As both a Member of Congress and a former Congressional page, I am outraged by news that a lawmaker sent sexually provocative e-mails to pages.

But I also think that many of the suggestions put forth by my colleagues and others to "solve" this problem are both unhelpful and unproductive. Some have called for ending the page program, others for disbanding this class of pages and starting over later. And still others have proposed reforms that either won't make things better or will make them worse.

But two facts must be kept in mind: One is that the pages did nothing wrong. They can't be blamed for appreciating it when a Member pays attention to them, and it's certainly not their fault when a Member takes advantage of his position, and of theirs, with galling actions of this nature.

The other is that the pages who received these messages already had left the program and returned to their home states. They were far beyond the jurisdiction of Congress or the House Page Board when they received the e-mails. None of the measures being floated would have addressed this situation.

Moreover, no members of the current class of pages were involved in this and none should be punished for it.

Clearly, protocols and directives concerning staff-Member contacts should be reviewed. Jim Oliver of the House Republican Cloak Room agrees. Oliver, who served with me as a page and has overseen the page program for the past 30 years, says we run a tight program now with a lot more rules than when he and I served. There are curfews. Pages must live in dorms. They can go out only in groups of two or more. The problem, he says correctly, is the behavior of Members. And most of the reforms being suggested for the page board or page program don't address that.

Would it be helpful to re-combine the boards that oversee the program for the House and Senate, as was the case 20 years ago? Perhaps. Although the bodies are quite different, the pages - their duties, their qualifications, their living situations - are the same and probably could be governed by one board, rather than two. But it's not a critical change.

Should the board be truly bipartisan in nature? Should it have an equal number of Republican and Democratic members? Yes. This change would alleviate the partisan bickering and gamesmanship that otherwise can result from the fact that one party has sole control over the program. This program should serve as an opportunity available to all of America's best and brightest young people, rather than a patronage program for the majority.

On top of that, improper behavior likely would become public far more quickly if the parties were equally represented. It's unclear whether that made a difference here, but it does enable the minority party to make the accusation, regardless of whether it's true.

Would a page foundation help? It could if funding of the page program becomes an issue. Pages receive salaries - which should continue to be paid by the government under any circumstances. They attend a page high school - my alma mater. That means teachers, classroom space and other expenses. They live in a dorm. That means maintenance, round-the-clock police protection and other expenses. A foundation that privately funds some of those expenses and bolsters the activities, cultural and academic experiences offered to pages could be helpful.

Funding also could help combat ever-more-clever predators who have more ways to reach young people today. Protection against so-called virtual predators over the Internet, instant messaging, mobile phones, etc., need to be strengthened so parents can be more confident their children - pages or not - are safe.

Many of the safeguards built into the program now are designed to encourage pages to report improper behavior by Members. Yet, currently, it's difficult for a page to report a Member or staffer for improper activity. There must be adults there they can talk to in confidence, and learning about established protocols for communication should be part of the orientation program. The Speaker's creation of a hotline is another positive step in this direction.

My four years as a page remains one of the most unforgettable times of my life. My office is full of mementos of those days, and many of the men and women with whom I served remain close friends. I watched history made. Observing Sens. Everett Dirksen (R-Ill.), Dick Russell (D-Ga.), Phil Hart (D-Mich.) and Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.) in the back of the Cloakroom during the civil rights debate gave me a great historical perspective that no class could teach. I am a much more effective legislator today because of those experiences.

I take personally what has happened here, and I want to make sure we protect these pages when their parents entrust them to our care.

But the pages aren't responsible for this scandal. Members of Congress are. And any reforms that go forward ought to have its primary focus on our behavior, not that of pages.

Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.) is chairman of the Government Reform Committee.