Going Reagan Billions Better

A Senate panel cuts spending even more than the President did

The 21 men and one woman seated around tables pushed together to form a hollow square called out numbers in what seemed a mystifying code. Aides chalked the figures on blackboards, erased them almost instantly, then chalked new ones. A horse-betting parlor? Commodities trading pit? No, the meeting room of the Senate Budget Committee, which last week gave a flying start to Ronald Reagan's plan to slash federal spending.

In a mere four days, the committee voted to reduce planned expenditures in fiscal 1982, which starts Oct. 1, by $36.4 billion—actually $2.3 billion more than Reagan asked.* Combining bluster and blarney, Chairman Pete Domenici of New Mexico easily held his eleven fellow Republicans together against all attempts by the ten Democrats to narrow reductions in social programs. Frustrated and divided, the Democrats in the end joined in a unanimous vote for the full package. "We are wreaking unbelievable havoc on the lives of millions of poor Americans," mourned Ohio Democrat Howard Metzenbaum —just before he meekly murmured aye on the last roll call.

Strangely, the victory caused no exultation at the White House, where Reagan's aides seemed rather apprehensive. Last week's vote, they cautioned, must be upheld by a long series of further actions in the Democratic-controlled House as well as the G.O.P.-dominated Senate. Also the comparatively low approval rating the President now has in polls (see box) might make those forthcoming fights harder to win. One political aide went so far as to say, "We've lost some momenturn, and I don't know how we will get it back."

There were some reasons for these jitters. An effort by members of Reagan's kitchen cabinet to launch a lobbying campaign for budget and tax cuts fell apart last week. The Coalition for a New Beginning, which was to organize the grassroots effort, disbanded after some of Reagan's corporate supporters complained that they felt they were being dunned for contributions. Also housing starts fell 25% in February, and industrial production declined for the first time in seven months, pointing to a possible spring recession. That, to put it mildly, would not help boost the President's poll ratings.

Despite such concerns, Reagan easily quelled a potential bipartisan congressional rebellion against his budget plans before it ever really got started. When the President journeyed to Capitol Hill for a meeting with Republican congressional leaders on Tuesday, he had to contend with two bits of bad news. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had just predicted that federal spending might soar as much as $25 billion above Reagan's forecast for the next fiscal year, and that the deficit might consequently balloon to a record $70 billion, vs. $45 billion projected by the White House. Reason: the CBO doubted that inflation and interest rates will come down anywhere near as rapidly as the Administration expects. Partly because of this gloomy forecast, Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee agreed during a six-hour meeting Monday night to support a move to trim cost-of-living increases scheduled next year in Social Security pensions and veterans' benefits, two programs that Reagan has ruled sacrosanct.