Reagan Vetoes $299-Billion Defense Bill

President Reagan vetoed the $299.6-billion defense bill Wednesday, declaring that it would redirect the nation’s military programs “away from strength and proven success and back toward (the) weakness and accommodation of the 1970s.”

The veto, favored by Vice President George Bush, signaled an effort by the Republicans to depict Democrats as soft on defense, although it may result in a Pentagon budget that would provide even less money for Reagan’s “Star Wars” missile defense system and eliminate other projects favored by the Republicans.

Sen. Sam Nunn of Georgia, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, predicted that a substitute defense bill could be passed that will not contain many of the items that Republicans favored in the original measure, such as bonuses for military aviators and other critical military personnel, authorization for additional active-duty officers, development of new anti-tank weapons, an additional $40 million for advanced tactical ballistic missiles and a mandated expansion of the Pentagon’s role in drug interdiction along the nation’s southern border.

However, during a hastily announced visit to the White House press room, Reagan said the vetoed measure, which was pushed through Congress by Democratic leaders, “would endanger progress in arms negotiations by giving away our negotiating leverage without getting a single thing in return from the Soviets.”

Also, he said, its cut in funds for the Administration’s Strategic Defense Initiative--from the $4.9 billion Reagan had requested to $4.1 billion--and restrictions on “Star Wars” tests would gut the space-based missile defense program.

“These are issues of national security, and they must remain above partisan politics,” Reagan said.

At the White House, officials did not discount the political considerations in the action. They said the veto was an opportunity for Bush, as a member of the Administration, to draw a sharp distinction between his position on defense and that of Democratic presidential nominee Michael S. Dukakis.

Dukakis criticized the veto, describing the legislation as a bipartisan bill that would “strengthen our national security.”

“I’m very puzzled, and I think the American people are very puzzled” by the veto, Dukakis said at a news conference in Boston. “National security is not a partisan issue.”

Got Conflicting Advice

The President was given conflicting advice last week by Republicans in Congress on what stance to take on the bill. Some encouraged him to take a hard line, but others who are also ardently pro-defense cautioned that any subsequent bill probably would not address his complaints.

Defense Secretary Frank C. Carlucci was among those who urged Reagan to accept the bill.

Among Democrats, Nunn charged: “It’s like Alice in Wonderland: Down is up and up is down.”

He noted that the bill was written in consultation with Carlucci and Lt. Gen. Colin L. Powell, the President’s assistant for national security affairs, and he asked with whom the Senate should work in the future.

“Do we confer with Robert Teeter, the pollster for the vice president, or do we confer with Lee Atwater, the vice president’s campaign manager?” Nunn asked.

Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.) said, “The object, it appears, is to make the Democrats look weak on defense. How the Republicans expect to sell the American people that Democrats are weak on defense when the President vetoes a defense bill that gives him all the money he asked for--and which is supported by Secretary of Defense Carlucci--escapes me.”

Earlier Bills Cited

Rep. Les Aspin (D-Wis.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, maintained that previous defense bills signed by Reagan had fallen further short of his requests, with deeper cuts in the “Star Wars” program and including many of the same arms control provisions.

“If this bill is bad, then last year’s bill was worse,” he said. “Why didn’t the White House veto those bills? Because George Bush wasn’t running for President, that’s why. If this bill is so bad, where was George last year?”

The veto message was read in the House Wednesday evening and the bill was sent to the Armed Services Committee on a 223-162 vote. That means there will be no vote soon on whether to override.

White House officials said Bush counseled Reagan to veto the bill.

As Reagan made the announcement, the vice president visited a Westinghouse Electric Corp. plant in Annapolis, Md., that makes electronic components for undersea weapons.

“If we start cutting our technological edge, as that bill did, it would not be good for our national security and it would not be good for the strength of the alliance,” Bush said. “So, the President had to make a tough call. I’m convinced he made the right call.”

Compromise on Spending

In the past, a central element in the annual battle between Congress and the White House on the defense bill has been the amount of funds appropriated. This year, that amount--$299.6 billion--was set in a budget compromise reached late last year by the Administration and the House and Senate.

However, the Administration objected to restrictions placed on the “Star Wars” program, particularly the limit of $85 million for work on the interception of missiles in space. Reagan had sought $330 million.

“The bill would gravely endanger the SDI program,” Reagan said. “The way this bill restricts our proposed space-based interceptors would cripple the very concept of a space shield against nuclear attack. I will not abide this.” Actually, the buildup in defense spending began in the final year of the Jimmy Carter Administration. It intensified in the early years of the Reagan’s Administration, and, with last year’s budget accord, will have declined for the fourth consecutive year.

The arms control restrictions Reagan objected to included an accelerated timetable for retiring old nuclear submarines and a ban on some missile tests.

A White House official, who asked to remain anonymous, said Reagan was persuaded to veto the measure by some congressional advisers who argued that, in the past, Congress had been able to “nickel-and-dime” him into accepting scaled-down Pentagon budgets.