Clinton, GOP Compromise on Budget, but Not Enough

The Clinton administration and congressional Republicans pared back their demands slightly in their budgetary tug of war Tuesday but remained far apart as they girded for a final push in the annual end-of-session battle over money bills.

After a meeting with congressional leaders, White House officials listed four key budget priorities on which the administration would insist: adding money to hire 100,000 teachers, recruiting 50,000 more police officers, paying back United Nations’ dues and removing from the final legislation 20 anti-environment riders.

The list represented a decided narrowing from Clinton’s previous demands, reflecting compromises on other spending issues and a recognition by the administration that it will not be able to win GOP assent on all of the president’s earlier initiatives.

At the same time, Senate Republicans served notice that they will not go along with the full 1.4% across-the-board spending cut proposed by their House counterparts, sending House GOP leaders scurrying to scale back their proposed reduction before sending it to the floor.

The modest shifts by both sides came as the budget negotiations entered their second week with little progress on any of the major issues and the possibility that lawmakers may have to remain in session until Thanksgiving to come to any agreement.

The House is expected to consider the proposed 1.4% spending cut when it takes up a massive money bill covering the departments of Labor, Education and Health and Human Services, possibly later this week. But the cut may be pared closer to 1%, in view of the Senate’s position.

Congressional leaders will also have to seek new stopgap spending authority within a few days to continue government operations while the budget negotiations go on. Clinton has hinted that he will probably sign such legislation, but not without some grumbling.

Both sides renewed their public relations efforts Tuesday in an attempt to gain the political high ground, with Republicans holding a round of news conferences and the White House bringing out a spate of Cabinet officers to rail against the proposed 1.4% cut.

It was clear from the machinations that neither side yet feels under sufficient pressure to get down to final negotiating. House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) told reporters, “I think you have to anticipate another couple of weeks.”

White House officials repeated Clinton’s vow to veto any across-the-board spending reduction. House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) dismissed the plan as a “mindless exercise.”

Nevertheless, House Republican leaders continued to insist on such spending cuts, contending they were needed to avoid having to dip into the surplus in the Social Security trust fund. And the Republicans insist all government agencies can absorb the cuts simply by eliminating waste and fraud.

House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas) told reporters that if Clinton were to veto legislation mandating a 1.4% across-the-board cut, it would be up to the president to find other proposed spending reductions to prevent “a raid on Social Security.”

A few minutes later, however, Senate Republican leaders made clear that they are far less enthusiastic about the proposal and would be unlikely to support any across-the-board cut larger than 1%, at most.

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) told reporters that Senate Republicans would “prefer to have the [across-the-board] cut as small as possible.” And he sounded dubious that even that would pass by a very wide margin.

In an effort to blunt criticism that the proposed across-the-board cut exempted the 3.4% pay hike lawmakers have voted themselves for next January, House GOP leaders announced that their own pay increase would be pared as part of the deal.

The anti-environment riders that Clinton wants lawmakers to drop from the Interior Department appropriation bill include proposals to allow more dumping of mining waste and to delay proposed extraction fees for oil companies.

Times staff writers James Gerstenzang and Richard Simon contributed to this story.