Porkbusters obtained the latest version of the "Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007’’, and as expected, the Democratic leadership has worked some funny business to dilute some of the Act's key provisions.

Based on what we're hearing from those who would know, key changes include:

• The old version (passed by the Senate) required conference / committee reports to list all earmarks and required the chairman of the relevant committee to distribute the earmark list. But the new version of the bill allows the Majority Leader (as opposed to the Senate parliamentarian, a more objective judge) to determine whether or not a conference report complies with the disclosure requirements.
• The new version removes the requirement for earmark lists posted online to be in searchable format.
• The new version removes the provision that prevented any bill from being considered at all prior to the disclosure of earmarks; now the text only prohibits a formal motion to proceed, which leaves open a procedural loophole that would allow bills to slip through without disclosure.
• The old version prohibited earmarks which benefit a Member, their staff, or their family/their staff’s family. The new version waters that down and only prohibits earmarks that would “only” affect those parties --- which means so long as you can make a case that your shiny new project affects at least one person other than you positively, you’re all set.

But don't take our word for it: you can download a PDF of the new text right here. Check it out, and if you find more nasty surprises in there, please leave a comment and tell us what you've discovered...

More: Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) just released a statement blasting the changes:

“There’s a lot of smoke and mirrors in the new ethics bill, but upon a close look its obvious that earmark transparency reforms have been eviscerated. Senator Reid has given himself and a few committee chairmen the authority to determine whether congressional earmarks have been properly disclosed to the public. My office has confirmed this with the Senate Parliamentarian. Under this bill, the American people would be forced to trust Senator Reid and Senator Byrd – two of the biggest earmarkers in the Senate – to certify earmark disclosure. This bill allows the fox to guard the henhouse and makes a joke of ethics reform.”

“I will offer an amendment to this bill to restore real earmark reform, and I hope all of my colleagues will support it. The culture of earmarks is what drives the culture of corruption, and if we don’t fix the earmark rules in this bill, we will continue to have business as usual in Washington.”

“This bill is nothing more than the status quo, allowing every chairman to decide whether to disclose earmarks or not. Senator Byrd has already ‘certified’ that he is complying with disclosure now, but an independent group, Taxpayers for Common Sense, already showed that $7.5 billion in earmarks have been undisclosed. The favor factory is still open and ready for business.”

And Senator Tom Coburn's (R-OK) staff prepared a handy chart highlighting the changes, which Mark Tapscott has posted over at Examiner.com.

And more: Coburn's office just released the following statement:

“Rather than opening the secret chambers of government to the public, this new Congress has opted to change the locks. This bill, which was negotiated in secret, guts key earmark reforms that both houses of Congress approved overwhelmingly. Unfortunately, this process shows that Congress’s 28 percent approval rating is well-deserved,” Dr. Coburn said.

“The problem in Washington is not lobbyists, but members of Congress. This bill solves the wrong problem and creates new ways to hide earmarks. For example, it is ludicrous to give the Majority Leader of either party, not the objective Senate parliamentarian, new unilateral powers to police earmarks. It is also obscene that the Senate gutted a key reform preventing senators from directing earmarks to family members. The new language mirrors existing Senate rules which have done nothing to prevent these serious conflicts of interest,” Dr. Coburn said.

“In the last election, the American people said they wanted the earmark favor factory to be shut down, not turned over to new management. As our Republican majority learned, breaking promises has consequences. Congress first broke its promise to impose an earmark moratorium by offering 32,000 earmarks. Now Congress has signaled its determination to continue the secretive earmark favor factory,” Dr. Coburn said.