The Project on Government Oversight reports:

Sources tell us that the secret hold blocking Neil Barofsky's nomination as the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP) has been lifted!

Could it be because the Senator's name was due to be revealed under the new rules within the next few days?

The new rules, passed in S. 1, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, require that holds be submitted in writing:

SEC. 512. NOTICE OF OBJECTING TO PROCEEDING.

     (a) In General- The Majority and Minority Leaders of the Senate or their designees shall recognize a notice of intent of a Senator who is a member of their caucus to object to proceeding to a measure or matter only if the Senator--

           (1) following the objection to a unanimous consent to proceeding to, and, or passage of, a measure or matter on their behalf, submits the notice of intent in writing to the appropriate leader or their designee; and

           (2) not later than 6 session days after the submission under paragraph (1), submits for inclusion in the Congressional Record andin the applicable calendar section described in subsection (b) the following notice:

     `I, Senator XXXX, intend to object to proceedings to XXXX, dated XXXX for the following reasonsXXXX.'.

(By the way, I wonder if anyone has ever submitted exactly that: "I, Senator XXXX," etc. That'd be funny.)

Anyway, there you can see the six session day rule. The Senator blocking the TARP IG nomination was required to put his notice of intent to object in writing and submit it to his party's floor leadership, and then at some point not later than six session days thereafter, submit his name and his reasons for inclusion in the Congressional Record.

Chairman Dodd noted the existence of the hold on November 21st. Since then, there have been four session days in the Senate, with a fifth coming tomorrow. The hold may in fact have been in place earlier than the 21st, which might make tomorrow the sixth session, but in any case, Monday's scheduled session would surely do the trick. So the Senator placing the hold was running out of time before he'd be required to own up to it, anyway.

Why lift the hold, though? The answer, if he's embarrassed by what he's done, might be here:

(3) NOTICE- A Senator who has notified their respective leader and who has withdrawn their objection within the 6 session day period is not required to submit a notification under subsection (a)(2).

In other words, lift your hold in time, and you don't have to publicly acknowledge that you were the one being a jerk.

(h/t to emptywheel for the heads up)