Senator Paul: Why Not Fund Disaster Relief With Foreign Aid Money?

Senator Paul: Why Not Fund Disaster Relief With Foreign Aid Money?
“My amendment, the ‘America First’ amendment, would take the money from money that we were going to send to foreign countries,” in order to pay for disaster relief in the United States, explained Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.). “We send billions and billions of dollars to countries who hate us. We send billions and billions of dollars to countries who burn our flag. I think it’s a very simple choice that when we’re looking at those in need in our country, we quit sending money to other countries.”

Paul’s amendment was a reaction to the proposals for the U.S. government to go even deeper into debt to aid in the disaster of Hurricane Harvey. Instead of taking on even more debt, Paul contends, why not just cut the amount of the American taxpayers’ dollars that go to foreign governments, which include dictatorships, many of whom hate the United States.

Apparently, few senators agree with Paul that helping Americans without going into debt is as important as keeping the levels of foreign aid where they are. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Paul’s fellow Republican senator from the Bluegrass State, made a motion last week to table (kill) Paul’s reasonable proposal, and that motion passed passed 87-10.

Paul’s amendment would have allocated $7.85 billion in aid to help in relief of the devastation brought on by Hurricane Harvey, which hit the Gulf coast of Texas and Louisiana, and $2.5 billion for damage expected from Hurricane Irma, which began hitting the western coast of Florida over the weekend. The senator argued that no reason exists to increase the national debt when the money can be taken from the foreign aid budget.

Many people put their expenses on a credit card, but credit cards have debt limits; such people do not have the option of simply raising their card’s debt limit when faced with unexpected expenses, as the federal government does every few months. So, when a family encounters unexpected expenses, they either take the money out of savings, or cut spending elsewhere to pay for it. They certainly don’t often take on debt to send their money to foreign dictators.

“In Washington, we have a disease — or a syndrome, rather. I call it the ‘dinosaur syndrome,’ big hearts, small brains,” Paul lamented in a speech last week on the floor of the Senate. “Unfortunately, it’s a reoccurring problem. Year after year, bill after bill, day after day. In Washington, it is argued that you are more compassionate if you give away more of someone else’s money. I would argue that true compassion is in giving your own money away. I would argue truly rational policy is giving away money that you have. So, it’s one thing to give away other people’s money, it’s another thing to give away money that you don’t even possess.”

As an example, Paul pointed to the foreign aid the U.S. has spent in “nation-building” in Afghanistan. President Donald Trump, in yet another reversal of his campaign promises, has promised to continue the war in Afghanistan — now the longest war in American history. “We spend billions of dollars — I think it’s over $100 billion — building roads in Afghanistan, blowing up roads in Afghanistan, building schools, blowing up schools, and then rebuilding all of them. Sometimes we blow them up, sometimes someone else blows them up, but we always go back and rebuild them. What about rebuilding our country?”

Trillions of dollars in taxpayer money have been given away around the world in foreign aid, since the Second World War. At one time, the argument was that this was needed because of the “Cold War” — the effort to keep a country from “going communist” — but even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the foreign aid budget has only increased.

What has the United States gained for all of this expenditure of national treasure? Is America more loved around the world? Can we really “buy” friends with all of this foreign aid? Much American blood and wealth was given in an unsuccessful attempt to “make South Vietnam a showcase for democracy in Asia,” followed by another unsuccessful attempt to “make Iraq a showcase for democracy in the Middle East,” but the doomed efforts to change foreign nations with American money goes on and on.

It must be understood that much of the foreign aid has been spent to prop up foreign dictators. Little of the money actually helps the average person in the receiving country. And, often this foreign aid actually causes so much disruption to the receiving nation’s economy that it leads to social and political unrest in that country.

And, it should be noted, there is no provision in the U.S. Constitution to take money from Americans and give it to foreigners, whatever the reason and results.

What the rejection of Senator Paul’s amendment illustrates, however, is that the forces inside the United States who benefit from continued foreign aid are so powerful that the giving away of American wealth — even if the country must go deeper into debt — will continue, despite the great unpopularity of foreign aid with the American public.

In essence, foreign aid is a redistribution of American wealth in socialist fashion to many socialist countries around the world. What those countries really need, as does America, is to allow the free market create wealth, rather than redistribute it.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/congress/item/26888-senator-p...

Views: 27

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I have said this very thing to my friends. Senator Paul absolutely is right about using foreign aid for our country.........then stop all foreign aid. I am sick of paying for these other countries. Obummer spent our money to rehab mosques in the middle east....he is a muslim so what do you expect?

AMEN sister.  Using foreign aid TOTALLY gets my support.  We have our own to take care of right now, and they should come first.  After all, it is OUR money...

ID# 15811 - Four Sports Fans Doing The Wave - PowerPoint Animation

Ditto AMEN!

