Partisanship Creeps Back in Congress

Having responded to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks with remarkable speed and unity, Congress now faces more divisive issues as it turns to the assaults’ broader effects on the nation’s psyche, economy and its legislative agenda.

One of the first fractures in Congress’ united front could come as early as today, when a Republican senator has threatened to offer controversial energy legislation--including a hotly disputed proposal to expand oil drilling in the Alaskan wilderness--during debate on a defense bill.

Republican leaders are expected to try to head off the effort, even though they favor the energy bill. But the threat by Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) foreshadows a dynamic that will unfold over the coming weeks on Capitol Hill: The political truce that has reigned between the parties eventually will fizzle, and members of both parties are hoping to find ways to push their agendas in a political climate transformed by the terrorist attacks.

The energy bill is just one of many issues in the coming weeks that will test the bipartisan spirit that congressional leaders celebrated as they muscled through legislation last week to bail out the crippled airline industry and give President Bush the power and money he needed to respond to the attacks.

The sailing will not be as smooth, however, for proposals that would impose new anti-terrorist measures, shore up the sagging economy and provide further help to industries and workers hurt by the attacks.

“We all can look good when we agree,” House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) said last week. “The question is how good can we look when we have our disagreements.”

Indeed, congressional leaders are beginning to revisit the many domestic issues--trade, health and education--that preoccupied them before the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center.

Republican proponents of Bush’s energy plan--which includes expanded drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge--are hoping it is an environment more hospitable to their argument that more domestic energy production would enhance national security.

“We think the issue is highly important in light of what’s happened,” said Gary Hoitsma, Inhofe’s press secretary.

But Inhofe has been criticized for departing from leadership efforts to avoid contentious issues at this time of national crisis. A senior GOP Senate aide said party leaders were hoping to “keep the defense bill focused on defense.”

Hoitsma said Inhofe might not push the amendment to a vote if he can secure a commitment from Senate leaders to address the energy issue before the end of the year. Although GOP leaders don’t want the fight now, they clearly plan to eventually deploy Inhofe’s argument about the heightened importance of energy policy to national security.

“The more dependent that we get on the Middle East for our energy, the more involved we become . . . in their policies and their government,” said House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.).

Another test of Congress’ unity will come as it struggles to take care of its most rudimentary responsibility: keeping the government funded. Congress has not approved any of the 13 appropriations bills needed to finance the government after the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1. Both chambers plan to pass early this week a temporary funding measure that would keep the government running through mid-October, allowing time for final budget negotiations between Congress and the White House.

A key question is whether the 13 bills will stick to the overall spending target set before Sept. 11--essentially Bush’s budget request of $679 billion--or whether more will be spent to meet the two parties’ diverging priorities, especially Republicans’ push for more defense spending and Democrats’ drive for more education money.

The next stage of Congress’ response to the terrorist attacks is expected to be legislation to tighten airline security by, for example, requiring plane cockpits to be more secure or federalizing airport security operations. Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta is expected to submit safety recommendations to Congress by Oct. 1, and members of both parties agree that fast action will be essential to restore public confidence in flying.

“We must convince the American people very quickly that it’s safe to go to airports and to get on airplanes and fly,” House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) said on the same show that he hoped Congress could act in the next 10 days on an airport security measure.

But that measure may be complicated by the Democrats’ desire to include some relief for workers who lose their jobs as a result of the airline industry’s troubles. Republicans are less enthusiastic about such benefits.

Congress also is expected to face pressure to provide help to other industries, such as travel agents and hotels, affected by the drop-off in air travel.

“I’m sure they’re going to come to us, and I think they’re probably lined up already,” Hastert said.

House and Senate leaders also are planning action on the administration’s request for new anti-terrorism tools, including expanded wiretap authority. But that probably will be slowed by resistance from lawmakers who worry that civil liberties will be curtailed in the process.

“Let us not rush into a vast expansion of government power in a misguided attempt to protect freedom,” said Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.), a conservative who sits on the House Judiciary Committee. Liberal Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also has counseled caution.

Armey said that one possible approach would be for Congress to act quickly on the anti-terrorism proposals that enjoy broad support--such as those to enhance penalties for crimes by terrorists--but take the time to weigh more controversial provisions, such as tougher immigration restrictions.

Even more time will be needed, leaders say, to decide what Congress should do, if anything, to stimulate the economy. Some Republicans are pushing tax cuts--in investment income or corporate tax rates; Democrats are more interested in tax cuts that put money in the hands of consumers, such as another income tax rebate or payroll tax relief.