Last week, U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., pleaded before members of the House Ethics Committee. On the 13 charges of misconduct against him, he said he didn’t have time to prepare a defense, he didn’t have a lawyer and didn’t have money to pay for one. He demanded a delay in the proceedings.

When the committee refused, Rangel, 80, walked out of the room and down the hall, smiling and waving to reporters.

But Rangel’s performance was just that, a performance. He’s known about the investigation and the ethics charges for two years. He had a highly rated law firm working for him until that firm quit when Rangel said he didn’t have money to pay more legal bills. Yet he was told repeatedly by the ethics panel that he could form a legal defense fund, as others in similar situations have done.

Given his four decades of Washington experience, Rangel’s performance revealed the kind of arrogance and made-for-TV speechifying that voters have been rejecting by sending political novices to Washington.

Rangel’s performance did not sway the ethics committee, which found him guilty of 11 violations and is now recommending that Rangel be censured, the toughest House punishment short of expulsion.

Rangel’s friends, including former New York City Mayor David Dinkins,

say he has suffered enough humiliation and should not be censured. But millions of average Americans see in Rangel the arrogance of too many career politicians who live a life of privilege and power inside the Washington Beltway. For some lawmakers, that life can feed a sense of entitlement and the belief that the rules don’t apply to them.Rangel claims his troubles have to do with carelessness or sloppy record keeping. But the cumulative effect of his violations look more like someone cutting corners and gaming the system.The charges against Rangel include failure to report income from rental property he owns in the Dominican Republic and misuse of four rent-controlled apartments in New York City, one of which he used as an office. Rangel also is charged with using his official position and office letterhead as leverage in trying to raise money for a university building to be named after him. It has also been revealed that his financial disclosure forms left out about $600,000 in assets.Even if censure on the House floor would be an embarrassment for Rangel, many would argue that he should resign or be expelled. A censure amounts to a slap on the wrist, albeit an uncomfortable one.The failure to pay his income taxes fully is ironic because Rangel had been chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over taxes.Most people, at least those outside his Harlem district who overwhelmingly re-elected him, would ask why Rangel should not face expulsion for such a list of ethics violations? Why no criminal charges for willful misuse of rent-controlled apartments?The ethics trials for Rangel and for Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., were postponed by House Democrats until after the Nov. 2 election. That was a partisan — and ironic — effort by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to spare Democrats embarrassment before the election. It was Pelosi, after all, who used Republican scandals to help Democrats win control of the House in the 2008 election — and vowed to “drain the swamp.”Though other members of Congress have done worse, allowing Rangel to remain in office sends a signal that ethics in government don’t matter.The list of offenses Rangel has committed and the fact that he likely will suffer only a slap on the wrist is another reason why Americans hold Congress in such low regard.Ethics in Congress appear to mean next to nothing. Rangel is only the latest to star in the farce known as congressional ethics standards.