“Every one of these weaknesses would have been improved with Republican input, but we were unable to do so because there was no conference.

“I assure you that we’ll return to the earmarks provision. This bill isn’t nearly as tough as it would have been on earmarks if Republicans had been involved in writing it. But weighing the good and the bad, many provisions are stronger than current law.

“I will support its passage.”

The critics said they could not muster enough GOP opposition because many Republicans were worried that voting against an ethics reform bill could come back to haunt them in the future.

“I can never try to rationalize somebody else’s decision, but clearly the fact that 22 are up for reelection may have an impact on it,” said Sen. Richard Burr (N.C.), one of the 14 Republicans to vote against the bill.

Five Republicans up for reelection in 2008 voted against the measure: Sens. James Inhofe (Okla.), Thad Cochran (Miss.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), John Cornyn (Texas) and Larry Craig (Idaho). But those senators’ reelection hopes appear to be on safe grounds. The only presidential candidate to vote against the measure was Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a longtime critic of earmarks, who said the American people had been “deceived” by the bill.

Those strong words put Sen. Mitch McConnell (Ky.), the Republican leader who is up for reelection in 2008, in a tough position. McConnell gave a speech criticizing several aspects of the bill, including the earmark reforms and what he said was a convoluted ban on gift-giving. Further, he questioned the rationale for forcing presidents to repay the government for using Air Force One for campaign travel at a charter rate. McConnell said that could amount to $400,000 per hour.

McConnell said that means the “end of presidential fundraisers outside Washington for Democrats and Republicans.”
Still, McConnell said the measure was an improvement over the status quo and voted for it, even though his deputy, Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.), voted against it because of the earmark language.

On today's overwhelming vote approving an ethics and lobbying reform plan, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.), the No. 4 GOP leader, voted with the majority in passing legislation that imposes new prohibitions on the senatorial revolving door to K Street and requires greater disclosure for lobbying firms.

But the four other elected Republican leaders, including Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.), McConnell's top deputy, joined a small but boisterous conservative bloc of 14 Republicans opposing the measure. Lott and the conservatives, led by junior Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), believe the bill was not strong enough in requiring disclosure of earmark provisions in spending bills, particularly those measures dropped into bills during House-Senate conferences that are sent back to each chamber in a non-amendable fashion.

“After the exhibition I saw on immigration, I don’t suspect there’s going to be a lot of strength and dynamic leadership here [to oppose the lobbying reform legislation], but we’ll see,” he said, referring to GOP criticisms of McConnell’s lack of visibility during the final days of the unsuccessful immigration debate in June.

Republican aides privately criticized McConnell for putting his re-election concerns before the leadership needs of his party; the proposed immigration reform was deeply unpopular in McConnell’s home state of Kentucky, where he has said his Senate seat is targeted by Democrats.

The "ethics reform bill" now making its way through Congress marks the end, for now at least, of any serious effort to reform the earmark process. This is a sad thing for the Republican Party. Through all of modern history, up until the last two or three years, the Republicans were the party of clean government. It was the Democrats who were associated with bribes, corruption, machine politics, and so on. The idea that the current Republican leaders in Congress--I am thinking especially of Mitch McConnell--are willing to throw away this heritage, and join with the Democrats in suppressing any serious effort at reform--is profoundly depressing.

The question for Republicans is simple: how many more of their members have to go to jail before their leaders embrace the concept of reform? The motivation need not even be so negative: The conservative ideological position of limited government gives the GOP an opportunity to exploit a great political issue by embracing reform. Yet neither the prospect of several Republicans' going to prison nor the disastrous loss of the 2006 election has weakened the party's embrace of the earmark model they ran from while holding the majority, in which each congressman provides for his district or state according to the New Deal model of "Tax, tax! Spend, spend! Elect, elect!"

The persistence of this consensus is therefore puzzling, especially when Republicans have few other issues working in their favor, thanks to the Iraq War. To date, Republican leaders have been very reluctant to upset the bipartisan consensus on earmarking. Between the parties and across regions of the country, lawmakers remain, by and large, steadfastly supportive of every congressman's right to perform "private charity" with other people's money. Senate leadership of both parties has been indifferent and even hostile toward Senators Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) for pursuing this issue with vigor.

All of this would seem to be a political opportunity for Republicans to educate voters about this Democratic about-face and regain some of their credibility on spending. Instead, House Republicans behaved like a docile minority begging for a few spending favors of their own; many were afraid to oppose a bill that includes the word "ethics." In the Senate, Messrs. DeMint and Coburn are at least considering further blocking moves, but we hear the rest of the GOP is split about whether to support the reformers. Minority parties don't become majorities again by helping Democrats pass legislation and then hoping to catch a few crumbs of credit.

The pivotal vote Thursday morning to cut off debate will require a two-thirds majority to prevail. Conservative taxpayer groups as well as Republican Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi have joined in the effort to block this motion. And Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.) will return from his presidential campaign for a press conference Thursday morning with Sens. DeMint, Coburn and other opponents.

But Democrats remain united, and Mr. Lott conceded that it was unlikely that the bill can be defeated. "It would take courage," Mr. Lott said, "Because your headline would be 'Republicans Defeat Lobbying-Ethics Reform.' "

Mr. McConnell's stance, confirmed by an aide Wednesday, is important given the fact that not just Mr. Lott, his second in command, but other Republican leadership allies, such as Sen., Robert Bennett of Utah, oppose the bill. Up for re-election in Kentucky next year, Mr. McConnell is sensitive to the political punch behind the ethics package when many voters are unhappy with the conduct of Congress. And his decision should make it easier for wavering Republicans to back the bill.