Checking and Balancing

By Hugh Sidey

The Presidency

"We're arriving at the sensible center," contends Norman Ornstein, Catholic University's government scholar now on leave at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington. "This Government is working just about as well as any system could."

Such heresy is the trademark of the genial Ornstein. He listens patiently to the endless yammering of the special interests and the experts, then gently suggests that they step back and look at the forest instead of their own imperfect tree. "James Madison [the Federalist) would be pleased if he were here," declares Ornstein. "The best features of the checks and balances are in play. We are not being dominated by sets of insidious special interests. We are arriving at a set of centrist and sensible policies."

Consider the signing of the Social Security rescue bill last Wednesday. Three codgers, who together have spent more than two centuries on this planet, assembled on the chilled South Lawn of the White House. Ronald Reagan, 72, signed cheerfully. Thomas P. O'Neill, 70, spoke passionately. Congressman Claude Pepper, 82, gave his fervent blessing. Three months ago they were ready to choke one another. Now they smiled.

The ceremony was only one reminder that our Government dawdles, wastes, flubs, bumbles--but works. Something is always out of plumb in Washington, and many interested people have come to help out. On some nights the crowded federal city has a significance gap. Stories and lamentations about agency favoritism, staff frictions, congressional capriciousness obscure the sum. "The bottom line is good," insists Ornstein.

Reagan jolted the place out of 50 years of slovenly habits. One of the laws of the political universe is that people who spend other people's money sooner or later become indifferent to the source and careless with the wealth. They need periodic kicks in the pants. Reagan delivered one. But he has gone too far in a number of ways and is being shouldered back to center. The defense budget has been cut and will be cut more. The MX missile will not be based in a "big bird" flapping about the heavens, but will be put into old silos in the ground to save about $33 billion.

Wherever one looks on Pennsylvania Avenue, sharp corners are being rounded, excesses are being contained. When he came into office, Reagan was not very interested in arms control. Preachers, professors and pundits have forced his attention. James Watt insulted the Beach Boys and was squelched by Nancy Reagan. When it appeared the President was forgetting about those suffocating $200 billion deficits, a memo from Budgetman David Stockman was leaked pleading for action lest the red ink extend "as far as the eye can see."

One correction deserves another. Kenneth Adelman is busy as director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. He hung by his thumbs for two months while a group of Senators played President, not their job. They were rebuked, and Adelman was confirmed. Reagan's covert operations in Central America got more attention than he anticipated and slowed him down in using the CIA in Nicaragua and sending more military advisers to El Salvador. But Reagan will have another say this week in a speech before a joint session of Congress.

Ornstein suggests it is time for academics to redefine "government." True, its heart still is the courts, the Congress and the Executive. But the special interests, the media, the experts have grabbed a larger share of the power. We pay a price sometimes in delay and frustration. "There is the old saying that one should never watch laws or sausage being made," says Ornstein. "We've opened up this Government so much that it is like having an entire sausage factory on the nightly news. The process may not look like much, but the product is good." This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.