Jeffords Shifts Power in Senate

Ebullient Democrats on Thursday prepared to seize control of the Senate and mount an emboldened opposition to President Bush, as Vermont Sen. James M. Jeffords’ defection from the Republican Party sent both parties scrambling to cope with a wrenching and unprecedented transfer of power.

Jeffords’ decision to become an independent, which will not become effective before June 5, will end the Senate’s precarious 50-50 party division, abruptly catapult Democrats into committee chairmanships and give them control of the chamber’s legislative agenda for the first time since 1994.

Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) prepared to assume the mantle of majority leader and immediately insisted that Bush treat Democrats as equal partners in policymaking.

“We have a divided government,” Daschle said. “The only way we can accomplish our agenda, the only way that his administration will be able to accomplish its agenda, is if we truly work together.”

Democrats made plain they would move quickly to put their stamp on the policy debate, saying the first bills brought to the floor would include a long-stalled measure to give patients more power in dealing with managed health care plans.

“There’s a new sheriff in town,” said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa). “We’re going to show the American people what this change means.”

Republicans, meanwhile, glumly confronted their impending loss of power and plunged into a bitter debate among themselves about whether their party had become poisonously inhospitable to moderates like Jeffords.

“Tolerance of dissent is the hallmark of a mature party, and it is well past time for the Republican Party to grow up,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

But many Republicans seemed unrepentant, saying that Jeffords had no grounds to complain that moderates were marginalized in the GOP. “You name an issue, they’ve had significant input,” said assistant GOP leader Don Nickles (R-Okla.).

For members of both parties, the day represented a landmark: Never before has Senate control changed hands midterm. The unprecedented turmoil is a reminder of just how narrowly divided the entire nation is, having just elected its president by a wafer-thin, bitterly contested margin. That suggested a silver lining for Republicans: Some held out hope that they might win back control of the Senate in the next election--if not sooner, thanks to some unforeseen fluke like another party defection.

“We will have our majority back soon,” promised Senate Republican leader Trent Lott of Mississippi.

The focus on Jeffords had been building since the start of the week. He had been telling colleagues he planned to quit the GOP and become an independent, throwing his support behind Democrats in organizing the Senate. But Republicans made repeated last-minute appeals to him to change his mind and were heartened by his willingness Wednesday to postpone his announcement for one day.

So televisions throughout official Washington were tuned Thursday morning to Jeffords’ appearance in Vermont. He confirmed that he would leave the GOP--although, in an effort to avoid disrupting work on Bush’s top legislative priority, Jeffords said he would not make the change until at least June 5. That will give Congress time to finish work on the $1.35-trillion, 11-year tax cut, which then will be sent to the White House.

Jeffords, speaking from the ballroom of a Burlington, Vt., hotel overlooking Lake Champlain, launched a pointed critique of the GOP, saying it no longer reflected the moderate principles that have guided his career.

“Increasingly, I find myself in disagreement with my party,” he said. “It has become a struggle for our leaders to deal with me, and for me to deal with them.”

Bush, in a speech later in Ohio, responded tersely to Jeffords. “I respect Sen. Jeffords. But I respectfully--but respectfully--I couldn’t disagree more.”

On Capitol Hill, both parties retreated into separate closed-door strategy sessions after Jeffords’ announcement, to survey the political landscape that had just been utterly transformed.

Republicans were grim-faced as they assembled. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas dabbed at a wet eye as she spoke with reporters. “I’m very sorry that we’re going to lose Sen. Jeffords.”

But Republicans were confronting the loss not just of their colleague but of the vast perquisites of majority power, including their committee chairmanships. Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), for example, had just become chairman of the powerful Finance Committee four months ago and on Wednesday presided over the triumphant Senate passage of the tax cut bill. With Jeffords’ decision, Grassley becomes just another committee member.

Said Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas), about to lose the helm of the Banking Committee: “I’ve been chairman, and I’ve been not chairman. Being chairman is better.”

Participants said the two-hour GOP meeting was impassioned and introspective. “We had a real venting of emotion,” Nickles said. “A lot of people are shellshocked.”

Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) said she made a personal appeal to her colleagues to come to grips with what she believed was the lesson of the Jeffords debacle: that the party needs to be more welcoming to its moderates.

“We’re going to have to do a far better job at being inclusive,” she said. “There must be changes.”

