Reid Opposing Another Earmark Reform

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, is speaking on the Senate floor as this is written in opposition to allowing the Senate to vote on an amendment by Sen. Judd Gregg, R-NH, to the Senate ethics reform bill. Gregg’s amendment uses the president’s existing recission authority as a mild version of a line-item veto and is designed to give the President a tool for highlighting wasteful spending and forcing Congress to take a second look at such proposals. The proposal would clearly make it more difficult for Members of Congress to slip wasteful spending like earmarks into legislation. According to Gregg, the amendment provides that the president can send up to 4 rescission packages per year. Congress would be required to fast track the President s recommendation within 8 days. Also, unlike a line-item veto proposal that was defeated in Congress in 1996, Gregg’s amendment today requires congressional affirmation of the President s rescission package. Savings from rescissions passed by Congress must be used for deficit reduction. The authority sunsets after 4 years giving Congress the ability to evaluate merits of rescission authority after President Bush and his successor have had the opportunity to use. Reid doesn’t want the Senate to vote onthe Gregg amendment, which has 30 co-sponsors, including senators from both sides of the aisle. Incredibly, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-IL, Reid’s majority whip, is claiming Gregg’s amendment is actually a parliamentary trick by the GOP to “bring this ethics bill down.” In other words, Durbin is saying voting to amendment the ethics reform bill to make it stronger is a vote to kill the ethics reform bill???? You can read more about the Gregg amendment and the earmark reform debate in this news article in The Hill. And you can watch the Senate debate live on the C-SPAN’s web site. UPDATE: Back Room Dickering Looks like Gregg has fought Reid and Durbin to a draw, at least for now, as the discussion has been moved behind closed doors. I understand that Reid wants Gregg to take his amendment off the floor for now in return for which Reid will agree to a separate vote at a later date. That is a transparent gimmick designed to sucker Gregg into withdrawing the amendment now while the attention is focused on the Senate and thus relieve the pressure on Reid, Durbin and the rest of the Senate’s Party of Government big spenders. Didn’t the Party of Government leadership under the GOP majority last year use a similar gambit to derail Coburn on the defense spending bill? UPDATE II: Reid Fails. Gregg Amendment Still Alive Looks like there may be a working 51-46 Senate split in favor of transparency at least sometimes, judging by events last night. That was the vote count when Reid tried to cut off debate on the Gregg line-item veto amendment. Reid lost. DeMint’s motion last week to add the stronger earmark reform language contained in the House bill to the Senate bill also passed on a 51-46 count. So what now? Here’s what Sen. DeMint had to say after the day’s battle was done and the survivors returned to camp to lick their wounds: ?“I?m pleased the Senate voted against this effort to kill earmark reform. Now we have the opportunity to vote on the line item veto so the President can work with Congress to challenge wasteful and corrupt earmarks. The line item veto promotes important checks and balances between Congress and President. ?If Congress is going to be serious about cleaning up the culture of corruption in Washington, it must do more than just disclose earmarks to the public. It must take serious steps to actually stop lawmakers from steering federal tax dollars to special interest projects.” Earmarks Senate Democrats Corruption GOP