Lindsey Graham: "Ron Paul is the biggest earmarker in Congress"

Why is municipality welfare any better than corporate welfare? And why do you think it distorts the economy any less?

If RP earmarks it to a public library so they can build a fancy modern new audio-visual wing, where people can check out all the latest Hollywood hits for free (which is the kind of thing a municipality would do with a windfall from Congress), do you not think that distorts the economy for all the for profit video rental places there?

An earmark I'd like to see is one that distributes cash money back to the taxpayers in his district in amounts proportional to however much they paid in income taxes.

But even aside from that, if a bad bill is going to pass (which is outside RP's control--all he can do is vote no on it, which he does), then the best (and most constitutional) case scenario for it would be that 100% of it be allocated by Congress in earmarks.

Really, my idea was meant to be an indirect way of [hopefully] enabling the bolded part above anyway. If not, it's in hope that the money would be spent on "essential" municipal services that residents would have been locally retaxed for otherwise (I put that in quotes because I'd rather the market handle them, but that's a pipe dream for now). Basically, the idea is that if the funds are going back to locals who were extorted for them, the worst possible distribution of them would be private special interests, since the actual taxpayers would see the least amount of their money back.

I guess you're proposing to have the government directly pay back individual taxpayers for the earmark, but I seriously doubt the feds would stand for having to directly calculate how much to give back to individual citizens. Even if they did do this, just to deliberately spend more money on federal workers, it would likely cost as much as the earmark is worth anyway.
 
Last edited:
Lindsey Graham Is A Bum. I Dislike Him More Then McCain

I believe McCain to be honest ( even though I dislike many of his ideas ) . I do not know alot about Lindsey , but if you watch enough interviews with him , you get the flavor that he is likely a typical dishonest politician .
 
Ron earmarks as a way to bring the people's money back to their district that the government has taken from them. Anyone who rails against earmarks is either intellectually dishonest or ignorant of how the budget works. Money is allocated in the budget to be spent but it is not always assigned where to be spent. If Ron didn't get it spent on his own community, then it would go to some other project or be left up to Presidential discretion. Either way the money is already spent, why not have it at least go to something that benefits the people who have paid for it?


Lindsey Graham is beating a dead horse on this issue.

Are you not a rather large supporter of a candidate that often rails against earmarks?
 
Are you not a rather large supporter of a candidate that often rails against earmarks?

I wish earmarks were illegal . There should be nothing attached to bills . If it is important , it should have its own bill , be read , and voted on.
 
Graham, a typical politican, is playing on the ignorance of the majority of voters. Unfortunately, this strategy usually works.
 
Back
Top