Robert C. Byrd: Child of the Appalachian Coalfields

21 WEST VIRGINIA ON THE GO

Chapter 21 z WEST VIRGINIA ON THE GO arly in January 1992, an article by James Risen in the Los Angeles Times commented on my ability to get things done in Washington for West Virginia. “Byrd’s pork barrel deals have prompted the kind of shock and outrage from his colleagues that has rarely been seen here since Jimmy Stewart filibustered Claude Raines’s crooked dam project in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” The article continued: “Perhaps Byrd’s biggest mistake was that he failed to follow convention and work through a bunch of shadowy lobbyists ; he has instead done ‘pork’ the old fashioned way—by dint of his brute power over the legislative process.” Risen wrote: “In 1989, Byrd surprised official Washington by stepping down as Senate majority leader to become chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. To most political pundits, it was a puzzling move; after all, as majority leader, Byrd was a national figure. He was trading in the status of statesman for the grubby world of an obscure committee post, and few outside the Senate saw the logic in it. Yet, Byrd, a Senator since 1959 (and a Congressman even before that, dating to 1953) understood where real power lay in Congress. At least the kind of power that was useful to West Virginia.” Risen’s article was but one of many that were being written in those days about my “bringing home the bacon” to West Virginia, and its publication by the Los Angeles Times was clear evidence that Americans from coast to coast, more than ever before, were learning that West Virginia is a separate state rather than the western part of Virginia. E 534 chapter 21  Byrd Scholarships  On February 21, I announced that the 1992 Higher Education Act contained language, included at my request, to expand the National Robert C. Byrd Honors Scholarship Program. “The Byrd Scholarships are awarded on the basis of outstanding scholastic achievement,” I said.“Expanding the scholarships to four years provides a greater opportunity to reward students who work hard to excel in academics.” I stated that under the planned expansion, the Byrd Scholarships, currently a one-year, $1,500 stipend, would henceforth be awarded for four years at $1,500 annually—in other words, a total of $6,000. “Our country is facing tremendous challenges in the emerging global economy,” I declared. “The Byrd Scholarship program is intended to be an incentive to those students who will ultimately answer those challenges and lead our country in future economic competition.” In West Virginia, a panel of members from the West Virginia Department of Education and the central office of the State College and Universities System selected the Byrd Scholars.  “Mr. Intimidation”  In February 1992, the Republicans tried to attach an amendment, cosponsored by Senators John McCain of Arizona and Dan Coats of Indiana, to a bill which would give President George H. W. Bush line item veto authority. After McCain and Coats had completed their speeches, I spoke for six hours. Having been prepared for this effort on the part of McCain and Coats, I came to the floor armed with a batch of speeches that I had written in advance, because I knew that, sooner or later, the Republicans would go for the line item veto. It was a good issue on which proponents could play the demagog. “The power of the purse is the taproot of the tree of Anglo-Saxon/ American liberty,” I said. “It is not a power that should be shared by kings or presidents. If we gave the president the line item veto and if he vetoed every penny in the budget for domestic discretionary spending, he would still not balance the budget. He would fall far short.” I also cited the words of OMB director Richard Darman, who had acknowledged that a line item veto, “in and of itself, is not directly a significant way to cut the deficit. What it does do is, it transfers a degree of power to the executive branch and gives the president a stronger hand in negotiations.” west virginia on the go 535 That was what I feared, because with the power to kill individual projects, a president could punish those who voted against him, reward others who voted with him, and virtually dictate policy, as well as promote partisan political interests:“If the chief executive were ever to...