Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (25009)	1/16/2007 6:29:36 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

The "Reid Amendment" Power Line House and Senate Democrats make unlikely reformers. On the House side, important senior Dems are plagued by ethical violations, and in some cases, current investigations. A list of such Dems would include, but not be limited to, John Murtha, John Conyers, Alcee Hastings, William Jefferson, Allen Mollohan, and Bennie Thompson. Even so, and to her credit, Speaker Pelosi was able to push through strong earmark reform legislation last week. Too strong, in fact, for her counterparts in the Senate Democratic leadership. Majority Leader Harry Reid and Majority Whip Dick Durbin rejected Pelosi's approach and pushed for watered down legislation that defined earmarks much more narrowly, thus undermining real reform. When Republican Senator Jim DeMint pushed instead for Pelosi's version, Reid and Durbin were not amused and, along with Ted Kennedy, maneuvered to block DeMint's efforts. This was not surprising since, as Robert Novak notes, Reid's four sons and his daughter's husband all have been lawyers or lobbyists for special interests and have "taken advantage of their close proximity to a powerful senator." When a few Democratic members balked (the list includes Russ Feingold, Barack Obama, Jon Tester, and James Webb) their slick leaders had to back down. But the episode shows that the Senate Dems intend to continue with business as usual once the first "100 hours" expire and the caravan moves on. Before that happens, though, they will have to vote on a proposal to take family members out of the earmark game. As Novak explains, Sen. Tom Coburn is sponsoring what has become known as the "Reid amendment," which would prohibit senators from requesting earmarks that financially benefit a senator, an immediate family member of a senator or a family member of a senator's staffer. It will be interesting to see how the "Reid amendment" goes down with the Dems. powerlineblog.com realclearpolitics.com

To: Sully- who wrote (25009)	1/17/2007 10:05:27 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Bringing Harry Reid to His Knees on Earmark Reform By Kim Priestap on Porkbusters Wizbang Republican Senator Jim DeMint led the fight to make earmarks transparent in new Senate rules. But Majority Leader Harry Reid fought tooth and nail to prevent that rule from passing, but he was brought to his knees and forced to cry uncle. By the time the dust settled, the rule passed 98 - 0. <<< WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The days of lawmakers slipping pet projects into spending bills at the last minute are ending after the Senate approved a new rule Tuesday forcing members to disclose requests for those "earmarks." The earmarks would have to be posted on the Internet at least two days before legislation comes up for a vote. The new disclosure requirements -- part of an ethics and lobbying overhaul that's expected to come up for a final vote later this week -- passed 98-0. The House already approved similar language to combat earmarks, a much-maligned process in which spending items championed by individual lawmakers are buried in appropriations bills to ease them through the legislative machinery. The rule change approved Tuesday does not prohibit earmarks, which critics often denounce as "pork barrel" spending. However, senators who request money for a project or tax break that benefits a select group must now provide a written statement outlining the purpose of the request and who will benefit, and certifying that they themselves will not benefit financially. Those statements must be posted on the Internet within 48 hours after they are submitted to the committee with jurisdiction over the request. Also, at least 48 hours before a bill comes up for a vote, any earmarks included in the legislation, and the names of their sponsors, must be listed on the Internet. This includes measures that bypass the normal committee process and conference reports reconciling differences between Senate and House bills -- both of which have been magnets for earmarks in the past. Senators will also be prohibited from agreeing to include earmarks to induce another senator to vote their way on another bill. The new disclosure requirements are similar to those passed by the House, although the House did not require information about earmarks to be posted on the Internet. The disclosure rules, proposed by Republican Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, were originally opposed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, who backed language with a narrower definition of what constituted an earmark. But after a procedural vote to shelve DeMint's proposal failed last week -- with nine Democrats breaking ranks -- Reid and the Democratic leadership changed course and backed the new requirements. >>> In spite of Reid's about face on DeMint's amendment, a source from inside the Senate says that Reid tried again today to block the Gregg Amendment, which would allow President Bush the power of earmark recission. That means he can send some earmarks back to the Senate to be voted on individually by the entire body. Reid ultimately succumbed to the pressure and agreed to negotiate with Gregg on his amendment. We all know the saying that actions speak louder than words. Well, for a man who says he wants reform and ethics in Congress, Reid is working awfully hard to make sure that billions of American taxpayer dollars flow freely to pork projects, away from any public scrutiny. wizbangblog.com cnn.com