Once again, a high-profile CEO has resigned under a cloud and is rewarded with a retirement and benefit package worth many millions of dollars.

The last such golden parachute that produced howls of protest was Richard Grasso's September 2003 controversial departure from the New York Stock Exchange - with a compensation package valued at $140 million. Eliot Spitzer, attorney general of New York, launched a lawsuit to force Grasso to return some of that money, alleging that his compensation was set by board insiders beholding to him.

This time, the high-profile CEO is Franklin Raines, the respected former Clinton administration director of the Office of Management and Budget. Raines resigned in December as CEO of Fannie Mac, the quasi-governmental organization that buys mortgages from banks and resells them to help expand home ownership.

Fannie Mae's government backing, at taxpayer expense, is justified because its mission of fostering home ownership is honorable and positive for the country The details surrounding the departure of Raines and his bloated compensation package, however, are neither justified nor honorable.

In early December, the Securities and Exchange Commission ruled that Fannie Mae had to restate earnings to the tune of $9 billion, a move that is expected to reduce Fannie Mae's reported profits over the past four years by about 40 percent. The fallout from what the SEC says are accounting discrepancies resulted in Raines taking what has been described as "early retirement" last month.

Despite leaving Fannie Mae under the cloud of an accounting scandal, Raines will be receiving a monthly pension check of $114,000. He will also walk away with $8.7 million in deferred compensation and $5.8 million in stock options. Though Raines has already left Fannie Mae, he claims his official date of "retirement" will be June 22, a delay that provides him with $600,000 in additional compensation.

Even if Fannie Mae were not now tainted by an accounting scandal, its CEO should not receive this sort of compensation. It is, as one editorial noted, a sign of disrespect for Fannie Mae's stated mission and government backing.

Those ultimately responsible for the travesty of this pay package, the board of directors of Fannie Mae, has contracted former Sen. Warren Rudman and his law firm to launch an independent investigation into board oversight and other issues, including how Raines' compensation was determined.

Federal officials have said efforts will be made to force Raines to return a significant portion of the money in his gold-plated compensation package. Public pressure can - and should - help make sure that that happens.

Once again it should be remembered that the CEO did not hold a gun to the members of the board of directors. This board, like too many others, failed its fiduciary responsibilities by signing off on such an outrageous pay package.

Both Raines and the Fannie Mae board should be held responsible. And that should result in Raines giving up some of his compensation package and the board members returning the fees they received for serving on the board.

Clearly, the lessons of Enron, WorldCom and Tyco have not been learned by enough corporate bosses and boards of directors.