Ron Paul - "Unabashed earmarker"

[Pangloss]

Politico is running an interesting piece comparing Rand Paul's positions that are in apparent conflict with some of his father's. Rand is in favor of term limits, for example, but his father has been in office for 11 terms now.

 

But the kicker is this earmarks business:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37467.html

 

While his father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), rails against big deficits, he is an unabashed earmarker — so much so that he has resisted calls from House Republican leaders to freeze pet projects this election year.

 

In the 110th Congress, Paul's 25 earmarks he secured by himself and with other members were worth $72 million, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense — for projects big and small in his Texas district.

 

After the speech, the congressman defended his requests, saying it was just part of the system and that it was Congress's constitutional responsibility to spend money where it saw fit — not the executive branch's.

 

"I made requests," Paul said. "If government takes money and they make grants and they're passing out highway funds, of course I do. Why should I let the executive branch do it? That's a constitutional issue."

 

Even though he requests earmarks, Paul made a point to say he "voted against" earmarks and that he agrees with his son that "earmarks are terrible."

 

"Everybody gets earmarks."

 

Hm, I guess that's the "do as I say, not as I do" approach to politics?

[bascule]

There's a huge amount of things I don't like about Ron Paul, and I certainly wouldn't want him to be President of the US, but compared to the average Republican I find him substantially more respectable.

[padren]

Yeah, I decided Ron Paul was nothing but a hypocrite when I found out that despite speaking out against the federal Income Tax, the guy still pays his taxes every freak'n year.

[ParanoiA]

Yeah, I can understand people taking issue with Ron Paul on this. Honestly, I'm not sure what I'd do in his place.

 

On the one hand, you have earmarks poisoning the system. On the other hand, if you don't participate, then your constituents' money goes to other people's earmarks - their money leaves the district altogether. Participating seems to be the only way to recoup some of their money.

 

I think I could stand behind his rationale better if he actually went to some trouble to organize and mobilize against it. For instance, if he were to try to gain support for rejecting earmarks by convincing other legislators not to participate as well - or perhaps draft a bill for it. Something. Something other than playing the game and then crying foul once somebody notices.

 

All in all, I acknowledge and accept this imperfection.

 

Rand Paul is a peculiar candidate to me. He has more politician in him than his father, which could be useful for bringing libertarian ideas to the mainstream. But, more politician means more slivery methodology and salesmanship, which is a big turn off for me. I guess we'll see...

[john5746]

The fact that he follows the law in regards to taxes and looks out for his constituents' money gives me a better feeling about him. He comes across as too much of a zealot for me, so being practical on some things is good, IMO.

 

Now, if he started preaching term limits, then that would be hypocritical on an issue that would only serve his ambitions.

[Mr Skeptic]

Hm, I guess that's the "do as I say, not as I do" approach to politics?

 

More of a "this is retarded but so long as it's the rule I won't betray my constituents by letting others abuse this while I sit on my high horse".