Although it has taken some time for the media to begin reporting on Republican improprieties at length, it appears as though a number of the major outlets have found their spines and have begun writing on the issue.

On Friday, The Washington Post ends the year with a bang by writing not one but two articles on GOP ethics issue. In a front page article entitled "House to Consider Relaxing Its Rules", Mike Allen and Charles Babington write about the despicable actions the Republicans are considering. They lead thusly:

House Republican leaders are urging members to alter one of the chamber's fundamental ethics rules, which would make it harder for lawmakers to discipline a colleague.

The proposed change would essentially negate a general rule of conduct that the ethics committee has often cited in admonishing lawmakers -- including Majority Leader Tom DeLay -- for bringing discredit on the House even if their behavior was not covered by a specific regulation. Backers of the rule, adopted three decades ago, say it is important because the House's conduct code cannot anticipate every instance of questionable behavior that might reflect poorly on the chamber.

Republicans, returning to the Capitol on Tuesday after increasing their House majority by three seats in the Nov. 2 election, also want to relax a restriction on relatives of lawmakers accepting foreign and domestic trips from groups interested in legislation before the House.

A third proposed rule change would allow either party to stop the House ethics committee from investigating a complaint against a member.

I need not explain why each of these measures would be an affront to Congress as an institution and the American people. Dana Milbank, fresh off of the White House beat, gets the nod for an analysis piece on this story. In "Lowering the Bar for Government Ethics?", he writes:

Ethics and government accountability groups say these events are a sign of weakening ethical restrictions. "We're seeing an easing of ethical standards and disclosure standards," said Charles Lewis, who runs the nonprofit Center for Public Integrity. "They can dress it up any way they want, but they're trying to increase the employment opportunities for their officials."

For example, the Office of Government Ethics has proposed, and Bush supports, legislation to ease financial disclosure requirements for government officials, reducing the amount of conflict-of-interest information that candidates and their families must report. The House recently passed a version of the legislation.

In addition, the ethics office last month issued a new rule, without giving notice or allowing public comment, that would make it easier for retiring administration officials to lobby former subordinates. The OGE says that Cabinet secretaries would still be blocked by other rules and that its changes were routine. But numerous nongovernmental analysts say the changes were a significant loosening of restrictions, a change championed by business interests.

The New York Times, not wanting to be out of the loop, sends Carl Hulse to report on complaints by ethics and government accountability groups. In "Watchdog Groups Criticize G.O.P. Plan on Ethics Complaints", Hulse notes:

After a summary of the Republican plans became public on Thursday, officials of the organizations said the changes appeared to represent a step backward and could cripple the ethics panel in efforts to hold lawmakers accountable for suspect conduct.

"We think this sends a message that there are no consequences for unethical behavior," said Mary Boyle, a spokeswoman for Common Cause, part of a coalition fighting the proposals.

Check out all three articles if you want to know the extent of the Republicans' unethical behavior. To me, the bigger story here is that the media is now willing to call a spade a spade and report that the GOP is taking a number of unethical actions to increase their power. It's about time somebody said something about this.