2007 Ron Paul 38:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, the FY 2008 budget is a monument to irresponsibility and
profligacy. It shows that Congress remains oblivious
to the economic troubles facing the Nation,
and that political expediency trumps all
common sense in Washington. To the extent
that proponents and supporters of these
unsustainable budget increases continue to
win reelection, it also shows that many Americans
unfortunately continue to believe government
can provide them with a free lunch.
2007 Ron Paul 38:2
To summarize, Congress proposes spending roughly $3 trillion in 2008. When I first
came to Congress in 1976, the Federal Government
spent only about $300 billion. So
spending has increased tenfold in 30 years,
and tripled just since 1990.
2007 Ron Paul 38:3
About one-third of this $3 trillion is so-called discretionary spending; the remaining two-
thirds is deemed mandatory entitlement
spending, which means mostly Social Security
and Medicare. I am sure many American voters
would be shocked to know their elected
representatives essentially have no say over
two-thirds of the Federal budget, but that is indeed
the case.
2007 Ron Paul 38:4
The most disturbing problem with the budget is the utter lack of concern for the coming
entitlement meltdown. The official national
debt figure, now approaching $9 trillion, reflects
only what the Federal Government owes
in current debts on money already borrowed.
It does not reflect what the Federal Government
has promised to pay millions of Americans
in entitlement benefits down the road.
Those future obligations put our real debt figure
at roughly 50 trillion dollars — a staggering
sum that is about as large as the total household
net worth of the entire United States.
Your share of this 50 trillion amounts to about
$175,000.
2007 Ron Paul 38:5
For those who thought a Democratic Congress would end the war in Iraq, think again:
their new budget proposes supplemental funds
totaling about $150 billion in 2008 and $50 billion
in 2009 for Iraq. This is in addition to the
ordinary Department of Defense budget of
more than $500 billion, which the Democrats
propose increasing each year just like the Republicans.
2007 Ron Paul 38:6
The substitute Republican budget is not much better: while it does call for freezing
some discretionary spending next year, it increases
military spending to make up the difference.
The bottom line is that both the
Democratic and Republican budget proposals
call for more total spending in 2008 than 2007.
2007 Ron Paul 38:7
My message to my colleagues is simple: If you claim to support smaller government,
dont introduce budgets that increase spending
over the previous year. Can any fiscal conservative
in Congress honestly believe that
overall federal spending cannot be cut 25 percent?
We could cut spending by two-thirds
and still have a Federal Government as large
as it was in 1990.
2007 Ron Paul 38:8
Congressional budgets essentially are meaningless documents, with no force of law
beyond the coming fiscal year. Thus budget
projections are nothing more than political
posturing, designed to justify deficit spending
in the near term by promising fiscal restraint in
the future. But the time for thrift never seems
to arrive: there is always some new domestic
or foreign emergency that requires more
spending than projected.
2007 Ron Paul 38:9
Nobody in Washington will look back 5 years from now and exclaim, Gee whiz, back
in 2007 we promised to balance the budget by
2012, so I guess we better stick to that pledge
and stop spending so much this year. The
only certainty when it comes to Federal budgets
is that Congress will spend every penny
budgeted and more during the fiscal year in
question. All projections about revenues, tax
rates, and spending in the future are nothing
more than empty promises. Congress will pay
no attention whatsoever to the 2008 budget in
coming years.
2007 Ron Paul 38:10
We should not let the debate over numbers distract us from the fundamental yet unspoken
issues inherent in any budget proposal: What
is the proper role for government in our society?
Are the programs, agencies, and departments
funded in the budget proposal constitutional?
Are they effective? Could they operate
with a smaller budget? Would the public even
notice if certain items were eliminated altogether?
These are the kinds of questions the
American people should ask, even if Congress
lacks the courage to apply any principles
whatsoever to the budget process.