U.S. Rep. Ron Paul | earmark |
earmark
Oppose the Spendthrift 2005 Federal Budget Resolution
March 25, 2004 2004 Ron Paul 24:5
The assertion that this budget will reduce taxes is nonsense. Budget bills do not change the tax laws one bit. Congress can pass this budget today and raise taxes tomorrow- budget and tax bills are completely separate and originate from different committees. The budget may make revenue projections based on tax cuts, but the truth is that Congress has no idea what federal revenues will be in any future year. Similarly, the deficit reduction supposedly contained in the budget is illusory. The federal government always spends more in future years than originally projected, and always runs single-year deficits when one factors in raids on funds supposedly earmarked for Social Security. The notion that today’s budget will impose fiscal restraint on Congress in the future is laughable- Congress will vote for new budgets every year without the slightest regard for what we do today.
earmark
The End Of Dollar Hegemony
15 February 2006 2006 Ron Paul 3:87
Too much is at stake. Corporations, bureaucrats, lobbyists and politicians have grown accustomed to the system and have learned to work within it to survive. Only when the trough is empty will the country wake up. Eliminating earmarks in the budget will not solve the problem.
earmark
Jack Abramoff Scandal
3 May 2006 2006 Ron Paul 33:4
H.R. 4975 also contains minor reforms of the appropriation process to bring greater transparency to the process of “earmarking,” where members seek funding for specific projects in their respective district. I have no objection to increased transparency, and I share some of the concerns raised by opponents of the current earmarking process.
earmark
Jack Abramoff Scandal
3 May 2006 2006 Ron Paul 33:5
However, I would like to remind my colleagues that, since earmark reform does not reduce the total amount of spending, instead giving more power to the executive branch to allocate federal funds, the problem of members trading their votes in exchange for earmarks will continue. The only difference will be that instead of trading their votes to win favor with Congressional appropriators and House leadership, members will trade their votes to get funding from the Executive branch. Transferring power over allocation of taxpayer dollars from the legislative branch to the executive branch is hardly a victory for republican government. Reducing Congress’s role in allocating of tax dollars, without reducing the Federal budget, also means State and local officials, to say nothing of ordinary citizens, will have less input into how Federal funds are spent.
earmark
Jack Abramoff Scandal
3 May 2006 2006 Ron Paul 33:6
Earmarks, like most of the problems H.R. 4975 purports to deal with, are a symptom of the problem, not the cause. The real problem is that the United States government is too big, spends too much, and has too much power. When the government has the power to make or break entire industries by changing one regulation or adding or deleting one paragraph in an appropriation bill it is inevitable that people will seek to manipulate that power to their advantage. Human nature being what it is, it is also inevitable that some people seeking government favors will violate basic norms of ethical behavior. Thus, the only way to effectively address corruption is to reduce the size of government and turn money and power back to the people and the several states.
earmark
Statement on Earmark Reform
April 9, 2008 2008 Ron Paul 23:1
Madame Speaker, abuses of the earmark process by members of both parties demonstrate the need for reform. However earmarks are hardly the most serious problem facing this country. In fact, many, if not most of the problems with earmarks can be fixed by taking simple steps to bring greater transparency to the appropriations process. While I support reforms designed to shine greater sunlight on the process by which members seek earmarks, I fear that some of my colleagues have forgotten that the abuses of the earmarking process are a symptom of the problems with Washington, not the cause. The root of the problem is an out-of-control federal budget. I am also concerned that some reforms proposed by critics of earmarking undermine the separation of powers by eroding the constitutional role Congress plays in determining how federal funds are spent.
earmark
Statement on Earmark Reform
April 9, 2008 2008 Ron Paul 23:2
Contrary to popular belief, adding earmarks to a bill does not increase federal spending by even one penny. Spending levels for the appropriation bills are set before Congress adds a single earmark to a bill. The question of whether or not the way the money is spent is determined by earmarks or by another means does not effect the total amount of spending.
earmark
Statement on Earmark Reform
April 9, 2008 2008 Ron Paul 23:3
Since reforming, limiting, or even eliminating earmarks does nothing to reduce federal spending, I have regarded the battle over earmarks as a distraction from the real issue — the need to reduce the size of government. Recently, opponents of earmarks have embraced an approach to earmark reform that undermines the constitutional separation of powers by encouraging the president to issue an executive order authorizing federal agencies to disregard congressional earmarks placed in committee reports.
earmark
Statement on Earmark Reform
April 9, 2008 2008 Ron Paul 23:4
Since the president’s executive order would not reduce federal spending, the practical result of such an executive order would be to transfer power over the determination of how federal funds are spent from Congress to unelected federal bureaucrats. Since most earmarks are generated by requests from our constituents, including local elected officials, such as mayors, this executive order has the practical effect of limiting taxpayers’ ability to influence the ways the federal government spends tax dollars.
