Is Rand Paul Backing Away from Anti-Earmark Pledge?
- Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:02pm by
Meredith Jessup
- Print »
- Email »
The modern-day tea party movement has prided itself on its conservative values and efforts to shrink government, cut wasteful spending and for ousting politicians who seemed to have neglected their values and sold-out to political interests in Washington. It came as a big surprise for many, then, when tea party-favorite Senator-elect Rand Paul, R-Ky., suggested over the weekend that he’d be vying for earmarks to bring home to his new Kentucky constituents.
During his hard-fought campaign for the Senate, Paul pledged to support a ban on earmarks. From his campaign website:
Rand Paul has made a ban on wasteful earmark spending in Washington D.C. one of the key points of his campaign. He has supported Sen. Jim DeMint’s vocal support for an earmark ban and he supports news that House Democrats are even coming around on the idea of a partial ban.
But in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, seemed to backtrack on this promise:
In a bigger shift from his campaign pledge to end earmarks, he tells me that they are a bad “symbol” of easy spending but that he will fight for Kentucky’s share of earmarks and federal pork, as long as it’s doled out transparently at the committee level and not parachuted in in the dead of night. “I will advocate for Kentucky’s interests,” he says.
Conservatives and tea partiers are no wondering: is Rand Paul backing away from his anti-earmark pledge?
National Review’s Veronique de Rugy asked Monday, “Is Rand Paul already selling out?”
I am fully aware that the issue of earmarks is a very symbolic one. Getting rid of earmarks won’t save us from the current debt explosion, nor is it likely to end the spending; it will just leave the decision in the hands of the agencies rather than selected lawmakers. Still, I could imagine that when a legislator submits his earmark request, the appropriations committee, at least sometimes, increases the overall budget for the agency by the amount of the earmark.
So is Rand Paul changing his tune? Did he misspeak? Or did the Wall Street Journal misinterpret his comments? After all, Paul also told ABC News’ Christiane Amanpour this past weekend, “No more earmarks.”
PAUL: No — no more earmarks.
AMANPOUR: No more? Not even in your state?
PAUL: No. No. But I do tell people within Kentucky is I say, look, I will argue within the committee process for things that are good for Kentucky that they want and also within the context of a balanced budget. Here’s what happens. You go to the Transportation Committee and they say, “What do you want?” But it should be, “How much do we have?” No one asks, “How much do we have?” So we just spend it. And then, at the end of the day, if we don’t have it, we either print it or borrow it. Those are bad things. There is no restraint, but that’s why you need rules.
What do you think? Is Rand Paul really abandoning is tea party anti-earmark roots?
Update: Appearing on CNN Tuesday afternoon, Paul reiterated his opposition to earmarking, saying he would not use them as a U.S. Senator.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 697 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 527 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 353 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 353 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 346 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 346 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 353 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 265 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 346 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (79)
Sunnyr
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:40pmJamestown
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:11pm
Semantics….this is UNBELIEVABLE….STAND IN FRONT OF THIS POS AND KNOCK HIS LIGHTS OUT
================================================
Report Post »You need to listen to Rand Paul instead of trying to sound like a rabid dog!
Jamestown
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:40pmSome how every single notion of the elected SHOULD have been disclosed…did he clarify what earmarked money does to a deficit…YES…then accountability means nothing….or will we the people say…its ok this time…THIS IS AROGANCE…UNFORGIVABLE AROGANCE
Report Post »coryf
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 1:29pmForget arrogance Jamestown. You seem to be just plain ignorant. And it is not just semantics. Language means something and definitions are important. I am not lock step with Rand Paul, but if you don’t understand the difference between earmarks and legitimate projects that need to be done for a state and how those are brought forth, then keep out of the conversation. Seek anger management and active listening courses at your local community college.
Report Post »USAPLISKENXI
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:39pmAll of you need to check this out, there are 4 parts then tell all of your friends!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9dGHuRExiM
Report Post »
Report Post »Sunnyr
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:38pmHere come the rumors! Rand Paul is against all earmarks that are being shoved into big Bills, in the dead of night and without congressional oversignt. An honest, vetted, debated earmark for something sorely needed by a State is a different thing and should be considered by Congress.
Report Post »Jamestown
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:28pmDefinitions are used by engineers to excuse the behavior…they knew was wrong the whole time…liars call illegals undocumented…but the crime is then ignored….earmarks are what he campaigned against…but now he calls them a different name….go the hell back to sleep….when you are part of this worthlessness.its an earmark plain and simple andwe see again a liar who got elected..
