Mike Levin: “I will vote in favor of the DeMint amendment as amended by the Durbin amendment. Last week, I voted to table the…”

“I will vote in favor of the DeMint amendment as amended by the Durbin amendment. Last week, I voted to table the original DeMint amendment because it would have stricken earmark reform language in the Reid-McConnell bipartisan substitute and replaced it with provisions which contain, among other things, a definition of earmarked tax benefits which is weaker than the Reid-McConnell language. The DeMint amendment would have defined a tax benefit as an earmark only if it benefits 10 or fewer beneficiaries. This would have left open a loophole for earmarks which were aimed at benefiting very small groups of people, even as few as 11. It would have been relatively easy to circumvent the DeMint language and the intent of the tax earmark language in the bill. The Durbin second-degree amendment which has been adopted removes the limitation of '10 or fewer beneficiaries' from the DeMint amendment and defines a 'limited tax benefit' as 'any revenue provision that provides a Federal tax deduction, credit, exclusion, or preference to a particular beneficiary or limited group of beneficiaries'. This is stronger language--a limited group can be far more than 10. The Durbin second-degree amendment also requires that the earmark disclosure information be placed on the internet in searchable format for at least 48 hours before consideration of the bills containing earmarks. The DeMint amendment did not previously have a similar provision.”