Having won the battle but not the war, Jewish activists here are turning their attention from opposing the balanced budget amendment to the Constitution to protecting programs from Congress’ chopping block.
The senate rejected the balanced budget amendment Thursday by the slimmest of margins. Proponents fell one supporter short of the two-thirds majority required to change the Constitution.
Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), who backs the amendment, voted against it, giving him the right to force lawmakers to vote on the measure later in his congressional session. Dole has threatened to bring the amendment back up for a politically explosive vote during the election campaign in the fall of 1996.
Several Jewish organizations immediately hailed the Senate vote.
“We urge Congress to put aside efforts to tamper with the United States Constitution and to set about the task of making the hard choices necessary for responsible fiscal management,” said a statement issued by the National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council.
The statement, issued by NJCRAC chair Lynn Lyss, cautioned that any plan to address the federal deficit should “not compromise the vital interests and well-being of the American people.”
The American Jewish Congress also was quick to issue a statement, saying it was “pleased that the Senate has turned back the ill-conceived attempt to write one particular federal economic policy into the fundamental law of our land.”
In the statement, Phil Baum, executive director of AJCongress, urged the Senate to “remain steadfast in opposing this dangerous measure.”
Rabbi David Saperstein, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, said, “This vote, more than anything else, restores a sound fiscal approach to composing the budget.”
Jewish groups have expressed concern over a wide range of domestic programs targeted by the congressional axe.
One congressional cost-cutting measure in the foreign sphere has drawn the ire of President Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.
The House Appropriations Committee was expected to adopt a plan to cut Jordan’s promised debt relief from $275 million to $50 million.
The move drew the attention of Rabin, who called Clinton this week to protest the move.
The Israeli prime minister was “upset and somewhat alarmed” by the move, believing it would upset peace efforts in the region, White House spokesman Michael McCurry said.
The Clinton administration pledged to urge Jordan’s debt forgiveness when the Arab country made peace with Israel last year.
“Those who oppose funding and debt forgiveness for Jordan ought to ask themselves the question, how much more expensive would conflict in the Middle East be; how much more expensive would be it be to prepare for war than to deepen and nurture the bonds of peace that are now developing between Israel and Israel’s neighbors?” McCurry said.
The move amounts to “yanking out one of the pillars of American leadership in the world” McCurry said adding that this move has taken “away our ability to support and nurture the peace process.”
The $50 million would pay off only about $125 million of Jordan’s total of $410 million debt, McCurry said.
The Anti-Defamation League voiced its concern over the issue this week. In a letter to members of Congress, the group urged the House to approve full debt relief for Jordan.
“It is imperative that the U.S. live up to its commitments,” ADL National Chairman David Strassler and National Director Abraham Foxman wrote.
“Support for the peace process has been and should continue to be a bipartisan issue which should rise above the differing conceptions of American foreign policy.”
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
