Hmm. Could you explain your thinking on how that has worked?

In the mid 00s, earmarks fell out of favor and were mostly banned. They gave reps a way to provide concrete benefits to their districts. Without them, all reps could offer was rhetoric, and there was less reason to negotiate mutually beneficial compromises. This article explains in greater detail.

I see. In a sense, I'm also imagining light corruption as being responsive to constituents, and/or solving problems using means that are otherwise unavailable. :) I'm not following your load-bearing claim completely. Do you mean just it had a important function? Or certain systems failed w/o it?

With earmarks, reps could provide concrete benefits to their districts and had reasons to negotiate. Without them, they can't actually deliver anything except vibes. And the only way to win a vibe war is to escalate your rhetoric (and there's no opposing force that encourages reps to back down ever)

Thank you for explaining. And for your patience with me questions. 🙏🏼

Absolutely! I'm happy to ramble at length about basically anything. 😄

I'm sorry to hear that! I am similarly afflicted! As my long-suffering friends can attest to! :) Nonetheless, it takes effort. And, you were kind and patient. 🙏🏼

No better use of my time than helping other people acting in good faith. It yields compounding dividends (if folks I help can better help others, who can themselves better help others, the cost of my initial effort is dwarfed by the net benefits)

this is super interesting! i remember the push back on earmarks, but never thought about the repercussions. bridges to nowhere notwithstanding, i see the give and take

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary" necessarily implies that government must account for our non-angelic nature. People are going to look out for themselves, and whatever we build has to accept that instinct and channel it to positive ends instead of pretending it doesn't exist

Yes, Adam. I've known plenty of guys who did a few sketchy things. But, they would throw down to take care of *people.* I try to live very by-the-book. (law that is. lol.) I don't expect everyone will do exactly the same.

and also how much it’s changed - currently giving our local Dems a hard time about endorsing a candidate who put forward anti-unhoused law, but they will keep him because he’s helping elsewhere. a give and take i can’t reconcile but without this dingus Dems have no one else to field.