Did The Senate Listen To Ron Paul? - Senate Rejects McCain-Backed Plan to Ban Earmarks

Posted March 14th, 2008 by TimG

If I could venture a guess here, I would be willing to say that McCain earmark ban proposal was shot down and a good portion of that reason is a March 12th speach of Congressman Ron Paul. Is it possible that someone is listening to the good doctor? I do not think it is a coincidence that Senate shot down McCain's proposal. You can listen to the good doctor here.

http://recap.fednet.net/a...

Bookmark/Search this post with:

output

From my memory

On March 14th, 2008 JohnGalt300 says:

Fortune Favors the Bold

"And the congress needs to do the responsible thing, get this budget under control. But my proposal, Senator McCain's proposal, they rejected it, cause they aren't serious about the budget. But I have signed an executive order, and i will not allow any earmarks, only military and defense spending. And this will not just be for me, but for all future presidents."

The emperor...

On March 14th, 2008 ebinrock says:

[Lifting hands] "...The Republic will be re-organized into the first galactic empire!"

Supreme Chancellor Palpatine, Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith

When was this speech? Is

On March 14th, 2008 winstonkirk says:

When was this speech? Is there a transcript available? Video online?

This would be big! The purse is one of the few remaining components of Congressional power.

Jesus

On March 14th, 2008 TimG says:

Between his signing statements and executive orders, President Bush has created one of the most powerful branches of Government that can now superceed any other branch. The checks and balances that were to be in place for the safety of our country have been blown away. Wouldn't this be a great time for Ron Paul to get the Presidency? He would have the opportunity to take back control and give it to the people. He is the only one that would take advantage of the new system and would give the power back to the people.

McCain will use this to start the next two wars in the Middle East and South America, along with railroading us into more unfair trade agreements and the North American Union.

King Bush!

On March 14th, 2008 lynnopoly says:

That's how I see it.

******************************************
The Delegate Rule Book for the RNC
Read It--Learn It--Know It! Don't let the GOP violate the rules.
Who knows you could learn a few tricks of your own.
pdf file:
www.gop.com/images/2008_C...

You know, this is a full time job!!! W/O pay!

On March 14th, 2008 brainon4u2 says:

Keeping these raskals in our sights!

However, we outnumber them by the millions IF we could get the millions involved!!!!!

Too lazy, let some one else do it while I remain selfish and self-centered.

Spread The Word of Downsize DC

On March 14th, 2008 TimG says:

This is a great way to keep them in check.

correction

On March 14th, 2008 JohnGalt300 says:

Fortune Favors the Bold

it might have been- I am going to sign an executive order- I thought he said he already had- I am like, 95 percent sure, he said I have as in past tense that's what i remember, but like i said i just saw it on tv. And i can't find any reporting on it

That's The Thing

On March 14th, 2008 TimG says:

Very little of the actual speach will be shown as the media wants to TELL us what was said. I am willing to bet the farm that Bush's last comment about dodging the value of the dollar question will be brought up no where but here.

Earmarks...

On March 14th, 2008 martfuncher says:

The special thing about earmarks is that they are protected from meddling by the Executive branch.

Getting rid of earmarks is a power-grab by Executive branch and getting rid of them is impractical because then the Executive branch would be responsible for choosing the merits of each project and overseeing and regulating their implementation. The Executive branch would have to grow the federal Department's staffing by leaps and bounds to manage the thousands of earmark projects.

I Agree

On March 14th, 2008 TimG says:

It is the responsibility of the Congress to decide on the allocation of Federal spending. The Executive branch then, as an act of checks and balances, can veto that bill if he feels the spending of our tax dollars is not in line with the needs of the country.

The problem has not been the earmarks, rather the problem has been some of the corrupt Congressmen who have been proposing the earmarks inappropriately on projects that are not for the good of their states even.

At the end of the day, the biggest run away spending has been on a unconstitional war and us posturing our military basis all over the world.

He also said

On March 14th, 2008 JohnGalt300 says:

Fortune Favors the Bold

no earmarks except for military spending

Yup..

On March 14th, 2008 martfuncher says:

.. we are cutting back food aid to foreign nations, education, health, and the elderly to pay for the damnable wars that funnel money into the pockets of the Elite whores running our lives.

TimG

On March 14th, 2008 eaglewings says:

The reps and senators generally feel the same way as Dr. Paul does, and they have "forever." So, not to rain on the parade, but I don't think it was because of his floor statement.

Nice thought, though.

I Agree and Here's Why It's Great for Us

On March 14th, 2008 IMissLiberty says:

This is an example of the representatives wanting to retain power for themselves. They gave Bush the power over the "war" to avoid responsibility, but they're not ready to give up all their authority.

The exact same logic applies to delegates to the GOP convention. They have executives and leadership who may want to take power, but the delegates will probably refuse to give up their own power. There is hope they will unbind themseleves at their state conventions, just as the Senate did, here.

IMissLiberty

bush already signed an executive order

On March 14th, 2008 JohnGalt300 says:

Fortune Favors the Bold

putting mccain's plan into effect, irrelevant of the congress

What's the point of even

On March 14th, 2008 john2k says:

What's the point of even having a Congress if Bush can do that?

Can't the Congress invalidate such an executive order?

Congress..

On March 14th, 2008 martfuncher says:

.. could stop the wars and bring the troops home. But they don't.

I'm 99% convinced that, like Mark Foley, many of the congress people have been lured into sex and child sex scandals and are being threatened if they don't obey.

Personally, I really don't care what they do with hookers or cheating on their wives. On the other hand, many congress people admitted to KNOWING for a long time that Mark Foley was messing around with little boys.

Any congress person who knows child sex is going on and doesn't say anything, now THAT bothers me! THOSE are the ones who should be imprisoned and kicked out Congress.