to vote on an amendment that has very little support on Capitol Hill.

And it is doubtful that Reagan really would want a constitutional convention. A constitutional amendment can be proposed in two ways--by a two-thirds majority vote in both the Senate and House or by a convention that must be called if three-fourths of the state legislatures request it. A convention has never been called since the one that wrote the original document in Philadelphia 200 years ago.

Many legal scholars say that a convention, once called, could not be limited to the subject for which it was summoned and could rewrite the entire Constitution--a prospect that even Reagan might find disquieting.

Reagan put peace in the Middle East on his priority list but he gave no hint of how he hoped to bring it about. He dismissed the subject with two sentences, saying his government seeks peace and stability “in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East more generally.”

Reagan’s Persian Gulf policy, which has included the reflagging of Kuwaiti tankers and protecting them with U.S. warships, has generated a growing controversy in Congress.