Accuser Voluntarily Kissed Packwood, Attorney Says : Ethics: Press conference offers a glimpse at likely allegations if the senator is granted public hearings on the sexual harassment charges against him.

WASHINGTON — For the second time in less than two weeks, a lawyer for Sen. Bob Packwood fired a public salvo Thursday in Packwood’s defense against sexual harassment allegations, this time asserting that one of the accusers was once seen voluntarily planting a big kiss on the Oregon Republican.

The announcement, at a full-dress Washington press conference, offered a glimpse of what likely would come if the Senate Ethics Committee next week grants Packwood’s request for public hearings: a flood of embarrassingly personal he-did, she-did charges and countercharges, fodder for a thousand supermarket tabloid headlines and a television spectacle lurid enough to outdraw a soap opera.

And that, coming at a time when Republicans are poised to write another chapter in their epic struggle to reshape the federal government and burnish their political image, has many of Packwood’s Senate colleagues worried.

Aware that the public will suspect the worst if they handle the case behind closed doors, many senators are also haunted by the thought of what open hearings could bring.

“Of course I’m worried about all the implications it has for the reputation of the U.S. Senate,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said. “You’ll hear that from 99 other senators.”

“It’s one more unhappy event that will dim people’s view of the institution,” said Ross Baker, a professor of political science at Rutgers University. “It’s going to be the Washington equivalent of the O.J. Simpson trial.”

The Packwood imbroglio looms just as Senate Republicans are heading into a particularly critical stage in this year’s legislative drama. Many of the issues that were whisked through the House have slowed in the Senate. And Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), trying to maintain his standing as leading GOP contender for the presidency, has a lot at stake in moving the Republican agenda through the Senate this fall.

Welfare reform is expected to come before the Senate next week. A big tax cut and major changes in Medicare are slated to be part of this fall’s budget package. The ceiling on the national debt will also have to be raised this fall, likely provoking a confrontation between Congress and President Clinton over fiscal priorities.

Until the prospect of time-consuming hearings developed, Packwood’s fellow Republicans had been counting on him to play a key role in all these battles. As chairman of the Finance Committee, he would normally be in the midst of the fray, and his legislative and political skills are universally acknowledged in the Senate.

*

“He has a critical role to play,” said G. William Hoagland, staff director of the Senate Budget Committee.

Whatever the Ethics Committee decides, what is in sight is the denouement of a 32-month investigation of allegations that the Oregon senator made unwanted sexual advances toward at least 17 women between 1969 and 1990. The committee was on the verge of deciding possible sanctions against Packwood before Congress began its August recess.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) has called for public hearings on the allegations. In early August, Packwood and most Republicans opposed her, and the Senate voted, 52 to 48, against a resolution to require public hearings. A day after the vote, the Ethics Committee unexpectedly announced that it was investigating two additional charges of sexual misconduct. Then Packwood abruptly switched his position and announced that he wanted public hearings.

The Ethics Committee is scheduled to meet Wednesday in its first session since Packwood asked for a public hearing. A key question will be whether Ethics Committee Chairman Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) drops his opposition to open hearings. He had led the charge against the Boxer resolution and made it plain that he thought Packwood was taking a big political risk in the process.

“This is the kind of thing your staff will whisper in your ear, ‘Boy, you don’t want to get near this one,’ ” McConnell said.

Yet Senate sources say it would be hard for the committee to deny Packwood’s request. “We’d show solidarity with what Bob Packwood wants,” McCain said.

Much is unclear about the shape and timing of open hearings, but many here expect that they would be reminiscent of the 1991 confirmation hearings of then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas after law professor Anita F. Hill made sexual harassment charges against him.

If his lawyer’s recent press conferences are any indication, one part of Packwood’s defense strategy is likely to be an attempt to impugn his accusers’ credibility. Last week the lawyer, Charles Slepian, released affidavits portraying one of Packwood’s accusers as sexually aggressive toward the senator.

The drama would be broadcast nationwide if there are public hearings. At least one national cable television station, C-SPAN, already has said it would televise the hearings in their entirety.

The heightened visibility of the Packwood matter could hurt other Republicans who, since taking control of Congress this year, have been trying to convince voters that they are changing the old, discredited ways of doing business in Washington.

*

“It’s going to be an appalling spectacle,” GOP strategist William Kristol said recently on NBC’s “This Week With David Brinkley.” He added: “One effect of it will be to increase distaste for Washington, and particularly for Congress.”

Others have argued that it would do more damage to Congress’ reputation to handle the matter in closed hearings--more so because the issue arises at a time when other members of Congress are contending with questions about their sex lives.

A jury recently convicted Rep. Mel Reynolds (D-Ill.) of sexual misconduct charges.

And a recent magazine article highlighted allegations that House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) has had extramarital affairs.

Some Republicans are hoping that this Congress’ legislative record will overshadow its members’ indiscretions. McCain said that although scandals may tarnish Congress’ reputation, they matter less to voters than whether Congress acts on legislation they support.

Hoagland said that it might help the budget process if the Ethics Committee put off the possible Packwood hearings until later in the year, until after the bulk of the Finance Committee’s work is done.

A source close to the investigation said the ethics panel would be unlikely to do so.

“I would be shocked if the committee went along,” the source said.

Still, the logistics of preparing for hearings could take weeks.

Slepian said: “I doubt the case would be prepared on either side by the end of September.”