Is the type of funding that Rand Paul criticizes when he speaks out against....

[specsaregood]

Somebody want to bother to post an eloquent answer to this guys question?

cyberhillbilly.blogspot.com/2009/10/rogers-brings-flood-control-dollars-to.html

U.S. Congressman Harold “Hal” Rogers (KY-05) announced today that the U.S. House of Representatives has approved federal funding for flood control efforts in southern and eastern Kentucky.

Today, the House passed the FY10 Energy & Water Appropriations Conference Report, which included $9.5 million for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to protect the region from future flooding.

Read More @: www.wkyt.com/wymtnews/headlines/63204402.html

Is the type of funding that Rand Paul criticizes when he speaks out against KY Congressmen bringing home projects to their district?
Posted by Cyberhillbilly at 10/02/2009

[RyanRSheets]

Somebody want to bother to post an eloquent answer to this guys question?

cyberhillbilly.blogspot.com/2009/10/rogers-brings-flood-control-dollars-to.html

I know Ron was all for using earmarks as a means to return some money to his constituents when a bill was going through either way. It was already budgeted and would be spent one way or the other. This might be a difference between Ron and Rand.

[krazy kaju]

Who here honestly thinks that the federal government is any good at "flood control efforts" after Katrina? A better answer is getting rid of federally subsidized flood control insurance, which uses taxpayer money to pay people to live in areas prone to floods. The other part of this answer is to allow private property owners and local governments take measures against floods, in order to protect their own property.

Somehow, I doubt a bureaucrat in Washington, D.C. knows what's better for Kentucky than Kentuckians themselves.

[amisspelledword]

Hal Rogers is my congressman.

There is a flood project near where I live, in Martin, KY. My dad has a business downtown and I have family members that live within the city limits. A little research on the Martin KY flood project will show that it is extremely unpopular even in Martin. The business owners don't want it, the residents dont want it, and the people whose homes will flood as a result of this project (the homes up the creek from Martin) sure don't want it.

Why do it? because the Mayor is lining her pockets with this money. It's not even debatable. It is happening. She's buying land up like crazy and then selling it to the city at an inflated price. Its not a new trick by any stretch. Interestingly (?) the city has only bought property that belongs to her or her family and bought no one's land that she does not own (yet). What do you think is happening to the property value in this kind of market? Is a "fair market value" of property that is promised in such an occasion truly "fair" if the project and the city have acted to devalue the property for years in advance of selling it? I dont think so.

That's another reason why you cant trust the government to do things efficiently. But guys know this already.

The flood project in Martin is a huge joke. It only looks good to people outside of Martin that dont see what's really happening. There are huge debates over whether or not this plan they're implementing would actually solve any of the flooding problems.

If you're going to bring me pork, at least bring me something good.

[skyorbit]

I'm actually not sure Rand's position on it.

The Earmark issue is a messy one. Rand almost sounded more like he was with Jeff Flake on that issue then his father.

Tracy

[dannno]

Who here honestly thinks that the federal government is any good at "flood control efforts" after Katrina? A better answer is getting rid of federally subsidized flood control insurance, which uses taxpayer money to pay people to live in areas prone to floods. The other part of this answer is to allow private property owners and local governments take measures against floods, in order to protect their own property.

Somehow, I doubt a bureaucrat in Washington, D.C. knows what's better for Kentucky than Kentuckians themselves.

This.

[dannno]

Hal Rogers is my congressman.

There is a flood project near where I live, in Martin, KY. My dad has a business downtown and I have family members that live within the city limits. A little research on the Martin KY flood project will show that it is extremely unpopular even in Martin. The business owners don't want it, the residents dont want it, and the people whose homes will flood as a result of this project (the homes up the creek from Martin) sure don't want it.

Why do it? because the Mayor is lining her pockets with this money. It's not even debatable. It is happening. She's buying land up like crazy and then selling it to the city at an inflated price. Its not a new trick by any stretch. Interestingly (?) the city has only bought property that belongs to her or her family and bought no one's land that she does not own (yet). What do you think is happening to the property value in this kind of market? Is a "fair market value" of property that is promised in such an occasion truly "fair" if the project and the city have acted to devalue the property for years in advance of selling it? I dont think so.

That's another reason why you cant trust the government to do things efficiently. But guys know this already.

The flood project in Martin is a huge joke. It only looks good to people outside of Martin that dont see what's really happening. There are huge debates over whether or not this plan they're implementing would actually solve any of the flooding problems.

If you're going to bring me pork, at least bring me something good.

Wow, thanks for this shining example.

[dannno]

I'm actually not sure Rand's position on it.

The Earmark issue is a messy one. Rand almost sounded more like he was with Jeff Flake on that issue then his father.

Tracy

Actually his father is against bringing money back to his district as he votes against the bills. What's so messy about the earmark issue? It's really just a matter of understanding how the process works.

The money is already allotted for earmarks, so forwarding an earmark does not increase the total budget. Any funds not spent on earmarks goes to the Executive Branch, which means it will probably be used to kill people with bombs. I'd rather our government build something stupid in Kentucky or Texas Gulf Coast than kill foreigners with bombs on the other side of the world..

Ron Paul just forwards the earmarks, then they are approved by a committee. That's his job. He votes against the spending at the end of the day.

[specsaregood]

//

[skyorbit]

Actually his father is against bringing money back to his district as he votes against the bills. What's so messy about the earmark issue? It's really just a matter of understanding how the process works.

The money is already allotted for earmarks, so forwarding an earmark does not increase the total budget. Any funds not spent on earmarks goes to the Executive Branch, which means it will probably be used to kill people with bombs. I'd rather our government build something stupid in Kentucky or Texas Gulf Coast than kill foreigners with bombs on the other side of the world..

Ron Paul just forwards the earmarks, then they are approved by a committee. That's his job. He votes against the spending at the end of the day.

I agree.

But it sounded like Rand Paul wouldn't forward the earmark requests to the committees in the interview I heard.

Tracy