Democrats to Get Senate’s Reins for a 17-Day Trot

Before he leaves town, Vice President Al Gore will bestow a parting gift to Democrats who have been out of power in Congress for the last six years: 17 tantalizing days at the helm of the Senate.

The brief interval of Democratic control owes to an odd combination of circumstances. The Senate that will be sworn in Wednesday will be split 50-50 between the parties, and tie votes will be broken by the vice president. That will be Republican Dick Cheney as of Jan. 20, the date set by the Constitution for the inauguration of the president and vice president. But for the 17 days before that, it will be Democrat Gore.

How Democrats run the Senate in the days before George W. Bush becomes president is expected to send an important signal about whether the mantra of bipartisanship in Washington these days is real.

Bush will send the Senate a flock of Cabinet nominees, some of them staunch conservatives who can expect a grilling from the Democrats. And the Senate itself may still be thrashing out how the two parties will--or won’t--share power after Cheney succeeds Gore and Republicans resume tenuous control of the Senate.

Both situations give Democrats plenty of openings to make mischief during their turn with the gavel. Leading Democrats, as of now, promise restraint in hopes that Republicans will offer the same when they take over.

“We’re just going to try to set a golden rule,” said Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic whip. “We could step in for 17 days and literally raise hell. But we should not do that.”

For instance, Reid and Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the Democratic leader, say they will not use their window of power to push for floor votes on any major legislation. They know they will not be able to find the 60 senators necessary to break a filibuster against any controversial legislation--just as the Republicans will have a tough time stopping filibusters after Jan. 20.

‘For 17 Days, We Will Rule the World’

The Democrats do, however, intend to introduce the session’s first bills. Daschle said these may include Democratic versions of campaign-finance reform, education reform, tax cuts and prescription drug coverage under Medicare.

And at least some Democrats have been a bit less conciliatory in their comments than has Reid. Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski of Maryland, a resolute liberal and one of Daschle’s lieutenants, recently jested, “For 17 days, we will rule the world, and the other 300, we will lay the groundwork for ruling the world.”

The GOP enjoyed a 54-46 advantage before November’s elections, and Republicans are well aware that the new Senate will operate differently than the old one. “Different times call for different approaches,” GOP Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi said recently. “We have recognized that and are prepared to deal with that. . . . I understand [Democrats] are going to try to get as much as they can, and we’re going to be as cooperative as we can.”

For several weeks, Lott and Daschle have met on the operation of the new Senate. Those privy to the talks decline comment for attribution, given that no agreements have been announced, but insiders speaking on condition of anonymity say progress has been slow.

The questions at hand are fundamental. For example, do the titles “majority leader” and “minority leader” still apply when each party has half the total of 100 senators? How many senators from each party should serve on committees? How much staff and office space should each party get? Who should set the agenda for committee hearings and action? And, in the delicate matter of perquisites, who gets to divvy up the limited supply of choice Capitol suites close to the Senate floor?

Most Republicans are willing to concede a point or two to the Democrats on matters of symbolism. More substantively, some seem willing to give the opposing side an equal share of seats on at least some committees. And Congress already has approved legislation giving Democrats nearly equal funding for staff--boosting the Senate budget by about $10 million in the bargain.

But Republicans insist on maintaining a preponderance of power where it counts--in the committees that could prove essential to the agenda of the Bush administration. Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) said he would agree to a 50-50 split in the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, where he serves. But Republicans, he said, should have an edge on the Finance, Judiciary and Appropriations committees--which will handle tax legislation, judicial appointments and spending requests, respectively.

Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, who will be the No. 3 Republican, has taken a harder line. He said the GOP should have a one-vote edge on all committees. “We cannot have legislation and nominations stuck in committees,” he said.

Until these issues are resolved, the Senate will be unable to perform the basic task of doling out new committee assignments to senators. Key panels, such as Judiciary and Finance, now have several vacancies.

As for the upcoming 17 days of role reversal, Republican senators interviewed last week said they were not worried that Democrats would pull any stunts. “I very much doubt there will be any big surprises,” said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.).

He said he didn’t blame Democrats for feeling bullish about their ascendant role. But he added: “I find a little disingenuous this talk of bipartisanship, which essentially means [to Democrats] that as long as we Republicans capitulate, everything will be fine.”

Senate Has No Rule Book on 50-50 Split

What makes the situation so challenging for the Senate is that there is almost no precedent to guide the institution, which thrives on traditions. The last time the Senate had major trouble organizing itself, in 1881, the chamber was split among 37 Republicans, 37 Democrats and two independents.

In 1953-54, Republicans enjoyed only a one-seat majority as the Senate convened. But the chamber’s makeup changed repeatedly due to deaths and replacements, and Vice President Richard Nixon’s ability to cast tie-breaking votes was important to maintaining GOP control.

Mike Mansfield of Montana, a veteran of that Senate who later served 16 years as Democratic majority leader, said Lott and Daschle should be able to effectively operate the new Senate with a little give on both sides. His advice: “Get together, put the country ahead of the party and be the people’s representatives.”