KNOTTY POLITICAL PROBLEM LACKS AN OBVIOUS SOLUTION.

Byline: Alison Mitchell The New York Times

For all the talk of duty and Constitution, it was not all that difficult for the House to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Clinton on Thursday. The more troublesome question is how Congress will bring to a conclusion the process that Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., called ``this venture, this excursion, this journey.''

The conventional wisdom, which Democrats have clung to across these tumultuous weeks for their party, is that the less impulsive Senate will never accumulate the votes to convict Clinton, and that that inescapable fact finally will force some kind of a deal between the president and the Republicans.

``The president is going to remain in office,'' pronounced Rep. James Moran, D-Va. ``That's a foregone conclusion.''

But conventional wisdom has often been wrong in this strange political year dominated by Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky. And issues with a high intensity factor sometimes take on a life and momentum of their own on Capitol Hill.

Many House members - including some Republicans - fear that having opened Pandora's box Thursday, they will never get it closed again without first moving through impeachment of the president and a Senate trial that could consume Congress for another year.

``It feels like it's out of control,'' said Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn. ``Everything's set in motion, and I don't know how you put it back in the box.''

This sense of riding a runaway train could diminish if after months of deliberations and gathering evidence, the Congress and the country jointly come to a national conclusion that Clinton should be impeached, tried and removed from office, like the consensus that Richard Nixon faced when he resigned.

The risk is that Congress could rush ahead without brakes even as the American people continue to resist the idea that Clinton should be ousted over the Lewinsky affair. ``This has the potential to be the most divisive issue in American public life since the Vietnam War,'' said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.

Two schools of thought

At the moment, two sharply different schools of thought co-exist on Capitol Hill about how the president's fate will be determined. Which one prevails could well be decided by the outcome of the elections just 3-1/2 weeks away, unless Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel, changes all the political calculations by forwarding to Congress new allegations of impeachable offenses.

Under the first scenario, the Republicans make only modest gains in November. They decide they have wrung maximum political advantage out of Clinton's misconduct and that prolonged impeachment hearings could hurt them going into the 2000 presidential elections. And for a brief window of time, the pressure to appease the party's conservative base would be off.

``I would say now that if nothing more comes out and there is no dramatic changes of seats in the House and the Senate, this will be resolved short of impeachment,'' said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. ``If the elections stalemate, that will be a signal from the American people not to do impeachment, but to do something.''

The alternate script could play out if the Republicans make strong inroads in November. Many Republicans already have signaled their deep belief that Clinton has committed perjury, obstructed justice, and placed himself above the laws that he has sworn to uphold.

One of their loudest voices, that of the House majority whip, accused Democrats on Thursday of seeking ``the path of least resistance. This is when we pitch the law overboard when the mood fits,'' said Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, ``when we ignore the facts in order to cover up the truth.''

Looking for GOP mandate

For such Republicans an election sweep would be read as a strong mandate to move forward with actual impeachment. And it could cause Democratic unity to crack, putting the president in even more jeopardy.

Still, Democrats on Thursday were adamant that their few defections on the inquiry vote mean that they are likely to stand united against actual impeachment. ``If Republicans are only able to pick off 15 percent of our members on a procedural vote three weeks before an election, how many votes are they likely to get four months from now on articles of impeachment?'' asked one Democratic strategist.

For now, the inquiry is likely to go on hold until after the elections. Hyde said no hearings would be convened until later in November. But battles already are brewing between the two parties over how to conduct the investigation.

Hyde has said he sees little reason to bring Lewinsky forward in public hearings, but the Democrats are likely to demand her appearance, adding to the sense of circus on Capitol Hill.

``You cannot have impeachment hearings where the star witness is not called and cross-examined,'' said Rep. Martin Meehan, D-Mass. ``You have to have Monica Lewinsky testify. You have to have her mother testify. You have to hear from Betty Currie and Vernon Jordan.'' And Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the senior Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said Thursday that Starr himself will be someone the Democrats want in the witness chair.

As these events move forward, Clinton's aides would dearly love to find a way to strike a deal on some punishment short of impeachment - not in the Senate but before the House takes the actual impeachment vote, according to a Democratic strategist close to the White House.

Clinton, who has thought so often about his legacy, is now fighting not to become the only other president besides Andrew Johnson to be impeached by the House. (Nixon resigned after the House Judiciary Committee crafted three articles of impeachment and before a House vote.)

Gingrich's position

Gingrich is the figure in the House who would have the stature to broker a deal, and just like Clinton, the speaker has an intense interest in how he is perceived in history. But it is far from clear whether the Georgia Republican - who presided from the speaker's chair through the entire House debate - would have any interest in such a role.

He has his own personal considerations to weigh. He will be standing for re-election as speaker when the new Congress convenes. His relations with Clinton have ranged from furious to occasional moments of alliance, while his relations with House Democrats have ranged from poor to awful. In a rare bipartisan leadership meeting over impeachment last month, he lectured House Democrats that he would be fairer to Clinton than Democrats were to Gingrich when his ethics troubles resulted in a House reprimand and a $300,000 fine.

Still, one House Republican with a good antenna for the speaker's intentions

said that should the politics and timing be right, ``I think he will try to broker a deal. He could come in at just the right moment and show he's above it all.'' But Rich Galen, a close associate of Gingrich's, said that if the evidence shows that Clinton committed perjury under oath, ``I don't think the speaker will think it's his role to get in the way of that process.''

CAPTION(S):

photo

PHOTO President Clinton meets with reporters Thursday at the White House.

Susan Walsh/Associated Press