Bush Supports Reagan’s Veto of Rights Bill

Vice President George Bush reached out to blacks and minorities along the campaign trail on Monday, but at the same time he declared opposition to one of the most-watched anti-discrimination bills of recent years.

In a day of campaigning dominated by the subject of minority politics and civil rights, the Republican presidential front-runner put himself on both sides of the matter.

On one hand, as he was endorsed by New Jersey GOP Gov. Thomas H. Kean, Bush borrowed the governor’s campaign pledge about making the Republican Party stand for “the politics of inclusion.”

And later Bush spoke to the first predominantly black audience in his campaign, a group of supporters holding a dinner in his honor.

But aboard Air Force Two between these stops, Bush for the first time disclosed his support for President Reagan’s veto of broad anti-discrimination rules for universities and other institutions receiving federal aid.

And Bush may have wandered unintentionally into controversy by saying that the line-item veto power he wants as a cornerstone of his presidency should apply to provisions of all kinds of bills, including civil rights legislation, and not just to spending.

After several days of rest following last week’s Illinois primary victory, Bush resumed campaigning with a trip from Washington to New Jersey, Connecticut and back.

Up-and-Coming Figure

First stop was New Jersey, where he received the much-sought-after endorsement of the popular Kean. New Jersey does not hold its primary until the end of the nominating season, June 7, along with California, but Kean is an up-and-coming figure in the GOP, and Bush lavishly praised his success at attracting votes from minorities.

“I will shamelessly steal his creed, if you will, of the politics of inclusion,” Bush told a group in Princeton. “. . . He’s done well with minorities, and in so doing he’s demonstrated that the open-door policy works. His success is an inspiration for what we can accomplish nationally.”

This may have been Bush’s effort to temper reaction to his major policy decision of the day--to side with Reagan and against civil rights leaders and bipartisan majorities in both houses of Congress over the civil rights measure, known as the Grove City bill.

Federal Funds

This measure would require institutions receiving federal funds to comply with anti-discrimination provisions of federal law. Congress passed the bill after the uproar created by a 1984 Supreme Court decision, which held that only the specific parts of an institution receiving direct federal funds have to adhere to anti-discrimination policies.

For example, if the athletic program of a university receives no federal aid, it is not bound to certify its adherence to anti-discrimination requirements of federal civil rights laws, the court held. Only those parts of the university that do receive aid would have to comply.

By lopsided margins--including the votes of 73 Republicans in the House and 27 in the Senate--Congress voted to make the entire university, or any other such institution, adhere to anti-discrimination requirements.

Pennsylvania School

Reagan vetoed the bill, which is known by the name of Grove City College, the small church-affiliated Pennsylvania institution that the Supreme Court held could not be charged with sex discrimination in its athletic programs.

Reagan argued that the bill “would vastly and unjustifiably expand the power of the federal government over the decisions and affairs of private organizations. . . . “

An override vote is expected in the Senate, perhaps as early as today.

Until Monday, Bush had taken no firm position on the measure, which is considered one of the most important civil rights matters to face Washington in recent years.

Won’t Oppose Reagan

Bush based his decision, at least in part, on his longstanding refusal to oppose Reagan.

“I’m not going to start doing that now which I haven’t done in 7 1/2 years,” he told reporters. “I favor the overturning of Grove City.”

Bush said he believed the legislation passed by Congress was “imperfect” and could infringe on religious freedoms.

The vice president seemed to indicate that parts of the measure, however, are acceptable. He told a group of local reporters in Connecticut that with selective veto power he could, as President, shape such a bill to his liking, vetoing those parts he did not like and signing the rest.

‘Conditional Veto’

“That makes a good case . . . for what I call a line-item veto and what (Gov. Kean) calls a conditional veto,” Bush said. “If the President had that, he could then take some of the extremes out of a piece of legislation, including protecting . . . the religious freedoms that might be at stake to some degree here.”

Currently, a President can only sign or veto an entire bill that Congress sends him. Bush has repeatedly campaigned on a promise to seek a line-item veto, which typically empowers a chief executive to reduce or eliminate spending items--but nothing else in a bill--while approving the rest.

As described by Bush on Monday, his proposed “conditional veto” is much broader than anything he has proposed before, and apparently would allow a President wide latitude to change the terms of new laws enacted by Congress.

Black Supporters

Bush wound up his day in Washington at a $200-a-person fund-raising dinner with 475 black supporters from around the nation. The vice president gave a crowd-pleasing speech pledging attentiveness to civil rights if elected.

“I will personally be involved in protecting the civil rights of every American . . . this effort will be at the top of the agenda for my attorney general. And the attorney general will be directly accountable to me for results,” he said.

Bush only briefly touched on the impending override vote on the Grove City legislation--and then in only the most generalized terms. He again called the legislation “imperfect” without specifying why, and said he would not be disloyal to the President.

Stands With Them

But he told the audience what it seemed to want to hear--that he stood with them on the overarching principle that “organizations that get tax dollars comply with our civil rights law.”

If the statement seemed slightly out of sync with his support for Reagan’s veto, a source argued that Bush was struggling between his own view of right and his loyality to Reagan.

Insisting upon anonymity, the source said: “This whole situation (Grove City) would have been handled differently by Bush in the White House.”