Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A serious question which in no way is intended to deride Rep. Paul, but...
Congressman Paul has been a member of Congress since 1997 and not once has he been able to pass a major piece of legislation and certainly nothing on the scale of which he is currently promoting as a candidate for the Presidency. His policies have little support within the Congress or the Senate nor do his views reflect the current thinking of either the leadership of the Republican or Democratic Parties. So absent a whole sale change of the Congress on a scale never before seen, how would President Paul enacted any of his major policy points?
Many of the ideas in Paul’s 11-page Plan to Restore America are familiar from his staunch libertarianism, as well as tea party favorites, like eliminating the Education and Energy Departments. But Paul goes further, proposing an immediate freeze on spending by numerous government agencies at levels from 2006, the last time Republicans had complete control of the federal budget, and drastic reductions in spending elsewhere. The Environmental Protection Agency would see a 30 percent cut; the Food and Drug Administration would see a 40 percent cut; and foreign aid would be zeroed out immediately. He’d also take an ax to Pentagon funding for wars.
Appearing on CNN ahead of the speech, Paul was pressed by Wolf Blitzer on how eliminating about 221,000 government jobs across five cabinet departments would boost the economy. He responded: “They’re not productive jobs,” he said.
“You cut government spending, that money goes back to you. You get to spend the money,” Paul said during his speech. “I am absolutely convinced it is the only road to prosperity.”
Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, food stamps, family support programs and the children’s nutrition program would be block-granted to the states and removed from the mandatory spending column of the federal budget. Some functions of eliminated departments, such as Pell Grants, would be continued elsewhere in the federal bureaucracy.
And in a noticeable nod to seniors during an election year, when Social Security’s become an issue within the Republican presidential primaries, the campaign says that plan “honors our promise to our seniors and veterans, while allowing young workers to opt out.”
The federal workforce would be reduced by 10 percent, and the president’s pay would be cut from $400,000 to $39,336 — a level that the Paul document notes is “approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker.”
Paul would also make far-reaching changes to federal tax policy, reducing the top corporate income tax rate to 15 percent, eliminating capital gains and dividends taxes and allowing for repatriation of overseas capital without tax penalties. All tax cuts enacted under former President George W. Bush would be extended.
And like the rest of his GOP rivals, Paul would repeal President Barack Obama’s health care reform law, along with the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory reform law enacted last year. A longtime Federal Reserve critic, Paul would also push a full audit of the central bank, as well as legislation to “strengthen the dollar and stabilize inflation.”
A serious question which in no way is intended to deride Rep. Paul, but...
Congressman Paul has been a member of Congress since 1997 and not once has he been able to pass a major piece of legislation and certainly nothing on the scale of which he is currently promoting as a candidate for the Presidency. His policies have little support within the Congress or the Senate nor do his views reflect the current thinking of either the leadership of the Republican or Democratic Parties. So absent a whole sale change of the Congress on a scale never before seen, how would President Paul enacted any of his major policy points?
Acknowledging that this is a most pessimistic outlook......even if Dr Paul could not get through any major changes....if all he could do is stop the backslide of the previous few years and start a trend, it would be better than continuing to just float with the fast moving current toward the falls.
Small changes in the right direction are better than nothing.
Most people join the military today because decent paying jobs are few and far between....If we close our bases around the world and bring most of the soldiers back some provisions have to be made for them...When and if they leave the military they are still going to have trouble finding decent paying jobs. Then what? Will they draw unemployment? Will they have to go on welfare and food stamps to be able to feed their families? If they go to work at "Mc Donald's" or take another low paying job they still might have to rely on a little help from welfare and food stamps....It's impractical to bring so many soldiers home at the same time when jobs are so scarce. All of this has to be well "thought out" and considered. This is the job of the president. A president is responsible and accountable for the decisions he or she makes....Same goes for shutting down all of the government depts. and laying off so many people at the same time when jobs are so scarce.....I might take Ron Paul's ideas more seriously if he had more plans and provisions for workers. He can't just "dump" everyone into a "bad economy" and walk away. This is not being a good leader as far as I'm concerned. And I won't vote for him (or anyone else) who doesn't "factor in" all the "variables."
