Feinstein Learns the Life of a Rookie

This is a story about a first-year senator trying to make her mark and an aging committee chairman putting the newcomer in her place.

The rookie, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), was elected in November, won a seat on the powerful Appropriations Committee and has aggressively fought for her state’s interests.

The veteran, Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W. Va.), is the autocratic chairman of the Appropriations Committee, grand master of parliamentary procedure and author of a two-volume tome on the history of the Senate.

One Senate custom permits Byrd to rank the Democratic members of his committee, and in January he quietly put Feinstein last behind first-year Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.). Byrd did this even though Feinstein, elected to finish Gov. Pete Wilson’s term, assumed office in November and has more seniority than Murray and other freshman senators who were not sworn in until January.

Later, Byrd stymied Feinstein’s efforts to divert more federal education funds to California.

The two episodes reflect the inevitable frustrations of a newcomer such as Feinstein, who wants to shake up the Senate, and the tremendous influence of an old-timer such as Byrd, the 75-year-old former majority leader who still controls the power levers in Congress.

At the moment, Feinstein’s ranking at the bottom of the Appropriations panel is merely an inconvenience. She must sit out of camera view at the far end of the committee room during hearings and speak last among Democrats when she wants to offer a comment or pose a question. But when a much-coveted Appropriations subcommittee chairmanship at some point becomes available, Feinstein will have to wait in line behind Murray.

While Republicans determine committee rank strictly along seniority lines, Democrats decide in secret sessions of the Steering Committee, heavily influenced by the chairman of each panel. One Democratic senator who participated in the selection process said Byrd simply listed Feinstein last and no one challenged him.

Why would Byrd go out of his way to bring Feinstein down a notch?

Byrd refuses to say. Feinstein believes that it was because she favors diluting the Senate’s power by granting the President line-item veto authority over spending programs, a position that Byrd vehemently opposes.

Feinstein, who recognizes the importance of getting along with Byrd, declines to elaborate.

“All I know is that it happened,” Feinstein said. “Was I ever informed? Yes, (Byrd) told me. I made some remonstration, but nothing significant.”

Another clash of sorts occurred in late March when the Senate began considering President Clinton’s economic package. During the debate, Feinstein learned that federal funding formulas favor smaller states and would provide California with only $1.7 million of the $235 million available to educate poor children nationwide.

Feinstein drafted an amendment to the President’s spending package that would increase California’s share to $18.7 million. But Byrd rebuffed her initiative, saying he wanted a clean bill with no amendments in his committee.

Instead, Feinstein planned to offer her amendment when the package came up on the Senate floor.

But before Feinstein could introduce her proposal, Byrd invoked a rarely used legislative procedure that in effect prevented any amendments to the Clinton economic package. Byrd’s tactic, which Feinstein did not even know was permissible, was employed to protect

the proposal from Republican amendments.

Asked if she felt double-crossed by Byrd, Feinstein said: “No, well . . . I really don’t want to get into this.”

Feinstein realizes that she must walk a fine line between deferring to venerable leaders such as Byrd and advancing her legislative agenda on behalf of California. What is important, Feinstein said, is that she is the first Californian in a quarter-century to win a seat on the Appropriations panel. She added that if Byrd did not want her on the committee, she would not have been appointed.

“I have an enormous appreciation for somebody who believes as much as (Byrd) does in this institution,” Feinstein said. “He also runs his committee with an iron hand. I appreciate this. I am going to do my level best to be a productive member of that committee.”

But that does not mean Feinstein will back down. She vows to return to the Senate soon with another proposal to get California its fair share of the education funds.

For his part, Byrd said he is impressed with Feinstein. “In her brief tenure in the Senate, she has proven herself to be effective and persuasive in her statements on the Senate floor. I look forward to working closely with her on issues of importance to this country.”