After reporters started asking questions, the Congressman disclosed his requests this year for about $400 million worth of federal funding for no fewer than 65 earmarks. They include such urgent national wartime priorities as an $8 million request for the marketing of wild American shrimp and $2.3 million to fund shrimp-fishing research
What is the answer in the video Ron Paul and Earmarks he says that they don't limit spending but he votes against them. Why does he vote against them if they don't limit spending.
Look the people of Houston should recieve federal funds for highways constitutionally defined limited government but Ron Paul district should not receive corporate handouts.
He puts the earmarks in the bills that he knows will pass then he votes against them.
Earmarks just set aside money that will already be spent. It will be spent anyway, so he tries to use it to help his district. It's not against the rules.
Wrong... earmarks are a opaque backdoor way of spending outside of the tradition appropriation channels.
But what kind of 'help' is he receiving? Money to refurbish private business? (Millions for privately owned movie theatres) Money public dollars research and development for the shrimp industry? How can that be part of the limited government objectives?
His district has not just received 400 million dollars in federal funding he has received 400 million on top of the traditional appropriation dollars. 400 million of pure pork.
Ron Paul needs to read the consitution and stop reading CIA reports that are never correct about any thing. Paul did over 400 million in earmarks last year.
Goggle:
The Constitution For Dummies (i.e. Ron Paul Supporters)
And you support who? Who is thedyed in the wool Constitutionalist this time around?
Unless you are backing a third party candidate, you are wasting your time trying to answer the question. Ron Paul is the only candidate within the major parties who reflects both the Constitution and the values held by those who framed it.
It's not enough to ask where in the Constitution does Congress have the authority to authorize particular spending or earmarks. You have to ask 'what does the spending or earmark do that advances the objectives that the Constitution clearly seeks to achieve?' Most earmarks are intended to benefit a single person or entity. This clearly violates the Constitution.
I would argue that the Preamble is clarified by the specific delegated powers later mentioned. The Preamble gives general goals, not means. Article 1 Sec. 8 (specifically) give us the means by which to attain and secure those general goals. This is nothing more than casuistry and case-law, two things the founders were very familiar with.
If I may, the Preamble sets the tone for legitimate gov. purposes from which its existence springs. It is true the ensuing Articles establish the legal means by which the purposes referenced in the Preamble are given, they were never intended to interfere with the individuals own pursuit of happiness and prosperity. Just the opposite in fact.
Art. I, Sec. 8 is significant in defining the scope of Congress' power to lay and collect taxes. Taxes must be used to 'pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the Unites States, . . .. Congress has no power to lay and collect taxes for any individuals' or states' debts, defense, or welfare, either singularly or collectively.
I'm putting together a huge list of people willing to do a coordinated donation of $25 or more every week at a specific time. It's called the Ron Paul Money Bomb. The list is growing very quickly! If we can get 40,000 joined on, we'll be able to flood the Ron Paul bank account with 1 Mil. every time we hit. We'll create a buzz and help take Dr. Paul all the way!!! To join, e-mail:
The problem with this method is that the Constitution's Preamble offers an easy answer to this question: ' . . . to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. . .,"
we need to re ask the question about what the other presidential candidates would reduce because that question was only purposed to Ron Paul. Yet I think it would be a tough question for them, the only other person who pandering when it comes to subsidies and big government is John McCain when he mentioned ethanol
can't get past the junk music intro.
donteatthekalanchoe 1 year ago
Wall Street Journal
Ron Paul's Earmarks
August 6, 2007
After reporters started asking questions, the Congressman disclosed his requests this year for about $400 million worth of federal funding for no fewer than 65 earmarks. They include such urgent national wartime priorities as an $8 million request for the marketing of wild American shrimp and $2.3 million to fund shrimp-fishing research
davidmesaaz 4 years ago
Watch his Meet the Press interview on 12/23 and you'll get your answer.
bgabbs69 4 years ago
What is the answer in the video Ron Paul and Earmarks he says that they don't limit spending but he votes against them. Why does he vote against them if they don't limit spending.
