Ron Paul on Earmarks

Paul explains why he'll earmark bills or vote for tax credits even though he doesn't believe Congress should do either. From the Robert Taft Club, October 11, 2007.

• Category

  News & Politics

[Neoamore]

Well, if "earmarks" are the worst anyone can say about Ron Paul, he's got my vote.

[gregor5434]

Ron Paul HATES taxes, but if his people are being taxed anyways, the least he can do is try and give them some money back. Besides earmarks do not increase spending, it just allocates it. 

[Guadalupe Isadro]

My comment was about your 'hypocrisy'. What should Ron Paul do? Earmark? Or not earmark?

[frogsoda]

My comment wasn't about earmarks. My comment was about hypocrisy. I'm not going to explain it to you personally.

Read my comment and try again.

[Guadalupe Isadro]

If those bills are NOT earmarked, the money is still SPENT (with NO transparency by the executive branch). By earmarking the bills you are making the money TRANSPARENT.

Ron Paul has NEVER voted for an earmark.

Cutting the number of earmarks does NOT cut spending. Earmarks account for roughly 1% of federal spending FYI.

It makes sense to earmark the allotted funds and KEEP transparency vs NOT earmark and still spend the money with NO transparency.

[Guadalupe Isadro]

Earmarks are not all bad. Earmarks=TRANSPARENCY and are a way for Congressmen to 'get back' tax dollars for the people they represent.

If there were no earmarks then there would be NO transparency AND the money still gets SPENT. The money that would have gone to the 'earmark' instead goes to the executive branch (i.e. Obama) and the executive branch would spend this money however it/he see's fit without DISCLOSURE. By earmarking and then voting against the bill Ron represents his constituents.

[CircularBoarder]

can you provide sources for your certainty that spending increases? I haven't been able to find any myself. and earmarks only allocate funds to the people he represents instead of the president choosing where they go, which sounds like republican democracy to me, not big government.

[frogsoda]

OK @ questions. 1. If earmarks don't increase spending as he says, Then why is he against them?

2. Why is he one of only four Republicans that do? Is he saying that all those other Republicans are irresponsible for not taking them even though he is against them? Even though they don't increase spending?

Ok that's more than two questions but the last two were rhetorical.

[howghi19]

No. He's basically saying, "Earmarks are a bad idea, but since I can't stop them, I still have to exercise my responsibilities to my district as Congressman." His analogy is good: Social Security is fraud, but you're still going to request your check when you retire. I prefer this analogy: I don't want to vote for either Romney or Obama, but since the system compels me to pick one, I'll vote for one anyways. It's not hypocritical; it's practical.

[Jeffrey Wilson]

So he's basically saying "I hate earmarks, but it's gonna happen anyway so I might as well use them too!" That's so incredibly hypocritical!!! That's the same crap argument everyone makes! And to me it's even worse to put your own earmarks in and then vote against them so you can say "I never voted for any earmark" no he just tacks them onto bills that will definitely pass and then votes No himself, I used to respect Ron Paul but now he joins the rest of Capitol Hill.

[busby3141592]

It absolutely does increase spending, furthermore the nature of his earmarks are totally opposed to his worldview - his earmarks are all government intervention in things that could be done best in his opinion by the free market. Some examples : $11 million from federal taxpayers for a "Community-Based Job Training Program."

$2 million from federal taxpayers for a "Clean Energy" pilot project.

$5 million from federal taxpayers in order to build a parking garage

[MrHroark]

Unfortunately...its not.

He says it of himself. He is a voluntaryist masquerading as a Constitutionalist.  If you seek to return America to her foundations you should find out what that means...google Ron Paul Voluntaryist.