Brooklyn Democratic State Senator Carl Kruger is being processed as I type.  The  New York Times explains why:

Mr. Kruger had been under investigation by federal prosecutors in Brooklyn who were looking into accusations that he had helped businessmen surmount bureaucratic hurdles in exchange for assistance raising campaign money, but the charges stemmed from an investigation by Manhattan federal prosecutors and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The offensive act:  He helped businessmen surmount bureaucratic hurdles.

The benefit derived from the act: Assistance in raising campaign money.

The crime: Politics.

It’s a curiosity.  The nature of politics requires those in office to raise ridiculous sums of money for their campaign, or their next campaign, hours after their last election.  Where does this money come from, and why does anyone want to part with their cash on hand and give it to some political guy?

The principled answer is that people contribute to the campaigns of people running for office because they agree with their philosophy, believe they will do an excellent job representing their constituents and, assuming they aren’t related, find them worthy of financial support.  Who are we kidding?

There are certainly some, maybe even plenty, of people who contribute to political campaigns because they are staunch believers and supporters.  Most are nickel and dime contributors, though a couple (Soros and the Koch Brothers come immediately to mind) are big bucks.  Yet a significant amount of the support necessary to run for office comes from otherwise nice folks who want something.  They want to curry favor.  They want a guy in office who will vote a particular way.  They seek a specific outcome.

This is the American way.  Trust me when I say that no politician truly enjoys going out night after night to local do-gooder groups and cub scout troops, handing out proclamations praising the planting of a tree.  It’s not that they don’t believe in the cause, or don’t like the group, but that they want to stay home with their family, kick off their shoes and watch Steven Tyler attempt to express a cogent thought or see which hairstyle best suits J-Lo.

It’s unbearably oppressive to get on the hamster wheel of politics. Why any sane person would want to do it is beyond me. Even the most philosophically naive learns quickly that the hamster wheel never stops turning.

My guess is that the question in Senator Kruger’s case will be whether the favor done had a quid pro quo, as in, he sold his support for a cash payment.  Maybe there was a hard, cold deal on the table, where Kruger promised to help a business “surmount bureaucratic hurdles” for $10,000 a pop. 

But he didn’t spend the money on a “fact-finding” trip to the leeward islands, or a sordid weekend with some floozy, or even bespoke suits so he could dress appropriately when he handed out proclamations.  It was campaign money, the life blood of politics. 

One might argue that there would be less potential for a crime if government didn’t create bureaucratic hurdles that needed surmounting through the interference of a state senator.  There aren’t too many people out there arguing for the creation of bureaucratic hurdles to make every business’ life pointlessly difficult.  The “hurdles” arise for good intentions, to protect us from some evil, real or imagined (or misguidedly imagined when linked to the name of a dead child), but somehow seem to take on a life of their own, with unintended consequences spreading misery far and wide.

And so constituents, and friends of constituents, seek comfort and aid from those in power who can use their influence to make the seas of bureaucracy part and allow life to move forward.  If Kruger did such a thing in a cause or case with which he disagreed, then he betrayed a trust.  If he did so for cash, then he committed a crime.

But if Kruger’s influence helped someone who deserved to be helped, and if Kruger’s efforts to help a deserving constituent produced a hefty contribution to his campaign chest to keep this hard working, right thinking, senator in office, then it would seem that the system worked perfectly. 

We may not like the way politics works.  In fact, we may think it stinks.  But the answer is to change politics, not indict those who are running on the hamster wheel as fast as they can.