New Hampshire Delegation Not Quite Unanimous on Torture

Around the halls of the Capitol building, on one issue - it's hard to tell if you're talking to a Democrat or a Republican. That's the issue of torture. 90 Senators, from both parties, voted to support an amendment to the defense appropriations bill that would ban torture of detainees. The amendment was authored by John McCain, who himself was tortured by his captors while held as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

Now 1st District Republican Jeb Bradley of New Hampshire has sent a letter to the House committee that handles defense appropriations.

He's asking House leaders to support the Senate's torture ban.

He says all branches of the armed services, the CIA and the FBI have got to be on the same page about what is acceptable.

"what I think the mccain amendment does is just take the army manual and make that the standard, and you can't go beyond that.then there's no gray area because the people doing the interrogating, and let's face it, we need to get that information, but there have to be clear standards that people have to be trained to adhere to."

The Pentagon recently issued a directive that would tighten the rules for interrogating detainees.

But second district Republican Charles Bass says that's not good enough.

Congress has to get involved and codify the interrogation standards into law, so that they have some accountability.

And Bass says there's one important thing to remember.

"well, first of all, interrogation doesn't conclude guilt. you can't say for sure that these people have done what they're accused of. that's the purpose of the interrogation."

But there is one aspect of this issue where both Congressmen say the White House may have it right.

And that's the question of whether or not detainees should be treated under the international standards for prisoners of war - the Geneva Conventions. Again, congressman Bass:

"on that there is a legitimate debate. they don't wear uniforms, they don't swear allegience to any state, so there is a legitimate debate on that, but not on the use of torture on any individual."

But to the Bush administration the question is far from settled.

The president says he will veto any bill that he says constrains the American military's ability to bring terrorists to justice.

Senator John Sununu was an original sponsor of he bill.

Hesays he doesn't know what to make of the President's opposition to the amendment banning torture.

" I don't think it will prevent us from getting the information that the armed forces needs. on the contrary, i think it will strengthen their position for two reasons. first, everyone knows what is allowed and second we're more likely to ensure that if they're taken captive they'll be treated fairly and justly"

The gulf between the White House and the Capitol seems wide. There is a veto proof majority supporting the torture ban in the Senate and support in the House may be equally broad.

But Senator Judd Gregg - who supported the amendment initially - now says his continued support depends on the final language in the bill.

He says the White House position is not so unreasonable, and there may be room for compromise.

"well, i think the white house thinks they've got to fight this war and they've got to stop people from killing americans and the senate has spoken in an academic way and the white house is dealing with the situation on the ground and there probably is some middle ground"

In the meantime, if the bill doesn't pass as an amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill, Senator McCain has promised to add it to any and every bill that comes up in the Senate.

For NHPR News, I'm Julie Donnelly in Washington.