Stevens Holds Senate in Session

The bridge flap gained national attention, cited by critics as a wasteful contrast to the recovery costs related to Hurricane Katrina, which hit the Gulf Coast after Congress passed the transportation bill last summer. The two bridges in question were not a huge priority within the state, and some Alaskans expressed concerns about a funding backlash.

That said, many Alaskans take a practical view of Stevens. "I would not say he's the most popular person in Alaska," said Gerald McBeath, a professor of political science at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks. "But people are aware of the seniority system and its benefits. It's a very healthy contribution that we receive from the federal government."

But the proposal to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has long eluded Stevens. He has tried to attach it to all sorts of bills, but has never been able to navigate around fiercely opposed environmental groups, which say that the refuge is a pristine wilderness and should not be sacrificed for what they contend is a limited amount of oil.

Earlier this year, Stevens and his longtime friend and drilling ally Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.), chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, hatched a plan to insert the Arctic provision in a major deficit reduction bill. Because the budget-cutting measure enjoyed special protection from parliamentary hurdles in the Senate, Stevens and Domenici thought it would be the perfect vehicle for passing the drilling plan. But that tactic had to be scuttled in the House because of strong objections from Republican moderates.

At the urging of House GOP leaders, Stevens decided to try his luck on the defense bill. Environmental groups, relieved they had beaten back the budget threat, were shocked when they learned last Wednesday of Stevens's latest plan. "I just didn't think it was possible," said Brian Moore, legislative director of the Alaska Wilderness League, an environmental group trying to preserve the refuge.

Democrats are considering their parliamentary options for a showdown expected tomorrow in the Senate. A memo circulating among Democratic senators and their staffs pointed out that the new language authorizes drilling in a larger area than would have been allowed in the budget bill. They also noted that President Bush would have broad discretion over how royalties are spent.

Democrats and moderate Republicans said that in challenging the drilling provision, they will argue that inserting an unrelated provision in the defense bill is a breach of Senate rules.

Stevens retorted: "I've done nothing illegal. I've done nothing immoral." Even more ominous for impatient senators, he appeared to be in no rush. "I could go all month," Stevens said on the Senate floor Monday. "I've been with it for 25 years."