WASHINGTON -- U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter said yesterday he was "working hard" to counter what he called an orchestrated campaign by abortion opponents to block his promotion to the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Associated Press Sen. Arlen Specter

" 'Confident' is a word I never use," Specter told the Post-Gazette when asked if he still expected to become chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the next Congress. But he took comfort, he said, in the fact that his colleagues "really know me" and are familiar with the strong support he has shown for President Bush's judicial nominees.

Even so, Specter said he was making it clear to anyone who would listen -- including conservative talk show hosts -- that he would not impose an abortion litmus test on any Supreme Court nominee proposed by Bush.

Despite Specter's cautious language and a continued drumbeat from his critics in the anti-abortion movement -- some of whom rallied yesterday in Harrisburg to call for his removal from the Judiciary Committee -- the threat to Specter's chairmanship seemed to be subsiding six days after he told a news conference in Philadelphia that it was unlikely the Senate would confirm "judges who would change the right of a woman to choose [and] overturn Roe v. Wade."

One factor in Specter's favor was what the senator called the "enormously helpful" support of his fellow Pennsylvania Republican, Sen. Rick Santorum, a prominent critic of abortion. The New York Times reported that after Specter's comments in Philadelphia outraged abortion opponents, Santorum persuaded his colleague to issue another statement in which Specter said: "I have never [applied] and would never apply any litmus test on the abortion issue."

In Pittsburgh yesterday, Santorum predicted that the political storm over Specter's comments would likely pass without damage and said the uproar was a result of "Arlen being Arlen."

"I would say it was probably not the best time for him to have made those remarks," Santorum said. "But I think he quickly clarified those remarks."

Santorum said Specter is committed to moving President Bush's judicial nominees through the committee for confirmation. "He told the president directly that he would get his nominees," Santorum said.

Santorum, who is chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, which must confirm the election of committee chairmen, said the decision would likely be made by Judiciary Committee members with minimal intervention from the leadership. "I don't tell any committee other than the one I'm on who the chairman should be," Santorum said.

So far only one Republican member of the Judiciary Committee has publicly raised serious concerns about Specter's elevation to the chairman's role. Last week Sen. John Cornyn of Texas told The Associated Press that he wanted to "sit down and discuss with him how things are going to work."

Yesterday spokespersons for several other Republicans on the Judiciary Committee said those senators had no comment on the controversy.

Santorum's support for Specter contrasted dramatically with the bitterness of the opposition that sprang up against Specter after his Nov. 3 remarks were first publicized. Much of the opposition came from a network of conservative activists that had come together to support Specter's challenger in this spring's Republican primary, U.S. Rep. Pat Toomey of Lehigh County. Toomey came within a few points of unseating the four-term incumbent.

Chris Lillik, chairman of Young Conservatives of Pennsylvania, said he and other former Toomey supporters had sent mass e-mails to conservatives, urging them to telephone congressional offices about Specter's comments. Several Web sites, including NotSpecter.com, sprang up over the weekend, posting details of the campaign to block Specter's promotion.

"Even if this isn't successful it's going to send a message to Specter not to play games with Bush's judges," Lillik said.

Mike Krempasky, a Westmoreland County native now living in suburban Washington, started the NotSpecter site. "We're getting a lot of feedback from the Hill," Krempasky said. "We actually have some Senate staffers writing for us anonymously, for the Web site."

Both Lillik and Krempasky said Capitol Hill staff members in touch with them reported switchboards were flooded with telephone calls from party conservatives demanding that Specter's chairmanship be blocked. They said much of the anger apparently was generated by the timing of Specter's comments.

"As soon as we look up from our election night of celebration, we see Arlen Specter has gone on television to squash the notion that this was any sort of mandate," said Krempasky. "That took a lot of the wind out of a lot of peoples' sails."

Some of those people were not mollified by Specter's protestation that he would work to get Bush's judicial nominees confirmed.

In Harrisburg yesterday, several Pennsylvania-based anti-abortion groups urged the Senate's Republican leadership to deny Specter the chairmanship -- or even membership on the Judiciary Committee -- and they questioned whether his clarification of his original remarks meant anything.

"Sen. Specter does not represent the values and morals of the majority of Pennsylvanians or the majority of Americans," said Diane Gramley, president of the American Family Association of Pennsylvania.

Jim Ludwig, director of LifePAC (Life Issues and Family Ethics Political Action Committee) said, "It is clear that the majority of people, the president and our elected officials would like to protect the moral values that made America great. The biggest threat we face is judicial tyranny."