De-Mint flavored reform

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) has been causing trouble in the upper chamber, and he is not indicating any letup.

DeMint is pushing hard for full disclosure of all Senate earmarks and has blocked the Senate from moving to bicameral discussions with the House on lobbying/ethics reform. The junior senator from South Carolina fears that when the lobbying reform bill is finalized, it will not include language stipulating that every earmark be publicly identified with the name of its lawmaker sponsor.

The chances of the bill passing once it is out of conference are high — regardless of whether the earmark language is included. Members are well aware that if they oppose a bipartisan lobbying reform measure, their political rivals could turn their “no” vote into deadly campaign ammunition in the run-up to November 2008.

In January, the House passed rules that require each member seeking an earmark to submit a justification for it, as well as to supply a statement certifying that neither they nor their spouses would benefit financially. The Senate did not change its rules, though it did include similar earmark language in its lobbying legislation.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is concerned about the implications for process of DeMint’s move, noting that conference discussions about the provisions in the different House and Senate bills should be tackled in conference.

That is a reasonable argument, because bowing to DeMint’s request would provide an incentive for other senators not on relevant conference committees to hold up bills until they secure promises about the outcome of bicameral discussions.

The delay of lobbying reform has presented problems for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who knows full well that the public mood does not presently gloss over the sight of a Republican holding up an ethics measure that most of the Congress supports.

DeMint, a former House member, has raised more than a few eyebrows with his maneuver. But when the authors of billions of dollars in Senate earmarks remain anonymous, members have the right to speak up.

As The Hill’s Manu Raju reported and DeMint noted on the floor yesterday, Taxpayers for Common Sense, a pressure group, has found that at least $7.5 billion worth of projects approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee this year do not have names attached to them.

This newspaper believes that some earmarks are legitimate, but transparency is key. There really is no reason why lawmakers should evade responsibility for the spending they foist on everyone else. They should be able, willing and obliged to defend their earmarks. The House yesterday held debates on specific earmarks, as they did earlier this month.
Only one earmark, pursued by Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), was voted down. Others sailed to passage.

That’s how it should be done. The Senate should follow suit.