Bush Vetoes Bill to Curb Rates for Basic Cable TV : Legislation: President to woo Senate votes today in effort to block first override of his Administration.

President Bush vetoed a bill Saturday to control the rising price of basic cable television service and set the stage for a two-day veto fight that will be the toughest of his Administration.

The President will make a strong personal appeal today at a hastily organized White House breakfast for Republican senators to switch their votes and avoid the embarrassment that would come if the Democratic-led Congress overturns a Bush veto for the first time. The Senate will take today off, and the veto override vote is scheduled for Monday.

The cable bill “illustrates good intentions gone wrong, fallen prey to special interests,” the President said in his veto message. “Rather, the simple truth is that under this legislation, cable television rates will go up, not down.”

The political battle over the bill now transcends the struggle between the cable operators, who do not want their industry regulated, and broadcasters, who see a lucrative new source of revenue for themselves in the bill. Presidential politics has intervened, and the White House is determined to keep intact Bush’s string of 35 veto victories without a defeat.

The President needs 34 Senate votes to uphold his veto, which means nine senators must change their positions. The Senate approved the bill on Sept. 22 by a vote of 74 to 25. Among Republicans, 24 voted for the bill and 18 against. It is assumed that the House, which passed the bill 280 to 128, still has the two-thirds vote necessary for an override.

One sign of the stakes involved was the involvement of White House Chief of Staff James A. Baker III, who met for a second straight day with GOP senators who voted to approve the measure.

It will be an uphill struggle. Sen. Nancy Landon Kassebaum (R-Kan.), one of the key votes, brushed aside pleas for her support and indicated Saturday she would vote to override. She also refused the invitation to dine with Bush--”she has other commitments,” Mike Horak, her press spokesman, said Saturday.

Even the assistant Republican leader in the Senate, Alan K. Simpson of Wyoming, is proving to be a shaky supporter. Simpson is known to feel strongly about cable operators, and told friends that when he was city attorney of Cody, Wyo., “those sapsuckers screwed the consumers.”

Simpson had indicated in a private meeting with other senators Friday that he would change his vote and support the President.

But on Saturday, a Simpson spokesman said he would vote to override, unless the President was in imminent danger of losing when the Senate casts its votes.

“If Al is not needed on this, he’ll stick with his guns” and continue backing the cable bill, said Simpson spokesman Stan Cannon. “But if the Democrats politicize the issue, that would put him in a position to change his vote. He will do all he can to make sure the President is not defeated 30 days before the election.”

Other Republican senators under pressure from the White House include Alfonse M. D’Amato of New York, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico, James M. Jeffords of Vermont, Frank H. Murkowski of Alaska and John W. Warner of Virginia.

Cochran said Saturday that he talked with Baker twice and with Bush once about switching his vote. He said he offered to “think about it.”

Cochran voted for the bill “on the merits I think it’s the best position,” he said. “But I’m a very strong supporter of the President, and I think that he should be able to make a case for his veto . . . . Whatever decision I make will be in the public interest.”

Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), who also voted for the bill, declined to say how he would vote on the override. “I haven’t been contacted by the President, but I have been contacted by just about everybody else. I won’t tell you what my intentions are . . . but it won’t be a problem for me.”

Democrats, unable to beat the President in any veto fight since he took office in 1989, hope they can reap support among consumers angered by the rapid rise in cable charges since the industry was deregulated in 1984.

For example, Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.), who will be working hard to secure a vote to override, is incensed because cable fees in his hometown of Waterville have increased 177% in six years.

The Democrats are eager to gain a political advantage by handing the President a highly publicized defeat in the midst of his hard-fought reelection campaign. The Democrats also hope to embarrass the White House by drawing attention to the cable connection of the President’s son Neil, who works for TransMedia Communications in Houston.

The company is part of a cable and programming conglomerate controlled by Bill Daniels, an important Republican campaign contributor who has been fighting hard against the cable legislation. Daniels has said that if the President’s veto is overridden and the cable bill becomes law, he will fight it in court.

Another strong supporter of the President, religious broadcaster Pat Robertson, also has been working to defeat the bill. Robertson has lucrative financial interests in the Family Channel. If cable rates are regulated by the federal government, the cable operators presumably would have less money available to buy Family Channel programs.

The bill passed both houses of Congress by substantial margins, after years of growing complaints by consumers. Cable rates climbed 60% in the past five years, about twice the rate of inflation.

The bill requires the federal government to set “reasonable” charges for the basic tier of service: the local television stations connected with the ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox networks, independent stations, public television outlets, and the channels run by local governments and school boards.

The second tier of service, the variety of channels carrying sports, news, music videos and other programs, would have prices regulated if consumers complained.

The “premium” channels, including HBO, Showtime and Disney, and boxing matches and music concerts carried as pay-per-view events, would remain free of price regulations.

“It is difficult to understand why President Bush does not believe something should be done immediately about skyrocketing cable rates, poor service and no competition,” said Gene Kimmelman, legislative director for Consumer Federation of America, which has formed an alliance with television broadcasters to lobby for the bill.

The TV stations favor the bill because it would enable them to collect revenues for the first time from cable operators who carry the broadcasters’ programs.

The producers of movies and television shows strongly oppose the bill because they would not share any of the new revenues going to the broadcasters.

Washington bureau chief Jack Nelson and staff writer William J. Eaton contributed to this story.