Glenn Reynolds is having a lot of fun with the hypocrisy of Congress grilling the executives who, until recently, were showering them with campaign contributions. He says, "Sorry, but I just don't think members of Congress have enough moral stature to wax righteously indignant over this affair -- especially since most of them were jostling at the trough for Enron money just a few months ago. I found their posturing offensive. The Enron execs deserve to be raked over the coals, but not by these guys."

Fair enough, but what exactly should happen instead?

1. Isn't this the strongest argument possible for campaign finance reform? If it's improper that Congress should be grilling Enron/AA after taking their money, wasn't it far more improper for them to have rewritten laws in their interest after taking their money? I'd rather see more Congressmen "hypocritically" act against the interests of their donors, rather than "honorably" staying bought.

2. If not Congress, then who? Congress is the body who will have to tighten the laws of accounting and disclosure that Enron and the accounting industry have managed to pry open. Like it or not, this is absolutely their area of responsibility. If it shames a few Congressmen to follow through with some bills in accordance with their rhetoric, that's not a bad silver lining.