Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, May 3, 1990 TAG: 9005030524
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A15 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: RAY L. GARLAND
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
A first year doesn't make a record any more than a dark suit makes a statesman. But Robb was hardly a novice or a non-entity when he gained the Senate. And he had a long history of speechifying on the need for courageous action to reverse the tide of sloth that has put the nation in hock.
When Robb is given a chance to vote yea or nay, there is a hint of that concern. But only a hint, and scant evidence of exerting leadership toward a coherent vision of true fiscal responsibility.
It is commonplace to observe that most of the work of the Senate is done in committee. When you examine every floor vote during a single year, as I just did, you can only hope that some work gets done in committee. The number of serious issues seriously dealt with on the floor during 1989 was extremely small.
The only floor amendment offered by Robb proposed to allow the president to seek military aid for non-communist forces in Cambodia. Bush no doubt will be glad to learn he has the Senate's permission to do what the Constitution clearly permits him to do anyway.
On his first test of courage, in the year's most dramatic episode, Robb flunked: the president's nomination of John Tower to be secretary of defense. Only 12 times in American history has a president's choice for the Cabinet been rejected.
Robb was required to rise above the "Borking" of a man whose long career had been marked by an absence of sanctimony. But he could not find it within his soul to disappoint Sen. Sam Nunn of Georgia, who expected to function not only as Robb's mentor, but also as de facto secretary of defense.
That cowardly vote was somewhat redeemed when he rejected the "Borking" of Donald Gregg, the president's choice as ambassador to South Korea. The irony is that Gregg, with his CIA ties, was probably as unwise a choice for that sensitive post as Tower, with all his political and military experience, was a wise choice for defense.
But the issue above all on which Robb promised to build his reputation was fiscal conservatism. If he has been no tower of strength, he has also been no bowl of jelly.
In broad policy terms, the most significant fiscal vote taken was on an amendment freezing federal outlays for 1990 at 1989 levels, exempting only Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. The notion was rejected 82-18, but Robb voted for the "freeze" while Sen. John Warner voted against it.
On a vote to cap the increase in expenditures for Senate committees at 5 percent, Robb voted with the minority to cut costs. Warner did not.
But these largely symbolic votes pale in comparison with the budget-busters that Robb consistently favored. His was a dependable vote supporting the aspirations of liberal Democrats to create a new federal entitlement for day care for pre-school children. The cost of the program was projected to start at $1.75 billion a year, but we can be certain of its ultimate destination in double digits.
Robb even voted to kill language permitting the states to use some of the funds to grant tax credits for low-income families with one parent caring for children at home. Warner supported the home-care tax credit, and consistently voted against a broad grant of federal authority to fund and regulate pre-school day care.
When the 1989 Senate convened, senior citizens were in shock to discover that Congress had expected the more affluent of them to bear the cost of new benefits under the 1988 Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act. While the grant of new benefits was broad, the bill would have required some seniors to pay a surtax of as much as $800 a year. The law was ultimately repealed.
But in a key vote to keep most of the benefits but reduce the maximum surtax to $200, Robb voted to do it; Warner did not. The effect of this and a subsequent Robb-backed proposal would have been to increase by many billions the burden of funding Medicare on working taxpayers.
While the idea thankfully hasn't prospered, Robb is very much on record favoring mandatory national service for all young Americans. It's hard to believe that a workable program of universal service (shades of Mussolini!) could be carried out for less than $30 billion a year.
When Robb had the chance to make largely symbolic gestures supporting fiscal restraint, he did so. But when real issues hung in the balance, he more often than not joined the big spenders. He was, however, one of the more moderate Democrats, supporting the president's position more often (73 percent) than his own party's leadership (69 percent).
If some conservatives are finding fault with Warner, they might think about what they could receive. And Robb is probably the most conservative Democrat this state is currently capable of sending to the Congress.
by CNB