Mrio Sergio Rodrigues Ananias Brasilia Out. 2010 Introduction Has very, the escolarizados citizens and with important cognitiva capacity they wait of the Brazilian Legislative an agenda that privileges the option for the ethics – while base for the formularization of its diverse proposals; transparency? represented for the stony taking of position for accountability; dignity? through, minimum, of honoring the fulfilment of the assumed responsibilities front to the diverse public, personalized or institucional. This popular will – not popularesca – intended as reform, comes being systematically postponed for as much how many they ascend to the power, therefore the related agenda would accomodate in its important target alteration in the status quo of urged there, reducing the specter of specific discricionariedades and minimizing the shunting line possibilities and malversaes that historically perenizam in the representation certain individuals or clans. The spite of necessary – although the little clarified – distinction between legislative institution, the body of elect that it integrates it and the gamma of indispensable servers to its functioning, is inferred, from the massiva envidada collection mainly for the press, a distanciamento enters the real intention of this Power and the disponibilizadas deliveries to its diverse plaintiffs. The expectation for objective results for the common good, of the State and the citizen – last addressee of the efforts of the consisting democratic power – esbarra, not rare, in the fisiologismo of personalities or groups of interests that if pledge not in serving to the popular sovereignty, estimated of the function for public agents, but in serving themselves of the democracy. Some relative popular positions to the Legislative one elapse of this first empirical perception, as me the evaluation, the diffidence, the disinterest, the room/indifference and until the pure and simple aversion to the politics. Notadamente, such concepts if consolidate for the exposition, through the ways of communication, of the parliamentary activity, mainly when this if shows ignbil, as in the recent cases of corruption, widely propagated of form not to differentiate the structures – to be able, agents and servers – that they compose the Legislative one.