Bush Confident on Thomas Vote; Key Senators Silent : Confirmation: White House aides claim 52 members support the nominee. Decisions of 13 swing Democrats remain unknown. Specter suggests delay in proceedings.

With three brutal days of testimony behind it, the U.S. Senate prepared today to make one of the most excruciating decisions it has ever faced--amid growing indications that it will confirm Judge Clarence Thomas for a lifetime seat on the nation’s highest court, despite allegations of sexual harassment lodged against him by law Prof. Anita Faye Hill.

Some sources still described the situation 24 hours before the vote as “precarious” and noted that nearly all of the 13 Democrats whose decisions are regarded as crucial have not yet announced how they will vote.

But White House aides claimed at least 52 senators--two more than the minimum needed to confirm--are ready to support Thomas. And President Bush, who returned early from a three-day weekend at Camp David to direct the lobbying effort on Thomas’ behalf, insisted that public support for his nominee was “holding strong” despite the explosive allegations of Hill.

A White House official said that Bush planned to confer this morning with senior advisers to determine the degree to which the President would have to crack the whip to carry his nominee across the finish line.

While only a day ago the halls of the Russell Office Building and the ornate Senate Caucus Room had been awash in the glare of television lights and abuzz with grim-faced senators, nervous witnesses and packs of reporters, on Monday an expectant quiet had fallen over official Washington. Most offices were closed for the Columbus Day holiday.

“The bleeding has stopped,” said a Republican with close ties to the White House.

Still the do-or-die struggle over Thomas’ confirmation had not lost its intensity. It simply had taken new turns.

One of those emerged late Monday when Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), an ardent defender of Thomas, raised the question of whether the vote scheduled for 3 p.m. PDT today should be delayed to give the Senate more time to consider the voluminous evidence presented at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings.

A top aide said that Specter plans to take the Senate floor this morning to advise his colleagues that on an issue as important as sexual harassment, “it really may be important to take more time.”

But what appeared to be the overwhelming sentiment among senators to put what many regard as the sordid affair behind them made it unlikely that such a proposal would win support.

Whatever the outcome, the Clarence Thomas confirmation battle will be long remembered and could fuel a continuing political battle over race, sex and the Supreme Court.

If Thomas indeed wins confirmation, despite Hill’s powerful allegations of sexual harassment, millions of Americans--and especially women--may be convinced that the male-dominated Senate cannot bring itself to believe a woman’s story of abuse. Once confirmed, Thomas would hold his seat for life and would have a key vote in deciding whether the Constitution gives women a constitutional right to abortion or whether federal law forbids harassment in the workplace.

“Women will remember this vote,” said Kate Michelman, executive director of the National Abortion Rights Action League.

However, if Thomas is rejected by the Senate, millions of others, including many African-Americans, will be convinced that the black conservative had been “lynched” by Senate Democrats and liberal interest groups determined to ruin his reputation.

Thomas has been subjected to “a witch hunt conducted by people who, in order to further their philosophical agenda, are willing to destroy people,” said Sen. John C. Danforth (R-Mo.), Thomas’s mentor.

Among other developments Monday:

--At her press conference at the University of Oklahoma, Hill said that she was glad to be back home, but added that she had been “deeply hurt” by the “personal attacks” made by Thomas’ defenders. She denounced the Senate Republicans for inventing “every 15 minutes” a new theory on why she had come forward to tell her story. None were based on “an iota of evidence,” she said.

--A third former employee at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission told senators that Thomas viewed black female employees as objects of “sexual interest.” Sukari Hardnett, a special assistant to Thomas from 1985 to 1986, said in a letter to the Judiciary Committee that she had not been sexually harassed or abused by the EEOC chairman. However, she complained about an “unpleasant” atmosphere for women. “If you were young, black, female and reasonably attractive, you knew full well you were being inspected and auditioned as a female,” she said.

--The Republican defenders of Thomas attempted to minimize the damage from a second set of allegations, those by former EEOC aide Angela Wright, who filed a sworn statement saying that Thomas had pressured her for dates and on one evening, showed up uninvited at her apartment. A second employee, Rose Jourdain, confirmed that Wright had complained of harassment by Thomas. But their sworn interviews were released late Sunday night, too late to get much attention.

--Leaders of women’s rights groups, anticipating a Thomas victory, lambasted the Judiciary Committee for failing to interrogate the nominee more vigorously. “This is a sorry example to American women of how men respond to serious charges of sexual harassment in the workplace,” declared Harriett Woods, president of the National Women’s Political Caucus.

--People For the American Way, one of the liberal lobby groups that came under sharp criticism from Senate Republicans, fired back Monday, accusing the accusers of “slinging mud without evidence.” John H. Buchanan, a top official of the organization, firmly denied that the group had anything to do with leaking the story of Anita Hill’s accusations.

--And in an attempt to gauge the mood of the nation on the issue of Thomas vs. Hill, several media organizations published national polls, all of which indicated that Americans favor Thomas’ confirmation to the court, if sometimes by narrow margins.

With tracking polls showing that most Americans still support the 43-year old black conservative, Bush aides were cautiously confident that Thomas’ long struggle for confirmation finally would end in victory when the Senate votes.

“I’m very pleased that support all across the country is holding strong for Judge Thomas,” President Bush said when he returned from a weekend at his Maryland retreat. In what he described as a “highly important” finding, he noted that new polls show “very, very strong” support for Thomas “among Afro-Americans.”

In that remark, Bush was making what aides said was a pointed reminder to the Southern Democrats who represent the majority of those senators who remain undecided and whose constituencies include a substantial number of African-Americans.

