Informed Speculation

Capitol Hill staffers recently voted Harry Reid the second most ‘ethically challenged’ man in the Senate, and not for nothing, either. Yet despite Reid’s best efforts, a piece of ethical reform that should be welcomed by both parties appears to be one step closer to passage:

After campaigning for months on a promise to tighten ethics rules, Senate Democratic leaders tried unsuccessfully Thursday to block a measure that would shine a light on the shadowy practice of earmarking federal money for lawmakers’ pet projects.

Last week the House Democrats passed an unexpectedly broad change to their chamber’s rules that would disclose the size, purpose and sponsor of any earmark.

But on Thursday, when Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, introduced the same thing in the Senate, Democratic leaders moved quickly to squash it, calling the House bill ill thought out.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, said he was happy to see the House “moving things along very quickly.” But, Mr. Reid said, “frankly, I don’t think they spent the time on this that we have.”

The Democratic leaders’ effort to block the DeMint proposal was defeated by a vote of 51 to 46, surprising almost everyone in the Senate. The outcome reflected the keen desire of many lawmakers to appear to be on the side of openness and reform after an election that turned in part on Congressional corruption scandals.

Listening to Harry Reid (the ‘public servant’ who somehow manages to be involved in million-dollar sweetheart real-estate deals) preach on the ‘culture of corruption’ was always galling – it’s nice to see that his power as Senate Majority Leader wasn’t sufficient to quell this much-needed reform…not that the tone-deaf Reid has given up:

“Earmark disclosure will be a major change in the way the Senate works,” Mr. Reid said. “We should adopt the Reid-McConnell version rather than the House version in the DeMint amendment. If we need to revisit the issue later, we can do that.”

Mr. DeMint argued that if the original bill was not strengthened, “the public’s going to know from Day 1 that the idea of being open and transparent is just a scam.”

A major change in the way the Senate works? My dear Harry, that’s precisely the point…