ELECTIONS / DISTRICT 24 : Congressional Foes Go On the Attack in Their 1st Meeting : Politics: Democrat Anthony Beilenson and Republican Tom McClintock display their sharply differing stands in a debate, as the campaign to fill the new 24th District seat officially begins.

Congressional opponents Anthony Beilenson and Tom McClintock put their wide ideological disagreements on public display Friday night, adopting sharply different stances on gun control, school vouchers and abortion restrictions.

It was the first campaign debate between Beilenson, the incumbent and a liberal Democrat from Los Angeles, and McClintock, a conservative Republican assemblyman from Thousand Oaks. In a race expected to attract national attention, the veteran politicians are running in a new congressional district covering the southwestern San Fernando Valley and parts of Ventura County.

The debate, which lasted nearly 2 1/2 hours, marked the first meeting between them.

Beilenson is an eight-term congressman and Harvard Law School graduate. McClintock is a five-term assemblyman first elected at age 26. The forum was sponsored by Temple Beth Haverim in Agoura Hills and drew about 175 people. Beilenson and McClintock both wore yarmulkes during the debate, held after a Sabbath service.

The race is expected to be a difficult one for Beilenson because the 24th Congressional District--created by a recent court-ordered reapportionment--is considerably less Democratic and more conservative than his old district, which contained a large chunk of Los Angeles’ liberal Westside.

In his precise, almost professorial style, Beilenson opened the evening by laying out his positions on foreign policy, defense spending and the environment, making no reference to McClintock.

The two were, however, soon engaged in sharp attacks on each other.

McClintock criticized Beilenson for repeatedly supporting tax increases.

“Just the measures that he has sponsored this session alone would cost more than $1,000 for every man, woman and child in the country,” McClintock said.

McClintock also criticized his opponent for voting to boost congressional pay last year and for opposing a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced federal budget.

Beilenson, describing himself as “fiscally very conservative,” said he gets better ratings than most Democrats from taxpayer groups, which he labeled “pretty far-to-the-right organizations.”

He said he voted for the $25,000 annual raise because it was linked to the elimination of speaking fees paid by special interests to members of Congress. Such fees, he said, amounted to thinly disguised bribery.

Beilenson said although he backs efforts to reduce the budget deficit, he recently voted against a proposed balanced-budget amendment because it would force abrupt, harsh cuts in Medicare and other needed social programs.

Beilenson critized McClintock for accepting campaign contributions from political action committees, which represent special interests such as corporations and labor unions. Beilenson is one of a handful of congress members who do not take PAC money.

“I’m free because I don’t take money from these people,” Beilenson said. He said PACs exercise undue influence over many of his fellow Democrats in Congress.

“Try it some time,” he urged McClintock, grinning. “It’s a very liberating experience.”

McClintock replied that his conservative philosophy is what attracts contributions from PAC and non-PAC donors. He also said that, in any event, PACs are composed of individual contributors, many of whom give $100 or less apiece.

He said only “10% to 15%” of his total contributions come from PACs. Beilenson said the figure was “40% to 50%.”

Beilenson, a longtime supporter of abortion rights, said he backs the proposed Freedom of Choice Act now pending in Congress. The bill would forbid states from imposing restrictions on most abortions and overrule limits set down by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1989 Webster vs. Reproductive Services decision.

McClintock said he opposes the Freedom of Choice bill because it would not require minors to obtain parental consent before getting abortions. He said he opposes government funding of abortions for poor women and supports certain restrictions on abortions, such as requirements for parental consent and a 24-hour waiting period.

Comparing himself with members of the Free Soil Party, who opposed the extension of slavery into new territories before the Civil War, McClintock said he believes government “has a right and a purpose in discouraging” abortion but should not make it illegal.

The candidates addressed the issue of gun control after an anti-gun activist from Thousand Oaks, Glenda Lee-Barnard, asked McClintock: “How can you get assault weapons off the street if you have to ask the gun lobby’s permission?”

McClintock, a backer of firearm rights, received a $5,000 campaign contribution from the National Rifle Assn. during his primary election race this year.

McClintock denied he is beholden to the gun lobby but said he opposes “any attempt to take away from decent, law-abiding citizens their right to defend themselves and their households.”

He described semiautomatic weapons as “perfectly legitimate firearms” used for hunting and self-defense.

Beilenson said he has voted repeatedly for “necessary and reasonable gun-control legislation.”

He said he supports a seven-day waiting period for handgun purchases and banning the sale of bullets capable of piercing protective vests worn by law enforcement officers.

McClintock said he supports school vouchers, which would give parents government money to enroll their children in schools of their choice, public or private. Beilenson said he strongly opposes vouchers, arguing that they would destroy public schools.

In their only agreement during the debate, both candidates said they support amending the Constitution to prohibit granting citizenship to children of illegal immigrants who are born in the United States.