Istook is the chair of the House Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the IRS, and he is widely recognized as the chittering primate who slipped this paragraph into the $388 billion omnibus spending package that was passed by Congress on Saturday:

Hereinafter, notwithstanding any other provision of law governing the disclosure of income tax returns or return information, upon written request of the Chairman of the House or Senate Committee on Appropriations, the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service shall allow agents designated by such Chairman access to Internal Revenue Service facilities and any tax returns or return information contained therein.

That's pretty clear, isn't it? Not easy to mistake the intent of that language. But the Washington Post reports that it was all just a wacky mix-up:

On Saturday, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) referred to the provision as the "Istook amendment," and congressional aides said it had been inserted at the request of Rep. Ernest J. Istook Jr. (R-Okla.), who chairs the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the IRS.

But yesterday Istook said in a written statement that he had been left in the dark about the provision: "I didn't write it; I didn't approve it; I wasn't even consulted. My name shouldn't be associated with it because I had nothing to do with it."...

"We have a problem with how bills like this are put together," Istook acknowledged. "The subcommittee chairman should never be bypassed like I was in this case."

Poor guy. If only he hadn't been bypassed. Still, what a hilarious misunderstanding! How did that language ever get written in the first place and then get inserted into the bill? It's a head-scratcher.

But according to some congressional Republicans, the provision might have been intended to protect people from the IRS! How, you ask?

House officials said the language was intended only to allow staffers to enter IRS facilities where returns were being processed, to oversee how taxpayer money was being used. Such full access is now denied by the IRS, they said, because of the chance a congressional aide might inadvertently see a return.

So some Republicans in Congress say they had nothing to do with it, it was a mix-up, it was bad staff work, there was a fire, there was a tornado, it wasn't my fault!

Others are saying that it was really a provision to protect taxpayers from the prying eyes of Congress -- by allowing any subcommittee staffer to look at anyone's tax return, anytime, no questions asked.

Well, it has to be one or the other, right?