Ron Paul is not going to "dump" the military into a bad economy. They'll still be in the military and they'll still get paid. They'll just be stationed here and spending their money here not overseas. I think this is a BIG MISCONCEPTION people have about Ron Paul.
A serious question which in no way is intended to deride Rep. Paul, but...
Congressman Paul has been a member of Congress since 1997 and not once has he been able to pass a major piece of legislation and certainly nothing on the scale of which he is currently promoting as a candidate for the Presidency. His policies have little support within the Congress or the Senate nor do his views reflect the current thinking of either the leadership of the Republican or Democratic Parties. So absent a whole sale change of the Congress on a scale never before seen, how would President Paul enacted any of his major policy points?
If he were elected, there's no doubt he wouldn't get his entire policy agenda through congress. However if Republicans gained complete control of the congress, I think we would begin to see some serious cutting. Probably not to the point that Paul wants, but enough to at least slow the race to the abyss. His foreign policy proposals wouldn't fly, unfortunately.
By the third year of his presidency we'd have a balanced Federal Budget.
................Many of the ideas in Paul’s 11-page “Plan to Restore America” are familiar from Paul’s staunch libertarianism, as well as tea party favorites like eliminating the departments of education and energy. But Paul goes further: he’ll propose immediately freezing spending by numerous government agencies at 2006 levels, the last time Republicans had complete control of the federal budget, and drastically reducing spending elsewhere. The EPA would see a 30 percent cut, the Food and Drug Administration would see one of 40 percent and foreign aid would be zeroed out immediately. He’d also take an ax to Pentagon funding for wars................................[LEFT]
Read more: Ron Paul to propose $1T in specific budget cuts - Dan Hirschhorn - POLITICO.com
[/LEFT]
Ron Paul is not going to "dump" the military into a bad economy. They'll still be in the military and they'll still get paid. They'll just be stationed here and spending their money here not overseas. I think this is a BIG MISCONCEPTION people have about Ron Paul.
Soldiers who don't re-enlist have trouble finding good-paying jobs right now. And the military has the "up or out" program to "squeeze" people out before they reach retirement.
A serious question which in no way is intended to deride Rep. Paul, but...
Congressman Paul has been a member of Congress since 1997 and not once has he been able to pass a major piece of legislation and certainly nothing on the scale of which he is currently promoting as a candidate for the Presidency. His policies have little support within the Congress or the Senate nor do his views reflect the current thinking of either the leadership of the Republican or Democratic Parties. So absent a whole sale change of the Congress on a scale never before seen, how would President Paul enacted any of his major policy points?
If anything I'd say Ron Paul's ideals have had a tremendous influence on the current candidates and congressman in recent years. Who's ideas do you think the Tea Party movement came from? Now I hear last night from Romney that "Ron Paul is right" we need to cut spending, need to eliminate government footprint, balance the budget, let states decide issues....I almost did a backflip when I heard Romney talking about Dodd-Frank.
A serious question which in no way is intended to deride Rep. Paul, but...
Congressman Paul has been a member of Congress since 1997 and not once has he been able to pass a major piece of legislation and certainly nothing on the scale of which he is currently promoting as a candidate for the Presidency. His policies have little support within the Congress or the Senate nor do his views reflect the current thinking of either the leadership of the Republican or Democratic Parties. So absent a whole sale change of the Congress on a scale never before seen, how would President Paul enacted any of his major policy points?
Who the hell do you think really started this new Constitutional Conservative movement, that stormed the 2010 mid-terms?
The Godfather of the Constitutional Conservative. Ron Paul, did, that's who.
The change is in the works and not only Ron, but you will see more and more Progressives, RINO's & NEOCON's get the boot, in not only Congress, but more and more States and local communities are waking up to the cancer that is lurking. 2010 was just the start of the change the people really wanted in 2008.
The change Obama sold like a salesman, ended up being a change in gear, to high, and a change of the throttle to full.
The change back to giving the people the power, is well underway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
