PRESENTED BY BY JOHN BRESNAHAN, ANNA PALMER AND JAKE SHERMAN THE TOPNews: House Republicans are expected to vote today on reversing their ban on earmarks for upcoming spending and infrastructure bills, according to multiple GOP lawmakers and aides. If the GOP Conference overturns its ban — as the leadership expects they will — this would represent a major shift for Republicans, which banned the practice when they took the majority in 2011. It would also be the most significant shift in Capitol Hill governance in years. And it could put pressure on the Senate Republicans to follow suit, since both House Democrats and Republicans would be putting earmarks in bills. Here’s how we see the massive shift: → Restoring earmarks would give Congress a bigger voice in directing the spending that it appropriates, and it would reassert the legislative branch’s power in Washington. Right now, lawmakers partake in a hazy process in which they try to influence how state and federal agencies spend they money they authorize. The GOP leadership’s argument as it tries to quietly build support for earmarks — referred to as “member-directed spending” — is just that: Let’s take control of how the money is spent instead of empowering the Biden administration. → Allowing earmarks would potentially help the leadership in both parties build support around spending bills. If members have projects and spending for their districts embedded in bills, they’re theoretically more likely to support them. → Leadership would also gain in power, because they’d ultimately have the tacit authority to strip trouble-making lawmakers’ earmarks out of bills. Top appropriators would see their stock rise, as well. → Earmarks would also give Republican appropriations lobbyists a new lease on life. → Of course, there’s a potential downside. The new earmark process has been designed so that no private companies can get money, only localities and quasi-governmental agencies. But anytime lawmakers have their hands in pots of money, there’s risk of abuse. There will be limits on earmarks. Members will have to declare publicly it’s their earmark and certify that they have no financial interest in the provision. As we noted, the money can’t go to a private company, just nonprofits or groups carrying out governmental functions. There will be a limit on how many earmarks a member can request. Just one percent of any spending bill can be set aside for earmarks. “Major changes have been made,” said Rep. Kay Granger of Texas, the top Republican on the Appropriations Committee. Granger said she is supporting the use of earmarks again, with the reforms now in place. “As long as we have those safeguards in there, I would,” Granger added. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and other senior GOP lawmakers have been pretty quiet on the issue, although the Freedom Caucus and other conservatives oppose lifting the ban. The opposition is not nearly as noisy as it has been in past years. How it will go down: One member of the House Republican Conference has to offer a motion to change GOP rules and get rid of the earmark ban. Five members would have to support the request. The important thing here is the vote has to be by secret ballot. If that’s the case, then earmarks will almost certainly be approved. There could be some internally maneuvering on this today, but it seems as if all parties want to get a vote out of the way. PRESENTED BY FACEBOOK It’s time to update internet regulations The internet has changed a lot in the 25 years since lawmakers last passed comprehensive internet regulations. It’s time for an update. See how we’re making progress on key issues and why we support updated regulations to set clear rules for addressing today’s toughest challenges. EASY AS ABC Stephanopoulos gets Biden to make news ABC’s George Stephanopoulos interviewed President Joe Biden Tuesday in Pennsylvania and the president made news on two fronts. → Biden said he would be in favor of reforming the filibuster. “‘I don’t think that you have to eliminate the filibuster, you have to do it what it used to be when I first got to the Senate back in the old days,’ Biden said. ‘You had to stand up and command the floor, you had to keep talking.’ ‘So you’re for that reform? You’re for bringing back the talking filibuster?’ Stephanopulos asked. ‘I am. That’s what it was supposed to be,’ Biden said.” But Biden’s suggestion is not quite an accurate description of how the Senate handled filibusters when he got there in 1973 and it wouldn’t be much of an improvement over the current system. In fact, it may be worse for reformers. Depending on how a “talking filibuster” is structured, a group of senators could hold the floor for days or even weeks. Nothing could get done — no nominations or bills or treaties — since this faction would control the floor. That’s why then Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield (D-Mont.) changed the rule in 1972 so that there could be “silent filibusters.” This allowed Senate business to continue while a filibuster was conducted on another track. It was considered a key reform at the time. Mansfield also changed the cloture threshold from 67 to 60 in 1975. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) in 2012 proposed a “talking filibuster” requirement for “extended debate.” It would require at least 41 senators to vote to support the filibuster. Then at least one senator would be required to be speaking on the floor at all times in support of the filibuster. If there is no senator available to speak, a cloture vote would be held and a simple majority could cut off debate. → Biden also said he thought New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo should resign if sexual assault allegations were proven true. Biden also said he thought Cuomo would “probably end up being prosecuted too.” PUNCHBOWL NEWS EVENTS The First 100 Days: Women Rising MARCH 24th @ 5 P.M. EST The second conversation in our three part series on The First 100 Days is happening next Wednesday … and we don’t want you to miss it. Washington is changing. More women and more women of color are rising in power — at the White House, in Washington offices and on Capitol Hill. We will be sitting down with top female staffers — Jennifer DeCasper, Christine Godinez, Alice Lin and Lakeisha Steele — who are breaking the mold, to discuss what has changed and what concrete steps need to be implemented to increase the pipeline for more diversity going forward. Afterward, Edelman’s U.S. COO Lisa Ross will join us for a fireside chat to discuss key takeaways. RSVP Here ![endif]>

