President Bush is demanding greater ability to hire, fire, promote and demote the workers and to exempt them from union coverage for reasons of national security. Democrats and Republicans in Congress remain at odds over that issue.
"On a bipartisan basis, we're trying to bridge that gap," said Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., one of a group of moderates seeking compromise. "We have to recognize that national security ought not be political."
The proposed compromise centers on the union issues, which would affect about 43,000 of the department's prospective employees, and are critical for most Democrats. Bush would still be able to exempt workers from union agreements for national security reasons, but the workers would have greater rights to a quick appeal on the decision.
Senate debate on the bill halted Tuesday as lawmakers paused for the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks. Even though debate is to resume Thursday, there are indications that the bill, once considered an easy winner, could be in some trouble.
Democratic Sen. John Breaux of Louisiana, who is also involved in the compromise talks, said if agreement is not reached "we may not get a homeland security bill."
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Bush remains "hopeful" the measure will pass but expressed impatience. No amendments have been voted on since last Thursday.
"The progress of the legislation can be summed up in one word, and that is slow," Fleischer told reporters.
Senate Majority leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., countered that there have been "good, instructive discussions" toward an agreement.
"It hasn't happened yet, but there's no reason why we shouldn't be optimistic," Daschle said.
Many Republicans appeared content to follow Bush's insistence that the new management powers are critical in blending 22 existing agencies into a single department dedicated to protecting Americans from terrorism at home. Republicans predicted Democrats would not have the stomach to keep up their opposition in an election year.
"The Democrats are more committed to the status quo and government employee labor unions than they are to national security; the American people don't care about the status quo," said Sen. Phil Gramm, R-Texas. "I am confident the president is going to win."
House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, issued a statement noting that 15 current Senate Democrats voted in 1995 to give then-President Clinton greater management flexibility at the Federal Aviation Administration.
Those Democrats, Armey said, "should stand up and be willing to give it to President Bush in a time of war."
Even if Democrats prevail on the worker issues in the Senate, a final agreement must be worked out with the GOP-led House -- which, in July, passed a version much closer to Bush's plan.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman, chief author of the Senate bill, said it was more important to get the agency up and running than to fight over labor issues. They could wait until the department's framework is settled, he said.
"We're having battles that are really not central to what it's all about," said Lieberman, D-Conn.
The president's Office of Management and Budget released a report Tuesday summarizing the $100 billion that has been spent or will be spent in response to the Sept. 11 attacks. That total includes $30 billion in war costs, $35 billion for homeland security and $21 billion for recovery in New York.
Last week, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office pegged the direct government costs of the terror attacks and response, including tax relief for New York, at about $81 billion over seven years.
Copyright 2002. Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
