HARRISBURG -- In a procedural move that left Republicans fuming, the Democrat-controlled House Appropriations Committee voted yesterday to send a Senate-approved open records bill directly to the House floor for debate tomorrow.

Republicans on the committee complained that Senate Bill 1, the open records bill that the Senate passed 48-1 last week, should first have gone to the House State Government Committee for the initial discussion about differences between that bill and a House version.

The State Government Committee last week approved an open records measure, House Bill 2072, that differs from the Senate bill in several ways.

The appropriations chairman, Rep. Dwight Evans, D-Philadelphia, said the only way a new open records law can be enacted before the Legislature adjourns next week for the holidays was to send Senate Bill 1 directly to the House floor, rather than have it be stalled in the State Government Committee.

"This is outrageous,'' said Rep. Scott Petri, R-Bucks. "Senate Bill 1 is 47 pages long and we haven't had a chance to study it. It's complicated and they're jamming it through. This is the choo-choo express.''

"Why are we rushing this bill?'' said Rep. Douglas Reichley, R-Berks.

"Do you call this reform?" said Rep. Mario Scavello, R-Monroe. He said Democrats have talked a lot about reforming House procedures since they took over in January but ignoring committee procedures wasn't reform.

Mr. Evans said legislators still have today to study Senate Bill 1 and submit amendments, and there will be a full discussion of the bill and any amendments on the floor tomorrow.

The House will then vote on Senate Bill 1 on Monday. If it is amended, it has to go back to the Senate, which will be in session Tuesday and Wednesday of next week.

Voting on Senate Bill 1 now "is our best opportunity to avoid having the open records law in political ping-pong, back and forth'' between the two chambers, Mr. Evans said. "We want to bring closure to this open records issue. We would like to make this bill a nice Christmas gift to the people,'' he added.

House Bill 2072 is sponsored by Rep. Tim Mahoney, D-South Union, but he said he was happy about Senate Bill 1 being sent to the House floor instead of his bill. He said he may still use a technique called "amendment by substitution,'' putting much or all of the language from his bill into Senate Bill 1.

Critics have a more negative term for the swapping-out technique -- "gut and replace.''

But Democrats said the Mahoney bill and the Senate bill don't differ in too many major respects and so the Senate bill really wouldn't be gutted.

"If we are serious about open records, this is the way to get it done by the end of the year,'' Mr. Mahoney said.

The Senate and House bills differ as to whether all executive branch, legislative branch and judicial records would be automatically presumed to be open. Both bills contain a long list of exceptions to openness, including guarding privacy of personal medical information, Social Security numbers and security information.

There are some differences on what remains private, but both bills would keep e-mails and personal letters from constituents to legislators from being released.

The two versions also differ on the amount of the fees for making copies of records and on specifics of appealing denials of records by state or local agencies.