Come election time, incumbents typically tout a lengthy record of accomplishments, including all the ‘bacon’ they brought home for locals to feast on.

In light of a record deficit however, to many the projects look reckless and wasteful. It’s not about being a Republican or a Democrat, but being in office when the pig got fat.

“People who are perceived as having contributed to that wasteful spending, rampant earmarking and huge debts, those people are having to run away from their earmarking records,” says waste watchdog Leslie Paige, with Citizens Against Government Waste.

Count the casualties. Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA), Sen. Robert Bennett (R-UT), Rep. Robert Mollohan (D-WVa), Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D-MI), Rep. Todd Tiahrt(R-KS) , Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson(R-TX) — all Washington insiders and incumbents who lost a primary – either for their office or another – in part because of spending issues. Half were on the powerful House or Senate Appropriations Committee.

“If they’re a heavy earmarker they’re in deep trouble with independent voters and even with some conservative Democratic voters who are just so frustrated with runaway spending,” says California political consultant Matt Klink.

Those in trouble, Klink says, include Senators Patty Murray in Washington state, Barbara Boxer in California, Harry Reid in Nevada, and Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas. All are incumbents attacked in campaign ads for doling out federal dollars on projects of little value.

For challengers, it’s easy. Pick an earmark, call it irresponsible, and let them try to defend it. In a year when voters have an ultra sensitive antenna for waste, many earmarks seem provincial and short-sighted.

Says Paige, “Taxpayers are up against the wall and they are absolutely disgruntled and disgusted with the culture in Washington that continues to be as if nothing is going on and let’s just keep spending as if we’re living high off the hog.”