Hopefully this time the Senate will act. The House voted 411-8 to pass S.1, the ethics and lobbying reform bill that would increase disclosure requirements for lobbying activities and for earmarks. The next step is for the bill's passage in the Senate, which may prove a bit more difficult. Read previous reactions by OMB Watch below.

Following up on Adam's blog, below is a closer look at and comment on the revolving door and earmarks provisions of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007.

Word is that the House will vote on the bill tomorrow; the Senate is expected to do so on Thursday.

The bill's "revolving door" provisions are as follows:

• Senators can't lobby Congress for two years -- current law provides a one-year -- after they leave office
• senior Senate staff and Senate officers can't lobby the entire Senate for one year, not just their former employing office, as under current law
• no change: the current one-year cooling-off period for House members
• prohibits senior House staff from lobbying their former office or Committee for one year after they leave House employment

The bill's main earmark process reforms -- all new -- are:

• all earmarked spending items and tax expenditures in bills, resolutions, conference reports and managers' statements must be identified and posted on the internet at least 48 hours before a vote
• Senators must certify that they and their immediate family will not financially benefit from any earmarks they've requested
• new earmarks in a conference report -- i.e., not approved by either House -- are now subject to a 60-vote point of order
• committees, to the extent technically feasible, must disclose in unclassified language the funding level and the name of sponsors earmarks in bills, joint resolutions and conference reports (emph. added)

CAVEAT: This last provision, reads as follows:

RULE XLIV, 4.(c) To the extent technically feasible, information made available on publicly accessible congressional websites under paragraphs 3 and 4 shall be provided in a searchable format.

How could providing such information in a searchable format ever not be technically feasible? In a sortable format, maybe, but searchable? That seems like an awfully and arbitrarily low standard, sticking out in this provision only like a sor(table)e thumb.

Today, the Democratic leadership in Congress released their long-awaited compromise lobbying and ethics bill - The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (text of the legislation). The bill is 107 pages long, but already there has been some criticism of changes to the bill, particularly the earmark disclosure sections (see Mark Tapscott's reaction and the Porkbusters blog for a sampling). Two Senators, Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Jim DeMint (R-SC) - whose amendment to the bill earlier this year on earmark disclosure greatly strengthen the bill - have also posted disappointing reactions.

At first glance it does appear the final version of the bill is not as strong (i.e. transparent) as the original and it is unclear why those changes were adopted at this point in the debate. DeMint has announced he will offer an amendment during final consideration of the bill to "restore real earmark reform." It's yet to be seen whether that amendment will be adopted of if this version is the best the House and Senate will be able to do this year.

CQ ($$) reports that the lobby bill is almost complete and may be ready for a vote in the House Tuesday. And again the discussion focuses on how a new agreed upon bill may alter the bundling provision, shifting the reporting from lobbyists to lawmakers. This change would mean campaign committees would have to report on bundled campaign donations they receive. And sure enough Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) may object to the final changes if the Senate-passed earmark language is not included. Since the bill includes changes to Senate rules, the Senate would need 67 votes to overcome an objection and approve the package. To help overcome any objection, lawmakers will need to work hard to ensure support. RollCall ($$) reports on such rallying with the role Senator Feingold (D-WI) may be play in the bill's passage.

With conservative Republicans bracing for significant changes to the bill passed by the Senate in February, McCain could end up fighting his former ally in an effort to block a significantly weakened bill. According to sources close to the issue, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has called on Feingold to help push the bill over the goal line. Reid hopes Feingold's progressive street credentials and reputation as a reform-minded lawmaker will help keep the left flank from bolting, particularly if Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) make controversial changes to the bill.

CQ ($$) reports that the long overdue lobbying and ethics bill could clear Congress before the August recess begins. Staff has been working on an identical measure to be voted in both the House and Senate to replace the passed S.1 and H.R. 2316. In his fight to ensure that earmark language is included, Senate Jim DeMint (R-SC) has reportedly promised to filibuster any legislation that does not contain the precise earmark language in the original Senate bill passed in January. Hopefully though he will be outnumbered and enough members will want to complete a lobbying and ethics package before the recess to avoid bad publicity. DeMint and nine other Republican senators wrote a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) warning that any new version of legislation brought to the Senate should not be changed from S.1. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has predicted that the bill will probably pass without going to conference.

In efforts to get a final bill passed, Democratic leaders continue to work on language that would require lobbyists to detail their "bundling" of campaign donations. The original lobbying provision amended the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA), while a new approach that is being considered would amend campaign finance law, requiring disclosure also by bundlers who are not lobbyists.

BNA Money and Politics ($$) reported that a approach "to beef up bundling disclosure under FECA and drop the LDA bundling-disclosure requirement could get the measure back on track by addressing reformers' demands for greater transparency about influence-peddling while also responding to lobbyists' objections about being singled out under rules that would not apply to other types of political contributors. . . . Representatives of reform groups, on the other hand, want to make sure that any bundling disclosure system will reveal the activities of lobbyists, even if it also includes bundling by non-lobbyists."

