$500-Billion Budget OKd Decisively in House Vote

The House Tuesday night overwhelmingly passed the massive budget deal struck by GOP congressional leaders and the White House, despite opposition from dozens of conservative Republicans who complained that the bill spends too much while cutting taxes too little.

The vote in favor of the $500-billion-plus appropriations bill was 333 to 95. The Senate also debated the measure Tuesday and is expected to approve it today, wrapping up a stormy session of Congress destined to be best remembered for the impeachment inquiry launched against President Clinton.

The final House vote was a surprisingly bipartisan capstone to the highly partisan year in Congress, one in which Republicans and Democrats were consistently unable to agree on major issues. Ultimately, more Democrats voted for the spending bill than Republicans. And the GOP foes of the measure far outnumbered the Democrats voting against it--64 to 31.

To stem conservative defections, once-strident Republican leaders urged their troops to recognize that the deal was the best they could reach with a Democratic president. They also stressed that it contains such GOP priorities as a large increase in the defense budget and significantly more money for anti-drug initiatives than Clinton had sought.

“In a free society you have to have give and take,” said House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). “There is no responsible vote except yes.”

Gingrich directed sharp rebukes at the bill’s GOP critics, saying that “perfectionist” conservatives had no realistic alternative to compromise with a liberal Democratic president.

“It is easy to get up and say, ‘Vote no,’ ” Gingrich said. “Then what would you do? Those of us who have grown up and matured . . . understand that we have to work together on the big issues.”

Lawmakers from both parties and in both chambers--given little time to review the 4,000-page, 40-pound bill produced in secret talks among a handful of top officials--howled at the way the legislation emerged from the contemporary equivalent of a smoke-filled room.

“Anybody who tells me they have a handle on this bill is like the local weather forecaster: They are either a fool or a newcomer,” said Sen. Conrad R. Burns (R-Mont.).

Among California’s 52 House members, Republicans voting against the bill were Reps. Brian P. Bilbray (San Diego), Tom Campbell (San Jose), Frank Riggs (Windsor), Dana Rohrabacher (Huntington Beach) and Ed Royce (Fullerton). Democrats voting no were Reps. Gary A. Condit (Ceres), Bob Filner (San Diego), Barbara Lee (Oakland) and George Miller (Martinez).

The must-pass bill, needed to keep the government running for the next year, became a magnet for all manner of legislative desiderata--from major policy changes to parochial local projects. In this hodgepodge, legislation to carry out the Chemical Weapons Convention and a major public housing overhaul sit side-by-side with $1.5 million for dredging in Marina del Rey and a measure to block restrictions on serving peanuts on airplanes.

$20 Billion Taken From Surplus

The bill, which combines eight unfinished appropriations bills for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1, provides money for a broad range of government operations, including funding for 10 Cabinet departments and the entire foreign assistance budget. It also dips into the projected $70-billion budget surplus to provide $20 billion for peacekeeping in Bosnia, aid to farmers and other activities deemed “emergencies” by Congress.

In appropriating this money, Republicans broke their pledge not to spend the surplus for anything but tax cuts. Democrats broke their promise to reserve it all for Social Security.

The overall bill’s key elements include $1.2 billion for the first installment of Clinton’s initiative to hire 100,000 new teachers, $18 billion the president sought for the International Monetary Fund and the $690 million anti-drug package pushed by Republicans.

Included in the bill are several provisions of importance to California and its key industries, such as a fatter defense budget, an increase in the ceiling for immigration of high-technology workers and millions of dollars for transportation projects.

Despite the efforts of GOP leaders to cast the agreement in its best light, some conservative Republicans cited a variety of reasons for opposing the deal. These included the decision to spend part of the budget surplus and the accord’s failure to cut taxes significantly. Many of these Republican critics first were elected to Congress in 1994, part of that year’s huge GOP victory.

“I came here four years ago talking about tax cuts, smaller government and doing the right thing,” said Rep. Jon Christensen (R-Neb.). “This is not what I came to do, to vote for a bill that . . . has very little tax cuts in it. This is an embarrassment.”

But, said Rep. Lois Capps (D-Santa Barbara), “this budget bill is a victory for the American people. It is a victory over mindless partisanship and it is a terrific victory for education.”

Although the bill’s basic outlines had been announced last week with great fanfare by White House and GOP leaders, lawmakers and their aides worked through the weekend to settle dozens of remaining disputes--and to handle a stampede of requests by lawmakers to get pet projects included in the measure.

Typical of the major issues addressed at the last minute was the Chemical Weapons Convention. The treaty, which would ban chemical weapons around the world, had been ratified by the Senate more than a year ago but the House had not passed the legislation required to implement it. That measure was tacked onto the budget bill at the last minute.

Peanut-Free Zone Stymied

Typical of other issues addressed in the bill is the provision concerning peanuts on airliners. Language added to the bill will block a Transportation Department directive requiring airlines to designate areas where peanuts will not be served. The rules were proposed to protect people who are allergic to peanuts. Critics said that it is an overreaction without scientific justification.

A particularly expensive last-minute addition to the bill would funnel $1.7 billion into Medicare to pay for home health care services. The proposal is designed to ease cuts made in payments in last year’s budget-balancing agreement, which, critics said, have forced some home health agencies out of business.

Some of the eleventh-hour deals were aimed at helping lawmakers in tight races for reelection. Sen. Alfonse M. D’Amato (R-N.Y.), facing a strong challenge from Rep. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), won approval of a provision requiring health insurance companies to cover reconstructive surgery after women have mastectomies. Like many Democratic candidates across the country, Schumer’s equation for victory includes strong support from women voters and D’Amato’s proposal clearly was designed to undercut that effort.

Not all the last-minute supplicants succeeded. The bill did not include a proposal from David Kaczynski, the brother of Unabomber Theodore J. Kaczynski, to make tax-free the $1-million reward he received for turning in his brother. David Kaczynski sought the provision so he could have more money to give away to the victims of his brother’s crimes.

Times staff writer Alissa J. Rubin contributed to this story.