By Charles Babington and Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, May 26, 2005
Having resolved a bitter impasse over judges, the Senate plunged into another contentious issue yesterday involving filibuster rights and President Bush's conservative appointees: the nomination of John R. Bolton to be United Nations ambassador.
Bolton, a forceful and outspoken State Department undersecretary, is scheduled for an early evening vote today that will either clear the path for his confirmation or extend the debate into June. Supporters said they will have enough votes to confirm him eventually, but first they must deal with Democrats' anger at the Bush administration's refusal to release documents dealing with Bolton's work history.
The battle over Bolton largely disappeared in recent weeks while the judicial nominees issue consumed the Senate. It reemerged yesterday with most Democrats still strongly opposing him, but with Bolton in stronger shape for two reasons: The hiatus slowed his critics' momentum and helped his backers regroup; and Democrats, having battled ferociously to preserve the right to filibuster judicial nominees, show no desire to pick a new fight by launching a full-blown filibuster over Bolton.
Instead, they agreed to a 6 p.m. vote today on whether to end debate on Bolton. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) said he and his allies are not trying to prevent an eventual confirmation vote, but have no other way to pressure the administration and demonstrate the Senate's displeasure over the records impasse.
Dodd urged Republicans to vote to continue the debate until the documents are released, even if they plan to support Bolton's confirmation. "The opportunity to avoid this altogether is in the hands of the administration," he said.
If today's "cloture vote" draws at least 60 senators, debate will end and the Senate will immediately vote on Bolton's nomination, confirmation of which would require a simple majority in the 100-member chamber. Republicans hold 55 seats. If the cloture vote falls short of 60, senators will start a week-long recess and resume the Bolton debate next month.
Bolton's nomination has sharply divided the nation's foreign policy and intelligence communities. Conservatives embrace his robust calls for intervention against nations suspected of harboring terrorists and his sharp attacks on U.N. policies and personalities he considers lacking. But others, including some foreign officials, see his denunciations of the United Nations as a symbol of U.S. hubris and indifference to allies and diplomacy.
The records for which Democratic senators are pressing the State Department deal with Bolton's role in assessing Syria's potential threat in 2003 and his seeking out information from secretly intercepted conversations of foreigners and, in some cases, U.S. citizens. The administration has said the documents contain classified information and are not relevant to the Bolton nomination.
Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), who opposes Bolton, said, "We have reason to believe, though cannot prove without the documents," that Bolton misled Congress about his role in preparing State Department testimony in 2003 about Syria's possible possession of unconventional weapons.
But Republicans defended Bolton and said all senators had enough information to assess his qualifications. Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) opened yesterday's debate by calling Bolton "extremely well qualified." He said Bolton, the State Department's top official for arms control, "has affirmed his commitment to fostering a strong United Nations" and "expressed his intent to work hard to secure greater international support at the U.N. for the national security and foreign policy objectives of the United States."
Critics say Bolton has a history of mistreating subordinates and using intelligence selectively to overstate the threats posed by Syria, Cuba and other nations. A deadlocked Foreign Relations Committee sent his nomination to the Senate without recommendation after Sen. George V. Voinovich (R-Ohio) said Bolton's record alarmed him.
Voinovich sharply criticized Bolton yesterday but said it was unclear whether any GOP colleagues would join him in opposing the nomination. "Most of my colleagues are not very happy about this [nomination], but they just go along with it," he told reporters.
The two senior members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence issued dueling letters yesterday regarding their probe into sensitive communications intercepts examined by Bolton as undersecretary. The Foreign Relations Committee had sought their help in obtaining access to the highly classified material and evaluating it.
Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) and ranking Democrat John D. Rockefeller IV (W.Va.) agreed that Bolton did nothing improper when he requested the identities of U.S. citizens whose names had been censored in the communications intercepts. Bolton's opponents have speculated about his motives, but both senators agreed Bolton's requests were approved by the appropriate officials.
But the two differed on Bolton's handling of the material in one instance. Bolton spoke to an official named in an intercept -- someone who worked for him -- even though such communication was not supposed to take place. Rockefeller said the incident was worthy of more investigation. But Roberts said Bolton was not at fault because Carl W. Ford Jr., the assistant secretary for intelligence, failed to warn Bolton not to share the information, even with someone with the necessary security clearance.