THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, January 23, 1996 TAG: 9601230009
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A12 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 65 lines
To cut a deal or not to cut a deal. That used to be the question, but it now appears likely that a Republican Congress and a Democratic president are going to agree to disagree.
President Clinton dragged his feet before submitting a plan to balance the budget using Congressional Budget Office numbers. The delay allowed him to attack Republicans while tacking to the right himself. He's now moved close enough to GOP positions on tax cuts and Medicare to make Republicans seem intransigent.
Republicans have cooperated in tarnishing their image by seeming to insist on capitulation. Both sides now seem willing to take the argument to November even though they are so close to a deal one could easily be reached.
The consequences of giving the voters nine more months of posturing instead of a rational compromise that puts the country on the path to a balanced budget while spreading the pain equally are unclear, but the Republicans are at risk.
A number of immediate decisions loom. Will the government be shut down again? The last shutdown backfired, making the Republicans look callous and foolish. And it cost $1.5 billion. Will the government be permitted to default on its debt? House majority leader Dick Armey has all but promised it. To actually do it would have unpredictable consequences and earn Republicans a reputation for recklessness and the country inflated interest rates for a generation.
Voters already feel the politicians are playing games, now they may decide the name of the game is chicken. Some Republican hard-liners - notably Majority Whip Rep. Tom DeLay - favor keeping the government open but funding operations they dislike at a fraction of their usual level. Instead of an orderly downsizing this would squeeze government in a capricious and inefficient manner. A private enterprise would never downsize in so feckless and random a way.
Meanwhile, President Clinton has been ceded the high ground. He's playing the part of the wise steward, the protector of the poor, the young and the elderly, portraying himself as the soul of sweet reasonableness prepared to compromise, but confronted with uncompromising zealots.
Though the Republicans are right on much of the substance in this debate and have been courageous in putting entitlement cuts on the table, they have gotten themselves on the wrong side of the image contest largely through overplaying their hand. They counted on the president to cave in. When he was only willing to meet them part of the way, they were unwilling to take yes for an answer. This could turn into a public-relations bungle worthy of Hillary Clinton.
Even if Republicans don't intend to deal, they need to keep government open and stop appearing like vandals. They must reassure markets there will be no default and resolve to debate the big issues at the heart of this disagreement in an orderly way.
Voters are eager for progress rather than gridlock and pragmatism rather than partisanship. If they conclude the Republicans can't be trusted to rightsize the government or are incapable of cooperation, many may drift back to the Democrats or embrace a third-party candidate. The stunning Republican victory of 1994 could be reversed in 1996. by CNB