Well, both cases involving prostitution. One key difference between Spitzer and Vitter is that Vitter is still holding public office:

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., has been mostly mum on the prostitution scandal that forced Democratic New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer to announce his resignation last week. But Vitter let down his guard a bit in a conference call with constituents. Scott Jordan, editor of the Independent Weekly of Lafayette, said he was able to ask Vitter whether he would resign after his phone number was connected last year to a Washington, D.C., escort service that federal investigators say was a call-girl operation. "I have made a very serious mistake a long time ago and I have to live with that every day," Vitter said, according to Jordan's account. "That's not a flippant statement. I need to spend my whole life making up for that." According to Jordan, Vitter turned "a bit defiant" and added: "Anybody who looks at the two cases will see there is an enormous difference between the two of them. The people that are trying to draw comparisons to the two cases are people who've never agreed with me on important issues like immigration and other things."

Last July, CREW filed a Senate Ethics Complaint against Sen. Vitter. We're still waiting for action on that.

Last week, the National Republican Congressional Committee called on Democrats to return contributions from Gov. Spitzer, but no similar call has been made for Republicans to return contributions from Sen. Vitter. Here's a link to a list of those campaigns that have received campaign contributions from Sen. Vitter.

Yesterday, CREW posed a question:  If Spitzer's contributions are an issue, shouldn't Vitter's be, too?:

In light of the National Republican Congressional Committee’s call for candidates and members of Congress to return soon-to-be former Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s (D) donations, CREW wonders why members and the National Republican Senatorial Committee have not returned Sen. David Vitter’s (R-LA) contributions. As widely reported, Sen. Vitter has solicited prostitutes in the past. Rather than being condemned and ostracized, Sen. Vitter received "thunderous applause" at a Republican Caucus luncheon after his transgressions became public.

Mary Ann Akers, a.k.a. the Sleuth at the Washington Post asked the question a different way (Whose money is dirtier, Client No. 9's or Vitter's?) and went to Capitol HIll to find out. There was no answer from those who brought up this issue in the first place: 

One GOP member who took Vitter cash, retiring eight-term Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-Ohio), tells CREW: fuhgeddaboutit!

"No, we're not giving the money back," Pryce spokesman Rob Nichols told us. "We spent it a long time ago."

Nor does the NRSC plan to return a $25,000 contribution it received from Vitter in the '06 cycle, according to NRSC spokeswoman Rebecca Fisher, who didn't elaborate.

Meanwhile, the NRCC's counterpart and political nemesis, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, is jumping on the hypocrisy bandwagon, too.

"There is certainly no shortage of hypocrisy in the Republican Party," says DCCC spokesman Doug Thornell, who finds the NRCC's crusade against "sleazy" Spitzer money laughable in light of GOP scandals.

"Between the former members wearing orange jumpsuits and the current members under indictment or criminal investigations you could fill a New York City subway car," Thornell groans.

NRCC spokesman Ken Spain says CREW is all but a front for the Democratic Party. "This is the very same Democrat-leaning organization that admitted just one day before that Governor Spitzer's alleged crime is 'more serious' and will likely amount to 'one or more felonies.' We take them at their word and agree with them wholeheartedly."

Though Spain still didn't tell us what makes Republicans think Spitzer's hooker money is any dirtier than Vitter's.

In light of the National Republican Congressional Committee’s call for candidates and members of Congress to return soon-to-be former Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s (D) donations, CREW wonders why members and the National Republican Senatorial Committee have not returned Sen. David Vitter’s (R-LA) contributions. As widely reported, Sen. Vitter has solicited prostitutes in the past. Rather than being condemned and ostracized, Sen. Vitter received "thunderous applause" at a Republican Caucus luncheon after his transgressions became public.

Government officials must obey all laws, not just those with which they agree. We do not, however, advocate returning legal campaign donations made by officials who broke the law when the contributions are in no way tied to the illegal activity. Nevertheless, we note that what is good for the goose should be good for the gander and, therefore, point out the following contributions made by Sen. Vitter:

2006 Cycle:

National Republican Senatorial Committee – $25,000

House members:
Charles Boustany, Jr. (R- LA) – $1,000
Steve Chabot (R-OH) – $2,500
Jim Gerlach (R–PA) – $2,000
Deborah Pryce (R-OH) – $2,000
Mark Souder (R-IN) – $2,000
Heather Wilson (R-NM) – $2,000

Senate members:
Bob Corker (R-TN) – $10,000
John Ensign (R-NV) – $5,000
Orrin Hatch (R-UT) – $5,000
Jon Kyl (R-AZ) – $6,000

2008 Cycle:

Senate member:
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) – $1,000

In light of the revelations about Governor Eliot Spitzer’s use of prostitutes, we are reminded again that the Senate Ethics Committee has so far refused to investigate Senator David Vitter (R-LA), who admitted to using the services of the so-called D.C. Madam to solicit for prostitution. Although Governor Spitzer’s conduct is more serious -- likely amounting to one or more felonies -- both men are high level government officials who have publicly proclaimed their high moral standards. Both should have to live by those standards and be held accountable for their actions. The Ethics Committee should not continue to give Senator Vitter a pass.

