Liberals Fight MX-Midgetman Deal

Influential House liberals balked Wednesday at a compromise between President Bush and congressional Democratic leaders providing for early deployment of 10-warhead MX missiles on railroad cars and slower production of single-warhead, truck-borne Midgetman missiles.

At a stormy meeting with Rep. Les Aspin (D-Wis.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, irate liberals insisted that the deal provides too much money for MX, which is favored by Republicans, and too little for the Democrats’ preference, Midgetman.

Aspin, who insisted that he never consented to the Administration’s plan, said the reaction of these liberals points up the need for the Bush Administration to negotiate an agreement with Congress for modernizing the nation’s land-based strategic missile program, just as the Administration sought compromises on Contra aid and the 1990 budget.

Essentially, the liberals objected to the Administration’s proposal because they fear the President will renege on his commitment to deploy Midgetman after the Administration has completed deployment of 50 MX missiles on railroad cars in 1992.

“This two-missile package is, in fact, a one-missile package,” said Rep. Les AuCoin (D-Ore.), a liberal and a proponent of Midgetman. “The first missile built will be the only missile built. That means MX, period. So long Midgetman.”

The rail-garrison MX plan would be less expensive because the MX missiles are already in place in silos. Putting them on railroad cars would cost less than a quarter of what it would cost to develop a new missile system, Midgetman, that would travel the nation’s highways mounted on trucks. But Midgetman backers say that it would take hours to transfer the MX missiles from their garrisons to trains where they could hide from enemy attack.

Anger of Liberals

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) said some liberals are so angry that their Democratic leaders had agreed to this proposal that they might vote to eliminate funding for Midgetman altogether, allowing MX to survive. But Frank’s remarks were dismissed by other liberals as nothing more than an attempt to get Aspin’s attention.

In response to these complaints, Aspin, who also has been skeptical of the Administration’s proposal, said he would seek enactment of legislation that would make it impossible for the Pentagon to proceed with MX deployment without also producing Midgetman.

Aspin said he also expected Democrats to add money for Midgetman when the 1990 defense budget is debated on the House floor in July. He said that Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, who outlined the budget proposal Tuesday in testimony before the Armed Services Committee, had “virtually invited us to put more money into Midgetman.”

Under the Administration’s proposal, the Pentagon would spend $1.2 billion in fiscal 1990 to produce a system that would permit taking the 50 MX missiles now deployed in silos and redeploying them on railroad cars, beginning in late 1991. Meanwhile, the Administration proposes to spend only $200 million on Midgetman production during fiscal 1990--a commitment that would prevent deployment of a small mobile missile until 1997.

Rep. Norman D. Dicks (D-Wash.), another liberal who attended the meeting with Aspin, said the Administration’s proposed commitment of money to Midgetman in fiscal 1990 is so small that “instead of ‘Midgetman’ we should call it ‘minisculeman.’ ”

“What Cheney offered for Midgetman is not even a faint heartbeat,” AuCoin added. “It’s a joke.”

Liberals said they were particularly suspicious because the Reagan Administration had reneged on a commitment that it made to Midgetman in 1983 when it sought congressional support to move ahead with MX. In response, Congress prohibited the Pentagon from deploying any more than 50 MX missiles--a limit that has never been lifted.

“Essentially, this is the same swindle we heard in 1983,” AuCoin said.

They also noted that Cheney had recommended deployment of MX only.

In his testimony, nevertheless, Cheney said the Administration’s proposal represented “a firm commitment” by the President to proceed with both missiles.

Although Frank argued the United States cannot afford to deploy more than one mobile missile, other liberal Democrats acknowledged they do not expect to be able to keep the Midgetman program alive without also agreeing to deploy the existing 50 MX missiles on railroad cars.

Nevertheless, the liberals are hoping that in U.S.-Soviet arms control negotiations the two superpowers will strike a deal whereby the United States agrees to eliminate the MX missile in exchange for a decision by the Soviets to dismantle their large mobile missile, the SS-24.

Sources who attended the House meeting said Frank and others were particularly upset that Aspin and his counterpart on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Chairman Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), had consented to the Administration’s proposal for funding MX and Midgetman without consulting with the liberals. But Aspin insisted that he and Nunn agreed to nothing, even though they have long supported the idea of deploying both missiles.

Aspin called on the Administration to enter into negotiations with the Congress to settle this dispute. He said it would be impossible for the Administration to negotiate a strategic arms limitation treaty with the Soviet Union without a consensus on MX and Midgetman.