I called my two senators yesterday, Sen. McCaskill and Sen Blunt.  After a wait, found that McCaskill voted to table Sen Paul's proposal.  After a long wait, was finally hung up on by Blunts office, so did not find out what his vote was. I'm not through though.  My next question is:  how do the senators, 87 who voted with McConnell to table the proposal, benefit with keeping the amount of foreign aid at it's present level?  Is there money involved, money for the senators?  It absolutely baffles me that these senators would NOT prefer to give some of the foreign aid money to our countrymen in Texas and Florida.  Today, I heard the National Debt has gone over the 20 trillion mark.  The cost of the interest will surpass what is spent on defense and non defense discretionary spending. The national debt went up 6.666 trillion under obama.   Words, words, words, that all I hear from these politicians. I'd like to go to D.C., line them all up and give each one who will not work for us people, a fat lip.

I think we should pass them through a gauntlet.....so we can all take turns giving them a fat lip

Image result for through the gauntlet

Good idea. I once worked with a doctor from Afganistan.  He and his family escaped when the Russians invaded, and came to the U.S. One day, I jokingly asked him how would he like a fat lip?  He looked at me in astonishment and just walked away.  I later explained and he actually became as good or better at joking with us like that. Women in Afganistan apparently do not say those things to men. Learning the idioms of our language is sometimes more difficult than learning the language.

How appropriate, 666, number of the beast.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

Facebook & Twitter

ALERT ALERT

BREAKING: Hillary Admits She Was Wrong About ‘Deplorables,’
White Nationalists Only ‘0.15%’ Of U.S. Population

(TeaParty.org) – Hillary Clinton, the failed liberal presidential candidate who sealed her fate by slamming half of U.S. voters as a load of racist, sexist, xenophobic “deplorables,” just came out and admitted she was wrong, Breitbart reports.

Speaking with Hugh Hewitt on his radio show about her book “What Happened,” he asked her if she actually believes that half of the American population are white nationalists and racists.

“Of the 62.9 million people who voted for President Trump, do you have a number in your mind that you think are actually white nationalist racists of that 62.9 million, a real number?” he asked.

“No, I don’t,” she said.

Still have any doubts? Later in the conversation, Hewitt asked the same question again. “Do you think there are more than a half million, you know, honest-to-God white nationalists running around the United States?”

Clinton: “Probably not, no.”

A white nationalist would like to establish a sovereign country for people of white European heritage, an idea everyone across the political spectrum finds unspeakably intolerable and offensive. Now, the woman who declared that this was the desire of more than half of Americans is saying that virtually nobody wants it. On both counts, she’s completely wrong.

There’s no doubt that Clinton is probably going to try running again for president in 2020 – if she’s even alive that long – and might be trying to absolve her guilt and pander to all those “undecideds” who instantly went MAGA the second she blasted them as no-good racist deplorables for not voting Democrat.

However, Clinton did later admit that there were more white nationalists in America than she had thought. Expressing her worries that the internet and the presidency of Trump is giving them a voice and a platform, she hinted that under her iron scepter, she will attempt to silence them.

“Unfortunately, their views, which used to be quite beyond the mainstream, you know, have a much broader audience now, because you know, of being online and having outlets and media presence that can promote those attitudes,” she said.

How many white nationalists are there in the United States? That’s a question with troublingly few answers, since for some mysterious reason the liberal mainstream media – even though it claims all the time that white supremacy is on the rise – hasn’t actually bothered to take polls and just ask people whether they are white nationalists.

Actually, there’s a simple answer to that. If such a poll were to be taken, our bet is that liberals would be very disappointed to discover that almost nobody is actually a white nationalist, and so there would be no way they could continue scaring people with those fears. A tactic Clinton has apparently given up on.

Left-wingers are entirely convinced that some vague but large majority of people who say they aren’t racists or white nationalists, actually share a lot of views with them – which is why Nazi and white supremacist have become interchangeable with Republican and libertarian.

An article by Newsweek, which polled around 5,000 in order address this very question, came up with this response:

About 70 percent of respondents strongly agreed that people of different races should be “free to live wherever they choose” and that “all races are equal,” and 89 percent agreed that all races should be treated equally. At the same time, 31 percent of respondents said they strongly or somewhat agreed that the country needs to “protect and preserve its White European heritage,” while 34 percent strongly or somewhat disagreed and 29 percent said they neither agreed nor disagreed.

Reality is, it’s a little true that some Americans do have overlapping views with white nationalists, but the overwhelming majority of respondents STRONGLY believe that the races should be free, are equal, and should be treated equally. Sounds like none of these respondents would be joining a lynch mob or waging a second Holocaust any time soon – trying to equate the preservation of white heritage with support for slavery and genocide is obviously one of the Left’s biggest lies, and the very reason why 39 percent of people in this same survey believe white people are under attack.

So Clinton changes her mind, and now says she believes less than one percent of the American population are white nationalists – did she believe there were even LESS than that during the campaign trail? Either way, she’s either just lying or plain stupid.

YES PATRIOT STORE

© 2017   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service