By ERIC SCHMITT
WASHINGTON, April 17 -- In a setback for the Clinton administration, the House Democratic leader, Richard A. Gephardt, intends to oppose granting China permanent normal trading privileges, several people familiar with his decision said today.
For months, Mr. Gephardt refused to say how he would vote, hesitating to worsen divisions among Democrats on the issue and jeopardize his greater goal of reclaiming the House this fall and becoming speaker.
He is expected to announce on Wednesday in St. Louis, his hometown, that alternatives to Congress's annual review of China's trading status fall short of giving lawmakers enough leverage over Beijing's behavior on human rights, religious tolerance and the environment.
The timing of the expected announcement is important, since the House began a two-week recess today, and during their time at home, undecided lawmakers will be the target of intense lobbying and advertising campaigns from both sides.
The Democratic leader is also expected to tell his rank-and-file to vote their consciences and the best interests of their districts. That would free some of them to vote for the pact, strengthening them in campaigns against pro-trade Republicans this fall.
Both sides say the House vote, scheduled for the week of May 22, is too close to call. The Senate is considered certain to back the change.
The vote on China's trade status will determine to what degree America benefits from China's expected entry into the World Trade Organization.
Mr. Gephardt's decision is a victory for the coalition of labor, environmental and human rights groups, and their allies on Capitol Hill, who oppose the measure as an undeserved reward to a repressive regime.
"I never had any doubt that Dick would come down on the right side of the issue, where his heart is," said Representative Peter A. DeFazio, an Oregon Democrat who opposes permanent normal trade status for China.
It also complicates President Clinton's efforts to rally dozens of uncommitted Democrats to support one of his most important remaining foreign policy goals. Given Mr. Gephardt's stature, his position could give wavering Democrats political cover to vote no on the agreement, which is an important step in China's entry into the World Trade Organization.
"Obviously, we're disappointed and wished he were able to be for this," Commerce Secretary William Daley, Mr. Clinton's point man on the vote, said in a telephone interview. "But we'll continue to make the case with Democrats and Republicans that this is good for national security and our overall world leadership position."
On Friday, Mr. Daley suffered an embarrassment when he was forced to cancel a trip with both Democratic and Republican lawmakers to China when most of the dozen invited legislators opted for various reasons to pull out.
Mr. Gephardt's decision is not surprising.
On virtually every nettlesome trade issue of the Clinton administration, Mr. Gephardt has joined the opposing charge, calling for tougher labor, environmental and human rights standards. He opposed the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement, which Mr. Clinton won, and the bill to give the President special authority to negotiate trade accords, which Mr. Clinton lost.
Over the years, Mr. Gephardt has voted against granting China normal trading status in the annual review. He is a staunch ally of organized labor, which is aggressively fighting the measure to give China the same permanent lower tariffs the United States gives most every other country.
Republicans never took Mr. Gephardt's silence seriously. The No. 2 House Democrat, David E. Bonior of Michigan, is leading the attack against the measure, but top House Republicans, especially Dick Armey of Texas, the majority leader, have always lumped Mr. Gephardt in with its foes.
Trade policy has long played in important role in defining Mr. Gephardt's political agenda.
The centerpiece of his failed 1988 presidential campaign was a measure that would have forced retaliation against nations that gained large trade surpluses with the United States through unfair means.
Mr. Gephardt has recently intensified his courtship of corporate America, especially high-tech companies, to dispel his label as a traditional, old-style Democrat. But many trade advocates said it would have been unfathomable for Mr. Gephardt to switch his trade stripes so quickly.
"We anticipated this, and the fact Dick is not making this a litmus test is very important to all of us," said Representative Robert T. Matsui of California, the top Democratic vote-counter in favor of the measure.
Clearly, the significance of the China vote has weighed on Mr. Gephardt. Last month, he said he was trying to broker a compromise with the administration, labor unions, business groups and House Democrats.
Such an alternative, he said, would include "a methodical way" to ensure that China abides by its treaties, a mechanism to evaluate its human rights record and a code of conduct for American companies doing business in China.
It would also permit the United States to impose sanctions against China if it violated the agreement, as long as the penalties were consistent with the World Trade Organization rules.
But some critics questioned Mr. Gephardt's commitment to finding a third way. He has been dismissive of a popular effort along those lines by Representative Sander M. Levin of Michigan, one of the uncommitted Democrats.:
