People often say that Congress only makes big changes when faced with consensus or crisis. This must be the reason why we have no progress to report today on ethics reforms.

Apparently, there's no consensus to produce an ethics and lobbying reform bill or a revamped House ethics process. And there must not be a crisis -- notwithstanding the recent indictment of Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) ongoing federal investigations involving Reps. Rick Renzi (R-AZ) and John Doolittle (R-CA) and the recent news that Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) had been hanging out with alleged prostitutes. Nah, just business as usual on the Hill.

But as members have the aroma of jet fumes dancing in their heads -- the month-long August recess is approaching -- there may be a new ethics and lobbying reform bill in the next two weeks.

So now Rep. William "Dollar Bill" Jefferson, D-LA (or D-Freezer, if you're the Feds) has been indicted on federal bribery, racketeering and money-laundering charges.

Aside from the obvious (never stash 90 grand in your freezer or try to solicit bribes while holding elected office), do you think Congress, and specifically, the Democratic leadership, will learn anything from this?

Here's a suggestion: You campaigned to create an "ethical Congress" but then you came up short on reform, specifically tracking the money that pays for "Astroturf lobbying" and a two-year "cooling off" period for yourselves and key staff.

But you've got one more shot to make things better. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, has a task force out there led by Michael Capuano, D-MA, to study whether the House should have some independent ethics oversight.

On Friday, May 24th the House of Representatives passed an ethics reform bill with a 382 to 37 vote. The bill was brought to the floor through the advocacy of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) and Reps. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Martin T. Meehan (D-MA).  The proposal calls for the provision of bundling reform, which requires lobbyists to disclose all campaign contributions made to members of congress. It also establishes a firmer system of monitoring lobbyists' charity contributions on behalf lawmakers.

Of course, in order to ensure these provisions, Congress had to drop the provision of the "revolving door" reform, which require that former Representatives wait an additional year until they are eligible to work as lobbyists after serving in Congress. Clearly, it has proven to be rather difficult for these lawmakers to enforce these ethics reforms.  

House Democrats want to be seen as the standard-bearers of ethics reform in government - but their efforts seemed to have stalled somewhere after the "100 hours" ended.

From today's Post:

Let the excuses begin!  There's something called an "options menu" out there...and this gem from task force Chairman Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA):

Pardon me?  Did I misread that?  After DeLay, Ney, Cunningham, Jefferson, and Foley, they can't possibly delude themselves that the current ethics process works and doesn't need outside enforcement.

Or can they?

Follow me inside to read what the watchdogs are saying, including a quote from our own Sarah Dufendach.

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?