NO HEADLINE

The congressional corruption cases are plenty ugly, but the way Congress normally operates isn’t pretty either. The political parties unwittingly acknowledge this as they trade charges about who is tainted by perfectly legal campaign contributions from the clients of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Furthermore, the back and forth about those contributions are just part of a game to persuade the public that if lawmakers can just rid themselves of the Abramoff taint, all will be fine.

Not true. Lobbyists have no power unless it is given to them. Leaders from both parties in Congress deliberately constructed a process that is as much about fund raising as it is lawmaking. The goal isn’t better government; it’s the accumulation of power. Both parties have called a truce on ethics investigations to keep the unseemly nature of the operation from public view.

Conscientious Democrats confess that when they controlled Congress, they unfairly changed the rules to consolidate their power. Some Republicans are saying the same now that they’ve taken charge.

“We simply have too much power,” said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., in calling for congressional reforms.

Flake is among many Republicans in Congress who see that it’s lawmakers, not lobbyists, who need reforming. Their efforts seem to be having an effect, because the two men who are hoping to replace former Majority Leader Tom DeLay – Reps. Roy Blunt and John Boehner – have begun to embrace calls for substantive changes in how Congress operates.

But the public needs to watch closely, because the headlines in the coming weeks and months will focus on alleged criminal activity. Once those cases are resolved and the spotlight recedes, it will be tempting for Congress to return to business as usual. But before the public can act as a watchdog, it must first raise its expectations and stay informed. A sad aspect of the current scandals is that the public finds them unsurprising. We need to demand better of our leaders.

Lobbyists cannot be driven from the system. They have a legitimate role to play in advocating for their clients. Plus, most are not corrupt. However, Congress should be more transparent in its dealings with them. And there are changes to the legislating process that can make it more difficult for corrupt or unethical practices to take root.

First, Congress must rein in the practice of “earmarking,” wherein a single member can tack on projects to spending bills that benefit an individual constituent. The number of earmarks in 2005 grew from 1,439 to 13,997. Such a practice means a lobbyist needs to sway only one key lawmaker. Those who benefit are typically large campaign contributors.

Second, if fact-finding trips are truly warranted, then the government should pay for them. Isn’t it odd how often the facts reside in balmy climates near exclusive golf courses?

Third, Congress needs to establish an Ethics Committee that is immune to the influence of party bosses.

There’s more Congress can do, but these reforms would send a signal that our leaders finally understand that they are sent to Washington, D.C., to represent our interests, not their own.