Veto Stirs Angry Political Reaction Among Democrats

By vetoing the defense bill on Wednesday, President Reagan set off an angry political reaction among Democrats in Congress that is likely to result in the enactment of a Pentagon spending measure for fiscal 1989 even more unacceptable to the White House.

“I think it’s going to backfire,” predicted House Armed Services Committee Chairman Les Aspin (D-Wis.), shortly after receiving Reagan’s veto message. “It really has unified the Democrats in a way that I don’t think I’ve ever seen before.”

In response to the veto, which Democrats characterized as a “desperate” political move designed to aid Vice President George Bush’s quest for the presidency, congressional leaders threatened to pass another measure that would provide even less money for Reagan’s “Star Wars” missile defense system and eliminate other projects favored by the Republicans.

In addition, Senate Democrats pledged to make the substitute defense legislation even harder for Reagan to veto by linking it to something the President dearly wants: $27 million in humanitarian aid for the Nicaraguan resistance.

Democratic Strategy

According to Aspin and Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), the Democratic strategy calls for a measure similar to the defense bill that Reagan vetoed to be attached to another Pentagon spending bill currently making its way through Congress. That measure will likely be sent back to the White House next month in a form Reagan could find even more unacceptable than the first bill.

If, as expected, Reagan vetoes the second bill, Democrats predicted that a third Pentagon financing measure--what Nunn characterized as a “skeleton bill” eliminating many of the Pentagon programs sought by the Administration--will be incorporated into a catch-all spending bill known as a “continuing resolution” that is traditionally enacted at the very end of every session of Congress. Such bills are usually veto-proof because they contain items needed to keep the government running.

The result of the Democrats’ carefully planned legislative strategy, if carried to its final conclusion, would be a high-stakes partisan showdown between the Democratic-controlled Congress and a lame-duck Republican White House, virtually on the eve of the presidential election.

As the battle proceeds, the chief item of contention clearly will be “Star Wars.” Although Reagan criticized Congress for providing only $4 billion for “Star Wars”--or about $800 million less than he requested--Nunn said the President could receive even less money for the controversial program in the next defense bill that arrives on his desk.

Pledge by Nunn

If the President insists on having a free hand in deciding how to spend the money for “Star Wars” research, as he has indicated he must, Nunn said he personally would vote to slash financing for the program. Nunn’s positions on defense issues influence many other Democrats.

Not only will Congress be reluctant to finance these and other programs popular with the Republicans, according to Nunn, but the President’s veto will likely encourage angry Democrats to add some extra provisions to the substitute bill that would be onerous to the Administration and politically embarrassing to the Republicans.

Among the measures that some Democrats are preparing to add to the substitute measure is a package of so-called “procurement reform” proposals intended to cure the abuses that allegedly brought about the current bribery scandal at the Pentagon. One of these proposals, which the Pentagon staunchly opposes, calls for creation of an independent procurement agency that would buy weapons and other goods used by the military.

Another legislative proposal that may be added to the so-called “continuing resolution,” according to liberal Democrats, is a bill currently under consideration in Congress that would impose additional U.S. sanctions on South Africa in an effort to persuade the government to abolish its system of apartheid. Reagan vetoed a sanctions bill two years ago, but he was overridden by the Congress.

‘Arms Control’ Provisions

Moreover, liberal Democrats indicated they have no intention of eliminating from any version of the defense bill the so-called “arms control” provisions, which the President argues would tie his hands in negotiations with the Soviets. Among other things, the Congress agreed to speed up the Pentagon’s timetable for retiring 1960s-vintage nuclear submarines in order to remain consistent with the limits set under the unratified SALT II treaty and to ban testing of missiles using trajectories designed for a sneak attack.