President Appears to Soften Stance on New Trade Bill : But Warns That Congress Must Revise the Measure Significantly to Win His Support

President Reagan appeared to soften his hard-line stand against a major new trade bill Saturday, but he warned that Congress must continue to revise the legislation significantly to win his support.

Congressional negotiators have been weakening many of the legislation’s toughest provisions, and the relatively moderate tone of Reagan’s remarks in his weekly radio speech reflected that. However, he complained that the bill “still contains provisions that restrict trade, deter investment in the United States, require mandatory retaliation that invites trade wars and unnecessarily hamper my prerogatives as President.”

The White House has long objected to such measures, saying they are likely to cripple economic growth, though Administration officials and Democratic leaders in Congress have expressed optimism that this year’s bill will be spared the bitter wrangling that killed previous trade legislation. They believe the legislation may even win passage by early next month.

Preparing for Recess

The President, directing his remarks at legislators hurrying to wind up work before the Easter recess, also urged the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to recommend ratification of the intermediate-range nuclear forces treaty when it votes on the matter this week.

But, apparently in an attempt to mollify conservatives who contend that the Administration has been hasty in its pursuit of arms control, Reagan provided a notably unambitious assessment of prospects for progress at his May 29 summit meeting in Moscow with Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev.

He said the pre-summit talks in Washington this week between Secretary of State George P. Shultz and Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard A. Shevardnadze had “made clear how difficult the issues are between the United States and the Soviet Union.”

“We’ve come a long way in our attempts to deal with the Soviets and to further the cause of peace and freedom around the world,” Reagan said. “The next summit will help. How much, we’ll have to see.”

Long-Range Weapons

Although Reagan has acknowledged the need for an agreement reducing long-range offensive arms, he emphasized that the United States must consider other issues on the summit agenda and “will sign only those agreements that are in our best interests.” Such issues, including human rights and regional conflicts such as the civil war in Afghanistan, have hampered arms control progress in the past.

Reagan’s comments on trade, though they raised the threat of a presidential veto, were considerably more moderate than those he made in a radio address just two weeks ago, when he declared: “My veto pen is ready.” On Saturday, Reagan praised Congress for producing a “sounder bit of legislation” than last year’s highly protective measure.

“My hope is that the Congress will stay on course and that we will settle on a bill that avoids the great danger of choking off international trade and slowing down economic growth,” Reagan said Saturday.

The change in tone appeared to suggest an Administration effort to come to accord with Congress on a trade bill whose passage many regard as inevitable.

Conciliatory Approach

In an indication of their more conciliatory approach, Administration officials last week agreed reluctantly to support a measure that would authorize the President to block foreign takeovers of American companies if the transactions were believed to threaten U.S. national security.

The move was viewed by congressional observers as an attempt to forestall another, more stringent provision, which would require disclosure of all foreign investments in the United States. The White House had warned that Reagan would veto the entire trade bill if this measure were included in the package.

Administration officials opposed to a harsh trade bill regard the time for compromise as auspicious because pressure for protectionist action has ebbed considerably.

Monthly trade figures have shown recent reductions in the U.S. trade deficit, providing an economic indication of improvement in U.S. trade competitiveness, while the scant voter response to Democratic presidential candidate Rep. Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri and his fair trade message diluted some of the political attraction of a hard-line trade bill.

Democrats did not respond directly to Reagan’s remarks on either trade or arms control, choosing instead to deliver in their own radio address a message of commendation to Nicaragua’s Sandinista government and the anti-government rebels, who last week signed a cease-fire agreement.