WASHINGTON — In a sharp rebuke to the White House, the Senate passed legislation Wednesday that would impose sweeping new restrictions on interrogation methods used by the CIA and ban a widely condemned technique known as waterboarding, in which a prisoner is made to feel he is drowning.
President Bush is expected to veto the bill, which would outlaw an array of coercive interrogation tactics that U.S. allies have denounced but the administration has said are crucial to prevent terrorist attacks.
The measure, already approved in the House, would require the CIA to abide by strict interrogation guidelines adopted by the Army after the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal.
Because of the veto threat, the Senate vote was seen in some ways as a political showdown over one of the most divisive issues in the country's response to the Sept. 11 attacks. Last week, the CIA confirmed it had used waterboarding, and the White House said the technique could be authorized again -- reigniting a controversy over human rights and national security.
The debate has ties to two other sensitive issues: the Bush administration's decision this week to seek the death penalty in military commission trials for six alleged Sept. 11 plotters, and its push for congressional approval of expanded electronic surveillance in a measure that gives immunity to phone companies for their roles in past spying. The Senate passed such a bill this week, and House members are debating whether to go along.
Many Democratic lawmakers have denounced waterboarding as a form of torture that has undermined U.S. moral standing in the world.
"To me, this is really a very big day," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), sponsor of the provision that would limit interrogation methods. "Torture is out."
But leading Republicans -- as well as conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia -- have defended the legality of what the CIA refers to as "enhanced" interrogation techniques.
The decision by Republicans to allow a vote on the measure -- forgoing procedural moves that could have blocked it from coming to the floor -- suggested that party leaders saw political advantage in setting up a presidential veto. The bill was approved 51 to 45 in the Senate after passing the House in December, 222 to 199. Neither margin would be sufficient to override a veto.
