Re:Now only (Score 1)

Paul is a Constitutionalist. Therefore, if something is not named in the Constitution as an enumerated power of the federal government, the federal government should keep their stinkin' noses and hands OUT of it. It's pretty simple really. It doesn't matter whether you, I or even Dr. Paul personally likes one of the unconstitutional things that the federal government is doing, or a piece of legislation they propose, because if it is outside of their authority, they have no business doing it. There is one way to change that and that is through amending the Constitution. So, if that is what you want to do, then by all means, lead the effort to get that done. But, don't yell out of one side of your mouth when the federal government partakes in unconstitutional activities like warrantless surveillance, sneak and peak, throwing out habeas corpus, starting unconstitutional wars and the like, but then proclaim that you like the other unconstitutional things they are doing like dictating the minimum wage, etc. You can't have it both ways.

What is so scary about freedom anyway? Why do we want to turn our lives and decisions over to the federal government, so they can dictate to us? That's not exactly what our country was supposed to be, right? The decisions that we decided needed to be legislated, were supposed to be made very close to us, at the state or local levels, so that WE THE PEOPLE, could have a whole lot of influence on how those decisions went. If we didn't like the decisions, we could throw the bums out. Why are we wanting everything turned over to the federal government? It is those same people who are running our country off a cliff, while putting laws in place to lock up and gag the people who are supposed to own this country (US). Our every move was not intended to be laid out for us, nor every need accommodated, by ANY government at all. Freedom doesn't make guarantees to us. Other than an opportunity to live our lives the way we choose, unless we infringe on the liberty of someone else. Sounds pretty darn good to me. How about you?

Note: By the way, Paul does not vote for pork-barrel spending at all. Check your facts. Maybe you don't understand how it works. When his constituents come to him and ask him to submit an earmark, he passes it on to the Appropriations Cmte. Then, he votes AGAINST the bill.

Earmark Victory May Be a Hollow One

by Ron Paul

Last week's big battle on the House floor over earmarks in the annual appropriations bills was won by Republicans, who succeeded in getting the Democratic leadership to agree to clearly identify each earmark in the future. While this is certainly a victory for more transparency and openness in the spending process, and as such should be applauded, I am concerned that this may not necessarily be a victory for those of us who want a smaller federal government.

Though much attention is focused on the notorious abuses of earmarking, and there are plenty of examples, in fact even if all earmarks were eliminated we would not necessarily save a single penny in the federal budget. Because earmarks are funded from spending levels that have been determined before a single earmark is agreed to, with or without earmarks the spending levels remain the same. Eliminating earmarks designated by Members of Congress would simply transfer the funding decision process to federal bureaucrats rather then elected representatives. In an already flawed system, earmarks can at least allow residents of Congressional districts to have a greater role in allocating federal funds - their tax dollars - than if the money is allocated behind locked doors by bureaucrats. So we can be critical of the abuses in the current system but we shouldn't lose sight of how some reforms may not actually make the system much better.

The real problem, and one that was unfortunately not addressed in last week's earmark dispute, is the size of the federal government and the amount of money we are spending in these appropriations bills. Even cutting a few thousand or even a million dollars from a multi-hundred-billion dollar appropriation bill will not really shrink the size of government.

So there is a danger that small-government conservatives will look at this small victory for transparency and forget the much larger and more difficult battle of returning the United States government to spending levels more in line with its constitutional functions. Without taking a serious look at the actual total spending in these appropriations bills, we will miss the real threat to our economic security. Failed government agencies like FEMA will still get tens of billions of dollars to mismanage when the next disaster strikes. Corrupt foreign governments will still be lavishly funded with dollars taken from working Americans to prop up their regimes. The United Nations will still receive its generous annual tribute taken from the American taxpayer. Americans will still be forced to pay for elaborate military bases to protect borders overseas while our own borders remain porous and unguarded. These are the real issues we must address when we look at reforming our yearly spending extravaganza called the appropriations season.

So we need to focus on the longer-term and more difficult task of reducing the total size of the federal budget and the federal government and to return government to its constitutional functions. We should not confuse this welcome victory for transparency in the earmarking process with a victory in our long-term goal of this reduction in government taxing and spending.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul392.html

You might also be interested in this article, which describes what he actually does.

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=177422&Disp=7

Note: I have read what this man, Dr. Paul, has written, for over 20 years and have watched how he voted. You will not find another man in Washington D.C., with more honesty and integrity than he. He is the real deal. I highly recommend that anyone who really wants to know more about him, go here www.RonPaulLibrary.org and start reading his speeches. That is how many people became supporters of Ron Paul. There are speeches there that go back to before we went to Iraq. On that site, you will also find links to some of his books, most of which are free downloads. There is only one way to know what this man is all about and that is to give him a fair shake and go check him out for yourself. Then, make your own minds up.