Look the people of Houston should recieve federal funds for highways constitutionally defined limited government but Ron Paul district should not receive corporate handouts.
He puts the earmarks in the bills that he knows will pass then he votes against them.
davidmesaaz 4 years ago
Earmarks just set aside money that will already be spent. It will be spent anyway, so he tries to use it to help his district. It's not against the rules.
hammurderer2 4 years ago
Wrong... earmarks are a opaque backdoor way of spending outside of the tradition appropriation channels.
But what kind of 'help' is he receiving? Money to refurbish private business? (Millions for privately owned movie theatres) Money public dollars research and development for the shrimp industry? How can that be part of the limited government objectives?
davidmesaaz 4 years ago
His district has not just received 400 million dollars in federal funding he has received 400 million on top of the traditional appropriation dollars. 400 million of pure pork.
davidmesaaz 4 years ago
Ron Paul needs to read the consitution and stop reading CIA reports that are never correct about any thing. Paul did over 400 million in earmarks last year.
Goggle:
The Constitution For Dummies (i.e. Ron Paul Supporters)
ListenForTruth 4 years ago
Are you a cartoon? Ron Paul needs to read the Constitution? Which part do you think he should read first?
Standards of weights and measures.
State's rights.
Mandatory declaration of war
Separation of school and state
Military defense over interventionism
Oppose central banking
Oppose unconstitutional bureaucracies
strict constitutional judges
Sounds like a platform that could have been written by our founders. Sounds good to me.
paleocrat 4 years ago
And you support who? Who is thedyed in the wool Constitutionalist this time around?
Unless you are backing a third party candidate, you are wasting your time trying to answer the question. Ron Paul is the only candidate within the major parties who reflects both the Constitution and the values held by those who framed it.
paleocrat 4 years ago
It's not enough to ask where in the Constitution does Congress have the authority to authorize particular spending or earmarks. You have to ask 'what does the spending or earmark do that advances the objectives that the Constitution clearly seeks to achieve?' Most earmarks are intended to benefit a single person or entity. This clearly violates the Constitution.
bbburton 4 years ago
Agreed.
I would argue that the Preamble is clarified by the specific delegated powers later mentioned. The Preamble gives general goals, not means. Article 1 Sec. 8 (specifically) give us the means by which to attain and secure those general goals. This is nothing more than casuistry and case-law, two things the founders were very familiar with.
paleocrat 4 years ago
If I may, the Preamble sets the tone for legitimate gov. purposes from which its existence springs. It is true the ensuing Articles establish the legal means by which the purposes referenced in the Preamble are given, they were never intended to interfere with the individuals own pursuit of happiness and prosperity. Just the opposite in fact.
bbburton 4 years ago
Art. I, Sec. 8 is significant in defining the scope of Congress' power to lay and collect taxes. Taxes must be used to 'pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the Unites States, . . .. Congress has no power to lay and collect taxes for any individuals' or states' debts, defense, or welfare, either singularly or collectively.
bbburton 4 years ago
I'm putting together a huge list of people willing to do a coordinated donation of $25 or more every week at a specific time. It's called the Ron Paul Money Bomb. The list is growing very quickly! If we can get 40,000 joined on, we'll be able to flood the Ron Paul bank account with 1 Mil. every time we hit. We'll create a buzz and help take Dr. Paul all the way!!! To join, e-mail:
RonPaulMoneyBomb @ yahoo . com
Please, spread the word!
carcabe 4 years ago
The problem with this method is that the Constitution's Preamble offers an easy answer to this question: ' . . . to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. . .,"
bbburton 4 years ago
we need to re ask the question about what the other presidential candidates would reduce because that question was only purposed to Ron Paul. Yet I think it would be a tough question for them, the only other person who pandering when it comes to subsidies and big government is John McCain when he mentioned ethanol
benjie2429 4 years ago