Politicians should never underestimate the power of public perception.

After high-profile corruption scandals led to the convictions of Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif.; Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio; and lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Congress' image was deservedly in disrepair. Many were left wondering whose best interest our nation's representatives were really serving: the general public's or lobbyists and special interest groups with the fattest wallets?

So when the House recently approved a sweeping ethics bill — despite Rep. Neil Abercrombie's vote against it — there was definitely cause to be hopeful. Among other things, the legislation is aimed at ending the cloak-and-dagger process that allows lawmakers to slip special-interest appropriations, or "earmarks," into legislation. The bill, which President Bush is expected to sign, would require disclosure of the names of lawmakers behind the spending requests.

That transparency is essential to ease the influence of well-moneyed lobbyists.

But on the road to redemption, Hawai'i's representatives have created a little detour of their own. The ethics bill doesn't require lawmakers to disclose the earmarks they are requesting before the legislation is filed. And even though dozens of lawmakers do so anyway, our delegation is inclined to keep that information to themselves.

Among the excuses: "leads to false hope"; "it's prema-ture"; "too many to list"; and "don't want to get people's hopes up."

Come on, folks. Taxpayers are grownups who can take a little disappointment. Even if the plans don't go through, the public deserves to know how their elected officials hope to allocate their tax dollars.

The ethics bill is a major step toward winning back public trust; it's a shame that effort is hindered by our representatives' refusal to reveal special projects.

Abercrombie wrongly criticized the ethics bill as merely "window dressing." Still, appearance counts for something. And the House is in serious need of a makeover.