Clinton Asks Again for Vote Delay on Test Ban

President Clinton made another concession to Republicans on Monday, the eve of the Senate’s scheduled vote on the nuclear test-ban treaty, raising the possibility that the two sides may hammer out a deal to avert an almost-certain defeat of the pact.

With Senate action expected late today or Wednesday, Clinton gave in to Republican demands that he put in writing a request that the vote be postponed. He wrote to Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) formally asking for the delay lest the vote “severely harm the national security.”

Last week, during a trip to Canada, Clinton acceded to GOP demands by publicly asking the Senate to postpone the vote on the treaty. But Republicans brushed aside his remarks at the time, saying they would insist that he make the request in writing.

Although Republicans remained cool to the president’s plea Monday, a spokesman for Lott said the majority leader would discuss the letter with Republican senators today. It was the first sign of a possible breakthrough.

Lott remained firm on another GOP demand: that Clinton agree not to bring the treaty up for ratification until the end of the 106th Congress in January 2001. That would prevent Democrats from using the vote against Republicans in the 2000 election.

“This written request is merely a first step,” Lott spokesman John Czwartacki told reporters. “As the majority leader has stated all along, not only must the treaty be withheld . . . agreement must be reached that it not come up again at any time in this Congress.”

The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty would ban nuclear testing worldwide and strengthen global monitoring to detect violations. But opponents say that “rogue” nations such as North Korea weren’t expected to sign the pact and that U.S. technology cannot accurately monitor small-scale nuclear testing.

Proponents of the treaty argue that rejecting the compact now would doom it to oblivion and damage efforts to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. Although more than 150 nations have signed the treaty, it must be formally ratified by all 44 nuclear-capable countries before it can take effect. Only about half have done so.

Most of the major nuclear powers--including the United States, Russia and China--already have announced moratoriums on nuclear testing. The United States has not conducted any tests since 1992.

Clinton was the first head of government to sign the accord, in 1996. The Senate began debating it Friday, after more than two years of delay. Under the Constitution, 67 senators--a two-thirds majority--would have to approve it.

The president’s new concession set off a flurry of efforts on Capitol Hill to explore possible compromises. GOP strategists said that it was not clear whether Republican senators would give Lott more negotiating room in today’s meeting but that the issue would be discussed.

Clinton has been less forthcoming on the demand that he formally agree not to bring up the treaty again during this Congress. Last week, he said he had no objection to postponing consideration until 2001, but he expressed concern that a formal agreement might hamstring him in case of emergency. It is this element that is likely to be the subject of any compromise.

Czwartacki hinted that Republicans might be willing to settle for an agreement on the second element between the Senate GOP and Democratic leaderships. “There must be agreement reached in the Senate,” he said, “that it not come up again at any time in this Congress.”

Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, called Clinton’s letter “a significant step forward.” Aides said Warner was working with Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.) on a compromise to submit to leaders of both parties today.

But Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), a key proponent of the treaty, urged Republicans to accept the president’s concession and put off the vote. “This should be an easy call,” Biden said in a statement. “I hope the Senate puts the national interest first.”

Senate Democrats also prepared to try to push through a motion that would in effect postpone the test-ban treaty vote indefinitely through an arcane parliamentary procedure that would require only 51 votes--16 fewer than would be needed to pass the treaty.

Democratic strategists said they still were not sure whether the motion, to be offered by Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.), would attract the 51 votes needed. Only the 45 Democratic senators and a couple of their Republican colleagues favor the test-ban treaty, but more may be willing to postpone it.

Republican leaders warned that they would exert heavy pressure on GOP senators to oppose the Byrd proposal. Czwartacki said the Democratic effort would be regarded as “an assault on the [GOP] leadership.”

Both Republican and Democratic strategists cautioned that the situation remains fluid and that the treaty still could come to a vote as scheduled. Even so, the response to Clinton’s letter marked the first time that Republicans have seemed willing to consider a delay.

Defeat of the test-ban treaty would be a major foreign policy setback for the administration. In his two-paragraph letter, Clinton reiterated his belief that the test-ban treaty is in the national interest. But he conceded that “there are a significant number of senators who have honest disagreements” about whether the United States should ratify it.

“I believe that proceeding to a vote under these circumstances would severely harm the national security of the United States, damage our relationship with our allies and undermine our historic leadership over 40 years . . . in reducing the nuclear threat,” Clinton said.

Although the administration sent the treaty to the Senate in 1997, it has been bottled up in the Foreign Relations Committee. The panel’s chairman, Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), along with many other conservatives, opposes it.

After Democrats pressed for action, Lott abruptly rushed it to the floor, knowing that the White House would not have the votes ratify it.