Georgia Congressman David Scott hired family members to do work on his campaigns. So did Rep. John Doolittle and many other members of Congress. It's legal, but the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's Jay Bookman says it's not a good idea:

Since 2002, U.S. Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.) has paid more than $500,000 in campaign money to members of his family and to his family-owned advertising company. The money was paid for work performed on his campaign.

The practice isn't illegal — an Associated Press survey two years ago found that roughly 50 members of the U.S. House had paid spouses or children to work on their campaigns. But it also isn't very wise.

Scott rejects any suggestion of impropriety. His company and family members — his wife, two daughters and a son-in-law — performed legitimate campaign work and more than earned their compensation, according to the congressman.

That may be true. The problem is that under the circumstances, it's difficult for outsiders to confirm that statement. And unfortunately, there's a long and sordid history of unethical politicians using their campaign treasuries as a personal cashbox.

In California, for example, U.S. Rep. John Doolittle, a Republican, paid his wife a commission of 15 percent of all donations to his campaign fund and political action committee.

To outsiders, that looked suspiciously like a scheme to divert political donations into personal income, but Doolittle's explanation sounds a lot like that offered by Scott. His wife helped him raise money, and "the family is the one that has the most direct vested interest of all in being honest about things and ensuring your success."