The latest issue of Bloomberg Businessweek features a brief history lesson involving former U.S. Sen. Phil Gramm. Among the more interesting observations is a thumbnail sketch of “public choice economics.”

Before going into politics, Gramm taught economics at Texas A&M University in College Station. As an academic he followed a school of thought called “public choice,” which holds that politicians aren’t motivated by their own beliefs, rather by the desire to get re-elected. To public choice economists, this is a simple truth, not a moral judgment.

The way they see it, it’s a waste of time to wish for better politicians — or to persuade the ones you have to do the right thing just for the sake of it.

Once in Congress, Gramm saw that the appropriations process was designed to cause deficits.

“I concluded that the average amendment was producing high benefits per beneficiary,” he says, “but the cost was low, because there are a lot of taxpayers.”

Translation: Federal money for a hospital rewards the congressional district that gets the hospital. Yet since the cost is spread out over the entire country, the district pays essentially nothing. Politicians wanted hospitals in their districts because voters wanted them, and that caused deficits.