
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: THURSDAY, September 2, 1993                   TAG: 9312300007
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A14   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

PARTY CRASHER

COMPARED to the parliaments of most world democracies, not much of a premium is put on party loyalty in the U.S. Congress.

That's why Republican solidarity against President Clinton's deficit-reduction package was so unusual. Unfortunately, that potential gain for political accountability was nullifed by the GOP's failure to put forward a serious alternative.

With the North American Free Trade Agreement, it's back to business as usual - or worse.

It's no surprise that many Republicans support the president on NAFTA and many Democrats oppose him. Indeed, it appears that only with significant GOP backing in both houses can the measure be passed. That's dandy.

The problem is the attitude of the Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives, where NAFTA's prospects are dicey.

Passage of the free-trade accord is one of the Clinton administration's top two legislative priorities now (the other being health-care reform). Yet Speaker Tom Foley, No. 1 Democrat in the House, says that, while he personally favors NAFTA, he won't push for it. Majority Leader Richard Gephardt, No. 2 Democrat in the House, opposes it, though reportedly is still talking with the White House about changes that might make it acceptable. (Thanks a lot.)

But it is Majority Whip David Bonior, No. 3 in the House leadership, who is turning in the most disgraceful peformance. Not only does he oppose the pact; he says he'll use the resources of his office - the purpose of which is supposed to be lining up votes f+iforo a president of his own party - to organize opposition to NAFTA.

Bonior represents a blue-collar union district near Detroit; his betrayal of the president on the trade issue is not apt to hurt him with the folks back home. Still, he had options. He could have supported NAFTA and, fully aware it might cost him re-election, sought to educate his constituents as to the long-term benefits of free trade. (There was a time, before Congress became so careerist, when putting principle above re-election was not the rarity it is today.)

Short of such political suicide, Bonior at least could oppose NAFTA more quietly - and refrain from using the Democratic whip's office to lead opposition to priority legislation from a Democratic administration.

Perhaps the whip needs disciplining.

by CNB