You could argue that Congress has a responsibility to deal with impending issues — unemployment benefits extensions or tax hikes, for instance. But should “repudiated” officials be involved in making long-lasting decisions for all of us?

Remember that the Department of Homeland Security was created in 2002 when a lame-duck Congress relied on post- 9/11 jitters to create the largest government bureaucracy in American history. A lame-duck Congress impeached the president in 1998.

This year, the lame-duck session will likely take up the DREAM Act, which would institute a major change in immigration policy, and a new nuclear arms treaty with an erstwhile democracy in Russia. The Senate already passed the so-called “Food Safety Modernization Act.”…

So does it make any sense to allow rejected senators like Robert Bennett, Blanche Lincoln or Arlen Specter to help kill earmark reform in the Senate this week, though none of them will experience the consequences of voting to preserve a corrupted process?