The skinny on Stevens & ethical reform

Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AL) has had quite an impressive week, for a senator who's corrupt at worst and ethically challenged at best.

First, his home was raided by FBI agents who are investigating his ties to a company whose officials have pleaded guilty to bribing Alaskan public officials. Considering his history of supporting some of the most ridiculous projects in the history of government, including a Bridge to Nowhere, which costs over $300 million, it's a more than interesting accusation. (How can a U.S. Senator support such an idiotic project? He's either one of the most asinine people ever to hold office in the U.S. Senate, he's getting paid, or both.)

Anyway, above is footage of a CNN reporter trying to catch up with Stevens to get a comment about the raid on his home, and he gets all angry and uppity: "Do you understand English? That's the only statement I'm going to make!" Touchy senator, awfully touchy. (By the way, I wish someone would tell Wolf Blitzer that the proper verb tense is pleaded guilty, not pled. I'd think a broadcaster with his experience and prominence would have verb tenses down by now.)

Even more interesting is how Stevens and other prominent Senate Republicans appear on the verge of opposing legislation passed overwhelmingly by the House that overhauls ethical guidelines for Congress. One unidentified Republican senator stated, "there will be plenty of holds on this bill." Of course there will be - why in the would Republicans want ethical reform? They don't want to turn off the sources of their largess since gaining power in Congress in 1994. Now that the Democrats are in control of Coingress, GOPers are probably afraid their money and privilege might dry up.

I've no doubt there are plenty of Democrats in Congress who are corrupt, too; in fact history reveals plenty of them (how's life these days, Dan Rostenkowski?). But, at least Democrats are taking steps to clean things up, which is more than I can say for Republicans when they were in control of Congress.

Anyway, Democrats want ethical reform, the public wants ethical reform, and the only way we're not going to get it is if Republican senators or President Bush prevent it from happening. In all fairness, I should note that I read yesterday that the ethical reform bill that passed the House did so with over 400 Representatives voting Yea, so that included a great deal of Republicans.

The bill that passed the House should do more, but it's a pretty good start. According to The New York Times, the bill will:

...let the public see for itself how much money is being traded for access. For the first time, the lavish torrent of campaign money from eager lobbyists to grateful politicians would have to be reported quarterly to the public via the Internet, with tighter scrutiny and penalties for violators. The reports would highlight lobbyists' so-called bundling, the massing of individual donations into eye-popping packages for politicians and their party committees.

And the bill would require that all earmarks — those budget-busting pet projects that fall like manna from heaven — as well as who’s sponsoring them be identified on the Internet before final passage. The bill would also curb such abuses as corporate-paid gifts and travel. It would end lobbyist-sponsored galas "honoring" ranking politicians at national conventions. It would even ban the ludicrous pensions now being paid to Congressional alumni doing prison time for felonies.

At least if this bill doesn't pass, we'll know who's responsible.