Editorial: Entertaining rules for Congress

Monday, Jan. 9, 2006 | 7:44 a.m.

One of the most disheartening aspects of former lobbyist Jack Abramoff's admission that he used campaign contributions -- among other things -- to win politicians' favors is the implication that his actions are typical on Capitol Hill, where experts say many ignore the rules but few get caught.

Abramoff's cozy, lucrative relationships with elected officials were shattered last week when he cut a deal with federal prosecutors, agreeing to work with them in a bribery and corruption case and also plead guilty to conspiracy, fraud and tax evasion. Abramoff, who commanded $750 an hour as a lobbyist, admitted to providing luxury trips, golf outings, campaign contributions and lavish wining and dining to influence politicians. He even admitted to defrauding Indian tribes he represented.

About two dozen lawmakers have forfeited or donated to charity the thousands in campaign contributions they received from Abramoff. But these are little more than token actions that do nothing to fix Congress' routinely corrupted ethics.

In a Hearst Newspapers report last week, Stanley Brand, former counsel for the House of Representatives, said lawmakers typically disregard the rules governing entertainment and gifts and only show a fleeting concern for those rules when someone gets caught. "There's no enforcement and no risk," Brand said. And the rules come with dozens of exceptions, he added.

Several members of Congress are proposing various measures to tighten restrictions -- such as requiring politicians to pay fair market value for sports tickets and sky box receptions. But tighter rules aren't worth the paper they're printed on when there is no mechanism for enforcement beyond self-governance and the occasional plea bargain by a sleazy lobbyist.

Congress needs better oversight to restore the integrity of its system. Without it, they may find themselves struggling to restore Americans' faith in their elected officials.