House Democrats set some high expectations with their campaign promises to “drain the swamp” of political corruption and run an ethical Congress.

Their performance, though, has been a mixed bag.

They approved the creation of a panel of outsiders to vet ethics complaints (H Res 895) but moved slowly in populating that panel. Its members might finally be named this week.

The new House majority also adopted rules requiring identification of earmark sponsors (H Res 6), but that drew attention to how numerous the special projects are and gave candidates willing to denounce earmarks a way to stake a claim to even higher ethical ground.

On Wednesday came the embarrassment of a powerful chairman, Charles B. Rangel, D-N.Y., asking for an ethics investigation of himself in an effort to rebut accusations that have been raised against him.

Meanwhile, the Republicans have been doing all they can to depict the new majority as ethical failures.

Yet the lawmakers who ought to be most nervous about facing the voters — the “majority maker” House freshmen — say they think they can campaign on their party’s successes on ethics improvements.

“I think we have a good record to stand on,” said Rep. Jason Altmire, D-Pa., who defeated three-term GOP incumbent Melissa A. Hart in 2006. “Ethics is a key issue for what we want to be judged by, and certainly there is more to be done.

“I think it would be difficult for someone to characterize us as being inactive on that issue,” he said.

“I think we’ve made great strides. But I would be the first to say there is much more to go,” said Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn., who made it into the freshman class by ousting Republican Gil Gutknecht, who served six terms.

Rangel, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, formally asked the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to determine whether he violated any rules by using office letterhead to seek meetings with potential contributors to his namesake college center.

The action gave Republicans a fresh reason to question the majority’s commitment to running an ethical House.

“The House ethics committee has never been as disengaged as it has been in the last 18 months,” said Minority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo.

“It is more and more clear that whatever problems are out there, the majority is not really interested in finding out about them or doing something about them,” he said. “They’re going to have to answer for that.”

Republicans have been circulating to reporters a “greatest hits” list of 58 newspaper articles about Democratic scandals, including the indictment of Rep. William J. Jefferson of Louisiana.

They’re silent about lawmakers in the GOP ranks who have been charged with crimes — Reps. Rick Renzi of Arizona and Vito J. Fossella of New York.

However, Renzi and Fossella have made things a little easier for their leadership by deciding not to run for re-election this fall.

Fossella is awaiting his day in court on a misdemeanor charge of driving under the influence, while Renzi faces federal trial on conspiracy, fraud, money laundering, extortion and other charges related to a land deal.

Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland said majority makers, like all other incumbents, will be judged on their own service and hard work and not held accountable for the actions of their colleagues or the House as a whole.

“The majority makers are going to stand on their own merit,” Hoyer said. “We don’t have any of them that are in real trouble.”

Rep. Paul W. Hodes, D-N.H., president of the freshman class, said he hoped the Rangel case would spur House leaders to get the independent ethics panel seated.

“One of the hallmarks of this Congress has been the extent to which we have made good on the promise of draining the swamp,” he said. “What we were all about was ending the culture of corruption, which was pervasive, in which here inside the Beltway what you had was K Street writing legislation and basically owning the legislators.

“I think the public has the sense that there is now a cop on the beat, and we have done what we set out to do,” he said.

Many of the freshmen said they’re trying to go the extra mile on ethics. Many of them post their requested earmarks on their Web site — when the rules only require them to reveal the ones they get written into legislation or committee reports, not everything they seek.

Rep. Joe Sestak, a Democrat from Pennsylvania who defeated 10-term Republican Curt Weldon, said he returns campaign contributions from anyone connected to an earmark.

“We want people to have confidence in the institution,” Sestak said. “I think my constituents will judge me on me. How hard have I worked? Have I tried?”