Concord — The New Hampshire Senate yesterday approved a major sex offender bill that would impose a potential 25-year mandatory minimum sentence for child rapists, a measure sought by Gov. John Lynch but opposed by the House.

"I believe we do, in fact, need to send a message that if you perpetrate a crime against a child, you deserve to be locked up for a long, long time," Senate Democratic Leader Sylvia Larsen of Concord said after the 21-3 vote.

"The bill passed by the Senate would give New Hampshire some of the toughest and most comprehensive child protection laws in the nation," Lynch said in a statement.

The Senate version would allow prosecutors to seek a mandatory minimum of 25 years in prison for adults convicted of aggravated felonious sexual assault of a child under 13, which includes penetration or touching the genitalia of a child for sexual gratification. Judges would have no leeway to impose a lesser sentence in such case.

The House overwhelmingly rejected that mandatory term last month, but the Senate made only a few other minor changes to the House bill. Both versions include mandatory terms for some repeat offenders; court-approved civil commitment of a person deemed to be a "sexually violent predator" likely to strike again; and stronger registration requirements for sex offenders.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Joe Foster, a Nashua Democrat, said the bill would head to a conference committee to work out differences between the two chambers, possibly by the end of the month.

"I think it's a strong vote," he said of the Senate tally. "They've got their views, we've got our views, and we'll work together to get a bill that works for New Hampshire."

All three Upper Valley senators — Peter Burling, D-Cornish, Carl Johnson, R-Meredith, and Bob Odell, R-Lempster — voted for the mandatory minimums, and Burling said the vote puts "immense" pressure on the House to yield to the Senate version.

"I think it is an appropriate use of a serious penalty for a hideous crime, and that's where I came out on it. We need to make it very clear that this society does not tolerate sexual predation on young children, and I think we've done that," Burling said.

The three Democratic senators who voted against yesterday's bill said the mandatory minimum terms might discourage reporting of sexual abuse or encroach on judicial independence. Some victim advocates have said mandatory terms could discourage plea bargains and force victims to testify unwillingly, and also don't take into account the fact that many sex abuse cases involve incest, where family members don't want to see the perpetrator jailed for decades.

"I have a belief that our judicial system should listen to the testimony and the facts before it, and then we have judges who are appointed who should make the decisions about what the sentences for these individuals should be," said state Sen. David Gottessman, a Nashua Democrat and the lone Judiciary Committee member to oppose the bill. The other two voting against the bill were Sen. Iris Estabrook, D-Durham, and Lou D'Allesandro, D-Manchester.

Though Attorney General Kelly Ayotte also has lobbied hard for the mandatory minimum term, how willing the House will be to change its position and accede to the Senate remains unclear.

"It's pretty obvious the House has a strong position," said House Speaker Doug Scamman, R-Stratham. "I think it puts a lot of pressure on them to figure out how there can be a compromise to answer the concerns the House had."

The New Hampshire action was a virtual replay of a vote in Montpelier on Wednesday where the Vermont Senate unanimously approved a sex offender bill with a 10-year mandatory term that the House had rejected.

One Granite State wrinkle yesterday, however, came when state Sen. Jack Barnes, a Raymond Republican, offered an amendment to surgically castrate child rapists after their appeals are exhausted, and then set them free.

Barnes said he believes too many sexual predators abuse children, are jailed, and then repeat their crimes upon release. "I think it's a heinous crime, and I think our children are the most important commodity we have in this state, and for someone to do something like that, we should fix it so they can never do that again," said Barnes, who argued that at least eight other states allow chemical castration.

(Vermont has a program where sex offenders can take medication to reduce their sexual drive, but officials do not use the terminology of chemical castration, and it is voluntary, said Georgia Cumming, director of the Vermont Department of Corrections' sex offender treatment program.)

Barnes' measure failed on a 16-8 vote, but had the support of Senate Majority Leader Bob Clegg, a Hudson Republican. "I'm in favor of anything that might stop people from molesting children, no matter how severe it is to them, because look what it does to the kids," Clegg said.

All three Upper Valley senators opposed the surgical castration proposal, which was denounced by Larsen, the Democratic leader.

"While all of us believe that child molesters deserve to be incarcerated for a long, long time, we are not a state or a nation that have ever advocated for the removal of body parts," Larsen said. "There are a lot of nations that have, in fact, a policy of cutting off arms and legs for thievery or other crimes, but to start with surgical castration was an offensive suggestion that I for one said I would not stoop to."

Barnes said, even without the castration measure, the Senate vote sent an important signal about the state's stand on sex offenders.