The following editorial appeared in Monday's Washington Post: It seemed clear, when Congress passed a lobbying law two years ago, that lawmakers would no longer be able to take corporate jets at a fraction of the real cost: They'd have to pay the fair market value of chartering a private plane, not simply first-class fare. It seemed clear, as well, to the Federal Election Commission, which had to write rules implementing the new law. Except that the rules, although approved, never took effect, because by the time the required explanation was written, the FEC was down to just two members, not enough for a quorum. Now that the agency is back up to what passes for full strength, its new Republican members seem more interested in carving out loopholes in the law than in enforcing it. So when the agency finally got around to issuing regulations this month, it switched gears: The stricter rules, it said, wouldn't apply when senators traveled for national campaign committees or even their own leadership political action committees. (The House was not involved because it passed its own internal rules -- without this glaring exception.) The FEC's about-face is a moderate-size outrage illustrative of an even bigger one. The problem with letting lawmakers fly the corporate skies at cut-rate prices was that it offered them a huge benefit in cost and convenience. Not only were they beholden to their corporate taxi services, they were also the captive audience of corporate officials who came along for the ride. This problem existed no matter what the purpose of the campaign travel -- whether to raise money for a lawmaker's own campaign, for an ostensibly separate leadership PAC or for the greater good of the party. The statute itself refers to payments for charter flights by 'the candidate, the authorized committee, or (begin ital) other political committee'(end ital) (italics ours). But if the language is somehow unclear, the intent of Congress is not. As then-Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., put it during floor debate on the measure, 'We need to end this corporate jet perk if we are to pass real, meaningful ethics reform.' The FEC's action has the effect of ending the perk -- part way. The larger outrage is the continuing our-way-or-no-way intransigence of the three Republican commissioners. FEC Chairman Steven Walther, an independent named by the Democratic side, said that he agreed with the original view but was reluctantly going along with the three Republicans in the interests of getting the rules 'on the books,' albeit two years late. Deadlock is, increasingly, the default position on the six-member commission, with the Republican bloc refusing to approve settlements already reached by the commission staff, open investigations or appeal losses in court. In the short term, it's time to name replacements for the two commissioners, including Republican Don McGahn, whose terms have expired but whose successors have not been nominated. If that requires President Obama to pick a Republican himself rather than waiting for suggestions from congressional Republicans, as is the custom, so be it. In the longer term, it's another reminder that something must be done about the inherently dysfunctional structure of this critical agency. 