Broadly paraphrased, the question that was put to the vice-presidential candidates last week at their debate went like this: The Washington that went back and forth on the bailout bill, was that Washington at its best, or Washington at its worst?

Well, regardless of what you think of the $700-billion bailout bill (we think some version of it was necessary to help restore investor confidence in the financial markets), at least one part of it represents Washington at its worst: The rescue package began as a three-page proposal from the Treasury Department. By the time the Senate got around to voting on it last week, it had blossomed into a 451-page bill that included enough goodies to choke even a good-sized gift horse, to mix a metaphor.

Yes, the financial meltdown turned into Christmas in October for our lawmakers, the latest gravy train attached to an essential piece of legislation. So, according to The Washington Post, the bill includes not just money for the bailout, but also, among many other provisions:

• Allows NASCAR to write off racetrack costs over seven years.

• Shields manufacturers of wooden arrows for children from an excise tax that's applied to other shafts.

• Includes tax rebates on rum imported from Puerto Rico.

And, in case you hadn't noticed, the bill included a four-year extension of that timber money for rural counties across the western United States. The counties, including many in Oregon, desperately needed the money, which is meant to cushion the blow to timber communities as logging in nearby national forests has diminished.

But let's be honest: The issue isn't so much that any of these items isn't needed. Maybe NASCAR really needs a tax break. The issue is that these items don't get a chance to stand or fall on their own merits. The issue is that adding all these items gives senators and representatives a chance to duck for cover: "No, I was against the bailout bill, but, golly, we really needed that wooden-arrow tax break for my district."

The issue is that we still, on some level, judge our congressional representatives solely on how much money they're able to bring back home - and we don't much care how they get the bacon.

It was sad last week, watching how these twists and turns led to agonizing on the part of Oregon's congressional delegation: Sen. Ron Wyden and Rep. Peter DeFazio, for example, two men who have fought for years trying to get Congress to approve an extension of county payments, ended up voting against a bailout bill they thought was flawed - even though it contained the timber money. (Watch: If either man ends up in a serious re-election battle in the future, you can bet this vote will be used in a negative TV ad.)

It's a shame they had to be in that position. It's a shame that this is how Washington operates. And it's a shame that this is how we expect Washington to operate.