Report Post »Ronko
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:24pmWho cares about Earmarks their are more important things at stake. What should happen is a limit on how much you can spend on Earmarks thats what should happen. Hopefully Rand’s going to be like his father
Report Post »troyvar
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:19pmK. Here it is, short version.
Report Post »Congress appropriates X amount of money (It’s a big number)
Bills go through committee and are passed. ( X – Combined bills)
There’s usually some $$$ left
Congressmen add their pet projects in the dark of night (earmarks) to the bill (no committee/no oversight)
Jamestown
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:18pmSTRIKE ONE….TWO MORE…OR THROW A FASTBALL BETWEEN HIS EYES
Report Post »NickDeringer
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:17pmRand Paul is a disaster waiting to happen. Sorry, Paul fans, but this guy’s a loose canon and will break your hearts in the end.
Report Post »Jamestown
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:14pmIF IT IS NOT TERMED EARMARK…WHAT THE HELL IS IT…
Report Post »murmai
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:12pmsnowleopard3200 do you have a life at all i have never seen a thing on here yet that you havent had at least 3 idiotic posts on my gawd you are a pompous blowhard !!!! get a life
Report Post »BurntHills
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:04pmNO Compromise and NO MORE Earmarks. period.
{as obama liked to sneer his election at us } … hey, dude, WE THE PEOPLE WON.
Report Post »Monty
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:39pmI second your ‘period’ and add an exclamation!
Report Post »HEY!!… It’s your turn to listen, and do the will of the people who put you in office.
NOT in POWER!
thefljuggalo
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:02pmhow can anyone take anything negative out of that interview. that man is one hell of a politicion. i really think the only legitimate “tea party” candidate
Report Post »SaintMichael
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:39pmGetting a program through a clear bill that gets debated which will help your state is one thing. Adding an ear markthat is on a totally different subject of the bill being debated is what the problem is.
Report Post »spendthrift
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:33pmRon and Rand Paul are true Americans, change for the better was elected on 11/2/10.
Report Post »mrsclark
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:27pmIts not that earmarks are bankrupting the country, its that earmarks are used to buy votes! This has to stop!
Report Post »troyvar
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:27pmI always took ‘earmarks’ to mean those hidden pet projects that were tacked onto a bill in the middle of the night. I don’t know of many congressional districts that can afford to foot a billion dollar infrastructure project.
Report Post »I guess what I’m thinking is all project spending bills need to go through committee, be stand alone (not attached to any other bill), have the sponsors name on them and also be posted on-line for public discourse before being voted on.
C. Schwehr
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:29pmAnd I believe that is EXACTLY what Dr. Paul was talking about…you do understand his point then!
Report Post »Exrepublisheep
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:23pmWell ,THAT didn’t take long.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:28pmYou mean the lies and trashing of Rand Paul? It’s on-going, and will continue until he’s out of office! Nothing new there!
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:33pmActually it took less time than you think, read Matt Taibbi’s article and it shows that Paul began falling into step with McConnell and the gang as soon as the primary was over. He went from an anti-war, anti-drug law, anti-earmark libertarian like his father to a run of the mill Republican overnight. To paraphrase the tea party referring to Obama voters…..You get what you vote for. I imagine he wont be the last either, most if not all of the “tea party” elects will soon follow suit.
Report Post »GOPatheist
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 8:33pmAnother self serving ego-maniac with no real convictions.
Report Post »Ernie
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:22pmUntil the states start managing their own affairs, many of the taxes will go to the federal government. The federal government then has the power of distribution and Rand is simply trying to get as much money as is paid in by the people of Kentucky instead of a portion of it being doled out to subsidize broke states like California and New York. This is also his dad’s position for his constituents in Texas, to my understanding.
Report Post »JohnnyJT
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:19pmFed Govt gets too much money from US taxpayers. Taxes need to be cut to the Bone.
Report Post »komponist-ZAH
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:16pmHmmm. Don’t know. On the surface of it, it does seem like he’s breaking a promise. But… Maybe not. After all, eliminating earmarks would not save a lot of money. What it would do is prevent one of the more obvious forms of vote-buying.
Report Post »ALLWOODTKR
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:14pmThis is sad. I am amazed by the influencing power of Washington. This shows us how weak Rand Paul’s character is.
