Although the Congressional investigation into Andersen and Enron is far from complete, lawmakers have introduced at least 30 bills they say will address the problems created by the two firms.

There are bills that would divorce the auditing and consulting functions of accounting firms to prevent the possibility of conflict of interest. Another would require companies to change auditors periodically, so auditor and client could not grow to cozy. Yet another bill would ban auditors from going to work for their clients for seven years after leaving accounting firms, to head off auditors giving favorable reviews to a potential employer.

One bill would even "establish a Federal Bureau of Audits within the Securities and Exchange Commission to conduct audits of all publicly registered companies" -- a proposal that would create thousands of government jobs for CPA's.

Some in the financial world say Congress could be going too far. The fear is that the laws will create new problems, worse than those they prevent, in the futile pursuit of total honesty.

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan got into the act this month, warning that Congress should guard against imposing too much regulation on accountants. "Regulation has, over the years, proven only partially successful in dissuading individuals from playing with the rules of accounting," Greenspan said in a speech at New York University, using unusually direct language.

Chicago-based Andersen audited the books of Enron, telling shareholders all was well with the Houston energy company. In reality, Enron had set up a series of partnerships to conceal debt and inflate earnings. When the scheme came to light last year, Enron rapidly fell into bankruptcy while Andersen auditors shredded tons of documents.

Now Andersen is under indictment for obstruction of justice, and at least 10 legislative committees are investigating the most spectacular accounting failure in history.

Much of the legislation under consideration would increase regulation of the accounting profession.

Rep. Michael Oxley, R-Ohio, for example, has introduced a bill to create a public regulatory board to oversee and discipline accountants. Currently most regulation of accountants is done at the state level, even though some accounting firms are global in reach.

The Oxley bill would prohibit auditors from providing non-audit services such as consulting. The goal is to prevent auditors from going easy on a client's financial statements in the hope of winning a lucrative consulting contract.

And among its other provisions, the bill would require corporate insiders to report stock sales almost immediately to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Such reports now can be delayed for weeks.

Oxley's bill has an influential fan in SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt. "We are already engaged in developing a number of proposed rules that are addressed by this legislation," Pitt said after the bill was introduced in February.

But not everyone thinks the federal government needs to rein in the accounting profession. "Its like saying `Let's not let criminals walk the streets' - unless you lock people in their homes, it isn't going to happen," said Diane Swonk, chief economist of Bank One.

If Congress requires companies to change auditors periodically, it could mean that a company's auditor would go to work for a competing firm, an obvious conflict of interest.

Accounting firms typically do tax returns for clients they audit, because they have access to financial data. If tax work is banned for auditors, companies will have to pay more to an outside firm for the same service.

Legislators and regulators are driven by political concerns, and that could lead to problems, another industry observer said. "We should do almost nothing until the political rhetoric dies down," said Arthur Bowman, publisher of Bowman's Accounting Report.

Bowman said that if Congress, for example, bans consulting by auditors, the cost of audits can only go up. Audit costs are typically subsidized by the profits of consulting.

Still, some observers say Congress will adopt new laws regulating accountants and other topics raised by the collapse of Enron.

"We are going to pass a bill this year and there is no doubt about it," said Ken Johnson, spokesman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee. "There is a sense of urgency on the part of Congress to act soon."

That urgency is sometimes bipartisan in nature.

Illinois senators Peter Fitzgerald and Dick Durbin, respectively Republican and Democrat, are among the sponsors of a controversial bill to change the way companies account for the cost of stock options.

Many publicly traded companies, Enron among them, compensate employees in part with stock options. Current accounting rules allow companies to deduct the cost of options from their taxes, but not report them as an expense in financial statements. The effect is to create a tax break while overstating earnings, critics say.

Business groups are lobbying furiously to stop the bill, and its future is in question.

But the accounting profession is certain to see some changes this year, as the SEC flexes its authority over audits and public companies.

The SEC is studying a proposal by Chairman Pitt to require directors and top corporate executives to immediately report their transactions in company stock.

The SEC is considering requiring companies to file their annual reports 60 days after the end of their fiscal year, rather than 90 days. Quarterly reports would have to be filed within 30 days of the end of the quarter, rather than 45 days.

Both measures are intended to give investors financial information more rapidly.

The SEC may also expand the list of events that corporations have to disclose. Among those events are any waivers of corporate ethics and conduct rules for officers, directors and other key employees.

At Enron, the board voted to waive its conduct rule for a top executive so he could set up a series of partnerships.

Those partnerships, which concealed debt and created bogus profits for Enron, were eventually responsible for bringing the company down.

-- Robert Manor