<OT> *** Ron Paul - Why Can’t Congress Stop Spending? ***
Every single time I read one of your Ron Paul articles I can't help but think that he is the lone voice of reason howling in the wind and no one is listening, no one cares. They will dance and sing their way to perdition, dragging the rest of us (the ones who do hear the voice) down with them. This craziness HAS GOT to stop! N2B ===============================================================
Hi Newly, I wholeheartedly agree with what you say. It's really unfortunate that most (imo) Americans don't have a clue of the underhanded and overpowered way things work , regardless of the party in power, in our nation's capitol.
Fwiw, I don't bring these essays here for any personal gain or political reason.... I just wish folks would start getting angry at the people they are voting into office under the farcial guise of looking out for the best interests of the politician's constituents.
Ron Pauls's Texas Straight Talk June 28, 2004
Why Can’t Congress Stop Spending?
Congress spent one evening last week debating a token measure to reduce government spending by implementing very slight caps on some future entitlements. Not surprisingly, even this exceedingly modest bill failed overwhelmingly. The process behind the vote, however, reveals just how deeply ingrained the spending problem really is.
House leaders knew the spending control bill had little chance of passing. In fact, that’s why they allowed the vote to happen. The real goal was to appease fiscal conservatives in Congress, some of whom have become increasingly uncomfortable with the unrestrained spending contained in the proposed 2004 budget. Some of these conservatives supported an alternative budget that merely spent about 1% less than the proposed budget, and even that nominal act of rebellion earned them the ire of House leadership. The spending control measure considered last week was merely a symbolic gesture designed to quash their complaints and ensure cooperation when the final budget vote is cast later this year. After all, those members now can tell their constituents they voted to keep a lid on spending, even as they please their party bosses later.
The pressure to go along with the herd in Congress is intense, regardless of which party is in control. Every member knows that thwarting his party’s leadership, particularly on budget matters, is risky. Any opposition to spending bills can result in veiled or even outright threats to cut funding for the member’s district, to limit the member’s committee assignments, and to bury the member’s legislation. Some members who buck the system find themselves facing primary opponents in the next election as a result. The desire to win reelection is paramount, and those who go along get plenty of help from their party’s fundraising machines.
Predictably, almost all members of the House Appropriations committee- the committee initially responsible for every nickel of federal spending- voted against the bill. This simply highlights the institutional problem that plagues Congress and government in general: no politician ever voluntarily relinquishes power. In Congress, control of the nation’s purse strings represents the ultimate power. Appropriators can reward some lawmakers and punish others with the stroke of a pen, by adding or eliminating federal projects in any congressional district. No amount of talk about spending can change the reality that government power naturally grows.
Everybody complains about pork, but members of Congress keep spending because voters do not throw them out of office for doing so. The rotten system in Congress will change only when the American people change their beliefs about the proper role of government in our society. Too many members of Congress believe they can solve all economic problems, cure all social ills, and bring about worldwide peace and prosperity simply by creating new federal programs. We must reject unlimited government and reassert the constitutional rule of law if we hope to halt the spending orgy.
The words of H.R. Gross, the great libertarian-conservative congressman from Iowa, ring as true today as they did during a budget debate in 1974:
“No amount of legislation will instill in a majority of the members of the House the ingredient, the element that has been missing. That is fiscal responsibility. Every Member knows that he or she cannot for long spend $75,000 a year on a salary of $42,000 and remain solvent. Every member knows this government cannot forever spend billions beyond tax revenue and endure. Congress already has the tools to halt the headlong flight into bankruptcy. It holds the purse strings. No President can impound funds or spend unwisely unless an improvident, reckless Congress makes available the money. I repeat, neither this nor any other legislation will provide morality and responsibility on the part of members of Congress.”
Freedom, self-determination, and the end of allegiance to an unaccountable government: 228 years ago this week a handful of radical American colonists set forth their demands in the Declaration of Independence. They sought independence not only from English rule, but also from the feudal notion of obedience to King and Crown. Their views were not shared even by a majority of their fellow colonists, nor could they hope to match England’s naval and military power- but their courage was undeniable.
A bloody conflict ensued, and the new Americans emerged victorious. But still we celebrate the 4th of July as the birth of our nation, rather than the date the Constitution was ratified. We celebrate the day our forefathers boldly proclaimed to the world that liberty was their goal, that the pursuit of individual freedom was paramount.
