Senate OKs Ambitious ‘Motor-Voter’ Bill : Legislation: The measure automatically registers people to vote when they get a driver’s license. Bush, many GOP lawmakers oppose it.

People who apply for or renew their driver’s licenses could automatically be registered to vote under terms of an ambitious registration measure that was approved Wednesday by the Senate. But it faces a presidential veto.

The “motor-voter” bill, which would register drivers unless they decline, would nationalize voter registration by mail and reach out to many other citizens by offering registration at welfare, unemployment and other government offices, beginning in 1994.

Officials estimate the effort could increase voter registration to 90%, up from the current level of 60%.

Senate approval was by 61 to 38, with only six Republicans backing the Democratic-sponsored measure. The House is expected to pass a similar bill soon but Congress is considered unlikely to muster the two-thirds majority needed in each chamber to override a threatened veto by President Bush.

Administration officials and congressional Republicans charged that the legislation would spawn fraud, cost too much and fail to boost voter turnout.

Democrats, however, pointed to the experience of states that already have motor-voter programs and those, such as California, that provide mail-in registration.

“The Senate has opened the electoral process and made it much more likely that a larger number of Americans will participate in and, I hope, restore trust in the process,” said Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.).

Susan S. Lederman, president of the League of Women Voters--which led a coalition of 60 groups in favor of the bill--called on Bush to drop his opposition.

“Americans need national voter registration reform to break down the barriers that discourage and discriminate,” she said.

Proponents claimed the bill would knock down a daunting array of registration practices that are inhibiting registration, as poll taxes and literacy tests once did.

“These practices include registration at difficult-to-locate sites during inconvenient hours, frequent lack of deputy registrars and the use of confusing registration forms,” said Sen. Terry Sanford (D-N.C.).

Simplified registration particularly would help disabled people, those just reaching voting age and the millions who move every year, said Sen. Wendell H. Ford (D-Ky.), the bill’s chief sponsor. One key provision would prohibit the purging of inactive voters from registration lists.

Opponents were led by Kentucky’s other senator, Republican Mitch McConnell, who charged that the legislation was part of a “troika of Democratic-sponsored measures that would redraw the political playing field to their advantage.”

The other two bills are a campaign finance overhaul already vetoed by Bush and a proposed loosening of Hatch Act restrictions on the political activities of government employees.

McConnell claimed there was potential voter fraud in the motor-voter proposal. He said it could lead to registering under-age drivers, non-citizens, non-residents, felons and other persons not qualified to vote.

Ford responded that the 26 states and the District of Columbia which have motor-voter programs have experienced little fraud. He said his bill protects against it by subjecting registrants to criminal penalties for lying about their eligibility.

Opponents, including some state and local officials, also protested that the legislation would impose burdensome costs by requiring computerized registration lists. California officials have said that initial motor-voter expenses could total more than $30 million.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated that one-time start-upcosts for all 50 states would be about $70 million and subsequent annual costs would be about $25 million.

Sen. Mark O. Hatfield (R-Ore.), one of the handful of Republicans who backed the bill, said he doubted that increased voter registration would help one party over the other.

“I have seen studies that show both parties will benefit greatly,” he said.

California’s senators split on the bill. Democrat Alan Cranston voted yes while Republican John Seymour voted no.