As Congress works to put the finishing touches on a massive bill to reform the nation's financial system, it's a fair question to ask whether the proposed legislation will do what its sponsors claim: reduce the odds of another crisis, protect consumers and ensure that taxpayers won't be on the hook for a future bailout.

We think bills passed by the House and Senate can get most of the way to those goals, if those bills are carefully merged during reconciliation. But there probably is no bill that can guarantee that the government won't someday be in a position of rescuing a foundering bank. And it's clear, the oodles of cash doled out by banking interests have, unfortunately, watered down the final product. But there's still time to make improvements.

Lawmakers should focus on these provisions:

Derivatives: These instruments, such as credit-default swaps, are contracts that allow investors to hedge their bets. There is nothing wrong with that. Derivatives have become a vital part of the financial markets. But in the run-up to the credit meltdown in the fall of 2008, most derivative contracts were done privately. Both bills would force these transactions more into the open, through a clearinghouse where prices would be transparent. The House bill allows too many exemptions — such exemptions should be minimal.

Consumer protection: The House bill would establish a separate consumer protection agency — which we'd prefer. But the Senate bill, which lodges such an agency with the Federal Reserve, at least provides for an independent budget and presidential appointment of the agency's director. Still, we question whether the Fed, which did such a poor job of looking out for consumers, should retain this responsibility.

Bailouts: The Senate bill would pay for future bailouts by collecting money after the fact from the recipient's competitors. The House would assess fees ahead of time and establish a fund. Another approach would be a tax on all banks, based on how much risk they are carrying on their portfolios. In any case, it makes more sense to cover the cost of a future bailout — whether it's called a fee or a tax — upfront. Collecting the money in the middle of a future credit crisis might be a little hard to do.

Neither bill is perfect; the final bill won't be perfect, either. But if carefully crafted, these legislative efforts should offer more protection to both banks and their consumers.