Security Agency Fight Heats Up

President Bush bore down on lawmakers Tuesday to approve his vision of a new Cabinet superagency to spearhead the nation’s defense against terrorism, but a major dispute over executive power is brewing in the Senate.

The Senate, in its first vote on the matter, agreed unanimously Tuesday to consider the legislation--the prelude to a floor debate that could take up to three weeks.

But the administration continued to attack provisions it objects to in the Senate bill, sponsored by Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.). The dispute centers on how much freedom Bush and his new homeland security secretary would have to run the department outside of the usual government rules and regulations.

The administration is pressing for what it calls “freedom to manage”--the ability to reshape pieces of the new department and to create a new system for hiring, firing and paying its employees.

Senate Democrats say the White House is overreaching. They want to preserve existing civil service protections for the federal employees--many of them represented by unions--who would be joining the new agency. The Democrats also want to preserve congressional authority over government spending.

Next week’s anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks is raising pressure on Congress to act on Bush’s proposal for the Homeland Security Department, much of which was included in a bill the House passed in late July.

Tuesday’s Senate vote cleared away an important procedural obstacle, increasing the likelihood that the Senate soon will pass its own version of a bill to merge all or parts of more than 20 federal agencies into one new department with as many as 170,000 employees.

The Senate legislation, like the House-passed counterpart, would set in motion the most significant governmental reorganization of the last half-century.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan denounced the Senate bill Tuesday. “It does not create the lean, effective and flexible agency that we need to defend against a ruthless enemy who can carry out their attacks at their choosing,” he said.

Bush, whose aides for weeks have threatened a veto by him over the employee-management issues, pressed his case Tuesday in a burst of lobbying. Several Republican senators came to the White House for a strategy session, and the president’s homeland security advisor, Tom Ridge, made the rounds at the Capitol.

But some Democrats, led by Sen. Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, promised to resist what they call an administration power grab.

Byrd acknowledged “a political windstorm” to create the homeland security agency is “blowing down Pennsylvania Avenue and through the halls of Congress.”

But he urged the Senate to slow down the debate and preserve the power of Congress to oversee the executive branch. “Let’s stop, look and listen and be careful about what we’re doing,” he said.

Despite his adamant tone on the Senate floor, Byrd indicated he would not necessarily use every parliamentary weapon to stop the bill. While he may offer amendments, Byrd told reporters, he did not plan to try to talk the bill to death through a filibuster. That, too, was a strong signal that the bill will advance.

The Senate debate on homeland security began as Congress ended its monthlong summer recess, reconvening for several frantic final weeks of legislating before, and maybe after, the Nov. 5 midterm elections.

The House returns today for what will be an unusual workweek. On Friday, both houses of Congress are scheduled to hold a ceremonial meeting in New York City to commemorate the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center. It will be the first time in more than two centuries that Congress has met in New York.

With the Sept. 11 anniversary much on the minds of lawmakers, many of whom are up for reelection this fall, the homeland security debate seems likely to yield a final bill by year’s end to create what would be the government’s third-largest Cabinet department.

But Congress will not meet the most optimistic timetables of some lawmakers.

Soon after Bush proposed the government reorganization in a speech to the nation on June 6, House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) urged that a bill be completed in time for a signing ceremony on the anniversary of the attacks.

Now, though, the issues surrounding civil service rules and management authority seem likely to prolong the debate and produce contentious negotiations between the Republican-led House and the Democrat-controlled Senate.

“We’re not going to roll over when it comes to principles and beliefs that we hold to be very, very important,” said Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.). He called the Bush plan “a power grab of unprecedented magnitude.”

Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), appearing with Ridge in the Capitol, fired back: “I think it’s important that we focus on homeland security and not bureaucrat security.”

Amid the partisan sniping, senators from both parties made clear they have reached consensus on a number of points. Most important, they agree that a new department should be created, bringing under one roof such disparate agencies as the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Coast Guard, the Transportation Security Administration and the Customs Service.

Lieberman, chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, tried to downplay the conflict over labor-management issues, maintaining that his bill would give Bush 90% of what he sought. He said his bill would help diminish the vulnerabilities in domestic security that the Sept. 11 hijackers so ruthlessly exposed.

“We are still at risk,” Lieberman said, “and that is why we must urgently proceed.”

Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee, the committee’s top Republican, said: “In the end, we both agree that the creation of a new Department of Homeland Security is needed to make this country safer.... Even advocates of smaller government realize that is a mission that is vital to the security of this nation.”

*

Times staff writer Janet Hook contributed to this report.