There are many questions surrounding the scandal involving New York Governor Eliot Spitzer. But ABC News picked up on one of the most important: Will Spitzer be charged? Because, as CREW noted, there are alleged crimes at the center of this controversy:

Will Spitzer Be Charged?

Whether or not he resigns, the governor may still have to face the legal ramifications of his actions. The U.S. attorney's office refused to comment on the matter Monday but experts say he could be facing serious charges, even though for the moment, he has not been charged with any crime.

"This federal law carries a penalty of up to 20 years imprisonment for knowingly persuading or inducing any individual to cross state lines for the purposes of prostitution," said Naomi Seligman Steiner, of the political watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington . "Gov. Spitzer also appears to have violated District of Columbia law, making it unlawful for any person to engage in prostitution or to solicit for prostitution. This is punishable by up to 90 days in jail, or a fine of up to $500, or both, for the first offense."

CREW thinks Governor Spitzer should resign:

It is completely unacceptable for any government official – much less one who has held himself up as a paragon of virtue – to engage in criminal conduct. Governor Spitzer’s behavior is reprehensible. The citizens of New York deserve better; Governor Spitzer should resign.

In light of today’s New York Times report regarding New York Governor Elliot Spitzer’s involvement in a prostitution ring, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) released this statement:

Given the reports that New York Governor Eliot Spitzer was heard on a wiretap arranging for a prostitute to travel from New York to Washington to meet in his hotel room, it appears that he has violated the Mann Act. This federal law carries a penalty of up to 20 years imprisonment for knowingly persuading or inducing any individual to cross state lines for the purposes of prostitution. Governor Spitzer also appears to have violated District of Columbia, making it unlawful for any person to engage in prostitution or to solicit for prostitution. This is punishable by up to 90 days in jail, or a fine of up to $500, or both, for the first offense.

Melanie Sloan, CREW's Executive Director and a former federal prosecutor, stated:

Given that Governor Spitzer appears to have violated both federal and D.C. law, the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Southern District of New York and the District of Columbia should cooperate and conduct a thorough investigation of Governor Spitzer’s likely crimes. In addition, the New York Commission on Public Integrity should also consider whether the governor’s conduct violated New York’s ethics rules.

It is completely unacceptable for any government official – much less one who has held himself up as a paragon of virtue – to engage in criminal conduct. Governor Spitzer’s behavior is reprehensible. The citizens of New York deserve better.

A breaking story from the NY Times:

Gov. Eliot Spitzer has informed his most senior administration officials that he had been involved in a prostitution ring, an administration official said this morning. 

Mr. Spitzer, who was huddled with his top aides inside his Fifth Avenue apartment early this afternoon, had hours earlier abruptly canceled his scheduled public events for the day. He had scheduled an announcement for 2:15 this afternoon after inquiries from the Times. But his appearance was delayed by at least 45 minutes.

Mr. Spitzer, a first-term Democrat who pledged to bring ethics reform and end the often seamy ways of Albany, is married with three children.

Just last week, federal prosecutors arrested four people in connection with an expensive prostitution operation. Administration officials would not say that this was the ring with which the governor had become involved.

But a person with knowledge of the governor’s role said that the person believes the governor is one of the men identified as clients in court papers.

The new Governor of New York was sworn in yesterday. He immediately established new ethical rules for state workers:

Yet Mr. Spitzer’s work began hours before the speech: He signed five executive orders before 9 a.m., including directives establishing new ethical guidelines for state workers, among them a ban on accepting almost any gifts, as well as new restrictions on lobbying and the use of state resources. He also barred elected officials or candidates from appearing in advertisements paid for by state entities, a frequent practice of Mr. Pataki.

Spitzer made ethics a top priority for his administration. Hi's actions apply only to state workers -- although he issued a challenge to the other branches of government in his state:

In signing his executive orders, Mr. Spitzer said he was fulfilling a promise “that one of the first acts I would take as governor, officially, was to put in place a series of ethics guidelines and strictures that would begin the process of restoring government to what it should be, which is responsive, open, transparent, available to the public.

“I am hoping that others in other branches will join me in this,” he added.

Mr. Spitzer prohibited nepotism in hiring and contracting, and barred former state workers from lobbying the agency or authority where they worked for two years after their departure. State employment officials were also barred from asking job candidates about their party affiliation.

Mr. Spitzer also prohibited state workers from making contributions to the campaigns of the governor or lieutenant governor, or affiliated political action committees.