Apparently you don't know how the federal budget process works, so let me explain...
A federal budget proposal is put up for vote, is passed by congress (Dr. Paul votes against it because of the unconstitutional spending in it), and then is signed into law by the prez.
Almost all of the funds in the budget are allocated to specific programs - defense, entitlements, etc.
A tiny percentage of the budget is not allocated to a specific use - this is where earmark funding comes from.
Keep in mind that the "earmark" money is already budgeted, is already stolen from the taxpayer, or borrowed from the chinese, and is going to be spent.
Then what happens is, some of the taxpayers in Ron Paul's district, who elected him to represent them, come to him with funding (earmark) requests. He passes these requests on to a congressional committee - some of the requests are approved, and his constituents then get back a tiny fraction of the taxes they paid.
What would you have him do different?
You are kidding right?
That's like saying someone will commit burglary anyways, so you might as well be the one to do it and benefit from it. If all congressmen stopped voting for earmarks, there will be no earmarks. Period!
So tell me something, even when Republicans take the the majority in November, and the GOP swear to stop all earmarks(which they have already apart from clowns like Ron Paul and a few others), Ron Paul is still going to continue demanding earmarks is he?
“Then what happens is, some of the taxpayers in Ron Paul’s district, who elected him to represent them, come to him with funding (earmark) requests. He passes these requests on to a congressional committee - some of the requests are approved, and his constituents then get back a tiny fraction of the taxes they paid.
What would you have him do different?”
Zero deficit budget. Til then oppose ALL earmarks on principle.