The House : Ex-Presidents’ Staff Budgets

By a vote of 219 for and 130 against, the House adopted an amendment that cuts fiscal 1986 spending for the staff expenses of ex-presidents.

Former presidents were to receive nearly $300,000 annually for staff support regardless of when they left the White House. The amendment cut this to $250,000 during years five through eight that the president has been out of office, and to $200,000 thereafter.

The amendment, which was attached to an appropriations bill (HR 3036) later sent to the Senate, leaves untouched the $86,200 annual pension for former presidents as well as outlays for Secret Service protection.

Sponsor Andrew Jacobs (D-Ind.) called the measure “the Former Presidents Enough is Enough Taxpayers Relief Act.�

Opponent William Broomfield (R-Mich.) said: “We think nothing of paying athletes, actors and rock stars millions of dollars, sometimes for a single performance. We should, as a token of simple respect, support our ex-presidents in an adequate manner.�

Members voting yes wanted to cut the staff budgets of former presidents.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Beilenson (D) x Rep. Berman (D) x Rep. Dixon (D) x Rep. Levine (D) x Rep. Waxman (D) x

Abortion Funding

The House adopted, 221-199, an amendment to prevent the District of Columbia from spending any of its budget for abortions.

This is probably the strictest anti-abortion language ever approved by the House, because it bans federally supported abortions in the District of Columbia even if the mother’s life is at stake or the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.

By contrast, in the 50 states abortions using federal money are permitted when either of those conditions are present.

The amendment also was unprecedented in that it limited the way District of Columbia officials can spend not only the District’s federal payment but also locally raised revenues such as property and sales tax receipts.

The ban was attached to the fiscal 1986 appropriations bill for the District of Columbia (HR 3067), which was sent to the Senate.

Supporter Robert Dornan (R-Garden Grove) said that in the District of Columbia “for the first time in the history . . . of any major American city, there were more abortions than there were live births.�

Opponent Julian Dixon (D-Los Angeles) said House members should have “the courage and dignity to allow the people here in this District of Columbia to make their own decisions as to what they do with their money.�

Members voting yes wanted to impose tougher anti-abortion restrictions on the District of Columbia.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Beilenson (D) x Rep. Berman (D) x Rep. Dixon (D) x Rep. Levine (D) x Rep. Waxman (D) x