D.C. Vote Bill Jerked From Senate Backer

By Mary Beth Sheridan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 21, 2007

Fresh off a major victory in the House, supporters of a D.C. voting rights bill turned their attention yesterday to the Senate, only to hit their first challenge: The legislation was yanked from the senator who promised to champion it there.

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), a longtime advocate of voting rights for the District, had vowed to move the legislation quickly through the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, which he leads.

But yesterday, the Senate parliamentarian ruled that the Finance Committee had jurisdiction instead, according to Lieberman's office. That would put the legislation in the hands of Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), whose views on the D.C. vote issue are not widely known.

"Today, a new wrench has been thrown into the works," said one Senate staffer, speaking on condition of anonymity because senators were still deciding how to proceed. "But it is definitely something that we can overcome."

A spokesman for Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), the majority leader, said last night that he expected the matter to wind up before Lieberman's committee.

The bill would expand the House by two seats. One would go to the heavily Democratic District, which has a nonvoting delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton (D). The other would go to the next state due to get another representative -- Republican-leaning Utah.

Analysts say the measure faces a much tougher road in the Senate than it did in the House, which approved it 241 to 177 Thursday. Democrats will have to pick up at least nine Republican supporters to avoid a filibuster.

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the minority leader, has made clear his opposition. He said in a speech last month that the D.C. vote bill "certainly will not have my support."

Republican congressional leaders say the legislation violates the constitutional requirement that House representatives come from states. The White House agrees and has threatened to veto the measure if it clears the Senate. Legal scholars have lined up on both sides over the bill's constitutionality.

Some Republicans also fear that the legislation could establish a precedent leading to two senators for the District.

Lieberman's staff said yesterday that he was in Canada and unable to comment on the latest developments. His spokeswoman, Leslie Phillips, said: "He is committed to voting representation for the citizens of the District of Columbia in the House. He has been for a long time, and he will continue to work to make that happen."

The Senate parliamentarian's office did not respond to messages left yesterday afternoon.

The decision apparently was prompted by the bill's tiny tweak to the tax code to fund the new House seats. Democrats included the provision because they had promised to pay for any costs created by new legislation rather than increase the deficit.

Reid's spokesman, Jim Manley, said last night that he expected a new bill, without the tax provisions, to be introduced.

"I think Senator Lieberman is going to introduce a bill that will go through the Homeland Security Committee," he said.

If such a bill passed, it would have to be reconciled later with the House version and possibly with other Senate measures.

A spokeswoman for the Finance Committee said she could not comment because she had not received official word of the decision. A spokeswoman for Baucus did not answer a message seeking comment.

Wade Henderson, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, which is lobbying for the bill, said Lieberman "has really been the person we looked to in the past . . . and who we anticipate will continue to lead this effort in the Senate."

D.C. vote advocates have begun reaching out to Republican senators to try to get enough votes for passage. One of their first goals is to persuade Utah's Orrin G. Hatch (R), an influential Senate veteran, to promote the measure.

Hatch has expressed lukewarm support for the bill because it would make the new Utah seat an "at large" or statewide position. The senator has said such an arrangement could be unconstitutional.

Activists say they hope to assuage his concerns, perhaps by returning to an earlier plan under which Utah's districts would be redrawn to include the new seat. Members of the state's three-man House delegation were wary of such a plan because they would have to run again in special elections in new districts.

"Part of the goal of the outside groups will be to try to facilitate a conversation among the Utah delegation and other interested parties in the bill . . . to figure out what's possible," said Ilir Zherka, executive director of DC Vote, an advocacy group.

Lloyd Leonard, head of the League of Women Voters lobbying office, said he was hopeful the measure would win support from Republican senators who have backed civil rights and good-government bills.

"The U.S. Senate is never a sure thing," he said. "But we've got a shot."