Bob Edgar [President, Common Cause]: "The creation of the independent Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) has sweeping implications for the House of Representatives and its members. Though the process of rooting out corruption among members of the House has changed over the years, this is the first time that private citizens will have the opportunity to investigate and report on possible misconduct by their elected representatives in Congress.

From a legal standpoint, a principal argument against an independent ethics body has been that it would violate U.S. Const., Art. I, § 5, cl.2, which confers the power to punish its Members for disorderly behavior upon the House (and Senate). While there is no judicial authority directly deciding this point, we have argued that there is no textual constitutional impediment to delegating certain responsibilities to an independent body outside the House.

In interpreting the powers of the House, the Courts are likely to accord substantial deference to its choice of the means to implement its self-disciplinary power, particularly if that legislative judgment is supported by a finding that the self-disciplinary process is not functioning in an orderly and efficient manner. I think it should be clear to anyone that the House Ethics Committee has been moribund since long before the recent series of scandals and that it was time to do something about it.

While an independent ethics body could be a huge benefit to Members and the institution, the OCE will be as good or bad as the party leaders make it. Objective, reasonable appointees with respect for the institution can shield members from frivolous, politically motivated ethics complaints. If the parties appoint political hacks with an axe to grind, members will become the victims."