Here's another story that's commonly repeated:
Freshman House Republicans who rode a wave of voter discontent into office last year vowed to stop out-of-control spending, but that has not stopped several of them from quietly trying to funnel millions of federal dollars into projects back home.
They have pushed for dozens of projects in their districts, including military programs opposed by the president, replenishing beach sand lost to erosion, a $700 million bridge in Minnesota and a harbor dredging project in Charleston, S.C. Some of their projects were once earmarks, political shorthand for pet projects penciled into spending bills, which Republicans banned when they took over the House.
They do this because they have to. While we like the idea of spending cuts, we like them better if they only impose costs on other people in other districts. We reward our members of congress who keep spending in our districts. It's one of the reasons spending is so difficult to cut. Once it shifts from being an abstract consideration to something concrete and recognizable, we tend to like it.
2302's especially should take note of this story since it helps explain the decisions of members of congress and their relationships with their constituents. 2301s should also take note, it helps us understand voter behavior and the screwy nature of democracy.
