Thread: Ron Paul Defends Asking For Special Projects

Ron Paul defends asking for special projects
GOP candidate 99.9 percent certain he won't run on a third party ticket

VIDEO LINK BELOW


updated 2:12 p.m. ET, Sun., Dec. 23, 2007

WASHINGTON - Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul, appearing on NBC's Meet the Press Sunday, defended his efforts in Congress to bring home money to his Texas district, despite his long-held aversion to big government and congressional votes to reign in federal spending.

"I've never voted for an earmark in my life," the Texas congressman said under questioning on NBC's "Meet the Press" about reports that he has requested hundreds of millions of dollars for special projects in his home district.

"I put them in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back," said Paul, who likened it to taking a tax credit. "I'm against the tax system, but I take all my tax credits. I want to get their money back for the people."



The 10-term congressman and longshot candidate for the Republican presidential nomination added that although he has requested special projects known as earmarks, he ultimately ends up voting against them in the House. Paul is known in Congress as "Dr. No" for his votes against some types of government spending, including a medal for Pope John Paul II and civil rights leader Rosa Parks because of the cost to taxpayers. Video


Meet the Candidate: Ron Paul
Dec. 23: 2008 Presidential Contender Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) on Meet the Press.
Meet the Press



For his home state, however, Paul has sought money for water projects, a nursing program, to expand a hospital cancer center and to promote Texas shrimp.

Just last week, President Bush complained about thousands of earmarks in a massive spending bill Congress sent to him.

As the only Republican candidate opposed to the Iraq war, Paul was an anti-war asterisk in the race until his campaign began raising money, most of it over the Internet. He brought in a record $6 million in one day, and $18 million in less than three months, though he still registers in single digits in most polls. MSNBC/McClatchy/Mason-Dixon polls


Paul, who ran for president as a libertarian in 1988, was asked whether he'd run as a third-party candidate next year if he loses the GOP nomination.

Paul said that was unlikely. "I have no intention, no plans of doing it, and that's about 99.9 percent," said Paul, a 72-year-old obstetrician-gynecologist and former Air Force flight surgeon.




Paul railed against the government's anti-drug policy, complaining that federal law overrules state laws that permit medicinal use of marijuana for pain or other symptoms of debilitating illnesses such as cancer, multiple sclerosis and other diseases. "This war on drugs is totally out of control. If you want to regulate cigarettes and alcohol and drugs, it should be at the state level," he said.
Paul said he wants to eliminate foreign aid to Israel and other nations. "Why make Israel so dependent?" he asked. "They can't defend their borders without coming to us."



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22379734/

"I've never voted for an earmark in my life," the Texas congressman said under questioning on NBC's "Meet the Press" about reports that he has requested hundreds of millions of dollars for special projects in his home district.

"I put them in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back," said Paul, who likened it to taking a tax credit. "I'm against the tax system, but I take all my tax credits. I want to get their money back for the people."

That's the same excuse given by the "porkers".....How is this any different? Maybe because a different method is used??

Originally Posted by gofer

"I've never voted for an earmark in my life," the Texas congressman said under questioning on NBC's "Meet the Press" about reports that he has requested hundreds of millions of dollars for special projects in his home district.

"I put them in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back," said Paul, who likened it to taking a tax credit. "I'm against the tax system, but I take all my tax credits. I want to get their money back for the people."

That's the same excuse given by the "porkers".....How is this any different? Maybe because a different method is used??

The man was elected to represent the people of his district. He has every right AND an overriding obligation to go after the money that his constituents paid in, even if he PERSONALLY thinks it's bad government. The fact that he then votes AGAINST the bills tells you he's on the right side of the issue Constitutionally.

Ultimately, it shows that he has the ability to represent THE PEOPLE FIRST, regardless of his PERSONAL feelings. What more could you ask for?

