Voting Bill Is Likely To Wait
Senate Decision Isn't Expected Before Break

By Mary Beth Sheridan and Omar Fekeiki
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, July 26, 2007

Key lawmakers said yesterday that the Senate probably will not take up the D.C. vote bill before its summer break, dealing a blow to advocates who had hoped the measure could be passed quickly.

The news came as about 50 D.C. vote supporters gathered near the Dirksen Senate Office Building, chanting, "No vacation without representation!" The protest was part of a flurry of activity aimed at persuading lawmakers to squeeze in the bill before their month-long recess, scheduled to start Aug. 3.

The District's nonvoting delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), urged crowd members to keep up their spirits. She said the delay was frustrating but would not harm the bill's chances of being passed.

"I've come to ask you not to yield," Norton declared, waving a fist. "Don't yield!"

A spokesman for Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said the majority leader still considers the voting-rights bill a high priority. But "it is unlikely it will make it onto the calendar before August," spokesman Rodell Mollineau said. He said the Senate is planning to tackle bills on homeland security, children's health insurance and other matters before the break.

He said Reid's staff had contacted Republicans to see whether there was any way to jam in the bill. Don Stewart, a spokesman for Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), said "it would be a shock" if the measure came up in the next week.

The voting-rights bill was crafted to win bipartisan support by adding two seats to the House: one for the overwhelmingly Democratic District and the other for the state next in line to pick up an extra representative. That is currently Utah, a Republican bastion.

The bill cleared the House in April and a Senate committee last month, giving D.C. voting-rights activists their biggest victories in decades. They had hoped that the momentum would carry through to a summer Senate vote.

But McConnell opposes the bill, and the White House has threatened a veto. Critics say the measure is unconstitutional, noting that House members are supposed to come from "the several states" and that the District is not a state.

Politics is also a factor, with some Republicans concerned that the bill could lead to the District eventually picking up two powerful senators.

Lobbyists for the bill said this week that they were optimistic they finally had the 60 votes to overcome a possible filibuster. Reid, however, told Congressional Quarterly that he had talked to Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), the bill's chief Senate sponsor, and learned "they aren't quite ready" to take the measure to the floor.

"I am confident 60 senators will vote to move to the D.C. voting rights bill and reject a filibuster. I am ready to bring this bill to a vote as soon as Senate floor time is available," Lieberman said yesterday in a statement.

Advocates hope the bill will require limited floor time, a key issue because the Senate has so much other legislation to debate. Republicans signaled they were in no mood to let the voting-rights bill slip through quickly.

"It's a constitutional matter. We would want to spend some time talking about it," Stewart said.

Proponents say the measure is legally sound, because the Constitution gives Congress broad authority over the District -- including the power to create a House seat, they maintain. Legal scholars have differed on the bill's constitutionality.

Norton said yesterday that the delay is frustrating, "because we want to pass it now." She told the demonstrators, "I have every reason to believe that the determination of Mr. Reid's office . . . remains strong."

In recent weeks, bill supporters have been holding protests, planting "I Demand the Vote" signs on D.C. lawns and calling senators to urge passage of the measure. One of the bill's co-sponsors, Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), held a briefing this week to try to convince Senate staff members of the measure's constitutionality.

Nelson F. Rimensnyder, 64, a D.C. vote activist who took part in yesterday's protest, said he was disappointed that the bill would probably not reach the Senate floor before September.

"Delay is never good for voters in the District of Columbia. We've been waiting for over 200 years," said Rimensnyder, of Capitol Hill.

Carol Waser, 70, who lives in Ward 3, had a different opinion of Reid's decision: "If he's doing that in order to generate more support, that's a good idea. I would rather wait."

Ilir Zherka, the executive director of DC Vote, the advocacy group that organized the demonstration, wasn't ready to give up on a vote this summer.

"We are going to still look for opportunities to get it before they leave," he said. If the supporters fail, he said, "we'll be back."