The Republican-controlled Senate Budget Committee voted 16 to 6 yesterday to reject President Reagan's fiscal 1987 budget despite protests that the committee was engaging in "president-bashing."

After the vote, committee Chairman Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) told reporters that he is meeting privately with Sen. Lawton Chiles (D-Fla.), ranking Democrat on the panel, in hopes of coming up with a bipartisan budget resolution, possibly by the middle of next week. "We're very hopeful . . . but we're not there yet," he said.

In a further defeat for the president, a majority of House Republicans joined most of their Democratic colleagues in defying veto threats from the White House and approving a relatively small deficit-reduction measure left over from last year. The tally was 314 to 86, with Republicans voting 92 to 76 for it.

Meanwhile, the Senate began debate on a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget that Reagan has endorsed, but the amendment would allow tax increases to achieve the balance, while Reagan wants a provision outlawing such increases. The amendment seeks to assure balanced budgets after the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit-reduction law expires in 1991.

The Senate Budget Committee has previously rejected Reagan budgets and its vote was no surprise in light of earlier bipartisan criticism of the budget. However, it underscored the deepening difficulties that Reagan's fiscal priorities face in Congress.

"I don't think this budget is just wrong around the edges; it's wrong at the heart," said Sen. Slade Gorton (R-Wash.). Those who supported it said it was useful as a starting point for deliberations.

The vote, coupled with comments Wednesday as the panel began its markup of next year's budget, indicated a potential bipartisan majority on the committee for tax increases as well as a sharp reduction in Reagan's proposed defense spending increase of 8 percent above inflation.

But Domenici warned sternly that defense spending cutbacks and tax increases would not be enough to raise the $38 billion necessary to reach the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit target of $144 billion for fiscal 1987. "It ain't so . . . We can't get there without touching domestic programs," he said.

All of the commitee's Democrats voted against Reagan's budget, along with Republicans Mark Andrews (N.D.), John C. Danforth (Mo.), Robert W. Kasten Jr. (Wis.), Charles E. Grassley (Iowa) and Gorton. Voting for it were Domenici and William L. Armstrong (Colo.), Rudy Boschwitz (Minn.), Orrin G. Hatch (Utah), Dan Quayle (Ind.) and Steven D. Symms (Idaho).

Domenici dismissed the significance of the vote, noting that Congress nearly always rewrites presidential budgets, but Armstrong contended it was an "exercise in president bashing" and several others agreed. "It just shows Congress is putting off getting down to business," Quayle said.

Democrats denied that they were bashing the president. "We're not bashing anyone," said Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D-S.C.). "It's just one budget that doesn't meet the target," he added, in reference to the Congressional Budget Office's conclusion that Reagan's budget falls $16 billion short of the $144 billion deficit target. Sen. J. Bennett Johnston (D-La.) said he likes Reagan "even though his budget is unworkable, mean-spirited and wrong-headed."

James C. Miller III, director of the president's Office of Management and Budget, issued a statement after the vote noting that no president ever had a budget approved "by acclamation"and expressing gratification for the support it got. He pledged cooperation in working with the committee on an alternative.

House Democrats, meanwhile, came in for a lecture from Rep. Lynn Martin (R-Ill.), acting ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee, for inaction on the 1987 budget. "All we have heard so far from the Democrats is President's '87 Budget Rejected Senate Panel Vote Underlines Reagan's Fiscal Difficulties By Helen Dewar Washington Post Staff Writer

The Republican-controlled Senate Budget Committee voted 16 to 6 yesterday to reject President Reagan's fiscal 1987 budget despite protests that the committee was engaging in "president-bashing."

After the vote, committee Chairman Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) told reporters that he is meeting privately with Sen. Lawton Chiles (D-Fla.), ranking Democrat on the panel, in hopes of coming up with a bipartisan budget resolution, possibly by the middle of next week. "We're very hopeful . . . but we're not there yet," he said.

In a further defeat for the president, a majority of House Republicans joined most of their Democratic colleagues in defying veto threats from the White House and approving a relatively small deficit-reduction measure left over from last year. The tally was 314 to 86, with Republicans voting 92 to 76 for it.

