But you admit, I think, that the Spending part (the Appropriations part) is first, and separate, and Ron Paul never votes for the spending.
Earmarking is simply getting that money back.
He didn’t want that money spent. He didn’t vote for spending. The RINOs, like McCain, who won’t stop spending, but would like people to think that it’s not “Spending”, which McCain does and Ron Paul doesn’t, but “Earmarking”, which just specifies where already spent (or appropriated) money goes, are the ones talking about the irrelevant Earmarking instead of the important Spending.
“Earmarking is simply getting that money back.”
No. Paul has to contort to a super flexible pretzel with his logic...and supporter like youself have to do the same.
The money is not spent. In fact the Fiscal year Budget are done in advance of the time the monies will be spent.
You are flat wrong. The lines can be changed. Paul’s argument is just a rationalization of pork spending in Earmarks.
The billions that have been earmarked are not debated, the;y are slipped in. The fact that the budget lines for distinct Budgets (Defense, Interior, Transportation, etc.) are set DOES NOT MEAN, the money is spent. It is not spend...and the EARMARKED MONEY (IN BILLIONS)...
...will come out of the finite pot of money that is obligated to be spent.
So, it is a corrupt way for Congressman to change the Budget without debate and scrutiny. Corruption, plain and simple.