Senate consideration of >S. 1, the Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2007 (discussed >here), veered off course of plans carefully plotted by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) yesterday, when Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) introduced an amendment that would greatly expand the scope of earmarks covered under S. 1. DeMint says that S. 1 would not require the disclosure of about 95 percent of all actual earmarks. Yesterday, the Senate rejected a motion to table (i.e., to kill) the DeMint amendment by a 51-46 vote. The DeMint amendment basically reprises the Pelosi earmarks disclosure requirement, adopted last Friday as part of the >new U.S. House internal rules package. The DeMint amendment also requires that information filed by the chairman of the committee or any subcommittee must be published in a searchable format on the committee's or subcommittee's website not later than 48 hours after receipt on such information. Neither S. 1 nor the Pelosi rule contain any such requirement. There are, however, three key differences between the earmarks provisions in S. 1 and the Pelosi rules:

• federal agency spending -- under S. 1, only funds directed to non-federal entities are considered earmarks. The Pelosi earmarks rule includes specific projects within federal agencies -- such as Pentagon weapons systems
• report vs. legislative language -- the Pelosi rules include earmarks found in report language accompanying bills and conference reports, rather than merely in the legisltive language of spending bills, as S. 1 does
• publication of earmarks prior to a vote -- S. 1 would make any earmark available on the Internet to the general public for at least 48 hours before its consideration, while the Pelosi rules provide only that to be printed in the Congressional Record prior to its consideration

Pelosi and DeMint appear to be improvements in earmark transparency over S. 1 on all grounds except perhaps one. S. 1 provides a time certain for debate and consideration for earmarks; the Pelosi requirement is merely that an earmark be printed in the Congressional Record sometime before a vote. We assume that instantaneous pre-vote internet publication of earmarks in the Congressional Record is not contemplated here. We would prefer to see 72 hours provided in any case. We also applaud the provision in the DeMint amendment for searchable-format, internet-accessible information about earmark requests sent to committees and subcommittees on a timely basis and would like to see this requirement extended to the point where all earmarks are trackable throughout the legislative -- and especially the conference committee -- process.