Meanwhile, considering the "revolving door" provision, Democrats may go ahead with allowing each chamber to have different rules. The Senate would set a two-year lobbying ban on former senators becoming lobbyists, while the House would leave its one-year lobby ban. The House is expected to consider its replacement bill first next week with Democratic leaders limiting amendments for quick passage, and then the Senate would then take up identical legislation. See this article on the topic from the latest Watcher.

The Wall Street Journal reports today that "Federal investigators are examining whether Rep. [Don] Young [R-AK] or Sen. [Ted] Stevens [R-AK] accepted bribes, illegal gratuities or unreported gifts from VECO Corp., Alaska's largest oil-field engineering firm."

The investigation is part of a continuing criminal probe of alleged political favors for the company. The issue under investigation is whether Young or Stevens accepted bribes or unreported gifts from VECO. Young is the former chairman of the House Transportation Committee and now its ranking Republican. Stevens, former chairman of the Appropriations Committee, is the longest-serving Senate Republican.

VECO has been awarded a series of federal contracts since 2000, including contracts to provide logistics support for arctic research. Young received $157,000 in campaign contributions from VECO employees and the company's political action committee between 1996 and 2001. Congressional records show that Stevens several times added extra funding for arctic research above what the agency sought.

The chart below, prepared by the Center for Responsive Politics, shows VECO ranking number one and two in corporation campaign contributions to Rep. Young and Sen. Stevens respectively since 1989:

Source: Wall Street Journal
(click to enlarge)

Bob Novak writes in today's Washington Post that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), is "plotting to strip anti-earmark transparency from the final version of ethics legislation passed by the Senate and House." While Novak does not identify -- and it is impossible to guess -- what earmark provision he has in mind, he nevertheless chastizes Reid, warning that frayed Senate relations "may get worse if plans to eviscerate ethics legislation are pursued."

Apparently, Mr. Novak didn't get the memo. His fellow GOP Senators are so annoyed with DeMint's months-long antics delaying a conference on the ethics and lobbying bill that, as Congressional Quarterly put it in a headline ($) last week: McConnell May Be Ready to Help Pull the Plug on DeMint:

... now McConnell is hinting that he might look the other way if Democrats try to get around DeMint's objection to a conference by having both chambers pass identical bills. That would eliminate the need for a conference on the lobbying measure.

"From a leadership point of view, my preference would be to go to conference," McConnell said, but added, "Either way, I think we ought to wrap the bill up."

Ironically, it appears that Sen. DeMint is doing his part to improve frayed relations among Senate leaders. And that may result in passage of the ethics and lobbying bill that DeMint has kept in the deep freeze lo these many months.

The Congressional Democratic leadership, no doubt exasperated over GOP holds blocking the lobbying and ethics bill from going to conference -- months after overwhelming passage by both houses -- now apparently plans to circumvent the bill's conference process entirely.

Said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): "I've done everything but get on my knees and beg for [a conference]."

Presumably, the House would vote on a substitute to the Senate version, S. 1, under a closed rule limiting or barring amendments, and the Senate would receive a "message" from the House, Reid would fill the amendment tree, file for cloture and, if that succeeds, proceed to a vote. Reid has said he wants to send the bill to the president before the August recess begins in two weeks.

To be determined -- or made public -- is the content of the bill. Of particular interest would be the outcome of the revolving door provision. Current law and the House version provide for a cooling-off period barring former members and staffers from lobbying Congress for one year; the Senate version calls for a two-year period. There is some speculation that a House-Senate 'compromise' would provide for different cooling-off periods regarding lobbying the two houses.

After much frustration in trying to send the ethics and lobbying reform legislation to conference committee, RollCall ($$) reports that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) have decided to abandon the normal conference committee process and will use a parliamentary tactic rarely used to push the legislation. According to the article, the plan would be that the House and Senate votes on identical language without amendments attached to circumvent the conference process.

Once a deal is reached Democrats will bring a new version of the bill back to the House floor using a rule to limit amendments. Pelosi could then pass the measure somewhat quickly and send the new version to the Senate. Reid would then have to block any effort to change the bill. The decision was reached as Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) continues to refuse to let the bill move to conference without a promise from Reid that new earmark reform rules will be included.

Given the high profile of the ethics issue, supporters would gamble that any filibuster could be overcome. But according to Republican aides, DeMint and other conservatives who have been pushing ethics and earmark reforms in the Senate will likely be in no mood to simply accept a new bill, particularly if they feel any of the provisions have been changed or watered down.

Meanwhile, BNA Money and Politics ($$) reports that some who are working on easing disagreements between the two versions might be considering dropping the bundling provision.

