Clampdown Transforms Cradle of Democracy

The side of the Capitol known as “the People’s House” abruptly shuts down in midweek. Vital congressional office buildings are sealed off. Concrete barriers seem more abundant than tourists.

These are only the most obvious signs of the security clampdown altering the landscape of the Capitol complex, perhaps the world’s foremost symbol of representative democracy.

Repeatedly in recent days and weeks, lawmakers have vowed to stand up to terror. They massed on the Capitol steps on the evening of Sept. 11 to sing “God Bless America,” seeking to project an image of a Congress and a government unbowed.

But congressional leaders acknowledge that the anthrax-filled letter opened last week in a Senate office and last month’s attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon will inevitably force tight and lasting security measures on Capitol Hill.

Already, key lawmakers are drafting legislation costing as much as $667 million to bolster security and speed construction of a visitors center that will more thoroughly screen people who enter the complex.

Sen. Robert F. Bennett of Utah, ranking Republican for legislative appropriations, said--only half in jest--that the measure would include “everything the Capitol Police ever asked for.”

Other lawmakers are peering ahead into the darkest scenario--the devastation of the Capitol complex in a war or terrorist attack. They are seeking a constitutional amendment to give governors the right to appoint members to the House of Representatives--instead of calling special elections--in the event that a sudden, massive number of vacancies leaves the House without a quorum.

Amid these efforts to protect both the Capitol and the continuity of government, there are laments about the loss of public access to a building that opened for business two centuries ago and has long been a magnet for tourists. Nearly 3 million people visit the Capitol each year, according to the Architect of the Capitol.

On Thursday, the same Capitol steps that had been the site of the stirring gathering of Congress members last month were eerily empty. So was the famed Rotunda--the result of a decision Monday to cancel tours indefinitely and reevaluate security. Ordinarily, on a brilliant fall day, both sites would be thronged by camera-toting tourists eager to capture snapshots of a busy Congress heading toward the end of a legislative year.

Noting the vacant halls and nearly empty galleries, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) reminisced on the Senate floor about the thrill he felt as a teenager visiting the Capitol on a trip to Washington with his parents.

“Now I have to think about a whole lot of parents and their children who can’t do that,” Leahy said. The Capitol, he said, should be open to show the world that “this symbol stands. This symbol shines. This symbol is open for business.”

Security scares have struck Congress before. A gunman broke into the Capitol in 1998, shooting and killing two police officers. Bombs exploded in the Senate wing in 1983, 1971 and 1915. Way back in 1814, the Capitol was torched by British troops and had to be largely rebuilt.

In each instance in modern times--and during the Persian Gulf War and in the aftermath of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing--Congress has reinforced security. Several side streets on Capitol Hill have been restricted or closed off to vehicle traffic. Metal detectors have been installed at building entrances. Concrete bollards have been placed at strategic points to block truck bombs, and more have been put in place since Sept. 11. Heavy truck access has been restricted.

Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski (D-Pa.) remembers one scare well. He was a 16-year-old page on the House floor in 1954 when Puerto Rican nationalists sprayed gunfire into the chamber from the galleries, wounding five congressmen.

“I was answering a call on the floor when the shots rang out,” he recalled. “One of the shots hit a column that was maybe 10 or 15 feet above my head. I got sprayed with some of the marble. I hit the floor like everyone else.”

Kanjorski was also in the Capitol on Wednesday when the House took the extraordinary step of recessing because of fears of bioterrorism. He agreed with the decision to pause for a security sweep, even though the Senate opted to remain open.

“I think we should work to remain as close to normalcy in operations as possible, be intelligent, take precautions and use modern devices to test against attacks and threats, but not to hunker down,” Kanjorski said.

Indeed, new restrictions have always been balanced by a congressional bias toward keeping the Capitol open. It is telling that Pennsylvania Avenue is closed to vehicles in front of the White House, but Independence and Constitution avenues, which run alongside the Capitol and six major congressional buildings, remain open.

Another example is the policy of open galleries. Some, including Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), have suggested installing bulletproof shields in front of spectators to protect the House and Senate floors, but the idea has gone nowhere.

But in coming years, the experience of visiting the Capitol will change dramatically. A new visitors center is planned for the eastern front of the 276-acre Capitol complex. Expected to open by 2005, the $265-million center will be part museum and part screening post. Lawmakers point out that the off-site center will help defend against suicide bombers and gunmen. In recent years, some Republicans have been skeptical of public funding for it. But that resistance has now evaporated, Lott and others say.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said she envisions “a Capitol that becomes like a campus, and people will just be checked for security reasons outside the campus and then let inside the campus to roam.” But how much they might be allowed to roam is still open to question.

While Congress ponders new defenses, some are asking what would happen if terrorists were to take out the Capitol and a substantial number of lawmakers.

The problem, as some see it: Under the Constitution, no one can serve in the House without being elected. That requirement has always been a point of pride in the House. In the Senate, by contrast, vacancies may be filled temporarily by gubernatorial appointment. But after Sept. 11, some lawmakers are wondering what would happen if a large number of House members were killed and surviving lawmakers were unable to muster a quorum.

Would the work of Congress in rebuilding America be put on hold while states scheduled special elections?

Last week, Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.) proposed an amendment to rectify what he sees as the potential constitutional weakness; the amendment would allow governors to fill House vacancies temporarily if a quarter or more of the members were to die or become incapacitated. So far, he said, House leaders have supported his research. Five lawmakers, including two senior Republicans, have agreed to co-sponsor the proposed amendment. To pass, the amendment would need two-thirds approval in both houses of Congress, and three-fourths of the state legislatures would have to ratify it.

“We have to put two and two together,” Baird said. “ . . . There are people who want to harm our country in the worst possible way. As difficult and troubling and disconcerting as it is to think about that, we have a responsibility to not only protect our citizens, but also to ensure that the republic and the Constitution endure.”