Despite their concerns + which deepened throughout the day as they had more time to study the proposed White House language + they expected to be able to negotiate with the White House a broad bipartisan resolution that could pass fairly quickly, perhaps within the next two weeks.

"I'm inclined to vote for a resolution that authorizes a necessary response. It hasn't been written yet," said Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, who like many Democrats expressed concern that the resolution was far too broad.

"We are interested and we are determined to keep the focus on Iraq, not on Iran and other countries in the region that may also pose a threat and a concern to the United States," the South Dakota Democrat added.

Several lawmakers + mostly Democrats but also a few Republicans + cited a concern that the "go-it-alone" approach could undermine the United Nations and weaken international alliances.

"It's really important that this be the world against Saddam Hussein, and we don't go it alone," said Michigan Democrat Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. He said the best way to force the Iraqi leader to comply with UN weapons inspections and disarmament would be to have him "look down the barrel of a gun held by the world."

Several lawmakers also pointed to "vague" and "overly broad" language allowing US forces to "restore international peace and security in the region."

"Not only does it fail to adequately define the mission in question, it appears to actually authorize the president to do virtually anything anywhere in the Middle East," said Sen. Russell Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat.

SOME SENATORS NOT SATISFIED

"That would not pass as it is," Louisiana Democrat John Breaux, a centrist who often helps bridge ideological gaps, said as he left a closed-door Democratic discussion of the resolution late in the day.

The doubts were not only among Democrats. Nebraska Republican Chuck Hagel told PBS' "NewsHour with Jim Lehrer" he was "not satisfied" with the current wording and that Congress must keep in mind "the importance of this resolution, not just for today but for future presidents and futures Congresses ... and possible future war."

Indiana Republican Richard Lugar said on the same program that some of the fast-moving events surrounding Iraq may further shape the resolution. "The American people will be heard through their senators and their representatives and I hope they'll be heard loud and clear," he said.

Many lawmakers in both parties expressed a desire to work on a bipartisan basis with the White House to modify the resolution so it could get broad support.

"We are united ... in that Saddam Hussein must be separated from his weapons of mass destruction or be separated from power," said Senate Foreign Relations chairman Joe Biden, a Delaware Democrat.

The White House also said it was open to working with leaders in Congress.

Other lawmakers were more pleased with the resolution and optimistic about its passage.

Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, a Mississippi Republican, said he approved of the draft and thought the American people would too. "I think they support the maximum flexibility for this president and they trust him," Lott said.

"It looks real good to me," said Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl. "It will pass overwhelmingly," predicted Sen. John McCain, another Arizona Republican.

(China Daily September 20, 2002)