White House Denounces GOP-Backed Senate Rights Bill : Legislation: Danforth’s proposed compromise is called a ‘quota bill’ by the Administration, which threatens a veto. Floor debate is delayed to today.

The Bush Administration on Wednesday denounced a Republican-sponsored civil rights compromise as a “quota bill” and threatened to veto the controversial measure--even though the Senate has yet to begin debating it.

A toughly worded “statement of Administration policy” on the proposal offered by Sen. John C. Danforth (R-Mo.) was issued by the Office of Management and Budget in coordination with senior advisers to the President.

Danforth, a Republican moderate who played a key role in securing Senate confirmation of Clarence Thomas, who was sworn in Wednesday as the nation’s newest justice on the Supreme Court, appeared to have given up hope of reaching agreement with the White House on the legislation.

The Senate, which had been expected to start debate Wednesday on the civil rights bill, agreed to postpone consideration of the legislation until today.

Bush, meanwhile, met with a group of six Republican senators who stuck by him in sustaining a veto of a civil rights bill passed last year. The session appeared to be designed to consolidate the President’s support in the event of another veto battle.

The White House insisted that Bush was still seeking a compromise with Danforth and his supporters. “We’re making a final effort at it,” White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said. “The President . . . would like to have a civil rights bill he can sign in a compromise.”

But the harsh Administration statement on the compromise bill dismayed Danforth aides. They noted that it employed the same language the White House had used to attack an earlier, House-approved measure that was far more sweeping in its provisions to aid women and minorities challenging racial or sexual discrimination.

The statement charged that key job bias provisions in the Danforth measure would “overturn two decades of Supreme Court precedent, replacing this settled body of law with novel rules of litigation that will drive employers to adopt quotas and other unfair preferences.”

At issue is whether employer practices that appear benign but operate to screen out minorities and women should be forbidden by law. For example, a height requirement for police officers could screen out women and Latinos, even though they otherwise could perform police duties.

“Employers who have not intentionally discriminated against anyone, but whose bottom-line numbers are not ‘demographically correct,’ will risk being dragged into lawsuits where the deck is stacked in ways that make a successful defense almost impossible,” the Administration document said.

It called the Danforth bill “a lawyers’ bonanza” that would allow jury trials and compensatory damages in job bias lawsuits.

Danforth has negotiated for months with White House Chief of Staff John H. Sununu and White House counsel C. Boyden Gray in an effort to develop a compromise bill that the President would support. Danforth said he has made dozens of concessions without any sign of give from the White House negotiators.

Even an 11th-hour meeting Tuesday night between Danforth and Gray failed to produce any progress. Despite the impasse, the Senate now appears likely to adopt Danforth’s bill by a margin of nearly 2 to 1.

But aides to Danforth said they still do not have the veto-proof majority of 67 that would be required to override the President if he rejects the bill. The Missouri moderate was reported to be two votes short. But it was not clear either that Bush could depend on 34 Republicans to provide the votes he needs to sustain a veto.

Since all 57 Democrats are expected to support the Danforth bill, the civil rights battle was shaping up as a struggle among Republicans, with Danforth and Bush leading opposing sides.

Bush met for 30 minutes Wednesday afternoon with Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) and GOP Sens. Christopher S. Bond of Missouri, Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico, John W. Warner of Virginia, Slade Gorton of Washington and Frank H. Murkowski and Ted Stevens, both of Alaska.

At one point this year, Domenici had backed an earlier version of the Danforth bill and an aide said the New Mexico lawmaker is still undecided about how he will vote.

Dole was understood to be seeking clarification about whether the White House expects a compromise to emerge or whether he should devote his efforts to assembling the 34 votes necessary to sustain a veto.

Administration sources said that White House officials suggested some flexibility in Bush’s position on a ceiling for damages that could be awarded to women in cases of sexual harassment. The harassment issue has become more sensitive because of charges leveled last month against Thomas by Anita Faye Hill, a law professor at the University of Oklahoma.

The President’s bill would cap these damages at $150,000. Danforth’s measure would allow damages of up to $300,000 for women who suffer sexual harassment at one of the nation’s large corporations. Damages paid by smaller firms would be capped at $50,000 or $100,000, depending on their size.