With major 11th-hour concessions from President Reagan, the Senate Tuesday night voted 53-46 to approve $14 million for the contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua`s Sandinista government.
Less than 2 hours later, the Democratic-controlled House rejected funding for the contras by a vote of 248-180, a rebuff to Reagan`s Central America policy that had been expected.
The House action set the stage for a crucial vote Wednesday on Democratic and Republican alternatives for humanitarian aid to the contras. If the House approves any of the alternatives, the issue will move into a House-Senate conference committee where differences must be hammered out.
Secretary of State George Shultz said the administration supports a House proposal by Minority Leader Robert Michel (R., Ill.) that would send $14 million in humanitarian aid to the Nicaraguan rebels through the U.S. Agency for International Development.
”We are working hard on that,” Shultz said. ”We are in there to win.” Reagan called the Senate action ”a historic vote for freedom and democracy in Central America,” but many Democrats warned that it was an open- ended commitment to deeper U.S. military involvement in the region.
For Reagan to even get the measure through the Senate, which his party controls, he had to agree to pursue negotiations and consider economic sanctions rather than a CIA-financed war conducted by opponents of the Sandinista regime.
There was an immediate favorable reaction from the Nicaraguan government to the talks proposal.
The proposal ”changes totally the situation” and will be closely examined, a spokesman for Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega said in Managua. Reagan promised to ”scrupulously” observe limitations that the aid be used only for ”food, medicine, clothing and other assistance” for the contras` ”surival and well-being.”
The promises came in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Robert Dole (R., Kan.).
”The President came a long way, but he assured the contras there would be some aid and we would not leave them bleeding,” Dole said.
Ten Senate Democrats voted for the administration`s aid plan, and nine Republicans voted against it. Alan Dixon (D., Ill.) voted for the measure and Paul Simon (D., Ill.) against.
”The President has gone far more than halfway in meeting the objections of this side of the aisle,” said Sen. David Boren (D., Okla.), who voted for the aid.
But many Democrats continued to express concerns over the language of the resolution approving funds for ”military or paramilitary operations in Nicaragua.”
The resolution is an ”open-ended authorization” for military action in Nicaragua,” Sen. John Glenn (D., Ohio) said in the floor debate. ”We`re not voting on letters.
”This is an ammo vote. . . . It`s an advanced Gulf of Tonkin resolution if I`ve ever heard one,” he said, referring to the 1964 congressional resolution that President Lyndon Johnson used to expand U.S. involvement in Vietnam.
Vice President George Bush, accompanied by Shultz, led the administration`s last-minute lobbying effort on Capitol Hill.
”It`s not a question of winning or losing,” Bush said. ”It`s a question of whether you stand for (a) certain principle. And the President has a certain principle.”
Under legislation passed by Congress last year, which set aside $14 million for the contras, the House and Senate must approve the release of the funds. If they pass differing measures they must negotiate a compromise to free the money.
In his letter to Dole, Reagan called the vote a ”moment of judgment”
and went further than he had been willing to earlier in meeting Democratic concerns.
Dole said Reagan`s letter was a ”carefully crafted effort to achieve bipartisan support.”
”I am convinced the President is committed (to) what he says in the letter,” he said.
In the letter, Reagan said the money will be used for humanitarian aid,
”not for arms, ammunition and weapons of war,” through the remainder of the fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30.
In effect, Reagan went beyond his compromise offered three weeks ago that the money be used for humanitarian aid only during a cease-fire between the contras and the Sandinista government, but could buy arms and munitions for the rebels if peace talks failed after 60 days.
Reagan pledged that the limitation on use of the money would be
”scrupulously observed,” but he didn`t specify whether the money would be funneled to the rebels though the CIA or another government agency.
Shultz said the money would be funneled through the CIA, an issue that upsets some lawmakers because of the CIA`s past role of covertly financing the rebels military activities. At the same time, however, Reagan`s letter says no other government funds beyond the $14 million will go to the ”armed democratic resistance.”
”I recognize the importance some senators have attached to bilateral talks . . . and the establishment of a cease-fire,” Reagan said. ”I intend to resume bilateral talks with the government of Nicaragua and will instruct our representatives in those talks to press for a cease-fire as well as a church-mediated dialogue between the contending Nicaraguan factions.”
But, he added, ”peace negotiations must not become a cover for deception and delay.”
He also said he would, as urged by some Democrats, ”favorably consider” economic sanctions against Nicaragua if it continues its ”intransigence on issues affecting our national security.”
The letter, drafted in Dole`s office by White House national security adviser Robert McFarlane and Shultz, met many of the conditions that Democrats had raised in earlier negotiations with the White House.
Senate Minority Leader Robert Byrd (D., W.Va.), who voted against the measure, said he was pleased Reagan intended to resume negotiations with Nicaragua but expressed concern over Reagan`s use of the phrase ”other assistance,” which he said ”could very well involve trucks and earth-moving equipment.”
”That phrase,” Byrd said, ”is big enough for an Amtrak train to go through,” and he said it was ”no way to legislate” for the President to produce a letter at ”the 11th hour and 59 minutes.”
Earlier in the day, the White House had broken off compromise talks with Senate Democrats.
Part of the problem, said Sen. David Durenberger (R., Minn.), chairman of the Intelligence Committee, was that the Democrats ”want to write every part of Nicaraguan policy on the Senate floor.”
Republican leaders were concerned that they risked losing some votes from conservative members of their party if they appeared to be letting the Democrats have too large a role in defining administration policy. By offering the concessions in this way, the White House is able to appear not to be letting the Senate Democrats write its foreign policy.
”What we`re saying is the President is still in charge of foreign policy,” said Sen. Richard Lugar (R., Ind.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.
The vote climaxed an emotional, daylong foreign-policy debate on the Senate floor reminicent of the Vietnam War era.
”Let`s turn our back on the idea of overthrowing a government,” said Sen. Tom Harkin (D., Iowa), a Vietnam veteran who returned this week from a visit to Managua with a peace proposal from Ortega that the administration quickly rejected.
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.), said he was convinced that ”if the United States remains committed to overthrowing the Sandinistas, the contras cannot do it alone. Sooner or later, the President will either abandon them to defeat or send in American military force.”.
As votes approached, the debate turned increasingly partisan.
Lugar hinted that Republicans will blame any new communist successes in Central America on the Democrats.
In the House, Rep. Newt Gingrich (R., Ga.) attacked ”ostrich Democrats who would have us believe there`s no danger from Nicaragua.”
