The House adopted its earmarks and ethics rules last week. This week, the Senate is struggling with its own rules package, S. 1, based on a bill that the Senate passed easily last year, with the expectation of considering several amendments and completing it next week. Regardless of the outcome, S. 1, "will be a tremendously important piece of legislation in the annals of history of this country," Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) said yesterday, per CQ($$). Let's see how it turns out. The ethics part of S. 1 tracks the equivalent provisions of the House rules. But regarding earmarks, the paths are diverging in one noteworthy respect thus far. Like the House package, S. 1 would require disclosure of all spending earmarks, targeted tax benefits, or targeted tariff benefits, the identity of members requesting them, and an explanation of their "essential governmental purpose." Similarly, those seeking earmarks would have to certify that neither they nor their spouses had a financial interest in the item. But the House version defined "targeted tax benefit" a federal deduction, credit, exclusion, or preference "to 10 or fewer beneficiaries," while S. 1, BNA ($$) reports, limits applicable tax benefits to those involving "a particular taxpayer or limited group of taxpayers." Budget Committee ranking member Judd Gregg (R-NH), author of the Senate provision, may withdraw it and replace it with the House version under pressure from reformers. Stay tuned.