New Congress Faces Fragile Balance of Unity, Division

The new Congress assembled Wednesday on a political landscape transformed by the tumultuous 2000 election, and the narrowly divided House and Senate quickly faced a spate of decisions likely to determine whether George W. Bush’s infant presidency is born into comity or conflict.

Once Bush takes office on Jan. 20, Republicans will wield control over the House, Senate and the presidency for the first time in almost half a century.

The dramatic changes whipsawing the nation’s capital were on vivid display Wednesday: Al Gore, the lame-duck vice president who came achingly close to winning the White House, presided over the swearing-in of new senators--including First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.). Her husband, the soon-to-be ex-president, watched from the gallery with other Senate spouses.

The occasion also underscored the precarious balance of power within the 107th Congress. Because of the 50-50 split between the parties in the new Senate, the proceedings were opened by Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota, whose party will control the chamber until Gore is succeeded by GOP Vice President-elect Dick Cheney.

In the House, J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) was reelected speaker with support not only from the chamber’s 221 Republicans but one maverick Democrat as well: Rep. James A. Traficant Jr. of Ohio. Democratic leaders said that Traficant now will be excluded from the party’s caucus.

With the swearing-in ceremonies, Congress reached a demographic milestone--the 535 members of the House and Senate now include a record 72 women, up from 65 in the last session.

As the lawmakers settle into their tasks, the key question looming over Washington is whether the evenly divided Senate, the GOP’s narrow majority in the House and Bush’s razor-thin victory are an invitation to obstinacy or a catalyst for cooperation.

Hastert told his House colleagues: “It serves no purpose to dwell on the past. We need to get over it. . . . We need to get to the people’s business.”

Democrats took a step toward the bipartisanship both parties have been saying is needed following the disputed presidential election, offering an olive branch on the core issue of tax policy.

Daschle and House Democratic Leader Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri said that, given the growing federal budget surplus and signs of an economic slowdown, they would be willing to support a bigger tax cut than they have in the past--although not as large as the $1.3-trillion reduction over 10 years that Bush wants.

“This may be one of the best opportunities for us to say we really mean what we say: We want to find common ground,” said Daschle.

Still, it was clear Wednesday that many Democrats are not ready to bury the hatchet. Democrats complained that in the House the first act by GOP leaders was to ram through a package of rules that shortchanged the minority party on committee assignments and legislative opportunities.

And at a meeting of the Congressional Black Caucus that preceded the swearing-in ceremonies, anger about the disputed presidential election remained palpable. Many African American lawmakers have charged that an organized effort was conducted to disenfranchise black voters in Florida, which helped tip the state--and the election--to Bush.

Gore, in an emotional speech to the group, urged its members to do their part to heal the nation’s divisions. But he also acknowledged the limits of bipartisanship, saying: “You . . . have to do your best to reach across party lines, but you also have to know when to draw the line.”

Gore was on center stage much of the day. At one point during the Senate session, he quietly sent an envelope to Sen. Clinton, sitting at her desk in the back of the chamber. In it was a memento of the event, an autographed copy of the cue card he used for administering the oath of office to her.

Another poignant moment occurred as the reelected senator from Connecticut--Joseph I. Lieberman, whom Gore picked as his running mate on the Democratic presidential ticket--took his oath of office. After Gore swore in Lieberman, the two warmly embraced.

“I love the Senate, but, needless to say, I’d hoped to be at another swearing in on Jan. 20,” Lieberman said later.

During the Senate’s opening session, Democrats reveled in the prospect of being in the majority for 17 days. That quirky interregnum is occurring because the Constitution allows the vice president to break ties in the Senate. So until Cheney succeeds Gore on Jan. 20, Democrats hold the majority.

It clearly was an enjoyable moment for Daschle when Gore recognized him as the majority leader of the Senate. “I assure you, I will savor every one of the next 17 days,” said Daschle, who has been minority leader for six years.

Until Jan. 20, Democrats also will chair Senate committees. And the chamber’s most senior party member, Sen. Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, will serve as president pro tempore, the Senate’s presiding officer.

The Democrats’ temporary control is largely academic, however, because the Senate is expected to conduct little business between now and Inauguration Day. Some committees will begin confirmation hearings on Bush’s Cabinet nominees, but no legislative action is anticipated.

More important is how Daschle and Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi work out questions about how the two parties will work together after the GOP resumes control. Democrats are demanding equality in representation on committees and in staff resources. Republicans want their party to have an edge. Both sides agree that settling the dispute amicably is crucial to setting a productive tone for the year.

The House dispute over rules and committee assignments illustrated the risks: Democrats boiled at what they perceived as unfair treatment. “This is the first test of bipartisanship . . . and the Republican leadership failed it,” said Rep. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.).

The House’s partisan climate also could be affected by decisions Republicans make today on who will become chairmen of key committees responsible for shepherding Bush’s legislative agenda. The jobs are open because of a 1995 rule forcing committee chairmen to give up their posts after six years. In many cases, the competition presents Republicans with a choice between moderate and conservative candidates.

For example, the battle for chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee pits Rep. Philip M. Crane of Illinois, who is backed by many national conservative groups, against Rep. William M. Thomas of Bakersfield, a more pragmatic Republican with an independent streak. At least one GOP moderate already appears to have lost out in the jousting to head the House Banking and Financial Services Committee. Rep. Marge Roukema (R-N.J.), the only woman in line for a chairmanship, apparently is going to be bypassed in favor of a more conservative member, Rep. Michael G. Oxley (R-Ohio).

Another crucial barometer of the partisan climate on Capitol Hill will be how Bush’s Cabinet appointments are handled in the Senate--particularly the controversial nomination of former Sen. John Ashcroft (R-Mo.) as attorney general. Ashcroft, a staunch conservative, began making the rounds of the Senate on Wednesday to build support among lawmakers with whom he served before losing his reelection bid in November.

Early confirmation fights have created rocky starts for other presidents, including Clinton. Senate Democrats have made plain that they are not going to give Ashcroft a free ride just because he is a former colleague, but it remains unclear whether they have the will or the means to block him.

Pressure on Democrats to oppose Ashcroft is mounting from African American activists and women’s groups--who are concerned that Ashcroft will not vigorously enforce some laws he does not like, such as those ensuring abortion rights.

“What’s been said in the Senate is he’ll be on the hot seat for a while and of course there will be opposition. But in the final analysis, he’ll get confirmed,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles). “Some of us would like to convince the Democratic senators that they’ve got to do more than that. They’ve got to be committed to stopping him if they can.”

Daschle said that he expects Ashcroft to face a “tough series of questions that he’s going to have to answer and that, ultimately, I think, will determine the votes of a lot of our colleagues.”

*

Times staff writer Richard Simon contributed to this story.