With the focus on the economic stimulus package shifting to the Senate, the partisan split evident with the Democrat-only passage of the bill in the House last night overshadowed a lot of the discussions on both sides of the aisle today. So much so that various leaders were practically disowning the word bipartisanship as if deadly germs were part of its etymology.

At a news conference earlier today, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended the Democrat-only passage of the economic stimulus package, contending that Republicans were indeed included; their suggestions on tax cuts had become part of the bill itself, she said. But several G.O.P. senators and representatives hit the airwaves today, criticizing the spending portions and promoting their view of a more palatable alternative — bigger, broader tax cuts and incentives.

When Mrs. Pelosi was asked whether the vote — 244 to 188 without a single Republican’s approval — represented a failure on her part to advance President Obama’s desire for a broad bipartisan bill, she practically snapped:

“I didn’t come here to be partisan. I didn’t come here to be bipartisan. I came here, as did my colleagues, to be nonpartisan, to work for the American people, to do what is in their interest. The president’s agenda is reflected in this legislation. It’s — I mentioned, some of the priorities that were there about creating jobs, cutting taxes, helping states through this difficult economic time, and to do so in a fiscally sound way. People vote for what they believe in. Clearly, the Republicans did not believe in the agenda that I just described for you, and that’s probably one of the reasons they voted that way. I think they probably voted their conscience and they couldn’t support that. … We reached out to the Republicans all along the way, and they know it. And they know it. They were part of the original bill, with the — some of the tax provisions were their suggestions. They had what they asked for in terms of committee mark-up. They had the rule on the floor that gave them plenty of opportunity to make changes. They just didn’t have the ideas that had the support of the majority of the people in the Congress. ”

She pushed back strenuously in response to remarks made by Minority Leader John Boehner and other House Republicans, who slammed the bill as “partisan” and full of excessive spending rather than the approach of using tax cuts.

They complained that the Democratic leadership acted autocratically, in contrast to Mr. Obama’s entreaties for work across the aisles. (And today Republican groups and officials continued to criticize the leadership, with one distributing earlier quotes from Mrs. Pelosi, when she opened this session touting bipartisanship.) Mr. Boehner, who was attending a retreat with his fellow members, issued another missive today — using bipartisanship in his own way (because 11 Democrats voted with 177 Republicans against the bill): “The vote last night sent a clear, powerful, and bipartisan message to Congressional Democratic leaders about the current version of the economic “stimulus” package: the American people deserve better. The current product isn’t good enough.”



On the Senate side, much remains up in the air in terms of how deep the Republican opposition will be.

For a sampling of those Republicans whose objections are fairly hardline: Senators John Barrasso of Wyoming and Jim DeMint of South Carolina were among those who complained in interviews that the effort was piling up unsustainable debt. “The Senate committee that addresses this has produced a bill and we’ll start talking about it next week,” Senator DeMint said in an interview today on Fox News. “It’s very much like the House bill. They rejected every Republican amendment. So this idea of bipartisanship is a bunch of rhetoric. There is no bipartisanship on this massive spending bill, but I think it is going to help define the Republicans and the Democrats once again because every Republican in the House rejected this and I think every Republican in the Senate might do as well.”

In a separate interview with Fox later today, Senator Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina, said he doubted he could vote for the measure unless it was drastically altered. “Well, I think there’ll be quite a few senators that choose to vote against this. Anything short of a major change in the

bill which would include a reduction in the amount of spending — you know, in about 45 days from the TARP to the Omnibus Appropriations Bill, this Congress will spend $2 trillion of taxpayer money. I’m not sure that my children will even be able to retire the debt on that deficit for their lifetime.”

At a Democratic leadership briefing this afternoon, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid seemed to be trying to head off a divide as severe as the one in the House, for starters by asking for “partisan bickering” to be put aside. While vowing to get a bill to Mr. Obama’s desk before any recess would begin, Mr. Reid promised to continue the resumption of an amendment process that has allowed Republicans to make real proposals on the floor, for the first time in a few years. “Until that’s abused, we’re going to continue it,” he said.

Mr. Reid began by drawing a comparison between the size of the stadium for the Super Bowl game (seating in Tampa at 75,000) to a layoff number of 85,000 from a total just the other day, to get a picture going. Senator Dick Durbin, noting the layoff number for this month alone is about 212,000, called that figure a “grim reminder of what this debate is about.”

“For those Republicans who voted against it, their alternative is what?” Mr. Durbin asked sharply. “We can’t stand back and do nothing.”

And Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York, went one further, invoking Mr. Boehner by name and saying he “is leading his members off a cliff. … I hope Senate Republicans make a strong break with their House colleagues.”

As for the G.O.P. labeling Mrs. Pelosi’s leadership a “failure” because of the House vote, Mr. Schumer expressed disbelief. “The failure will be not to do a bill,” Mr. Reid said later.

A few points underlining the way the Senate leaders may be leaning:

Disposable Programs Faced with criticisms about some individual items in the House bill that drew fire, Mr. Reid said: “Let’s understand this is a very large package. … Is everything we have in this perfect? Of course not, and that’s why we’ll have a bill that’s different from the House.” Dealing with philosophical differences as to what will indeed create jobs, Mr. Reid quipped: “Stimulus is in the eye of the beholder, O.K?”

(As an aside, Mrs. Pelosi corrected a reporter who said Mr. Obama had indicated the Senate version would “improve” on the House bill: “Strengthen,” she admonished.)

More Housing Help Some — including Senator Chris Dodd — are questioning whether there shouldn’t be additional assistance in the stimulus package to ease the mortgage crisis. Mr. Reid seemed to indicate that more help might fall outside this particular bill. (Senator Dodd also wants to see — in or out of the stimulus bill — a 90-day moratorium on housing foreclosures.)

Tax Cuts Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., in an interview with CNBC today, indicated that he believed the Senate bill — and perhaps the final compromise — would include more on the “tax side” of things, though he stopped short of giving an emphatic answer to a specific query on “tax cuts.” He also said he thought there might be additions on the infrastructure portion as well, and predicted that some Republican senators would vote for it.

Alternative Minimum Tax Changes One provision that would adjust the AMT to keep down income taxes for some middle-class Americans this year, will be taken care of, whether it’s in the stimulus bill or not, Mr. Reid said. It is, however, favored by many Republican senators, as it amounts to about $75 billion in tax relief.