Democrats force delay of vote on Bolton

WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats forced a postponement yesterday of a confirmation vote on the nomination of John R. Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations, dealing President Bush a setback on a key appointment and heightening pressure on his administration to release more details of Bolton's handling of top-secret intelligence.

Republicans needed 60 votes to cut off debate and move immediately to a vote on Bolton's nomination, but the final tally was 56-42. Democrats said they objected to the Bush administration's refusal to release two sets of classified documents that they say are relevant to the Bolton nomination.

Bolton is still on track to gain confirmation since Democrats made clear that they will drop their stalling tactic as soon as the Bush administration allows lawmakers to review the material. The fact that more than 50 senators voted to cut off debate on Bolton suggests that his nomination will receive the necessary majority vote when it reaches the floor.

But the vote leaves Bolton's fate lingering until at least June 7, after lawmakers return from a weeklong Memorial Day recess.

Democrats hailed the vote to keep Bolton's nomination from reaching the floor, saying it shows the legislative branch is willing to assert itself against an administration that has guarded information closely.

''We just don't want to vote absent information we're entitled to have as an institution," said Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., a Delaware Democrat who is the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. ''We are willing to vote 10 minutes after we get back in session, if in fact they provide the information -- information which Mr. Bolton's staff had access to, that they will not give to the majority leader of the United States Senate."

The dust-up over Bolton brought a swift return of partisan rancor to a chamber that earlier this week had averted a bruising showdown over judges following the intervention of a band of 14 moderates from both parties.

Democrats insisted they were not labeling their move a filibuster. But the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist, mocked the assertions, accusing Democrats of returning to a pattern of ''obstructionism" just days after the compromise on judges allowed up-or-down votes on three controversial Bush judicial nominees.

''It quacks like a filibuster," said Frist, a Tennessee Republican. ''It does disappoint me. We had an opportunity to finish and complete this week with a very good spirit."

Earlier in the day, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada informed Frist that he didn't think Democrats had enough votes to block Bolton, and asked Frist to delay the vote because of the documents, according to Jim Manley, a Reid spokesman. Frist refused, and Reid responded, ''Well, it's a crapshoot," with the vote too close to call, Manley said.

The vote on whether to shut off debate on Bolton was in doubt even as senators voiced ''ayes" and ''nos" on the floor of the Senate chamber just after 6 p.m. Members of both parties buttonholed about half a dozen undecided Democrats, with Senator Barbara Boxer of California seeking to convince members for Democrats and Senator Norm Coleman of Minnesota doing the same for Republicans.

The cajoling convinced Democratic senators Tom Harkin of Iowa, Ken Salazar of Colorado, and Blanche L. Lincoln of Arkansas to vote with their party. The only senators to cross party lines were Democrats Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, who voted with the Republicans to end debate.

As the roll-call was ending, Frist switched his vote to no, giving him the procedural right to force the Senate to vote again on the issue.

The nomination in March of Bolton, 56, has been a major flashpoint in long-running disagreements between Democrats and the Bush administration over foreign policy steps dating back to Bush's first term. Bolton's combative nature and outspoken criticism of the UN left Democrats saying that he is ill-suited to help the US regain some of its standing in the world community since the launching of the Iraq war.

The Foreign Relations Committee interviewed several former colleagues of Bolton, who said that he had attempted to exaggerate intelligence on weapons of mass destruction in Syria and Cuba in 2003, and that he tried to punish two analysts who disagreed with his policy views.

For two months, Senate Democrats have been seeking documents on the issue involving Syria, but the Bush administration has declined to provide them. The administration has said that the inquiry isn't relevant to Bolton's nomination and that internal communications must be kept private to encourage candor in deliberations.

Democrats have also sought the names of 19 Americans whose identities Bolton requested from a series of 10 National Security Agency intercepts, to determine whether Bolton acted appropriately by asking for the names. But they also have been rebuffed on that request.

''If we can't get those documents, if we're not being allowed to see the very things the nominee was allowed to see, then I don't think we're being treated as a coequal branch," said Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut and a senior member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said before the vote yesterday.

Dodd and Biden declined to say what Democrats would do if the administration continues to refuse to release the documents, but said they hoped last night's vote would convince the president to reconsider. ''Let's see what happens in the next 10 days," Dodd said.

Republicans defended the administration by noting that it allowed the chairman and ranking Democrat of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to review NSA intercepts -- albeit with the names blacked out. Republicans say the documents should explain why Bolton wanted the names.

''After completing an examination of these issues, I found no evidence that there was anything improper about any aspect of Mr. Bolton's requests for . . . identities of US persons," Senator Pat Roberts, Republican of Kansas and chairman of the intelligence committee, wrote in a letter to colleagues.

Republicans sought to turn discussions of the Bolton nomination into a debate over the United Nations, which they depicted as a scandal-plagued and ineffective international body that is in desperate need of a shake-up. In that context, a critical voice like Bolton's is needed to make sure the United States is getting its money's worth out of the organization, said Senator James M. Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma.

''It's broke. He can fix it," Inhofe said. ''I sometimes watch the United Nations and wonder who's on our side. I can assure you with John Bolton we're going to have someone who's on our side."

Farah Stockman of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Rick Klein can be reached at rklein@globe.com.