Long before a potential House or Senate majority was a gleam in their eye, Congressional Democrats pledged earlier this year to support certain lobbying and process reforms. Among them:

Lobbying

• a ban on Congressional travel, meal, and gifts financed by lobbyists
  
• extension of the lobbying ban for former members of Congress from one to two years
  
• extension of this ban to senior Congressional staff

• a minimum 24-hour review period post conference report before voting on legislation
  
• a ban on no-bid government contracts

House and Senate Minority Leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, respectively, have proposed these reforms in an "Honest Leadership and Open Government Act," which Pelosi said last month would be the first House vote following the election of a new Speaker, should the Democrats win.

The debate over the efficacy and even-handedness of the new House earmarks disclosure rule continues. The rule requires that earmarks’ sponsors be identified by name in legislation and conference reports. It expires when the 109th COngress adjourns, unless re-adopted by the new House next year.

The issues of the definition of earmarks and whether any tax expenditures would really qualify are reviewed in a meaty article today by BNA.

George Yin, the most recent former chief of staff of the JCT … said he finds it hard at times to 'distinguish' between an appropriations earmark and a tax earmark. He said one has to look at the bottom line and see if there is a big difference, for example, between a company getting an appropriations grant and the company getting a special tax ruling.

Also: under the earmark language the lawmaker inserting the specific tax deduction, credit, exclusion, or preference still would not have to attach his or her name to the measure because it would not be considered an earmark if it benefits more than one entity.

Possible solution? The next House might want to consider a “single beneficiary sector” tax expenditure standard based on SIC codes, as opposed to the current single "entity” appropriations standard they current applies to tax expenditures.

CQ reports ($$) that the House Appropriations Committee Chairman -Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA)- did not renew the contracts of 60 investigators who examined federal spending. About 16 investigators remain on staff, but given the contractor reduction, no investigations will be going forward any time soon.

Committee spokesman John Scofield said Thursday that the contracts were not renewed because the panel is conducting a “bipartisan review” of the unit’s staff.

“Frankly, the work we’ve been getting as of late has not been that good,” Scofield said. “There is nothing sinister going on.”

All 60 of them were doing a bad job? That doesn't pass the smell test.

Rep. Lewis could have other things on his mind. From Sen. Tom Coburn's (R-OK) office:

Rep. Jerry Lewis, the top GOP appropriator, is currently under investigation by the Justice Department for connections between lobbyists, Lewis' campaign contributors, and earmarks awarded by Lewis' committee. Rep. Duke Cunningham was sent to prison earlier this year for selling defense earmarks in return for bribes.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has a paper out on the lame-duck budget cuts that are nearly a foregone conclusion.

In September, Congress shifted $5.3 billion that Senate appropriators planned to devote to domestic programs to the defense and homeland security appropriations bills. As a result, $5.3 billion will have to be cut from other appropriations bills the Senate Appropriations Committee has approved — bills that largely fund domestic programs — when Congress reconvenes after the election.

In Part 1 of our evaluation of the 109th Congress to date, we looked last week at Congress’ effort to meet its minimal constitutional requirements: producing a budget resolution and adopting a budget.

While Congress failed to complete work on the FY2007 budget, it did approve an additional $70 billion in tax cuts over five years, and allowed discretionary spending to increase to $873 billion, $30 billion above the 2006 level. On top of this, Congress approved two major FY 2006 supplemental bills to finance the war in Iraq and Katrina recovery, totaling $110 billion.

Concludes the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:

The 109th Congress took already large projected budget deficits and passed legislation that will make them larger. The legislation increased projected deficits from 2005 (the year the Congress convened) through 2011 (when the current five-year budget window ends) by a total of $537 billion. Moreover, the budget deterioration over the past six fiscal years — 2000 to 2006 — is the second largest deterioration for any six-year period in the past half century.

It could have been a lot worse. Remember the Bush Administration’s partial-privatization plan for Social Security? By the Administration’s own estimate, reported in the Washington Post by Allan Sloan, the all-in costs of the plan: $24.182 billion in fiscal 2010, $57.429 billion in fiscal 2011 and another $630.533 billion for the five years after that, for a seven-year total of $712.144 billion.

Congress refused to touch this politically and fiscally toxic plan. Sometimes doing nothing can be better than the alternative.

FedSpending.Org is now online! Check it out!

Next Tuesday, Oct. 10, at 9:30 a.m. EST, OMB Watch is launching FedSpending.org, a new, searchable online database allowing you to search, aggregate and analyze all federal spending.

Be a more informed voter this midterm election. See which federal programs and agencies got the most federal dollars this year. See which contractors are getting paid how much to work in your congressional district.

Click here for your invitation to the Oct. 10 launch.