Despite such comments, anger at Jeffords seethed below the surface. “Republicans are not going to work with someone who betrayed their party,” said a senior Republican aide. “He will be ostracized.”

Said Sen. Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.): “He’s created a lot more problems for other people. . . . He didn’t just solve his own.”

Jeffords’ defection sparked speculation that a challenge would be mounted to Lott’s party leadership, coming in the wake of the GOP’s five-seat loss in the 2000 elections. Nickles, long considered a rival for Lott’s job, would say only, “It’s not my intention” to challenge him. The mood during the two-hour meeting of Senate Democrats was far different.

“There wasn’t champagne, but there was a lot of applause,” Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) told reporters. “There was a lot of smiles. And also there really was a sense of responsibility and that it’s our job to demonstrate something different than what was happening in the Senate.”

Daschle’s new status as majority-leader-in-waiting was obvious as he walked down the Capitol’s steps to talk with reporters. His strides were captured by dozens of photographers and television cameras, and the news conference attracted scores of journalists.

Still, Daschle was clearly aware of the limits of his power in a Senate soon to consist of 50 Democrats, 49 Republicans and 1 independent.

“This is still one of the most closely divided senates in all of our history,” he said. “Bipartisanship, or I guess I should now say tripartisanship, is still a requirement.”

Daschle called Bush later in the day and said their 10- to 15-minute conversation was “very amicable” and that the president offered congratulations. “We talked about the mutual desire to find ways with which to work more closely together,” Daschle said.

But for all his conciliatory talk, Daschle and his fellow Democrats are planning to move quickly on the managed care legislation known as the patients’ bill of rights, which GOP congressional leaders have blocked for years despite strong bipartisan support for it among rank-and-file lawmakers. With a stroke, Daschle can break that logjam by bringing it to the floor--though he then would still have to muster 60 votes to break a potential Republican filibuster.

That is just one of the policy consequences of a Democratic Senate. Others include:

* Tax cuts: The power shift in the Senate apparently will not stop the sweeping tax cut bill nearing final approval. But it likely will make it harder for Republicans to follow through on other tax cut bills.

* Bush nominations: In what may be one of their last acts in the majority, Senate Republicans on Thursday won confirmation of Bush’s controversial nominee for solicitor general, Theodore B. Olson. Once Democrats are in charge, they will have more control over the flow of judicial nominations and other appointments.

* Minimum wage: Action had already been expected on a bill to increase the minimum wage. Democrats will doubtless bring it up sooner than the Republicans would have.

* Bankruptcy reform: Legislation to make it harder to declare bankruptcy has stalled because of a Senate dispute over the makeup of the conference committee to resolve differences between House and Senate versions of the bill. That deadlock now will presumably be broken, with Senate Democrats getting additional representation in the conference.

* Medicare: Democrats hope to push sooner on legislation to provide a prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries.

* Campaign finance reform: Lott has used his power to slow or block campaign finance reform legislation. Most recently, he has delayed sending a bill passed by the Senate to the House. Daschle said that delivering that bill would be one of his first acts as leader.

The anticipated changes in committee chairmanships also will have a major effect. For instance:

* Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.), a leading supporter of Bush’s tax cut, is expected to be succeeded as chairman of the Budget Committee by the Democrats’ point main in opposing the tax cut, Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota.

* Armed Services Chairman John Warner (R-Va.), a backer of Bush’s missile defense initiative, is likely to be replaced by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), who is more skeptical of the proposal.

* Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), a leading liberal, is in line to succeed Jeffords as chairman of the committee that oversees education, labor and health bills. That will put Kennedy center stage as Democrats spotlight the patients’ bill of rights measure.

* Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), who as Judiciary Committee chairman led the fight for Olson, may be succeeded by liberal Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), who will surely give greater scrutiny to Bush’s choices.

But in a sign of a potential turf battle among Democrats now that they have real power, reports surfaced Thursday that Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware might be interested in the Judiciary panel’s chairmanship, a post he held from 1987 to 1995.

*

MORE INSIDE

Who lost Jeffords?: Republicans point fingers at White House. A18

Enter Daschle: New test for Capitol Hill insider. A16

Bush soldiers on: President touts his agenda in Cleveland. A22

Senator’s statement: Excerpts from Jeffords’ announcement. A22

*

Times staff writers Nick Anderson and Greg Miller contributed to this story.