Washington is abuzz pondering the consequences of the Abramoff guilty pleas and what the fallout may be as this investigation plows ahead. First, this probably ends any chance of Tom DeLay reclaiming his leadership post. Whether fair or unfair, guilty or not guilty - just from a public relations standpoint it would be politically stupid for the Republicans to reinsert DeLay as majority leader. However, beyond specific lawmakers brought into the net by Abramoff I question just how much of an effect this will really have on the ’06 elections.

Obviously the Democrats are pushing the line that this “culture of corruption” will drive voters in November to demand wholesale change, but I’m skeptical. I think Dick Meyer has it about right:

Washington scandals can change history. They have in modern times. But it's hard to predict what has legs and what doesn't.

Watergate, of course, brought down a Republican president and installed a Democrat, but only for one term. It also brought a new generation of Democrats into Congress and they continued Democratic control of the House for another generation. When the Democrats finally lost the House in 1994, scandal played a big role. But it was a long series of scandals, years of it, which did the damage: Jim Wright, Tony Coelho, Dan Rostenkowski, and the House Post Office. The Republican's spiritual leader of those years, Newt Gingrich, was an insistent, relentless scandalmonger. (Ironically, a scandal forced Gingrich from office. Ironically, Gingrich is leading the current call for Republicans to dump DeLay and clean house.)

Other scandals, even big ones, have not had big effects on elections or even careers. Senator Ted Kennedy and Chappaquiddick provide one rather striking example. Iran-Contra provides another; it was a huge, year-of-headlines story and yet the Republicans held the White House and soon captured Congress.

Are Congressional Republicans now in a cycle of corruption, as the Democrats hope and pray? So far we have Tom DeLay's troubles, Duke Cunningham's fall, the Abramoff case and stories about Bill Frist, which frankly strikes me as without merit thus far. I'm not in the prediction business, but nothing leads me to think this series of Washington stories matters much to voters in a time of war, of a new kind of domestic security fear, of massive technological change and of economic insecurity.

It is not like Tom DeLay has received glowing press coverage for the last 10 years, in reality all this does is throw a little more wood on the fire that DeLay is a guy that has pushed the envelope and associated with some pretty unsavory characters. Voters are not so naïve to believe that if you put the Dems in charge of the House and Senate suddenly all this unseemly lobbying is going to stop. Most voters understand intuitively that a certain amount of lobbying is just how the sausage gets made.

The problem for Republicans is that it is all an amount of degree, and this guy Abramoff looks like he was in a galaxy far, far away when it comes to lobbyists and politicians skating the legal/illegal line. For the politicians who were close to Abramoff, you wonder where their common sense and judgment went, and the answer is it looks like it went right out the window.

It’s easy to make DeLay out to be the bad guy and to demonize the “K Street” project, but this was a big part of congressional Republicans changing the mentality of their minority status for the previous 40 years. For Republicans who wanted to push through their conservative agenda this was an important part of making it clear to the permanent government in Washington that there were new leaders in charge. However, what might have been politically necessary 10 years ago has obviously gone too far in the last 2-4 years. Congressional Republicans would be wise to read David Brooks’ most recent column and take much of his advice.

First, they need to hold new leadership elections….

Second, the Republicans need to get a grip on earmarks.

Earmarks are the provisions that single members can stick into gigantic bills to steer spending toward favored projects. They're an invitation to corruption. If individual members of Congress can control $100 million federal contracts or billion-dollar pork barrel projects, then of course companies are going to find ways to funnel graft to those members.

To prove they're serious about special-interest spending, Republicans could declare a one-year earmark moratorium until they get a handle on this problem. Or they could promote legislation mandating that earmarks eat up only 1 percent of any spending bill's total cost.

Third, Republicans need to steal David Obey and Barney Frank's lobbying-reform ideas. For some insane reason, having to do with their own special interests, Democrats have been slow to trumpet the ideas coming from their own party. Republicans have a chance to hijack them before the country notices.

Specifically, there should be a ban on lobbyist-paid travel. (Members should be allowed to take spouses on publicly financed travel because it is important that members get out and see the world.) Former members should not be allowed to lobby on the House floor. All lobbyist contacts with government officials should be posted on the Internet…..

Fourth, enforce House rules. There's bound to be corruption when spending provisions can be slipped into legislation in the dead of night, outside the normal oversight procedures. There's bound to be corruption when members are forced to vote on sprawling bills nobody has a chance to inspect. Instead, all legislation should be posted online for 72 hours before the vote, so the staff and bloggers can nitpick and expose.

Fifth, rebuild the ethics committees….

Sixth, readopt the pay-as-you-go budget rules. As long as a $2.6 trillion a year government is expanding into more areas of national life, businesses will have an incentive to invest in lobbyists. The 1990 pay-as-you-go rules, which forced Congress to offset new expenditures with spending restraint, not only imposed fiscal discipline but also forced pork projects to compete for limited resources.

Finally, today - before noon - fire Bob Ney as chairman of the House Administration Committee. For God's sake, Republicans, show a little moral revulsion.

If Republicans can step up and follow through on a third of these ideas this scandal will have no effect on the ’06 elections except for the politicians specifically fingered by Abramoff. If they slap a little PR band aid on this mess, then they are going to be rolling the dice going into November and maybe the voters should throw them out of power to teach them a little lesson.