Some Democrats Agonize Over Upcoming Vote

With the House set to vote Thursday on whether to open a presidential impeachment inquiry, Rep. John M. Spratt Jr. (D-S.C.) is facing a decision that could cost him either way.

Three newspapers in his conservative, largely rural 5th Congressional District have demanded President Clinton’s resignation. So has Spratt’s Republican opponent in November’s election. But 30% of his constituents are African Americans, and many of them are telling Congress, in no uncertain terms, to leave Clinton alone.

For Democrats such as Spratt who are getting mixed messages from their districts, Thursday’s vote amounts to an excruciating choice over which bloc of voters to anger. And their decision could help shape the nature of the impeachment probe.

Said Spratt: “It leaves some of us in a difficult position.”

Added Rep. Vic Fazio of West Sacramento, a House Democratic leader: “This is putting people on the horns of a big dilemma. This is not an easy decision.”

Congressional Democratic leaders concede they don’t have the votes to stop the Republican-controlled House from approving an impeachment inquiry. But which way Spratt and other fence-sitting Democrats vote is expected to have a large impact on the character of the House Judiciary Committee’s investigation.

If only a handful of Democrats vote with Republicans for the proposed open-ended inquiry, it will give more ammunition to Clinton and his allies to continue attacking the investigation as a partisan witch hunt. Conversely, surprisingly strong Democratic support for such a probe will increase its political legitimacy.

Democrats most likely to defect are Southerners, conservatives (who often are from the South), those from swing districts elsewhere in the country and those who are just plain appalled at the details of the Monica S. Lewinsky case.

On Tuesday, Democratic vote-counters were uncertain about which way as many as 100 of their 206 members would vote. But the goal of the party strategists was clear--keeping defections to less than 50.

The Democratic leaders are hoping to minimize defections by proposing a more limited, focused inquiry as an alternative to the GOP proposal, as was unsuccessfully tried by party members on the Judiciary panel. By giving Democrats something to vote for, Clinton allies hope to make it easier for Democrats to vote against the Republican plan.

Republicans--who expect few, if any defections from their own ranks--say they will not allow a vote on the Democratic alternative. But Democrats will be able to push for their alternative in a vote to send the GOP proposal back to the Judiciary Committee for amendment.

Judiciary Committee Democrats, during the panel’s Monday debate, proposed a narrowly focused inquiry that would end by Thanksgiving. Other Democrats now are arguing for a less restrictive time limit and other changes before the alternative is brought to the House floor Thursday.

Even a less restrictive alternative will not keep all Democrats on board.

Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.), a conservative who has called on Clinton to resign, said he would vote against any Democratic alternative and for the proposed GOP inquiry, which was modeled on the Watergate investigation.

“If it was good enough for looking into President Nixon, it is good enough for President Clinton,” said Taylor.

Rep. Charles W. Stenholm (D-Texas), who is facing a tough reelection fight in a conservative, mostly white district in West Texas, says he is “leaning very, very strongly” toward the Republican plan because he does not think the inquiry should be limited in scope or time.

Although lawmakers see this as a vote of conscience, they acknowledge it is also inevitably a political one.

“I think people are going to take a look at what their constituents think is best,” said Taylor.

But for members such as Spratt, constituents are a poor guide because they are themselves divided. On the one hand, Spratt hails from a state that is one of strongest bastions of anti-Clinton sentiment in the nation. But if he votes to open a broad inquiry, Spratt, who is white, risks alienating the black voters who are a cornerstone of his political base.

Discussing opinion within his district on the impeachment issue, Spratt says, “It runs the spectrum.”

“Either way he goes, he’s going to anger some Democratic voters,” said Earl Black, a political scientist at Rice University who specializes in Southern politics.

Rep. David E. Price (D-N.C.), who is locked in a tight reelection fight, is another case in point. His opponent is running ads demanding that Price ask the president to resign. But his district also includes Democratic strongholds in communities surrounding North Carolina and North Carolina State universities.

“There is no clear message” from his constituents, Price said. “I’m hearing all kinds of things.”

Some lawmakers say that while divisions among their constituents may create difficult political crosscurrents, they also liberate them to make up their own mind.

“You vote [to support the GOP inquiry] and I’m sure people in your base are going to question your loyalty to the president,” said Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-N.J.), who comes from a swing district where voters have installed a new congressman in each of the last four elections. “But if you vote the other way, then you’re seen as a Clinton apologist. That’ll be the risk I’ll have to take. And I will vote my conscience.” He remains undecided.

As the vote approaches, Democrats may also be watching how respected senior members such as Rep. Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.) cast their ballot. Hamilton, who is not running for reelection, says he has not yet made up his mind. But he says he is troubled by Democratic proposals to set a time limit on the inquiry.

“I’ve had a lot of experience with investigations,” said Hamilton, who was co-chairman of the special panel that investigated the Reagan administration’s Iran-Contra scandal. “Time limits create large incentives for delay.”

Democratic leaders’ efforts to craft an alternative inquiry proposal, however, may run afoul of liberal members who think no inquiry is justified at all. Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles) says he will vote against both Democratic and Republican inquiry proposals.

House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri has told rank-and-file Democrats that they are free to vote however they want or need to in order to survive politically.

“Our No. 1 interest is to win as many House seats as possible,” said a House Democratic leadership aide.

Gephardt has, however, been meeting assiduously with fellow Democrats to discuss what kind of Democratic alternative would satisfy them.

Times staff writer Jim Gerstenzang contributed to this story.