Paulson's original proposal was three pages. When it was defeated in The House, it was 102. Now, it's 451 pages (thanks to the Wall Street Journal for the full text).
On page 88, there is Section 131, "AUTHORITY TO SUSPEND MARK-TO-MARKET ACCOUNTING."
The Securities and Exchange Commission shall have the authority under the securities laws...to suspend, by rule, regulation, or order, the application of Statement Number 157 of the Financial Accounting Standards Board [FASB] for any issuer...or with respect to any class or category of transaction if the Commission determines that is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and is consistent with the protection of investors.
I've elided various parentheticals talking about US Code sections. FASB is Statement Number 157, "Fair Value Measurements", which describes how mark-to-market works from an accounting standard perspective.
Below it is Section 132 (surprise!), "STUDY ON MARK-TO-MARKET ACCOUNTING", which directs the SEC to conduct a study on mark-to-market, and report back to Congress within 90 days. The study is to attempt to determine if such accounting hurts banks, if it helped cause this crisis, and what we might use as a replacement.
I'm sure the rest of it is riveting reading - it starts with the Troubled Assets Relief Program, which it helpfully points out spells "TARP". I guess we'll use it to temporarily cover our Really Outrageous Overwhelming Failure. I am also sure that very few people will have finished reading it by the time it passes.
However, the inclusion of at least the mechanism to suspend mark-to-market shows some hope that perhaps some understanding of underlying causes is beginning to seep in. Mr. Paulson, for one still (as far as we can tell) is a fan of the accounting measure - as recently as July, he said "I think it’s hard to run a financial institution if you don’t have the discipline which requires you to mark securities to market." Perhaps he's changed his mind, or perhaps the near future will, and perhaps the SEC thinks otherwise, in any case. It's nice to see they'll have the choice, anyway (if this measure passes, of course...)