Sen. Packwood Enters Alcohol Abuse Facility : Ethics: He retains an attorney to represent him during possible inquiries into accusations he sexually harassed women.

Newly reelected Sen. Bob Packwood (R-Ore.), under fire over charges that he made unwanted sexual advances to female staff members and women lobbyists, entered an alcohol treatment facility Monday for evaluation of his drinking habits.

Packwood also retained an attorney from a prestigious Washington firm to represent him during an anticipated inquiry by the Senate Ethics Committee into alleged sexual harassment of 10 women at various times since 1959.

The announcement by his Senate office said that Packwood decided to seek “professional advice” after reflecting on a Washington Post story detailing the allegations and naming several of the women who brought the charges.

The location of the alcohol treatment facility or the length of his stay were not disclosed. Elaine Franklin, Packwood’s chief of staff, called on the press “to give Sen. Packwood the privacy he needs right now to begin this difficult evaluation process.”

Both steps appeared aimed in part at deflecting demands that Packwood resign his Senate seat. They also suggest that he may have been under the influence of alcohol if he behaved improperly toward women in his Capitol Hill office.

But Monday’s developments did little to quiet the controversy, which erupted less than three weeks after Packwood narrowly defeated Rep. Les AuCoin (D-Ore.) to win a fifth six-year term in the Senate.

The allegations have raised questions about how to deal with past incidents of sexual harassment that may be viewed much more seriously in today’s political environment. Many activists dubbed 1992 the “year of the woman” in U.S. politics and a record six women will serve in the U.S. Senate next year.

Senate leaders of both parties have called for an immediate Ethics Committee inquiry, even though the panel’s chairman, Sen. Terry Sanford (D-N.C.), and its ranking Republican, Sen. Warren B. Rudman of New Hampshire, will not be returning to the Senate next year. An aide said that Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.) has asked Sanford to launch an inquiry as soon as possible.

Leaders of women’s organizations continued to press demands for a full investigation and new legislation that would apply laws against sexual harassment to members of Congress to replace the existing self-enforced rules against such conduct.

“It’s time to take a firm stand,” said Harriett Woods, president of the National Women’s Political Caucus. “Is this going to go on or is the (Senate) institution going to take a stand? I think it will be a test of their credibility.”

Jane Danowitz, executive director of the Women’s Campaign Fund, added: “The Senate has got to stop being hypocritical and enact legislation. . . . Dealing with an individual case is not going to solve the problem: There are other abusers out there as well.”

James Glassman, editor of Capitol Hill’s Roll Call newspaper, said that some of the Packwood allegations are stale, dating back to 1959 in one case. He said that they should be referred to the Senate’s newly created Office of Fair Employment Practices rather than the ethics panel.

The employment practices office would provide greater confidentiality while the charges were investigated and, if found guilty, Packwood could be fined, Glassman said.