Flag Amendment Faces Death in Senate : Congress: In a rare confession of error, two key backers of the proposed constitutional change switch sides.

A proposed constitutional amendment to outlaw flag burning appears doomed in the Senate, where two influential Republicans who originally co-sponsored the bill changed their minds and switched sides Tuesday.

Both the leading supporter and opponent said Tuesday there are not enough votes to pass the amendment by the required two-thirds majority.

Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), floor manager for a bipartisan coalition fighting the Bush Administration proposal, said he already has assurances of “no” votes from far more than the required 34 senators.

Biden said Congress’ recently passed bill to make flag burning a federal crime has taken the political steam out of the drive to amend the Constitution.

“The vote against will be well into the 40’s,” Biden said in an interview. “More than 45 senators would vote ‘no’ if they knew they were casting the deciding vote.”

A spokesman for Sen. Alan J. Dixon (D-Ill.), chief Democratic sponsor of the amendment, also conceded that the 67 votes required to pass it are “looking less and less likely.” He added that he thinks supporters can count on only 58 votes.

In a rare public confession of error, Republican Sens. John C. Danforth of Missouri and Warren B. Rudman of New Hampshire dropped their sponsorship of the amendment and announced they would vote against it.

“I rise for the purpose of admitting a mistake,” Danforth said. “It was a mistake of the heart, but nevertheless a mistake.” He added that his decision to co-sponsor the amendment “was just flat wrong.”

If the amendment passes, he said, “ . . . it will be the first time in the history of our country that we have altered the Bill of Rights. . . . Every country has a flag. But America has the Bill of Rights. And it is the crowning glory of our country.”

Rudman, echoing Danforth’s arguments, concluded: “This is no time to tamper with the Bill of Rights.”

Senate rejection of a flag-burning amendment would put it into a legislative deep freeze for an indefinite period even though the House is expected to vote later this year on an identical proposal.

It takes a two-thirds vote of both the Senate and the House to initiate an amendment to the Constitution. Then three-fourths of the states must ratify it before it takes effect.

The drive to amend the Constitution and the congressionally passed bill to make flag burning a federal crime grew out a June 21 Supreme Court ruling, which held that burning the national symbol was a form of speech protected by the First Amendment. The President said recently he would allow the flag-burning bill to take effect without his signature but reiterated his belief that changing the Constitution was the only way to protect the flag.

Some Republican backers of Bush’s proposal complained that the White House has done little, if anything, to round up votes in the Senate on an issue that had widespread support less than four months ago. A vote could come today or Thursday.

Although leaders on both sides said the amendment was in deep trouble, and although two Republican co-sponsors reversed their positions, Senate Republican leader Bob Dole of Kansas refused to concede defeat.

“It’s close, and we’re working on the undecideds,” a spokesman for Dole said.

However, two other original co-sponsors of the amendment--Sens. Slade Gorton (R-Wash.) and William S. Cohen (R-Me.)--were reported to be leaning against the amendment. Asked if he had switched his position, Gorton avoided a direct answer. His current position, he said, was not undecided but “unstated.”

Other Republican senators expected to vote against the amendment are Gordon J. Humphrey of New Hampshire, John H. Chafee of Rhode Island, James M. Jeffords of Vermont, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Mark O. Hatfield of Oregon. Even Administration loyalist Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) listed himself as undecided, and Sen. Dave Durenberger (R-Minn.) was leaning against Bush’s position.

In explaining his reasons for reversing his support for an amendment, Danforth said:

“Maybe if we give the statute (against flag burning) a chance, some more people will conclude as I have that to amend the Constitution of the United States is no trivial matter, that there is no more profound thing that we as a country do than to amend the Constitution of the United States.”