Both the House and Senate version of the reform bill contain provisions to require lobbyists to include in reports filed under the Lobbying Disclosure Act the campaign money that they collect or arrange to have delivered to lawmakers and other candidates. A new proposal now reportedly being considered would require only candidates and other political committees, but not lobbyists, to report information on bundled contributions to the Federal Election Commission. . . . But, reformers suspect that others have privately supported DeMint's stance because of objections to provisions in the underlying lobbying legislation, such as the requirement to disclose bundling.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) is apparently single-handedly holding up the Senate's lobbying and ethics reform bill with a hold keeping it from going to conference over a pet provision that he wants guaranteed will be included in the conference committee's final version.

Such guarantees are hard to come by, and sometimes harder to make stick. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) did the next best thing yesterday, offering to put DeMint on the conference committee. But DeMint scoffed at that: "The majority leader is trying to be clever, but I wasn't born yesterday... Everybody knows Democrats are going to control the conference, 4 to 3, and they will vote 4 to 3 to kill [it]." Majority rule can be a bear.

Spurned by DeMint, Reid warned GOP members today to work with Democrats to complete work on the bill "in a timely fashion," before the August recess starts. "Otherwise it will be finished in an untimely fashion . . . because we're going to finish this stuff before we have our August recess."

The principal DeMint believes he is defending stands a snowball's chance in August if he keeps the Senate from going on its summer vacation this year. Per The Hill: "You have to always be careful around here not to overplay your hand," [Sen. Trent] Lott warned.

Last week, the Washington Post and OMB Watch urged the Senate leadership to break the impasse. See:

• Get it Done: "Enough is enough. It's time to get this bill done. Neither the House nor the Senate measure is perfect, but either would effect significant improvements over the unacceptable status quo."
• OMB Watch Joins the Call to Move Lobby Reform Legislation Forward: "We strongly urge Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (KY) to join with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) in offering and supporting the cloture motions needed to get the lobbying and ethics reform bill to conference."

This week, OMB announced a new feature to what it terms its "earmarks database" -- data showing estimates of the number and cost of earmarks in the individual FY 2008 Appropriations bills as they move through the legislative process.

We road-tested this database here at OMB Watch and give it one thumbs-up.

The Thumb: Unbidden by Congress, OMB has taken it upon itself to produce and publish the first current-year accounting of earmarks ever -- a significant improvement in a hitherto almost wholly shrouded aspect of government spending. It is now possible to follow earmarks as bills move through the legislative process after: 1) House and Senate Committee action, 2) House and Senate floor action, and 3) Conference Committee action -- drilling down to the program level.

The Palm: The "database" has no advanced search functions -- you can't search and retrieve bills, sort for trends, or drill down jurisdictionally further than state-level. "Database" is a misnomer here -- it's more like a set of files with very limited sub-search ability. The earmarks identified are only "legislative" -- executive branch earmarks are not identified. And tax expenditure earmarks are omitted entirely.

OMB Watch has released a press statement in response to recent actions that have blocked the Senate from going to conference on lobbying and ethics reform legislation. The latest Watcher has an article on the fruitless attempts to send the measure to conference.

We understand that at least one senator is blocking this bill from moving forward to ensure the senator's provision is part of the conference negotiation. OMB Watch concurs that both the House and Senate bills could be made stronger. But the best way to make that happen is to move to a conference where the better of the two bills can be approved by Congress and signed into law by the president.

An editorial in Roll Call ($$) calls on Senators to go along with Senator DeMint's (R-SC) request on earmarks "so disclosure of spending requests is not delayed until President Bush signs an ethics reform measure that still has not even gone to a House-Senate conference."

Congress has now returned from the July 4th recess and efforts to send lobbying and ethics legislation into conference committee were once again blocked. These events are a repeat of what occurred right before the recess. The Politico reports on the struggle Democratic leaders will face, especially from Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) who is insisting that the earmark disclosure provision is not altered during conference. However, Democrats simply see this as a means to block the ethics reform bill. DeMint says he supports the lobbying reform package, but he will not change his mind unless Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) promises that the Senate rules on earmarks will not be deleted or changed in the final bill. DeMint argues that a change in the Senate rules should not be included in any conference committee with the House.

The potential impasse could delay action further and threaten passage of one of the Democrats' most important campaign promises. Behind the scenes, it's clear many senators are unhappy with a separate proposed requirement that lobbyists disclose how much money they bundle in campaign donations for incumbents and candidates. Some lobbyists privately warn that they may limit their fundraising roles under such scrutiny.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) objected to a unanimous consent request by DeMint to add the earmark language that passed in January as an amendment to the lobbying and ethics bill. DeMint's request also moved to send the lobbying bill to conference with the House. Senate Democratic leaders said they could not guarantee that DeMint's earmark language would survive negotiations.