Those who signed the Declaration of Independence envisioned a nation based on the rule of law and the right of individuals to live their lives free from oppression. To a degree perhaps unimaginable to that band of radical idealists, their vision has come to pass over these two centuries.
That vision has been challenged throughout our history, however. The nineteenth century held slavery. The twentieth century saw the rise of socialism and its sister, fascism.
But rather than focus on where we have failed, we should stay focused on the ideal of freedom. The freedom we enjoy today is the direct result of the commitment of men and women who refused to compromise their ideals. Certainly they failed at times, but they understood that the goal was liberty. Today our government and society seem to have lost sight of this goal.
For more than six months of every year the average American toils not for his family, for his needs, or for his future. No, for the first six months of the year the average American works to pay the cost of federal, state, and local taxes and regulations. From New Year’s Day until about the 4th of July, you worked to pay for government. This is unconscionable.
Our Founding Fathers no doubt would be embarrassed at our squandering of their vision. After all, they revolted at a comparable tax rate in the single digits or less. And yet we willingly suffer an effective tax rate of 50%, and much more in many cases. They tyranny of the Crown has been replaced by the tyranny of the federal government in Washington.
We are not slaves, but many feel they are indentured servants to government. And by and large it has happened with our willing consent. We have knowingly compromised our sacred liberty for temporary promises of security or false prosperity.
But it does not have to be so. We can reclaim our independence not with guns, but with our voices. We can reject creeping statism and encourage the blessings of liberty for our land. It will require work, and it will require commitment, and it will require a willingness to stand firm for our beliefs. But that is a small price to pay compared to the sacrifices made by those who founded America.
Liberty, freedom, and self-determination. Those goals are as worthy of our attention today as they were 228 years ago in a hot convention hall in Philadelphia. Just as devotion to those goals brought forth this great nation then, a renewed adherence to liberty can save our nation today.
Our Founding Fathers felt freedom was worth their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor." Do we?
You may not have heard of the American Community Survey, but you will. The national census, which historically is taken every ten years, has expanded to quench the federal bureaucracy’s ever-growing thirst to govern every aspect of American life. The new survey, unlike the traditional census, is taken each and every year at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. And it’s not brief. It contains 24 pages of intrusive questions concerning matters that simply are none of the government’s business, including your job, your income, your physical and emotional heath, your family status, your dwelling, and your intimate personal habits.
The questions are both ludicrous and insulting. The survey asks, for instance, how many bathrooms you have in your house, how many miles you drive to work, how many days you were sick last year, and whether you have trouble getting up stairs. It goes on and on, mixing inane questions with highly detailed inquiries about your financial affairs. One can only imagine the countless malevolent ways our federal bureaucrats could use this information. At the very least the survey will be used to dole out pork, which is reason enough to oppose it.
Keep in mind the survey is not voluntary, nor is the Census Bureau asking politely. Americans are legally obligated to answer, and can be fined up to $1,000 per question if they refuse!
I introduced an amendment last week that would have eliminated funds for this intrusive survey in a spending bill, explaining on the House floor that perhaps the American people don’t appreciate being threatened by Big Brother. The amendment was met by either indifference or hostility, as most members of Congress either don’t care about or actively support government snooping into the private affairs of citizens.
One of the worst aspects of the census is its focus on classifying people by race. When government tells us it wants information to “help” any given group, it assumes every individual who shares certain physical characteristics has the same interests, or wants the same things from government. This is an inherently racist and offensive assumption. The census, like so many federal policies and programs, inflames racism by encouraging Americans to see themselves as members of racial groups fighting each other for a share of the federal pie.
The census also represents a form of corporate welfare, since the personal data collected on hundred of millions of Americans can be sold to private businesses. Surely business enjoys having such extensive information available from one source, but it’s hardly the duty of taxpayers to subsidize the cost of market research.
At least the national census has its origins in the Constitution, which is more than one can say about the vast majority of programs funded by Congress. Still, Article I makes it clear that the census should be taken every ten years for the sole purpose of congressional redistricting (and apportionment of taxes, prior to the disastrous 16th amendment). This means a simple count of the number of people living in a given area, so that numerically equal congressional districts can be maintained. The founders never authorized the federal government to continuously survey the American people.
More importantly, they never envisioned a nation where the people would roll over and submit to every government demand. The American Community Survey is patently offensive to all Americans who still embody that fundamental American virtue, namely a healthy mistrust of government. The information demanded in the new survey is none of the government’s business, and the American people should insist that Congress reject it now before it becomes entrenched.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
