Every job has its good points as well as bad from an employee's perspective. A responsible individual weighs these elements of the job thoroughly before the individual applies. The amount of travel and the time away from family are realities every working man and woman faces in the private sector if they expect to satisfactorily execute the job they agreed to perform. Politicians, especially career politicians should not be given a pass by the public, regarding their factual residence, because they need to function in multiple places. Extensive travel, time away from family is part of the requirements of a US Senator. No one promised public service was easy or comfortable, ask any member of the armed services. Politicians should not be permitted to elevate the public costs of supporting their personal lifestyle just because while they should travel extensively, elect to move families and burden the taxpayer with additional expense. Everyone has a choice. Perhaps Mr. Santorum, or any Washington politician would be more focused on getting the proper business of the people done, and done more efficiently if they had to function like the private sector.

Expense aside, if a politician is truly serving the people, how does he or she reflect the true wishes of constituents if they are absent from the people they represent 2 thirds of the year? And who does the Senator get to see if he is not in his state 2/3 of the year? Well, I for one don't think pollsters, lobbyists and special interest groups that converge on Washington to influence the thinking of elected officials truly reflect the needs of the local taxpayers.

If Mr. Santorum needs to be in D.C. more than other officials because he is # 3 man in the party, then the party should pay for his additional travel, not the taxpayers.