By Brian Bohl

Complaints about the corrupt political culture in this country often resurface during elections. At campaign rallies, barbeques or even conversations at the office, there usually is someone spouting a familiar lament regarding how public officials from both parties care more about their careers than working towards the public good.

Of course, people historically tend to hold unfavorable opinions of congressmen and senators in general but will still vote for the incumbent in their district. Yet if most voters do the same thing, the makeup of the political landscape does not drastically change. It’s the “everyone is terrible, but I like my guy” philosophy on voting, and it usually means a high winning percentage for incumbents except in special cases like the 2006 midterm elections, which shifted congressional power from Republican to Democratic hands.

When considering the economic stimulus bill, the same principle can be applied to show the hypocrisy of most Americans. How many people deride government funding for non-essential projects or programs, also known as pork-barrel spending, when discussing large-scale publicly financed initiatives?

Pork, like public opinion with politicians, is something people tend to hate in the abstract while doing nothing to change the culture that allows it to permeate. Everyone points to projects like Alaska’s famous “Bridge to Nowhere” as examples of runaway government spending that should be stopped. Every candidate for office lambasts Washington’s culture of entitlement and selfishness in vowing that taxpayer money would not be allocated for frivolous projects under their watch.

Realistically, politicians and the public embrace pork spending when it benefits their state and pork is only a problem when the area benefitting from the funding is far away from those critical of the expenditures. New Yorkers look at money earmarked for a little-used bridge in a far-off state and scream that government is once again participating in wasteful spending.

It’s funny how all that local anger was quickly muted when it was announced the Empire State stands to gain $20.5 billion in total funding over the next two years as part of the federal stimulus package. National taxpayer money will surely do some good things for the state, including increasing tax credits for college tuition and boosting unemployment benefits. Most reasonable people would agree an infusion of cash into school districts that prevent or reduce the need for drastic budget cuts is a positive.

Would people from Iowa or Oklahoma feel as good about their tax money potentially going toward a high-speed rail service that improves a New York City-to-Buffalo route? A well-meaning project locally can be considered pork by another city.

Many of the state’s Democratic lawmakers were critical of the oversight methods and other provisions in then-President Bush’s $700 billion bailout plan signed in October.

This is what Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer told reporters on Oct. 3, 2008, on the bailout bill: “We will not Christmas-tree this bill,” he said. “The times are too urgent. Everyone has their own desires and needs. It’s going to have to wait.”

Apparently the appropriate waiting time was about four months because Schumer’s only regret over voting for the stimulus bill was that it didn’t provide enough funding for museums. Cultural education is an important part of society, though a federal stimulus package is not the appropriate forum for giving funds to art galleries or aquariums.

During a time when glaring budget deficits at the state and federal level are forcing lawmakers to make difficult decisions on what to cut, not even a huge national program can appease everyone. Education, medical care, police protection and the development of culture are all important to a society. But there needs to be a compromise to reduce the country’s debt and get the economy to reverse a downward spiral.

Everyone agrees there need to be cuts, just not to the area in which they work. Teachers unions say there should be no reduction in school aid or services. Ideally, that would be correct. No one wants to take away extracurricular activities from children or diminish education efforts. It’s the same thing for police; no one wants to see police academy classes cut or fewer patrolmen on the street.

There needs to be a compromise and politicians need to practice what they preach. Those elected officials who want to eliminate pork need the backing of the public, because if bringing home federal funds to the home state is what gets those men and women reelected, the proliferation of pork-barrel projects will only continue.

Brian Bohl is a master’s candidate for journalism. You may e-mail him at [email protected].