Earlier this month, state Sen. Vincent Fumo, D-Phila., was indicted by a federal grand jury on 141 counts charging misuse of some $1 million in taxpayer funds and another $1 million in money from a nonprofit organization run by his former top aide.

Fumo's indictment paints a picture of a man enthralled with using "other people's money." An attitude of entitlement, avarice and indulgence is found behind most of the charges in the indictment, including having Senate staffers clean his house, work on his farm and oversee the renovation of his 33-room mansion in Philadelphia. The indictment alleges that Fumo's pet nonprofit bought $75,000 worth of power tools for Fumo and also bought a bulldozer and backhoe that were delivered to Fumo's Harrisburg-area farm.

The Fumo indictment reveals an over-the-top, self-serving lawmaker. But over the past five years or so, the entire state legislature has, mostly through the actions of its leadership, indicted itself as something of an ethical swamp, where doing what you can get away with is more common than doing what's right.

The individual counts in the informal indictment against the Pennsylvania General Assembly include:

• The 2 a.m. pay-grab on July 7, 2005. The vote, which was preceded by no public discussion and no open debate, gave lawmakers and others massive raises. The stealth vote involved a last-minute replacement of the entire contents of an earlier, smaller and unrelated bill.

• The use by many lawmakers of unvouchered expenses following the controversial pay-raise vote to pocket the extra money immediately, instead of waiting until after the next election, as the state constitution mandates. Lawmakers' use of unvouchered expenses amounted to filing false expense reports.

• The pension-grab vote of 2001 through which lawmakers boosted their own pensions by 50 percent and the pensions of other state workers by 25 percent. No public discussion preceded the vote.

• The use of four $50 million "leadership accounts." Legislative leaders have used these slush funds at their own discretion with little or no oversight, and these funds were the source for the nearly $4 million paid in questionable bonuses to top legislative aides.

• The failure for nearly four years to enact a lobbyist disclosure law. For several years, Pennsylvania was the only state in the nation to not have a lobbyist reporting and regulation law. So during that time, lobbyists representing corporate and other special interests were working to influence state lawmakers, but the public was not able to follow the trail of money, gifts and political contributions passing from lobbyists to lawmakers.

• Widespread abuse of per diem payments, which lawmakers receive for every day they are in Harrisburg on state business. Since per diems require no receipts, lawmakers who often are treated to free meals, or served catered meals paid for by taxpayer dollars, use per diems to pad their already generous paychecks.

• Questionable use of nonprofit organizations to funnel taxpayer dollars to groups that benefit key lawmakers. In April 2006, it was reported that six top lawmakers directed $29 million in taxpayers' money to nonprofit groups that they controlled or created. Among those shifting taxpayer dollars to favored nonprofits were the now-indicted Fumo and former state Rep. Mike Veon, D-Beaver.

The potential for abuse with these nonprofits was illustrated by the nearly $1 million allegedly spent by Fumo's favored nonprofit (Citizens' Alliance for Better Neighborhoods) for Fumo's personal benefit.

• Continued use of various commissions and authorities for political patronage jobs. One such agency, the Turnpike Commission, could come under deserved scrutiny as part of Fumo's trial because the husband of the former Fumo aide who ran his nonprofit headed the Turnpike Commission. A 2005 article in a Pittsburgh newspaper noted, "At the turnpike, patronage is almost as routine a practice as handing out tickets at a tollbooth. It ranges from hiring groundskeepers to more lucrative pinstripe patronage of selecting politically connected lawyers to oversee financial matters. The article reported that a Fumo friend, and partner in M&PConsulting Co., had received a $10,000-a-month contract that was classified as "sole source" — meaning no other company was considered. The report further noted that Turnpike officials refused to provide any studies or progress reports that M&PConsulting had produced.

The state legislature's 2005 pay-raise vote served to awaken voters across the state. Since that time, it seems Pennsylvanians have seen a steady stream of reports revealing a "what's-in-it-for-me" attitude — at least among the majority of party leaders and many entrenched incumbents.

Harrisburg lawmakers have so degraded the institution that nothing less than a full housecleaning, along with a slew of changes mandating transparency, accountability and honesty, can restore public trust in the state legislature. Some criminal convictions and jail time might help, too.

The Fumo indictment is an appropriate exclamation point to the broader indictment of the entire legislature that has emerged over the past several years.