Impeachment Finale Still in Question

As the Senate enters what appears to be the final week of President Clinton’s impeachment trial, it is virtually certain about the outcome but is sharply divided over whether to open the deliberations to the public and to consider a separate resolution censuring the president.

In televised interviews Sunday, key senators left no doubt that, as widely expected, the final vote now scheduled for late Thursday or Friday will not yield the two-thirds majority required to convict Clinton of the charges and remove him from office.

But they cautioned that two companion decisions this week could be close: one to open the final debate to the public instead of holding it in secret, as required by Senate rules and, possibly, a bipartisan move to censure Clinton immediately after the trial.

In one blunt assessment, Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) told ABC-TV’s “This Week” that as many as 15 Republicans may join Democrats in voting to acquit Clinton on the first article of impeachment charging him with perjury, short of even a 51-vote majority.

He said the second article, which accuses the president of obstructing justice by trying to encourage former White House intern Monica S. Lewinsky to hide the truth about their relationship, might win a few more votes but probably will not garner a full two-thirds.

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), another key Republican who has been critical of Clinton, conceded that the outlook appears to favor the president. “We’re going to do our constitutional duty this week and get rid of this,” he said Sunday on CNN’s “Late Edition” program.

The Senate is slated to resume the trial at 10 a.m. PST today with the start of six hours of closing arguments--three hours each for the House prosecution team and the president’s counsel--to be followed by up to 25 hours of debate and deliberations by the senators.

Just before the final balloting, senators will face a vote on a bipartisan proposal to open the final debate to the public rather than going into closed session, as Senate rules now require in the case of impeachment trials.

But several senators on Sunday predicted the vote will be close and that there is a strong possibility that sponsors may not be able to muster the two-thirds majority that would be needed to change Senate rules and open the debate.

Most Democrats and some Republicans favor opening the trial on the grounds that Americans should have the chance to observe the Senate deliberations. Opponents argue that keeping the debate closed would allow freer discussion and avert grandstanding for the cameras.

Even more controversy could arise if some senators--again, mostly Democrats, joined by a few Republicans--follow the final balloting on impeachment with a vote on a formal motion to censure Clinton for his behavior.

Although many senators want to use such a resolution to go on record deploring the president’s behavior, conservatives have argued that the procedure is not sanctioned by the Constitution and would leave future presidents open to censure whenever lawmakers disagree with them.

Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas) warned on Sunday that if a censure resolution is brought to the floor, he will try to block it by offering numerous amendments. He also suggested some lawmakers might filibuster the measure, requiring a 60-vote majority to cut it off.

“Impeachment is about the Constitution; censure is about getting political cover,” Gramm said Sunday on NBC-TV’s “Meet the Press.” “What we’re really trying to do here, which is not unusual for politicians, people want to be on both sides of the issue.”

But Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah) said a censure motion should be considered seriously. “A vast majority of the members of the Senate, regardless of party . . . want to leave some kind of formal statement of indignation and outrage over what this president has done.”

Also unresolved for sponsors of any censure resolution is the language that would be acceptable to a sufficiently large group of Republicans and Democrats. Although GOP lawmakers generally want tough wording, Democrats have expressed concerns about going too far.

A three-member bipartisan team, which includes Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), has been sounding out groups of senators with various draft proposals, but so far it has been unable to win sufficient support.

Both Republicans and Democrats are anxious to avoid any appearance that the trial has been a partisan venture, as some critics say the House impeachment proceedings were. Many GOP lawmakers have said they would prefer to avoid party-line votes whenever possible.

Shelby said of the effort to craft a censure resolution that “censure, for it to be anything, [has] got to be bipartisan, it’s got to be tough and it’s got to be thorough.” Otherwise, “it’s not going anywhere.”

Meanwhile, Sen. Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, an influential Democrat, said he believes Clinton’s behavior constitutes an impeachable offense, but he suggested that he may oppose removing him from office anyway on grounds that doing so might hurt the country.

“The question is, does this rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors? I say yes, no doubt about it in my mind,” he said in an interview broadcast Sunday on “This Week.” “But the issue is, should the president be removed?”

On that score, Byrd contended, there are “other factors” to consider, including whether it would “make the [nation’s] wound[s] deeper” if Clinton were expelled. He also speculated that no president will ever be removed when the economy is at record highs.

Significantly, Byrd, who has become known as a traditionalist where Senate procedures are concerned, said he believes unequivocally that the chamber’s final debate should be open to the public. “We owe it to ourselves” and “we owe it to history,” he declared.

There had been earlier concerns that the Senate trial might be delayed because of the funeral of Jordan’s King Hussein, since some senators had expressed a desire to attend the ceremonies.

On Sunday, however, Senate leaders announced they will send a two-man delegation, Sens. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.). The pair will return Tuesday, before the Senate begins deliberations.

Also Sunday, a key House manager brushed aside as irrelevant a surprise affidavit from a writer who contradicts testimony by White House aide Sidney Blumenthal that he was not a source of stories portraying Lewinsky as a “stalker.”

The House manager, Rep. Asa Hutchinson (R-Ark.), said on “Meet the Press” that the affidavit from Christopher Hitchens, a freelance journalist who conceded on the same program that he is virulently anti-Clinton, was not crucial to the trial.

At the same time, however, Hutchinson and several other Republicans urged that the Senate and the Justice Department investigate the allegation, which they hinted might result in perjury charges against Blumenthal if it turns out to be true.

“I think it’s a very serious matter, [and] the Senate should deal with this, investigate it,” he said. But he added: “I don’t think all of this side investigation is very relevant. . . . It should not diminish the strength of the case that we presented.”

* ABA TO WEIGH IN

The American Bar Assn. will likely urge death for the Independent Counsel Act. A4