Meanwhile, the Senate began debate on a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget that Reagan has endorsed, but the amendment would allow tax increases to achieve the balance, while Reagan wants a provision outlawing such increases. The amendment seeks to assure balanced budgets after the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit-reduction law expires in 1991.

The Senate Budget Committee has previously rejected Reagan budgets and its vote was no surprise in light of earlier bipartisan criticism of the budget. However, it underscored the deepening difficulties that Reagan's fiscal priorities face in Congress.

"I don't think this budget is just wrong around the edges; it's wrong at the heart," said Sen. Slade Gorton (R-Wash.). Those who supported it said it was useful as a starting point for deliberations.

The vote, coupled with comments Wednesday as the panel began its markup of next year's budget, indicated a potential bipartisan majority on the committee for tax increases as well as a sharp reduction in Reagan's proposed defense spending increase of 8 percent above inflation.

But Domenici warned sternly that defense spending cutbacks and tax increases would not be enough to raise the $38 billion necessary to reach the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit target of $144 billion for fiscal 1987. "It ain't so . . . We can't get there without touching domestic programs," he said.

All of the commitee's Democrats voted against Reagan's budget, along with Republicans Mark Andrews (N.D.), John C. Danforth (Mo.), Robert W. Kasten Jr. (Wis.), Charles E. Grassley (Iowa) and Gorton. Voting for it were Domenici and William L. Armstrong (Colo.), Rudy Boschwitz (Minn.), Orrin G. Hatch (Utah), Dan Quayle (Ind.) and Steven D. Symms (Idaho).

Domenici dismissed the significance of the vote, noting that Congress nearly always rewrites presidential budgets, but Armstrong contended it was an "exercise in president bashing" and several others agreed. "It just shows Congress is putting off getting down to business," Quayle said.

Democrats denied that they were bashing the president. "We're not bashing anyone," said Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D-S.C.). "It's just one budget that doesn't meet the target," he added, in reference to the Congressional Budget Office's conclusion that Reagan's budget falls $16 billion short of the $144 billion deficit target. Sen. J. Bennett Johnston (D-La.) said he likes Reagan "even though his budget is unworkable, mean-spirited and wrong-headed."

James C. Miller III, director of the president's Office of Management and Budget, issued a statement after the vote noting that no president ever had a budget approved "by acclamation"and expressing gratification for the support it got. He pledged cooperation in working with the committee on an alternative.

House Democrats, meanwhile, came in for a lecture from Rep. Lynn Martin (R-Ill.), acting ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee, for inaction on the 1987 budget. "All we have heard so far from the Democrats is criticism of President Reagan's budget," she said. "We get the feeling that the Democrats in the House are more interested in budget sabotage than in budget cooperation."

The leftover deficit-reduction measure approved by the House would save $18.1 billion over three years, reduced severely from its earlier three-year total of $75 billion. It shrunk because of delays and elimination of controversial provisions such as the Superfund tax that caused a deadlock over the measure last year.

The measure would make the 16 cents-a-pack cigarette tax permanent, bail out the tobacco price-support program, set states' share of royalties and other receipts from off-shore oil and gas production, limit Medicare reimbursements, shore up the pension benefit guarantee program and extend welfare benefits to two-parent families.

The administration objects to revenue-raising and increased spending. Senate leaders plan a meeting with White House officials today on how to proceed. criticism of President Reagan's budget," she said. "We get the feeling that the Democrats in the House are more interested in budget sabotage than in budget cooperation."

The leftover deficit-reduction measure approved by the House would save $18.1 billion over three years, reduced severely from its earlier three-year total of $75 billion. It shrunk because of delays and elimination of controversial provisions such as the Superfund tax that caused a deadlock over the measure last year.

The measure would make the 16 cents-a-pack cigarette tax permanent, bail out the tobacco price-support program, set states' share of royalties and other receipts from off-shore oil and gas production, limit Medicare reimbursements, shore up the pension benefit guarantee program and extend welfare benefits to two-parent families.

The administration objects to revenue-raising and increased spending. Senate leaders plan a meeting with White House officials today on how to proceed.