As the murky facts of the Spitzer scandal become clearer, the question inevitably arises whether he can or should continue in office.

Leaving aside whatever personal feelings one may have about Spitzer's alleged conduct, it is not at all clear that the governor committed a criminal act; in fact, what is known suggests the opposite. Hiring a prostitute is not a criminal offense in this state or the District of Columbia. Transporting a person across state lines for the purposes of immorality is technically illegal under the Mann Act; however, that Act has not been used for purposes of prosecution since the 1950s.

Nor is anyone alleging that public funds were used in the escapade.

In short, we are not talking, presently, about public crimes, but about private sins.

What Eliot has done is shake the confidence of the public in his image as the ethical sheriff of Wall Street; notably, that part of town is aflame with hilarity at his stumbles. This is, to be sure, a bad thing, and weakens the ability of the governor to lead the state effectively, which places a further burden on a man who has, so far, failed to cow the Albany status quo into acquiescence, 69% electoral mandate be damned.

It's fair to say that Eliot has damaged himself and his administration, probably badly so. An assessment of the actual extent of that damage won't be possible for a while.

So should he resign? No. Barring actual criminal behavior, what Eliot needs to do now is this: recognize that he violated the trust of New Yorkers (and of his family, but that's a different matter), and reach out to the state to regain that trust. Eliot was elected for a reason: this is the worst-governed state in the union, and its people wish for that to change. If he resigns, David Paterson would become the governor, but more importantly, Joe Bruno would be elevated to the position of the lieutenant governor. That latter prospect should send chills down everyone's spine, and not just because Bruno is himself under Federal investigation, but because it effectively removes any leverage for a Progressive agenda in the State Senate. If Eliot resigns, whatever hope we have for a renewal of New York State is diminished.

Bruno's ascension would also give republicans every possible incentive to bump him up one step further on that ladder, by finding a way to remove a governor Paterson. While it's unlikely that they would succeed in that, the mere attempt would paralyze the state government. We saw that scenario before in the impeachment of Bill Clinton, for example. Then, there is the case of Alabama governor Don Siegelman, also brought low by a Federal investigation that turned out to be more politically convenient than founded in fact.

It's fair to say that many New York Democrats are mortified by the Spitzer scandal. Whether it rises to the level of a resignation is sure to be debated hotly over the next few days, but barring further disclosures, probably not.