“They’ve heard from all the civil rights groups,” one official said. “This should be a reminder of who they’re going to hear from in November.”

A Los Angeles Times poll found that 51% of those surveyed believed the Senate should vote to confirm Thomas, reflecting a statistically insignificant slippage from the 54% who had favored Thomas in September.

Other polls showed even wider support for Thomas, with 56% of those surveyed in an ABC-Washington Post poll released Monday favoring his confirmation. A USA Today poll showed that 57% of men and 53% of women backed Thomas.

Support for Thomas among blacks was even larger, according to each of the studies, with 61% of African-Americans surveyed in The Times poll favoring confirmation.

Among other indicators of public support, Deputy Press Secretary Judy Smith said Monday, has been the 2-1 margin by which calls to the White House over the last three days have favored Thomas. The White House has received 600 such calls, she said.

The reference to the polls was central to a White House strategy aimed at persuading senators that national sentiment is on the side of Thomas.

Opponents of the nomination certainly had not given up, however.

“It’s too close to call,” said Ralph Neas, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, a group that had fought the nomination long before the accusations of sexual harassment were revealed.

Two key lawmakers--Sen. Dennis DeConcini (D-Ariz.) and Sen. J. Bennett Johnston (D-La.)--reaffirmed their backing of Thomas during interviews, saying that the accusations of Anita Hill and the outraged denials by the Supreme Court nominee had not changed their minds.

“The burden of proof to overcome a presumption in favor of Judge Thomas has not been met,” DeConcini said at a news conference. “I came to the conclusion that it (the weakened testimony) was inconclusive.”

Johnston, considered a bellwether for other Southern Democrats, said that he was not persuaded by Hill’s testimony.

“I don’t believe a woman who had been victimized, as she claims to have been, calls up just to say hello after the employment has been terminated,” said Johnston. He predicted that Thomas would be confirmed with a favorable vote “in the mid-50s.” His Louisiana colleague, Sen. John B. Breaux, also a Democrat, was also “99% certain” to vote for Thomas, an aide said.

Still, Danforth described the outcome as a “toss-up,” since the Republican leaders did not have a firm vote count.

And the final-day debate is certain to be further complicated by the surprise maneuver by Specter, who for three days grilled Hill and her supporters in his appointed role as the Republicans’ chief interrogator on the Judiciary Committee.

The senator’s administrative assistant, Carl Feldbaum, confirmed that Specter had told local television interviewers Monday that “there ought to be a little more time” for senators to consider the Thomas case and that he planned to say “at least that much” on the Senate floor today.

Specter leaned toward a delay after a “weekend from hell” of Senate testimony that he believes has left too little time for senators to absorb what went on at the complicated hearings, the aide said. He said that Specter also was influenced by “an outpouring of concern” about sexual harassment, including a conversation he had with the wife of another senator, who said that she had personally been subjected to such harassment.

But as other Thomas backers continued to urge a decisive vote on his behalf, Danforth, who sat behind his former protege throughout the Senate hearings, said that the nominee’s testimony over the weekend showed a changed man.

Wreathed in smiles compared to the deep frowns he displayed in recent days, Danforth said that Thomas underwent a “metamorphosis” following disclosure of Hill’s charges.

“Earlier last week, Clarence Thomas was shattered,” Danforth told reporters. “I didn’t know how he was going to continue. I was really worried about him.

“Then he decided . . . he didn’t have to walk on eggs any longer--that he didn’t have to listen to handlers any longer--he could say what he wanted.”

As a result, Danforth added, Thomas’ forceful denials indicated that he had an inner strength, adding: “Once you decide you can take the job or leave it--the polish is gone and you can say what’s really in your heart. . . . He (Thomas) is the strongest person I have ever known.”

As the Administration gears up its final lobbying, Vice President Dan Quayle was expected to return early from a fund-raising trip to Ohio to make lobbying calls of his own and to preside over the Senate during the vote, knowledgeable sources said.

With the vice president in the chair, the Administration could be confident that Quayle would break a tie vote in its favor.

Times staff writer William J. Eaton contributed to this story.

The Cases For, Against Confirming Thomas

In deciding whether to vote for or against the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, the Senate will have to consider a number of factors and arguments, some that are in his favor, others that are not. Among the considerations:

FOR:

* Thomas is a Yale Law School graduate, the former chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and a U.S. appeals court judge who has the strong endorsement of President Bush.

* Only one woman, Prof. Anita Faye Hill, has testified in televised hearings that Thomas made sexually explicit comments to her in the office. Other co-workers say that Thomas was always proper.

* Thomas has steadfastly denied the accusations “categorically” and said that he never talked of sex and pornography in the office.

* Hill maintained a “cordial” relationship with Thomas after leaving his employ and never mentioned his alleged harassment to co-workers.

* Senators have no right to probe Thomas’ private life, including subjects such as whether he has an interest in pornography.

* Since the charges remain unproven, President Bush’s nominee deserves the benefit of the doubt.

AGAINST:

* Thomas is only 43 years old, has minimal legal experience, has not done legal scholarship and has received only a lukewarm “qualified” rating from the American Bar Assn.

* He should not be confirmed because charges of sexual harassment and lying under oath still hang over him.

* A second female employee, Angela Wright, told the committee in a sworn statement that Thomas also pressured her for dates and made sexual comments to her in the office. A third woman, Sukari Hardnett, has made similar charges.

* Hill’s accusations were specific and detailed. She came forward only when asked to do so.

* Three of Hill’s friends testified that she had told them in the early 1980s that her supervisor, Clarence Thomas, was sexually harassing her.

* Since a substantial doubt remains, the Senate should not give Thomas a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court.