If the House GOP was hoping that headlines and gossip linking their ranks with corruption and scandal would fade away after last November's massacre, they were definitely being overly optimistic.  In fact, even though last November saw a House-cleaning of sorts, the worrisome numbers are building again.

Let's see...so far I can count one...two...three...SIX current Republican Members of Congress under investigation/suspicion of corruption.  Let's review!

Roll Call asks an excellent question:  when it comes to Members of Congress who come under criminal investigation, what is the rule for stepping down from important committee posts?  The answer, simply put, is that there isn't one.

Well, uh...that just sounds like an invitation to do nothing...

Oh, and what do you know?!

Last month, the House was quick to claim victory on a package of ethics reforms it adopted as part of their much-ballyhooed "First 100 Hours." But as Congress began significant debate on Iraq and 2007 and 2008 appropriations, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) dealt a tough blow to further ethics reforms.

They did so by naming an ethics task force that is to recommend, by May 1, whether the House can enforce its own ethics rules. The alternative would be to create some outside office to carry out ethics enforcement and investigations.

Independent enforcement is a no-brainer. In two words: Mark Foley.

He gets super-super buddy-buddy with House pages not even half his age, members know what he's doing and ignore it FOR YEARS, and when the scandal erupts, the Ethics Committee can't find ANYONE to punish?

Like most Americans whose names don't rhyme with Back Sabamoff, USA Today is disgusted with the state of politicians' "shameless money schemes."

They go on to classify some of the tactics used in these dishonest practices:  nepotism, as symbolized by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA), undisclosed land or investment incentives, as represented by Sens. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Harry Reid (D-NV) - to which list I would add Sen. George Allen (R-VA) - and direct action taken by the likes of Reps. Alan Mollohan (D-WV) and Charles Taylor (R-NC) to steer favorable legislation towards endeavors that they directly benefit from.

Here we go again with another potential ethics flap involving a member of the U.S. House.

After two and a half years of percolating beneath the surface, today's morning papers are abuzz with news of FBI raids on the homes and offices of Karen Weldon, the daughter of Rep. Curt Weldon, R-PA. The feds also raided the home of Charles P. Sexton Jr., a Weldon ally, and the Florida offices of the Itera Group, a Russian natural-gas supplier.

And if that wasn't enough, Rep. Dale Kildee, D-MI, a member of the House Page Board, said yesterday that the investigation into Rep. Mark Foley's explicit communications with House pages may expand to other members.

This Congress has done virtually nothing to reform itself from ethics problems that have enveloped former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-TX and former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-CA; and threatens Rep. William Jefferson, D-LA and Alan Mollohan, D-WV.

For months this year, House leaders promised a "bold package of reform" to better police the ethical behavior of its members. But they fell far short when it came to deliver. No independent examination of ethics complaints. No strengthened "revolving door" provisions. No stronger curbs on lobbyist-funded travel or gifts for members of Congress. No, none of that was necessary, they claimed. Even the Ethics committee itself is out of commission, unable to recover from a four-month standoff that has crippled it.  

Last Thursday, the House voted for better disclosure on earmarks in appropriations bills -- a rule that will expire at the end of this Congress. That's all the ethics reform you get. Well, that and access restrictions to the House floor and gym for former members who are lobbying Congress.

The question Jeffrey Birnbaum asks in today's Washington Post is "Will the corruption issue go national?"  He answers it himself by considering the growing list of familiar Abramoff-linked names in electoral trouble, along with non-Abramoff-linked names that are finding their campaigns in undesirable waters (such as Ohio Senator Mike DeWine).

Tom DeLay.  Bob Ney.  Conrad Burns.  Ralph Reed.  Why is it that these Abramoff-associated names evoke more visceral reactions than other names linked to corruption, such as Jefferson, Doolittle, Mollohan, and Harris?

Here's a quick and dirty answer - isolated incidents of corruption are deplorable, and the electorate will punish those at fault.  But the Abramoff scandal carries the connotation of a conspiracy, which permeates throughout an entire party and casts doubt on the integrity of our political system as a whole, and that is unforgivable.

It's unfortunate for upstanding members of the Republican party, who for all intents and purposes had little or nothing to do with Abramoff and his cronies.  The Abramoff stink is threatening to contaminate their campaigns just the same, and it's unclear at this point if there's any escape.

Maybe it's finally sinking in that voters aren't so keen on their elected officials peddling influence, funnelling dirty money, taking bribes, and selling access.  It seems as though Ralph Reed's primary loss in Georgia was a wake-up call.  Today's Washington Post has a good article on how the corruption issue is worrying both parties:

I especially like how they'll consider effective lobby reform as a "political cover," but not on its merits.  Democrats discussed are Reps. Jefferson (LA) and Mollohan (WV).  The other Republicans mentioned are Reps. Lewis, Doolittle, and Pombo, all from California; Tom DeLay makes a cameo appearance.

It's a good breakdown of exactly why politicians should care about scandals and corruption.  Let's hope it's a lesson that sticks with them.