Ulysses Currie’s triumph and tragedy — followed by partial vindication in court this week — is more than a personal fall from grace.

It is an embarrassment to the Maryland Senate as an institution and a sad reflection of senators’ “look-the-other-way” attitude toward wayward members of the club.

Maryland’s State House is lacking in strong ethics rules. There’s an unwritten law that good manners and truthfulness are required for those working in this government cocoon.

But when it comes to legally binding codes of conduct, there are enough loopholes to let State House figures chart their own course — however unethical that may be in isolated instances.

We may never know if the Prince George’s senator felt he could evade the legislature’s weak ethics code or that he wasn’t doing anything wrong.

We do know that had tough ethics standards been in place, Currie may not have tumbled into his four-year legal nightmare.

Ethics lapses in Annapolis have been on display for decades. In the mid-1970s, a Baltimore city senator named Joe Staszak, a tavern owner and good ol’ boy, openly pushed legislation to help his liquor business. When confronted by reporters, he replied: “Conflict of interest? What conflict of interest? How does this conflict with my interest?”

Ethically challenged legislators pop up occasionally — former Senators Larry Young, Clarence Mitchell III and Clarence Mitchell IV of Baltimore city and Thomas Bromwell of Baltimore County come to mind.

All of them — and now Currie — tried to use their legislative positions of power to make easy money on the side.

Currie’s actions went far beyond the bounds of propriety. As chairman of the key Senate budget committee, he called top state officials into his office. It was clear that failure to comply with Currie’s requests at these private meetings with Shoppers Warehouse executives could lead to budget cuts. He never mentioned he was being paid as a Shoppers consultant.

This was quiet blackmail. It was an abuse of legislative power. Currie must resign before his colleagues are forced to heap more public shame on him.

The fact that Currie was acquitted of criminal charges is beside the point. What he did was improper and a stain on the Maryland General Assembly.

The trial must have been personally humiliating. Currie’s lawyer won by portraying the senator as nice but incompetent.

He was described as disorganized, incapable of marshalling factual presentations, a bumbling and inept manager of his own finances.

His bout with cancer was said to have caused his fuzzy, inconsistent answers to prosecutors.

The “dummy defense,” his cancer and weak conspiracy charges that failed to hold up under scrutiny saved Currie from prison. Now he must live with himself and come to terms with the blot he leaves on the Maryland Senate.

The parade of character witnesses underlined the “honor among thieves” perception citizens have of elected politicians. Top officials, past and present, federal and state, tripped over themselves in affirming Currie’s likability and caring nature. None of them addressed his misconduct.

Being a “good guy” was more important to these politicians than stating the obvious — what Currie did was flat-out wrong.

The focus of attention will shift from Currie to Senate President Mike Miller and House Speaker Mike Busch.

Do they look upon this as an aberration and resume politics as usual? Or do they demand heightened standards of conduct?

They should follow the lead of Baltimore County Executive Kevin Kamenetz, who has proposed a tougher ethics code for county officials that includes penalties for incomplete or late filings of disclosure reports.

The General Assembly needs to crack down on ethics abuses and give legislators the power to impose financial penalties, suspensions, removal from committee assignments and referral to legal authorities.

For too long, Annapolis politicians have ignored the public’s skepticism and distaste for the way some lawmakers operate. Now the tea party and Occupy Wall Street movements — from opposite ends of the political spectrum — are giving voice to such complaints.

It’s time for those in the House and Senate to implement stringent standards. If they condone Currie-style abuses by doing nothing, they risk greater public anger and forceful challenges at the polls.

If they take weak half-steps, public criticism and fury will mount.

Miller and Busch can demonstrate good leadership by insisting on laws and rules that demand a performance code the public can admire, not scorn.

Currie, for his part, needs to exit Annapolis and politics. His reputation is forever tarnished. That’s a tragedy for a man who came so far — the near-illiterate son of a sharecropper who became a respected educator and then a fixture in Prince George’s and Annapolis politics.

Uly Currie is a kind-hearted, gentle soul. Now he must own up to his mistakes and tell his colleagues and constituents, “I’m sorry for the wrongs I committed.” And then walk out the door.

Barry Rascovar is a State House columnist, communications consultant and a radio commentator on WYPR-FM, 88.1. He can be reached at brascovar@hotmail.com.