WASHINGTON In an abrupt shift, Senate Democratic leaders said they would not provide the $80 million that President Obama requested to close the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. The move escalates pressure on the president, who on Thursday is scheduled to outline his plans for the 240 terrorism suspects still held there.
In recent days, Mr. Obama has faced growing demands from both parties, but particularly Republicans, to lay out a more detailed road map for closing the Guantánamo prison and to provide assurances that detainees would not end up on American soil, even in maximum security prisons.
The move by Senate Democrats to strip the $80 million from a war-spending bill and the decision to bar, for now, transfer of detainees to the United States, raised the possibility that Mr. Obamas order to close the camp by Jan. 22, 2010, might have to be changed or delayed.
Guantánamo makes us less safe, the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, said at a news conference where he laid out the partys rationale for its decision, which is expected to be voted on this week. However, this is neither the time nor the bill to deal with this. Democrats under no circumstances will move forward without a comprehensive, responsible plan from the president. We will never allow terrorists to be released into the United States.
Senate Democrats said they still backed Mr. Obamas decision to close the prison. But lawmakers have not exactly been eager to accept detainees in their home states. When the tiny town of Hardin, Mont., offered to put the terrorism suspects in its empty jail, Montanas senators, both Democrats, and its representative, a Republican, quickly voiced opposition.
Administration officials have indicated that if the Guantánamo camp closes as scheduled more than 100 prisoners may need to be moved to the United States, including 50 to 100 who have been described as too dangerous to release.
Of the 240 detainees, 30 have been cleared for release. Some are likely to be transferred to foreign countries, though other governments have been reluctant to take them. Britain and France have each accepted one former detainee. And while as many as 80 of the detainees will be prosecuted, it remains unclear what will happen to those who are convicted and sentenced to prison.
At the White House, the press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said the administration expected that Congress would eventually release the money to close the camp, and he suggested that the concerns of lawmakers would start to be addressed on Thursday, when Mr. Obama will present a hefty pa rt of his plan.
At the Pentagon, a spokesman, Geoff Morrell, said he believed that the administration remained on track to meet the deadline for closing the prison. I see nothing to indicate that that date is at all in jeopardy, Mr. Morrell said.
As the administration has struggled with the issue, it has come under assault from the right and the left.
Conservatives have sought to portray the president as weak on national security. Liberals, including some human rights advocates, have criticized several of Mr. Obamas decisions, including his plan to revive the military commissions created by the Bush administration to prosecute terrorism suspects held at Guantánamo.
Lawmakers, mindful of polls showing wide public opposition to bringing detainees to the United States, have expressed concerns about the safety of their constituents, and some have said that any location housing detainees, even the most secure prisons, would become a potential target for a terrorist attack.
On Tuesday Republicans, including the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who has been warning for weeks about the dangers of closing the prison, applauded the Democrats decision.
At a news conference, Mr. McConnell said he hoped it was a prelude to keeping the camp open and dangerous terrorism suspects offshore, where he said they belong. He noted that no prisoner had escaped from Guantánamo since the Sept. 11 attacks.
Guantánamo is the perfect place for these terrorists, Mr. McConnell said. However, if the president ends up sticking with this decision to close it next January, obviously they need a place to be. It ought not to be the United States of America.
Senate Democrats on Tuesday conceded that their decision to shift course in part reflected the success of Republicans in putting them on the defensive.
But the Democrats said they had also acted to avert a partisan feud that would delay the military-spending measure, which is needed to finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and other national security programs through Sept. 30.
The House last week overwhelmingly approved the $96.7 billion spending measure after stripping the money for closing Guantánamo and inserting language barring Mr. Obama from transferring any detainees to the United States without first presenting a detailed plan to Congress, and giving lawmakers a chance to review it.
Later in the week, the White House announced that it would revive the military commissions to prosecute some of the terrorism suspects held at Guantánamo.
The Obama administration said it would expand the legal rights of suspects, including a limit on the use of hearsay evidence and a ban on evidence gained from cruel treatment.
Still, discomfort has only grown in Congress. Senate Democrats had initially included the $80 million for closing the prison in their version of the war-spending measure, but with tight restrictions requiring Mr. Obama to submit a plan before the money could be used.
Jim Manley, a spokesman for Mr. Reid, said the majority leader had not intended to suggest that detainees could never be transferred to American prisons, but only to say that the Senate would not provide money for closing Guantánamo until a task force created by Mr. Obama presented a report on detainee policy in July.
Mr. Reid in his comments, however, was unequivocal in insisting that the terrorism suspects never reach American shores.
You cant put them in prison unless you release them, he said. We will never allow terrorists to be released in the United States.
Mr. Reid said he and other Senate Democrats had shifted course after seeing the version of the spending bill approved by the House last week, a rare gesture of deference by the upper chamber of Congress to the lower one.
In looking at the position of the House, that was more logical, Mr. Reid said. We have clearly said all along that we wanted a plan. We dont have a plan. And based on that, this is not the bill to deal with this.
