This sounds almost too good to be true. The Democrats have got an ethics reform bill — the Honest Leadership, Open Government Act — passed by the House and the Senate, by wide margins in both cases.

Republicans put up some half-hearted token protest:

A group of conservative Republicans protested the earmark reforms, saying they had been weakened to the point of meaninglessness. But, in the end, the measure passed overwhelmingly in the Senate, as it had earlier in the House.

The House had passed it 411-8. The Senate — despite threats by the hapless Ted Stevens to put a hold on the bill — approved it 83-14.

(In the Senate, all 14 “nays” were from Republicans; in the House, 6 were from Democrats. That includes John Murtha. Shouldn’t every member of the Democratic congressional leadership have voted for it? Shouldn’t Pelosi have been able to get Murtha to go “aye”?)

The bill is drawing the kind of rave reviews that lend themselves to Hollywood-style blurb advertising:
The Politico: “a sweeping ethics and lobbying reform bill!”
WaPo: “Congress’ strongest reaction yet to scandals involving former GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham!”
NYT: “a sweeping package of new ethics and lobbying rules!”
L.A. Times: “the most sweeping overhaul of congressional ethics rules since the Watergate era!”
Public Citizen (a nonprofit group): “far-reaching lobbying and ethics reforms!”
Democracy 21 (a nonprofit group): “For the first time, citizens will be able to get a full picture on how lobbyists and lobbying organizations use money in Washington, D.C., to gain access and influence in Congress!”

Some highlights of the bill:
• Lawmakers seeking to insert earmarks into bills will have to publicize their plans in advance.
• Lawmakers and political committees will have to disclose the names of lobbyists who raise $15,000 or more for them within a six-month period by bundling donations from multiple people.
• Lawmakers will be barred from taking gifts from lobbyists or their clients.
• Former senators and high-ranking executive branch officials will have to wait two years before lobbying Congress; ex-House members would have to wait one year.
• Senators and candidates for the Senate or White House will have to pay full charter rates for trips on noncommercial planes.
• House members and candidates will be barred from accepting trips on private planes.
• Lawmakers convicted of bribery, perjury or similar crimes would lose their congressional retirement benefits.

WaPo reported that

Some advocates called it the biggest advance in congressional ethics in decades. But Bush received it coolly, saying it does not go far enough.

The president has “serious concerns” about the measure and has not decided whether to sign it, said White House spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore.

but he must have changed his mind in a hurry, because the NYT says:

If President Bush signs the bill into law — and administration officials have indicated that he will…

A major billed passed by the Democrats, and Bush has agreed to sign it? Are they building snowmen in hell today, or are we just going to see a blockbuster signing statement later?

What the heck, let’s go ahead and give equal time to the Republican reviews too:
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell: “This bill isn’t nearly as tough as it would have been on earmarks if Republicans had been involved in writing it.” (Yes, if only the Culture-of-Corruption Republicans had ever had control of the House and Senate, and been in a position to show us their version of ethics reform.)

George Bush (via spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore): the earmark disclosure requirements are “toothless”

Sen. John McCain: “We are passing up a great opportunity and again the American people will have been deceived.”

Finally, I hope this makes your day as totally as it made my evening yesterday:

Among those voting for it was GOP Sen. Ted Stevens, whose Alaska home was searched this week by federal agents probing alleged influence-peddling involving earmarks.