Tuesdays in the Senate are normally reserved for catered “policy lunches” aimed at getting the party on message for the week. But things are far from normal in the Senate these days.

Republicans circulated in and out of this week’s luncheon, expressing a range of opinions on issues critical to President Bush and party leaders. If there was a clear message, it wasn’t getting out.

In one corner, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., was demanding that his Judiciary Committee get a shot at marking up and amending a military tribunals bill (S 3861) that has already divided the GOP. In another corner, Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., a pivotal player on immigration, gave a cool response to Majority Leader Bill Frist’s push for a vote on a border fencing bill (HR 6061).

Martinez, who prefers a more comprehensive immigration plan, was noncommittal: “I’m just taking it slow and seeing how it goes.”

Intelligence Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., meanwhile, was granted a chance for his panel to write its own version of pending wiretapping legislation (S 2453, S 2455, S 3001) — a move that makes the bills less likely to pass the Senate before the chamber adjourns for its campaign recess.

Even some bills thought to be slam-dunks are now in the category of maybe not.

For instance, negotiators have been unable to agree over chemical plant security language in the Homeland Security appropriations bill (HR 5441), which remains in its final stages of discussion.

In many ways, Tuesday was a day of competing priorities for Frist, who would like to go out on a high note with a series of significant accomplishments in his final weeks as majority leader. Balancing the demands of the White House and the desires of wayward GOP members seemed to put him in a bad mood.

In an unusually sharp news conference, the Tennessee Republican continuously referred to the pending detainees legislation as the “Warner-McCain-Graham bill,” a pointed effort to marginalize the three powerful members of the Senate who wrote it.

“The Warner-McCain-Graham bill falls short,” Frist said. “The Warner-McCain-Graham bill subjects our personnel to international courts and vague standards, ambiguous standards . . . which we know will force shutting down a very, very important program.”

Frist said that the Senate Armed Services Committee bill — opposed by Bush but backed by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., John W. Warner, R-Va., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. — lacks the votes to pass.

But as of Tuesday evening, Frist did not have a firm plan for bringing any detainees legislation to the floor, even though the White House is pressing for action on the issue.

Even in the more disciplined House, GOP leaders have encountered a few obstacles in finishing its military tribunals bill (HR 6054). Judiciary Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., R-Wis., has asserted his panel’s jurisdiction over the bill, and the House International Relations Committee may also consider the legislation, delaying the quick House passage that leaders were hoping for.

Majority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, insisted Tuesday that Republicans are on the same page.

“We see unity amongst Republicans in our willingness to give the president the tools to fight the terrorists and to help keep America safe,” Boehner said.

But in the same breath, Boehner admitted “we are still arguing about the details of those tools, I should say, trying to resolve the details of those tools.”

To be sure, compromises on detainees, immigration and a terrorist surveillance program may well emerge in the coming days, and Republicans would be able to tout a modest list of accomplishments to voters.

Both chambers plan to recess at the end of next week to give lawmakers plenty of time to campaign before the November elections.

But Olympia J. Snowe, R-Maine, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, warned that Congress should not move too quickly on terrorist surveillance and military tribunal bills just because an election looms.

“A deadline is not a justification for doing the wrong thing,” Snowe said. “These are complex issues and it’s critical for us to get this right.”

Added Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas: “We have to get pragmatic about what we can and can’t accomplish.”

Democrats, who have spent the past few years in a constant attack mode against the Bush administration and Republican congressional leaders, appear to have discovered a new strategy — serving as passive spectators of the GOP infighting.

“The president picked a battle, and he thought it would be with Democrats, but it’s been with Republicans,” said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Asked where his party stood on the details of setting up military tribunals for suspected terrorists, Reid gladly demurred.

“We have to see what the Republicans do to erase fissures among themselves,” he said.

Reid appears to be taking a similarly neutral approach to the border fencing bill, pointing out instead that “the president of the United States says he likes our bill dealing with comprehensive immigration reform.” A senior Democratic aide said party leaders are not portraying the fencing bill as an important party unity vote, freeing members to vote however they want.

A bellwether procedural vote on the fencing bill is expected Wednesday, and although Democrats are not unified in blocking the legislation, Reid said they plan to offer numerous amendments to broaden the measure.

The strategy, Democratic aides say, is to avoid being labeled as “obstructionists” this close to the election. It’s a label that hurt them in the 2002 and 2004 elections.

Besides, said Reid spokesman Jim Manley, this time the Republicans are the ones with the bigger problems.

“The administration’s tough talking rhetoric is ringing hollow this time,” Manley said. “We can’t do anything until they work out issues amongst themselves, then we can work out bipartisan solutions.”