House Democratic leaders have grown irritated at what they consider hypocritical calls for earmark reform by Republicans, and are contemplating calling their bluff with a moratorium on pet spending projects.

No decision has been made yet on whether to impose such a moratorium, but some reports have indicated there could be a House vote as soon as next week.

Such a blanket moratorium would be a sharp escalation from the previous Democratic tactic — a letter from House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) indicating that Republicans calling for a moratorium on earmarks should also not be seeking them.

Democratic supporters say they realize that cutting off earmarks could anger members who have become accustomed to them or feel that pet projects are important to winning reelection. But they say that a Democratic-imposed moratorium would steal away a signature issue of Republicans’, leaving the GOP searching for a new talking point in an election year.

And it would take the issue away from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has long railed against earmarks.

“I think it makes a lot of sense,” said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who has publicly renounced earmarks. “Earmarks are out of control, and the public is fed up with it.”

Democrats have stressed that they cut back on the pet projects and imposed new rules. But Waxman says that just “isn’t resonating.”

Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), an ardent supporter and recipient of earmarks, considers talk of a moratorium “nuts.” He calls it “conceivable,” but unlikely.

“I’m not particularly concerned,” he said.

Moran said that despite their party’s call for an end to earmarks this year, Republicans have lined up with him for earmarks in the defense appropriations bill. But of McCain, he said, “He’s got some integrity on that issue.”

But some Democrats are considering joining Waxman in unilaterally forswearing the spending projects. Rep. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), who is running for the Senate, walked off the House floor Thursday on his way to discuss with his staff the possibility of renouncing earmarks.

“I think there’s a lot of merit to it,” Udall, said, adding that he has talked to several other members about it. “I don’t see a groundswell. It’s more individuals saying, ‘This makes sense.’ ”

Republicans say a moratorium would be a victory for their campaign against earmarks.

“If it weren’t for Republicans, they would have never considered it,” said Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.). “Now [Democrats] have a big problem because they have no one on the [presidential] campaign trail talking about fiscal discipline. With McCain, we’d have it on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.”

Anti-earmark crusader Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) said Democrats could steal the mantle of reform away from his party.

“I’m still hopeful that Republicans will demonstrate leadership on earmark reform by declaring our own moratorium, but if Democrats beat us to it, more power to them,” he said.