January 12, 2007: Continued Work On Senate Ethics Bill

[11:00]
Dick Durbin (IL) is now offering Amendment #44, an amendment to the DeMint amendment #11 (see immediately below).  This is a second-degree amendment, and Durbin stresses that his changes do not change the bulk of DeMint's defining language.  Rather, this second-degree amendment is focusing on two sections of language in the DeMint amendment.  One section which does not recognize tax credits/tax breaks as earmarks.  Durbin says that when Congress gives an entity a tax break it is basically appropriating money to that entity—a "tax earmark."  This is all well and good, indeed it might strengthen DeMint's amendment

Second, Durbin's amendment changes the timing of earmark disclosure in DeMint's amendment, requiring that the name(s) of lawmakers supporting an earmark be made available before votes and not 48 hours after, as is the current language in the DeMint amendment.

As far as I can tell right now, the Durbin amendment modifies the DeMint amendment in only these two ways—tax earmarks and disclosure timing.  It does not appear that Durbin is seeking to reign in DeMint's broader definition of earmarks, which would include earmarks to federal entities and earmarks inserted late in the process (during conference).  I am eager to hear DeMint's reaction to Durbin's second-degree amendment.


[10:54]
David Vitter (LA) indicates that there might be a rush to cloture on this ethics bill such that some amendments might never come up for a vote.  There will be a bunch of votes on amendments on Tuesday.  Vitter noted, however, words from Majority Leader Reid to the effect that Reid will work with Jim DeMint (SC) on the Demint Amendment (#11) which offers an alternative definition of earmarks, an amendment which fought off a tabling motion yesterday and which Reid urged his fellow senators to vote down.  DeMint's definition of earmarks is arguably much more broad than the definition Reid has offered in his "substitute" ethics bill.


[9:56]
They're gonna go ahead and vote on the Kerry amendment, sure to pass.  It prevents members of Congress from receiving their federal pensions once they've been convicted of certain crimes.  The amendment passes 87-0.


[9:44]
Russ Feingold (WI) is calling up four amendments to the S1 substitute (Amendment #3).  But he's going to explain them at a later time.


[9:39 est]
Senator John F. Kerry (MA) is now offering his amendment (#1), which would terminate the pensions of those congressmen who are guilty of corruption.  Kerry is talking about the like of Cunningham and Traficant who will enjoy pensions despite having been thrown out of Congress and sent to jail.  Under the amendment, lawmakers who are guilty of graft would receive back their contributions to benefit plans.  Kerry notes this facet of the bill as appropriate in cases where there are innocent spouses and children of the corrupt lawmakers.