earmark
Statement on Earmark Reform
April 9, 2008 2008 Ron Paul 23:7
Madame Speaker, all members should support efforts to bring greater transparency to the earmarking process. However, we must not allow earmarking reform to distract us from what should be our main priority — restricting federal spending by returning the government to its constitutional limitations. I also urge my colleagues not to allow the current hysteria over earmarks to justify further erosion of our constitutional authority to control the federal budget.
earmark
Earmark Declaration
27 September 2008 2008 Ron Paul 64:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information for publication in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD regarding an earmark I received as part of H.R. 2638:
earmark
Earmark Declaration
19 November 2008 2008 Ron Paul 70:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act (H.R. 2638): Requesting member: Ron Paul. Bill number: H.R. 2638. Account: Rdt&E Defense Health Program. Legal name of requesting entity: Gulf Chemical and Metallurgical Corporation. Address of requesting entity: PO Box 2290, 302 Midway Road, Freeport, TX 77542–2290. Description of request: The project earmarks $3,000,000 for a Department of Defense lead study of vanadium to assess the health safety and risks of military and civilian workers exposed to vanadium through work in military applications.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:1
Mr. PAUL. I would like to address the subject of earmarks today. I think there’s a lot of misunderstanding here among the Members as to exactly what it means to vote against an earmark. It’s very popular today to condemn earmarks, and even hold up legislation because of this.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:2
The truth is that if you removed all the earmarks from the budget, you would remove 1 percent of the budget. So there’s not a lot of savings. But, even if you voted against all the earmarks actually, you don’t even save the 1 percent because you don’t save any money.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:3
What is done is, those earmarks are removed, and some of them are very wasteful and unnecessary, but that money then goes to the executive branch. So, in many ways, what we are doing here in the Congress is reneging on our responsibilities, because it is the responsibility of the Congress to earmark. That is our job. We are supposed to tell the people how we are spending the money, not to just deliver it in a lump sum to the executive branch and let them deal with it, and then it’s dealt with behind the scenes.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:4
Actually, if you voted against all the earmarks, there would be less transparency. Earmarks really allow transparency, and we know exactly where the money is being spent.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:5
The big issue is the spending. If you don’t like the spending, vote against the bill. But the principle of earmarking is something that we have to think about, because we are just further undermining the responsibilities that we have here in the Congress.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:6
If we want to get things under control, it won’t be because we vote against an earmark and make a big deal of attacking earmarks because it doesn’t address the subject. In reality, what we need are more earmarks.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:7
Just think of the $350 billion that we recently appropriated and gave to the Treasury Department. Now everybody’s running around and saying, Well, we don’t know where the money went. We just gave it to them in a lump sum. We should have earmarked everything. It should have been designated where the money is going.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:8
So, instead of too many earmarks, we don’t have enough earmarks. Transparency is the only way we can get to the bottom of this. And if you make everything earmarked, it would be much better.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:9
The definition of an earmark is very, very confusing. If you would vote to support the embassy, which came up to nearly $1 billion in Baghdad, that is not called an earmark. But if you have an earmark for a highway or a building here in the United States, that is called an earmark. If you vote for a weapons system, it would support and help a certain district, and that’s not considered an earmark.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:10
When people are yelling and screaming about getting rid of earmarks, they’re not talking about getting rid of weapons systems or building buildings and bridges and highways in foreign countries. They are only talking about when it’s designated that certain money would be spent a certain way in this country.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:11
Ultimately, where we really need some supervision and some earmarks are the trillions of dollars spent by the Federal Reserve. They get to create their money out of thin air, and spend it. They have no responsibility to tell us anything. Under the law, they are excluded from telling us where and what they do.
earmark
EARMARKS
March 10, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 24:17
So, the sooner we in the Congress wake up to our responsibilities, understand what earmarks are all about, and understand why we need a lot more earmarks, then we will come to our senses, because we might then have a more sensible monetary and banking system, the system that has brought us to this calamity. So, the sooner we realize that, I think it would be better for the taxpayer.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
June 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 68:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the House Republican standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding an earmark I obtained as part of H.R. 2487.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
June 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 68:7
Description of Request: An earmark of $1,000,000 to fund the Bay Area SATOP program to transfer the knowledge and technology of the U.S. Space Program to small businesses. SATOP provides technical assistance to small businesses.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
June 17, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 69:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, “Pursuant to the House Republican standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding an earmark I obtained as part of H.R. 2892.”
