Clinton Siphoning Power From Congress : Cabinet: His plans to appoint as many as six influential leaders to top posts may help the White House now, but it could hurt later.

As he turns to the next round of Cabinet appointments, President-elect Bill Clinton’s choices are being complicated by the knowledge that his decisions could leave as many as six powerful congressional committees in the hands of chairmen who are new to the posts, aides say.

Such a shift--the potential consequence of Clinton’s efforts to elevate leading lawmakers to top Cabinet jobs--could give the White House new influence over Congress in the short term as he puts forward his new agenda.

But some experts warn that the departure of strong Democratic chairmen in such fields as economics and defense ultimately could prove troublesome for the new President.

Clinton already has created two such vacancies, and the emerging congressional leadership void is said to be a factor as the President-elect weighs whether to elevate House Armed Services Committee Chairman Les Aspin of Wisconsin to secretary of defense.

Another leading contender to a top national security post, Rep. Dave McCurdy of Oklahoma, would similarly have to leave behind his chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee if he is named director of central intelligence, a move that is considered likely.

The announcement of Clinton’s choices for the top national security posts is expected to come next week, and both men are still regarded as favorites for the jobs. Some Clinton aides indicated that they favored the appointments precisely because they would help further shift power from Congress to the White House.

But they also suggested that such a shake-up would leave the Armed Services Committee in the hands of a new chairman on whom the White House could less reliably count for assistance. The two expected contenders in a battle to succeed Aspin are Rep. Ronald V. Dellums (D-Berkeley) and Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.), both of whom have had rocky relations with the Pentagon.

As a result of Clinton’s choices, a new and potentially controversial chairman, New York Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, already has been installed at the helm of the Senate Finance Committee to replace Treasury secretary-designate Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-Tex.). And a battle is under way for control of the House Budget Committee, relinquished by Rep. Leon E. Panetta (D-Carmel Valley), who is budget director-designate.

While some of the potential incoming chairmen are held in high regard, some experts warn that the leadership shake-up could deprive Clinton of vital allies.

Frederick McClure, who headed the legislative affairs operation for President Bush, expressed particular surprise that Clinton had not chosen “to keep these guys out there who could be stalking horses as you try to get things through Congress.”

Thomas Mann, who heads the government studies division at the Brookings Institution, agreed. “All in all, he probably would have been better off having all of these individuals retain the chairmanships and work from there on his behalf.” But, he quickly added: “Sometimes you have to give up something in order to get the best people in the top government jobs.”

Congress’ unique role as a reservoir of Democratic expertise may have made it particularly difficult for Clinton to bypass Capitol Hill in his quest for top talent. On matters of taxes and budgets, departing committee chairmen like Bentsen and Panetta are among the party’s undisputed experts, as are front-runners Aspin on defense and McCurdy on intelligence.

A congressional Democrat closely aligned to the Clinton camp acknowledged that even the loss of two committee chairmen to the Cabinet has been “harmful to the community” on Capitol Hill. But the official, who requested anonymity, characterized the change as an inevitable consequence of Democrats reclaiming the White House.

“Our needs have shifted,” the congressional official said, suggesting that the departure of “a hostile party” from the White House has made it less important that the Democrats maintain the prominent chairmen.

If Clinton moves to compound the shake-up by elevating Aspin and McCurdy, however, veteran Democrats and Republicans say the move could have a significant effect on relations between the institutions that occupy opposite ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

According to a wide array of congressional officials and former White House lobbyists, the effect of the shift may be least noticeable during the early days of the new Administration, as post-inaugural collegiality and the residual authority of the congressmen-turned-Cabinet members is likely to give the White House a strong voice in the key congressional committees.

Over time, however, as relations between the White House and Congress inevitably begin to fray, the newcomers could become increasingly vulnerable to challenges from Democrats and even other Republicans.

Of the six congressional chairmanships that could change hands, at least one, and perhaps two, could do so no matter how the President decides to fill out his Cabinet.

Rep. Jamie L. Whitten of Mississippi was deposed early this month as chairman of the Appropriations Committee, and his place already has been filled by Rep. William H. Natcher (D-Ky.). Separately, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dan Rostenkowski of Illinois, the subject of a federal investigation related to the House post office scandal, has given no indication that he would step down but may find himself under pressure to do so.

While an additional vacancy would be created if Clinton decides to dispatch Aspin to the Pentagon, it remains unclear how a parallel decision to send McCurdy to the CIA would affect the chairmanship of the Intelligence Committee.

McCurdy remains the chairman of that panel, but some congressional officials have suggested that House Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.) might not renew the Oklahoman’s appointment for the term that begins next month.