16 March 2006
Pursuant to the order of the House of
Wednesday March 15, 2006, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. PAUL) and a
Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Texas.
2006 Ron Paul 18:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission
to revise and extend his remarks.)
2006 Ron Paul 18:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is offered in an attempt to save
some money. If my amendment were to
pass, we would cut $500 million from
this appropriation. Everybody knows
that this is a huge appropriations bill
and that it is a supplemental. It does
not fall under the category of the budget
rules. It is $92 billion. It involves the
finances of our military approach to
our foreign policy around the world,
which is two-thirds of this funding. The
other third, 19 or $20 billion is for domestic
use. It is a huge sum of money.
And we are doing this at a time when
we are running a deficit, our national
debt at least is going up over $600 billion
a year, and we are concerned this
week about raising the national debt
limit to over $9 trillion.
2006 Ron Paul 18:3
It is unfortunate thats the way the system works around here. It is very
difficult to cut anything. My amendment
is an attempt to seriously consider
the problems that we have in
reining in the spending and living within
our means.
2006 Ron Paul 18:4
The major point I make here is by cutting $1 billion from the military
portion of the bill it makes the point
that we spend way too much on military
operations. We spend more on
military operations around the world
than all the other countries of the
world put together. And we do not have
a lot to show for it. When you think
about what has happened in Afghanistan,
the problems there, what is happening
in Iraq and the potential problems
that are coming in Iran; yet the
money is continuing to be spent in this
reckless manner.
2006 Ron Paul 18:5
So I propose we cut a billion dollars out of that which would be easily done,
because it should be cut a lot more. I
would then take $500 million of this
and I would put it into some areas of
the country that have been neglected
from some of the hurricane damage
that has existed in the south, in particular,
in Texas.
2006 Ron Paul 18:6
So to me, this is an approach to emphasize the importance of foreign policy,
that this notion that we are in the
business of nation-building, and that
we are the policemen of the world, and
that we should reconsider that and
save money. At the same time, we
could reduce our deficit while actually
increasing funding for some of the serious
problems that we have in this
country. So to me, it sounds rather
logical to do this. To cut things from,
say, building roads in Liberia. Yes, Liberia
needs money, but what about the
people that have been hit by the hurricanes?
They need some money, too.
And the way we do it always involves
deficit financing.
2006 Ron Paul 18:7
My approach emphasizes the need to cut in the places less important than
any other places, spend the money here
at home, and end up actually cutting
back on the deficit financing. Otherwise
we are going to continue with this
process. I see no serious attempt whatsoever,
when we bring up supplemental
appropriations bills like this, to rein in
the spending and even to pretend that
we are cutting. This whole idea of putting
domestic spending together with
military spending is not a ploy to
maybe reduce spending. It is the ploy
to make sure that people are trapped
into voting for both and nobody can
vote against the domestic spending,
and nobody can vote against the military
spending. And yet, of course,
spending is excessive in both areas.
2006 Ron Paul 18:8
But my amendment, the way it works, emphasizes mostly cutting the
militarism and the type of foreign policy
that we finance around the world
that has so many ramifications and unintended
consequences and so much
blow-back, that it literally hurts our
national defense and ends up costing us
so much more money.
2006 Ron Paul 18:9
Long term, to come up with a solution, it will not occur with tinkering
with the budget. It will not happen
today, nor tomorrow. The only way
that we can make any sense out of our
spending in this country and on this
floor will be to reassess our policies.
We must ask: Do we want to continue
to be the policemen of the world? Do
we really believe we can nation-build
around the world and that we can
spread democracy by force? The result
is then, if we do not like the results of
the democratic elections then we say,
well, it did not work. We cannot support
that democratically elected leader.
2006 Ron Paul 18:10
So it is a change in policy, at least a reconsideration of what we think we
should be doing around the world. At
the same time, we have to reconsider
the domestic spending.