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
June 17, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 69:6
Description of Request: An earmark of $100,000 to fund construction of an Emergency Operating Center in Brazoria County, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
June 24, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 75:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the House Republican standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I obtained as part of HR 2996.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
June 24, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 75:7
Description of Request: An earmark of $2,500,000 to fund Land Acquisition for the San Bernard Wildlife Refuge in Brazoria County, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
June 24, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 75:13
Description of Request: An earmark of $500,000 to fund Water and Wastewater infrastructure improvement in Baytown, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the House Republican standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I obtained as part of H.R. 3183, the Energy and Water bill
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:7
Description of Request: An earmark of $250,000 to fund Solar Energy Project at the Port of Galveston, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:13
Description of Request: An earmark of $675,000 to fund investigations at Port Freeport, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:19
Description of Request: An earmark of $200,000 to fund investigations at Sabine Pass to Galveston Bay, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:25
Description of Request: An earmark of $500,000 to fund infrastructure improvement in Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:31
Description of Request: An earmark of $2,500,000 to fund infrastructure improvement in Clear Creek, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:37
Description of Request: An earmark of $8,000,000 to fund infrastructure improvement in the Texas City Channel, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:43
Description of Request: An earmark of $1,790,000 to fund infrastructure improvement in Cedar Bayou, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:49
Description of Request: An earmark of $3,316,000 to fund improvements in Freeport Harbor, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:55
Description of Request: An earmark of $13,095,000 to fund infrastructure improvement in Galveston Harbor, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:61
Description of Request: An earmark of $2,264,000 to fund infrastructure improvement in Victoria Harbor, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:67
Description of Request: An earmark of $26,046,000 to fund infrastructure improvement in the GIWW, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:73
Description of Request: An earmark of $4,627,000 to fund infrastructure improvement in the Matagorda Ship Channel, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 16, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 80:79
Description of Request: An earmark of $4,000,000 to fund infrastructure improvement in the Texas City Ship Channel, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 23, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 84:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the House Republican standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I obtained as part of HR 3183, the Education and Transportation bills
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 23, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 84:7
Description of Request: An earmark of $400,000 to fund infrastructure improvements at the Highway 146 and Spur 330 in Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 23, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 84:13
Description of Request: An earmark of $500,000 to fund transit vehicle replacement in Galveston, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 23, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 84:19
Description of Request: An earmark of $750,000 to fund a Park and Ride in League City, Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 23, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 84:25
Description of Request: An earmark of $200,000 to fund equipment purchases at Brazosport College in Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 23, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 84:31
Description of Request: An earmark of $380,000 to fund curriculum development at Brazosport College in Texas.
earmark
EARMARK DECLARATION
July 28, 2009 2009 Ron Paul 85:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the House Republican standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I obtained as part of H.R. 3183, the Education and Transportation bills
earmark
- Trust funds are being robbed, hundreds of billions at stake
20 February 1997 Texas Straight Talk 20 February 1997 verse 7 ... Cached
A number of years ago it was decided that establishing trust funds was a good way to earmark money for specific projects. These trust accounts would be paid into by those who use the particular service or project. For example, when a pilot fills up his plane with fuel, the tax on the fuel goes into a special trust fund. Under the law, money from the fund goes only for projects dealing with airport issues - like new runways, control towers, and radar systems. The same holds true for the canal systems, the highways, and, of course, Social Security.
earmark
CARA: Environmental Protection or Destruction?
05 June 2000 Texas Straight Talk 05 June 2000 verse 6 ... Cached
In the CARA legislation, some non-tax revenues, such as those from oil drilling leases, would be used to mitigate problems resulting from the drilling. However, areas without any such damages were still expressly earmarked for pork-barrel spending projects.
earmark
So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress
05 May 2003 Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 5 ... Cached
Opposition to the bill was minimal, although 40 Republicans did cast principled votes against it. Other conservatives who were slightly uncomfortable with the vote satisfied themselves by passing an amendment that requires some of the $15 billion to be spent on abstinence programs. Yet does anyone honestly think we can control how our dollars are spent once they reach Africa? Obviously money is fungible anyway, so “earmarking” funds for pet conservative programs does nothing. Furthermore, Republican leaders completely ignored efforts in committee to forbid funding for abortion in the bill.
earmark
Want to Reform Social Security? Stop Spending.
