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!

If everything goes as planned, it looks like we can finally get some movement on ethics...and not a moment too soon!

Last November, voters overwhelmingly voted to send legislators a message: ethics are important. Don't believe me? Take a look at the exit polls. 74% of voters said that ethics was either "very important" or "extremely important." Since voters made that statement, we've had scandals involving Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ), Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA), Mark Zachares, Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL)...and scandals involving the Justice Department, specifically the ousted attorneys who were investigating people like Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA). There are also the Bush Administration officials that either are under investigation or who resigned in disgrace. And finally, there is the lobbyist at the center of it all, Jack Abramoff!

I don't know about you, but this is all getting a little hard for me to keep track of. I'm beginning to wonder if there is anyone left in Washington who doesn't have a Common Blog smart tag with their name on it! It's time for Congress to finally get serious on ethics reform. Lobbying reform would be a great way to start...

In today's New York Times, Adam Cohen comes to an uncomfortable conclusion:

And now there's another to possibly add to the list - Debra Wong Yang of L.A.  Yang was the prosecutor in charge of the federal investigation of Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA).  She resigned her post in mid-October of 2006; the "purge" of the other prosecutors came on December 7.

And here's where it gets murky.  Yang said she was leaving for personal reasons, but she took  a very well-paying job at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, a Republican-affiliated firm that, oddly, was also defending Lewis in Yang's investigation.  They gave her a $1.5 million signing bonus.

That doesn't sit right.  Yang was on the White House's list of prosecutors being talked about.  If she thought she might lose her job, it makes sense that she would look for a position elsewhere.  However, it's also possible that Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher offered her a job with a compensation package she couldn't resist - conceivably (and conveniently) stalling the Lewis investigation.

Whatever the case, this is yet another instance of possible impropriety for investigators to look into.

If you thought Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) would eventually cave to pressure and follow in the steps of Reps. Doolittle (R-CA) and Renzi (R-AZ) by stepping down from his important committee seats...think again.  Lewis is holding fast:

A federal grand jury issued subpoenas last May to a variety of agencies, cities, and counties seeking information about Lewis' ties to a lobbying firm.  Then the investigation quieted down, and stayed under the radar until the recent raids on Reps. Doolittle and Renzi brought the issue of leadership and corruption back to the forefront.

Now, amid new calls for him to step down as ranking member of the powerful House Appropriations Committee, Lewis is citing House Minority Leader John Boehner's (R-OH) support as his reason for not capitulating:

On the heels of yesterday's Roll Call editorial that wondered why there was no concrete rule regarding leadership roles for Members of Congress under criminal investigation, today's edition of The Hill takes a closer look at Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA), the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee.

That doesn't seem to make much sense to me - if the case is supposedly not going anywhere, what in the world is the point of almost a million dollars in legal defense expenses?

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?!

It's doubtful many of you have ever heard of the House Appropriation Committee's Surveys and Investigations team...I sure hadn't.  But it exists, and is tasked with providing oversight of contracts and other appropriations processes.  It used to be headed by Robert Pearre, appointed by then-Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-CA); last fall, Pearre effectively dismantled the unit by firing the majority of its staff without warning.

But it looks like the team is being put back together under new Chairman David Obey's (D-WI) watch - he's just replaced Pearre with his own deputy staff director, David Pomerantz:

One of the first things they'll reportedly do is complete the Hurricane Katrina probe that was derailed by the firings.

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.