(these were just from a March 2007 list)

1. $25,000 for the Brazoria County Sheriff to establish a “Children’s Identification and Location Database.â€

So you're saying that the people of his district shouldn't get any of that money that they've paid in? That, on principle, they should forgo their own cash?

That's like saying because I don't agree with the income tax that I shouldn't file for my return.

Despite this impressive record, Ron Paul's history contains some curious indiscretions, including a vote for $232 million for federally mandated election reform (only 1 of 21 Republicans to vote for it)[26] and a vote against the line-item veto[27] -even after it was modified to pass constitutional muster. Paul's record on pork was outstanding in 2006, voting for all 19 of Jeff Flake's anti-pork amendments in 2006,[28] but his record took a stark turn for the worse in 2007, in which Paul received an embarrassing 29% on the Club for Growth's RePORK Card, voting for only 12 of the 50 anti-pork amendments.[29]

Some of the outrageous pork projects Paul voted to keep include $231,000 for the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association's Urban Center; $129,000 for the "perfect Christmas tree project;" $300,000 for the On Location Entertainment Industry Craft Technician Training Project in California; $150,000 for the South Carolina Aquarium; and $500,000 for the National Mule and Packers Museum in California.[30] This year, Ron Paul requested more than sixty earmarks "worth tens of millions of dollars for causes as diverse as rebuilding a Texas theater, funding a local trolley, and helping his state's shrimp industry."[31]

In defense of his support for earmarks, Rep. Paul took the if you can't beat 'em, join 'em position, arguing that "I don't think they should take our money in the first place. But if they take it, I think we should ask for it back."[32] This is a contradiction of Paul's self-proclaimed "opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution."[33]

Shouldn't, under his own beliefs, the money be spent within what the Constitution allows? How is the marketing of shrimp constitutionally allowable? At the outset, I was under the impression that Paul was one of the dozen or so that didn't take pork because of his statements that he never voted for a pork bill. And the money isn't just going to his district, it's going all over the place and it makes people question. And this change came about in 2007....a reversal of his 2006 votes.

The question is NOT whether he is getting the money, but (according to him) that the money only be spent as allowed by the Constitution. Hillary was castigated for the pork for the "Woodstock Museum" but Paul has the "National Mule and Packers Museum" for a half million.

I like Ron Paul, but I'm realistic enough to know he's not going to be able to do away with all those federal agencies. His idealism prevents him from taking some steps in the right direction, such as his vote against "school choice" and "tort reform." I understand his reasoning but I think it prevents progress in the right direction. I admire and respect Dr. Paul for his small govt and Constitution stances. I'm just going through a process of working things out in my own mind to the point I'm semi-comfortable with a choice.

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/10/ro ... omic_i.php

Regardless, I'd be willing to wager that Dr. Paul's record AGAINST pork far surpasses the records of ANY other candidate running.

ANY of them.

It wouldn't surprise me at all, Pine. He's certainly better than Hunter who went 0-19 on Jeff Flake's anti-pork amendments. Thompson got a lot of pork but mostly for the TVA, which could be argued in a positive manner. If Paul hadn't turned in 2007, it wouldn't be an issue for him.

I also discovered John McCain wants a welfare program for Michigan manufacturing workers. One that would pay them the difference in their old wage and a lower paying job. That's sounds like a democrat pandering. Paying auto plant wages for a McDonald's job.....wow...and for how long? Apparently until they can get another job paying the same. Of course this would never fly, but heck, promise them anything knowing you can't deliver. McCain seems to go more and more left and maybe the dems are helping him in the polls now

Its his job to bring home money to his Texas district...I just belive it should be done as a separate Item

Originally Posted by GREGAGREATAMERICAN

Its his job to bring home money to his Texas district...I just belive it should be done as a separate Item

I totally agree with you Greg instead of them hiding it in a HUGH Omnibus Bill so the average person doesn't know all the money for Bridges to No where that are being passed by our sneaky congress.

At least the money Dr. Paul asked for seems to be for worthy causes.