24 January 2005 Texas Straight Talk 24 January 2005 verse 9 ... Cached
Your money has never been safe in the government’s hands, and it never will be. Governments spend money; it’s just their nature. It is preposterous to believe our government is capable of simply sitting on a huge pile of money without touching it because it’s earmarked for one purpose or another. No matter what politicians promise, Social Security reform will not change the fact that your money is taken from your paycheck and sent to Washington, where it will be spent.
earmark
The Ever-Growing Federal Budget
13 February 2006 Texas Straight Talk 13 February 2006 verse 3 ... Cached
The Bush administration released a proposed 2007 budget last week that increases federal spending to a staggering $2.77 trillion, a sum that is 4 times larger than the Reagan-era budgets of the early 1980s. With a public angry about useless earmarks and bridges to nowhere, and a Republican congressional delegation promising to restore some small measure of fiscal discipline, it's troubling that the administration chooses to ignore economic reality and increase spending without regard to revenues and deficits.
earmark
The Ever-Growing Federal Budget
13 February 2006 Texas Straight Talk 13 February 2006 verse 11 ... Cached
There has been a great deal of talk in Washington about scandals lately, but few seem to understand that enormous federal budgets provide the mother's milk for every backroom deal, questionable earmark, and sleazy lobbying trick. Like many of my Republican colleagues who curiously vote for enormous budget bills, I campaign on a simple promise that I will work to make government smaller. This means I cannot vote for any budget that increases spending over previous years. In fact, I would have a hard time voting for any budget that did not slash federal spending by at least 25%, especially when we consider that the federal budget in 1990 was far less than half what it is today. Did anyone really think the federal government was not big enough just 16 years ago?
earmark
Earmark Victory May Be A Hollow One
18 June 2007 Texas Straight Talk 18 June 2007 verse 1 ... Cached
Earmark Victory May Be A Hollow One
earmark
Earmark Victory May Be A Hollow One
18 June 2007 Texas Straight Talk 18 June 2007 verse 3 ... Cached
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.
earmark
Earmark Victory May Be A Hollow One
18 June 2007 Texas Straight Talk 18 June 2007 verse 4 ... Cached
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 necessary 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.
earmark
Earmark Victory May Be A Hollow One
18 June 2007 Texas Straight Talk 18 June 2007 verse 5 ... Cached
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.
earmark
Earmark Victory May Be A Hollow One
18 June 2007 Texas Straight Talk 18 June 2007 verse 8 ... Cached
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.
earmark
High Risk Spending
13 August 2007 Texas Straight Talk 13 August 2007 verse 3 ... Cached
Last week this column addressed the train wreck that federal spending has become. To score political points politicians will make loud noise about fairly small matters such as earmarks, even while refusing to address the real problem. Namely, that our federal government is too big and does too much. Politicians prefer to pass a bill or create a program every time somebody points to a new social problem, this way they can tell their constituents how much they are doing to help. Instead of rationally explaining the proper role of government, politicians have attempted to play the role of friend, preacher, parent, social worker, etcetera-- in essence, whatever any organized special interest can demand.
earmark
On the Omnibus Spending Bill
23 December 2007 Texas Straight Talk 23 December 2007 verse 3 ... Cached
What this bill means is lots more of Washington spending your money. And, with a year of talking and fighting about earmarks, we did not see a significant change in that area either.
earmark
On the Omnibus Spending Bill
23 December 2007 Texas Straight Talk 23 December 2007 verse 4 ... Cached
Especially disconcerting is the overseas spending. Let me point to just one example. In that portion of the bill for military construction, there were nearly one billion dollars in earmarks for spending overseas. Again, this is just in the portion for military construction projects.
earmark
On the Omnibus Spending Bill
23 December 2007 Texas Straight Talk 23 December 2007 verse 6 ... Cached
How odd is it that while this legislation failed to pass, we are now earmarking hundreds of millions of dollars for bases in countries such as Bahrain and Qatar? Our policy is gone awry, is costing us billions here, and billions there, totaling trillions of dollars when added up. Yet the last key piece of legislation passed by Congress this year does absolutely nothing to even begin to address this problem. In fact, as I have suggested here, it only exaggerates the problem.
earmark
On the Omnibus Spending Bill
23 December 2007 Texas Straight Talk 23 December 2007 verse 8 ... Cached
America is a generous country, at this time of year that is more visible than ever. But, in this case, charity truly must start at home. We need to stop these overseas earmarks and put those dollars to work here in this country.
earmark
On Foreign Entanglements: The Ties that Strangle
30 December 2007 Texas Straight Talk 30 December 2007 verse 2 ... Cached
Last week I highlighted the irony of sending nearly $1 billion overseas in military earmarks as we close down bases here at home to save money. Our government's flawed foreign policy troubles me this week especially.
Texas Straight Talk from 20 December 1996 to 23 June 2008 (573 editions) are included in this Concordance. Texas Straight Talk after 23 June 2008 is in blog form on Rep. Paul’s Congressional website and is not included in this Concordance.
Remember, not everything in the concordance is Ron Paul’s words. Some things he quoted, and he added some newspaper and magazine articles to the Congressional Record. Check the original speech to see.