Report Post »Spookytruck
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 8:55amYou need to listen to what he is saying and not insert what you think he is saying while he is talking. He is against earmarks. Listen to what he is saying. These reporters are trained to put you on the spot. That is their job. That’s what they get paid for. Figure it out for crying out loud. Rand Paul didn’t say anything different from what he has always said on the campaign trail. I know you think you understood what you thought he said, but do you understand that what you think you thought he said, was not really what he meant to say. LOL!
Report Post »S_Malc13
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:13pmMust we get off to a bad start?
Report Post »SHOESHINEBOY
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:09pmhe better not..I have friends over there who worked hard on his election…and no earmarks was a big deal for them
Report Post »Jamestown
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:11pmSemantics….this is UNBELIEVABLE….STAND IN FRONT OF THIS POS AND KNOCK HIS LIGHTS OUT
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:26pmJamestown: You sound like a good union member…..why don’t YOU try to knock his lights out?
Report Post »Johnnybravo
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:54pmfight fight, take it outside or ill knock your light out
Report Post »PatriotMomof5
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 10:14amI think we all need to understand earmarks. Pork laden earmarks are unacceptable. Period! But this TEA Party member is understanding that there may be projects that are needed for certain districts.
Report Post »In our mountainous area we suffered greatly from a bark beetle infestation. Due to the eco-environmentalists we were fined heavily if a tree was cut down. Subsequently, there too many trees per acre, not enough water. The beetle took over and destroyed the pine forest. The fear was a fire would potentially wipe out the community of expensive homes and the loss of life could have been catastrophic. We received an earmark to cut down dead pine trees. And now we are encouraged
to thin our properties- no more penalties. So folks, lets get educated on earmarks and when and where they are appropriate before we totally shut the door on them. Flexibility is critical at this point!
SND97
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:08pmI’m from Kentucky, this talk about him changing? Not true, I followed him during the race here, he pretty much said the same all through it
Report Post »snowleopard3200 {mix art}
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:27pmLet his actions speak the truth in the time to come. The people can change his office position to unemployed if needed.
Report Post »Rational Man
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:51pmI could see this comming as soon as he said it. He didn’t say pork barrel earmarks. He just said earmarks. The fact is everybody gets earmarks. That’s how we build schools and roads and stuff. I’m sure what he was talking about is the wasteful spending on things like turtle tunnels under the highway. But the Dems will beat him over the head with it. I think he is just trying to clarify his statement now. But it sounds bad to do it now.
Report Post »Rogue
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 6:51pmIf I remember correctly, Paul was talking about ending earmarks in general. There was talk of submitting specific projects to the Appropriations Committee, and only ones that showed the most benefit and merit would be chosen. Also, they would have to remain within budget for all appropriations like this. Technically they are not earmarks, they are Federal funding for specific projects. I could be wrong, though – I can’t find where I had originally heard that.
Report Post »PatriotMomof5
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:30pmI was totally against earmarks until I heard about certain ones that were useful. Our Congressman Jerry Lewis was responsible for the very important and useful Drone project. He had to go a round about way in committees to get the project approved. The roads to nowhere, the airports with no passengers, those need to go!
Report Post »Jaybo
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 7:40pmThis is exactly what will kill the Tea Party and fiscal conservatism. They promise the moon, they get elected on their promises, then they “redefine” their promises and the same crap keeps on happening.
Mr. Paul, I hope you seriously reconsider what you appear to be saying. Otherwise you are just another sell out and flipping the bird to the voters that elected you.
Report Post »jimjonjr
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 8:17pmSo, wait, Rand Paul didn’t run on getting rid of earmarks?
Report Post »jimjonjr
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 8:20pmSo wait, Rand Paul didn’t promise no earmarks? I’m confused.
Report Post »patriot4all
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 9:06pmLike any Tea Party backed candidate–he can lose his office as fast as he got it–IF he forgets himself too much. Now, we need to get rid of more of the establishment Republicans and in my opinion 95% of the Dems. in 2012.
Report Post »slimster
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 10:37pmRand should run for president with his dad.
Report Post »Anarcho Capitalist
Posted on November 9, 2010 at 11:18pmSLIMSTER
Report Post »I could support a Paul/Paul ticket
Polwatcher
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 8:36amAn earmark is used to get votes of congress one legislator at a time behind closed doors. If you need 150 votes you give out 150 earmarks. Earmarks are an out and out bribe. What Rand Paul describes is nothing of this kind. He is discussing ordinary committee approved up front legislation where everyone votes at the same time on the same thing. I suspect that we will always see legislation for highways, public works, etc. but no more secret out and out bribes please.
Report Post »