Senate Passes Clinton Jobless Benefits Bill

WASHINGTON —  The Senate Wednesday approved a $5.7-billion measure that would extend unemployment benefits for an estimated 2 million workers, handing President Clinton a victory in the first--although perhaps the easiest--test of his economic plan.

Senate Democrats and a handful of Republicans banded together to approve the bill, 66 to 33. Although the House already had voted on the measure, a decision by the Senate to add a provision freezing congressional salaries at $133,644 this year and forgoing next year’s 2.1% raise will require a second vote in the House, which is expected today. The bill then will be sent to Clinton for his signature.

Republican opponents argued that passage of the jobless benefits would swell the federal deficit by billions of dollars. But they failed in a 57-43 party-line vote to gain approval of an amendment that would have required a reduction in government spending to pay for the expanded benefits.

Democratic advocates--accusing Republicans of prolonging gridlock--said that spending reductions and tax increases in other parts of the President’s program would offset the cost of the additional jobless benefits.

That not a single Democrat voted against the measure may bode well for the Administration, indicating that the White House may be able to muster the support of even conservative party members. Some of those Democrats have been grumbling that the Clinton economic plan contains too much spending and too few budget cuts.

White House spokesman George Stephanopoulos said that the Administration is “pleased with the vote.”

But Administration officials acknowledged that they may have a tough time retaining such solid support when voting begins on provisions that are less popular than extending jobless pay to out-of-work Americans. And it was clear that Republican opposition remains intense.

The White House strategy is to bring the economic package up in a series of votes, scheduling those that are politically easiest first. The hope is that after members of Congress have been on record favoring parts of the package they will be less likely to desert the Administration in later votes.

Separately Wednesday, Leon E. Panetta, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, met on Capitol Hill with a group of conservative Democrats who have pushed to add about $60 billion in spending cuts to Clinton’s package, which currently would reduce federal spending by $223 billion over four years.

After the meeting, participants said that considerable progress had been made toward solidifying Clinton’s support among the conservatives. “We don’t want to slow down the whole package,” said Rep. Timothy J. Penny (D-Minn.), one of the leaders of the conservative group. “The public will not be impressed if we bog down.”

Under the provisions of the unemployment bill, jobless workers in California and five other states with the highest unemployment would be eligible for an additional 26 weeks of benefits. Workers in other states with lower unemployment rates would be entitled to an additional 20 weeks of benefits.

Jobless workers would be able to apply for the extended benefits until Oct. 3, with payments continuing until next Jan. 15.

Fifty-six Democrats, including both California senators, and 10 Republicans voted for the legislation, while 33 Republicans opposed it. One Democrat, Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, was absent. While the bill ultimately was approved by an overwhelming margin, the battle over the proposal by Sen. Bob Packwood (R-Ore.) to cut spending to pay for the extended benefits became the first Senate showdown on Clinton’s economic package.

Every Democrat voted to kill Packwood’s amendment and every Republican supported it, indicating political polarization over the President’s plan to revive the economy and cut the deficit.

“This amendment is an attempt to torpedo the President’s economic program,” said Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.). His GOP counterpart, Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas, termed it a watershed vote, adding: “This is going to set the standard for whether we pay for things or whether we just spend.”

As the debate dragged through its second day--and the midnight Saturday expiration date for the current program loomed--some Democrats accused their GOP colleagues of stalling.

“From where I come from, this is what people don’t like about government,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). “I think we were sent here to break the gridlock.”

Sen. Jim Sasser (D-Tenn.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said that he saw an emerging GOP plot. “There is a strategy developing here to slow things down, to reinstitute the old gridlock that Americans are so sick of,” he said.

But Republicans insisted that they were just trying to impose fiscal responsibility by requiring that the extended benefits be paid for by reducing spending, rather than by more borrowing that would raise the deficit.

Times staff writer David Lauter contributed to this story.