U.S. Rep. Ron Paul | Colombia |
Colombia
UNNECESSARY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS AND UNWISE MILITARY ADVENTURISM IN COLOMBIA
March 29, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 20:3
But we should be very cautious about what we are doing today by expanding our involvement in Colombia. We are now moving into Colombia and spending a lot of money and expanding our war in this area. We should not be spending our money on military adventurism. We should be taking this money and spending it to build up our military defenses. We should be using this money to pay our military personnel more money, give them better housing and better education and better medical care.
Colombia
2000 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT
March 29, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 21:2
It is said that we need to appropriate this money to fight the drug war in Colombia. We have been fighting the drug war for 25 years. We have spent $250 billion on the drug war. Some day we will have to wake up and decide that the way we are fighting the drug war is wrong.
Colombia
2000 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT
March 29, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 21:4
Quite frankly, I am not sure the real reason why we are in Colombia has anything to do with drugs. I do concede a lot of individuals will be voting for this bill because of the belief that it might help. But it will not help. So we should reconsider it and think about the real reasons why we might be there.
Colombia
2000 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT
March 29, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 21:5
I had an amendment that was not approved. But what I would have done, if I had had the chance, I would have taken all the money from the overseas spending, Kosovo, Bosnia, East Timor, and the funds now for this new adventure down in Colombia, and put it into building up our military defense. That is what we need. We need better salaries, better medical care, and we need better housing for our military personnel. But here we go spreading ourselves thinly again around the world by taking on a new adventure, which will surely lead to trouble and a lot of expense.
Colombia
2000 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT
March 29, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 21:6
Members have referenced the 65 helicopters that will be sent to Colombia. There is one, I guess, cynical hope about what might happen with our involvement in Colombia. Usually when we get involved its only going to be for a short period of time. We were going to go into Bosnia for 6 months. We have been there 5 years. We were going to go to Kosovo for a short period of time. It is open-ended. We are in East Timor for who knows how long. And we will soon be in Colombia.
Colombia
2000 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT
March 29, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 21:9
Who is going to fly the Blackhawk helicopters? Do my colleagues think the Colombians are going to fly them? You can bet our bottom dollar we are going to have American pilots down there very much involved in training and getting in much deeper than we ever should be.
Colombia
2000 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT
March 29, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 21:12
Under the Constitution, we should have a strong national defense, and we should provide for national security. Going into Colombia has nothing to do with national security and serves to undermine national defense.
Colombia
2000 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT
March 29, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 21:16
Can any Member come to this floor and absolutely assure us that we are not going to lose American lives in Colombia? We are certainly committing ourselves to huge numbers of dollars, dollars that we do not have, dollars that if we wanted to could come out of the current $1.7 trillion budget we already have.
Colombia
2000 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT
March 29, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 21:18
The war on drugs, by trying to reduce interdiction does not work. It has not worked. It is not going to work. It is only an excuse. It is an excuse for promoting military intervention in Colombia to satisfy those who are anxious to drill for oil there and for the military industrial complex to sell weapons.
Colombia
Amendment No. 5 Offered By Mr. Paul
30 March 2000 2000 Ron Paul 22:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Amendment No. 5 printed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD offered by Mr. PAUL: At the end of the bill, insert after the last section (preceding the short title) the following new section: SEC. . (a) The amounts otherwise provided in title I for the following accounts are hereby reduced by the following amounts: (1) “DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE—Drug Enforcement Administration—Salaries and Expenses”, $293,048,000. (2) “DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-MILITARY —OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS—Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense”, $185,800,000. (3) “BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE —Funds Appropriated to the President —Department of State—Assistance for Plan Colombia and for Andean Regional Counternarcotics Activities”, $1,099,000,000. (b) None of the funds made available in title I for “Military Construction, Defense- Wide” may be used for construction outside of the United States or any of its territories or possessions. (c) None of the funds made available in title II may be used for operations in Kosovo or East Timor, other than the return of United States personnel and property to the United States. The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday, March 29, 2000, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. YOUNG) each will control 10 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL).
Colombia
Amendment No. 5 Offered By Mr. Paul
30 March 2000 2000 Ron Paul 22:4
But I would like to say that my amendment deals with what I consider a monster, and that monster to me is careless foreign military interventionism in which we engage way too often and something we are getting ready to further engage ourselves now in Colombia.
Colombia
Amendment No. 5 Offered By Mr. Paul
30 March 2000 2000 Ron Paul 22:8
But, unfortunately, when it came time to deal with the funding, we were all too anxious to permit and authorize and appropriate the money to go into Kosovo. Today we are continuing to fund our activities in Kosovo as well as Bosnia, East Timor, and now with plans to go into South America, principally Colombia.
Colombia
Amendment No. 5 Offered By Mr. Paul
30 March 2000 2000 Ron Paul 22:11
In Colombia, there are a lot of weapons already, and we are responsible for 80 percent of them. There is one irony about this bill that strikes me. The administration and many here on the floor who vote for these weapons are the same individuals who are anxious to prohibit the right of an American citizen to own a cheap weapon in selfdefense. At the same time, they are quite willing to tax these individuals and take their money to spend it on the weapons of war around the world and become involved in no-win situations.
Colombia
Amendment No. 5 Offered By Mr. Paul
30 March 2000 2000 Ron Paul 22:12
I cannot think of a worse situation where there is a four-way faction in Colombia for us to get further involved. Buying 63 helicopters is bound to cause trouble and some will be shot down thus requiring more involvement by American troops.
Colombia
Fiscal 2000 Supplemental Appropriations/DEA Funding Cuts Amendment
30 March 2000 2000 Ron Paul 23:4
Why continue a war that does not work? This is money down a rat hole. This is totally wasted money and, as far as I am concerned, only an excuse to sell helicopters and go in to Colombia and protect oil interests. That is the real reason why we are down there.
Colombia
Fiscal 2000 Supplemental Appropriations/DEA Funding Cuts Amendment
30 March 2000 2000 Ron Paul 23:8
This is the furtherest stretch of the imagination to believe that what we are spending here on this budget, especially what we are going to do in Colombia, has anything to do with national security. What are we worried about? Are the Colombians going to attack us? This is not national security. This is special interest spending. This is conservative welfarism; that is what it is.
Colombia
Minding Our Own Business Regarding Colombia Is In The Best Interest Of America
September 6, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 69:1
Mr. Speaker, those of us who warned of the shortcomings of expanding our military presence in Colombia were ignored when funds were appropriated for this purpose earlier this year. We argued at that time that clearly no national security interests were involved; that the Civil War was more than 30 years old, complex with three factions fighting, and no assurance as to who the good guys were; that the drug war was a subterfuge, only an excuse, not a reason, to needlessly expand our involvement in Colombia; and that special interests were really driving our policy: Colombia Oil Reserves owned by American interests, American weapons manufacturers, and American corporations anxious to build infrastructure in Colombia.
Colombia
Minding Our Own Business Regarding Colombia Is In The Best Interest Of America
September 6, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 69:2
Already our foolish expanded pressure in Colombia has had a perverse effect. The stated purpose of promoting peace and stability has been undermined. Violence has worsened as factions are now fighting more fiercely than ever before for territory as they anticipate the full force of U.S. weapons arriving.
Colombia
Minding Our Own Business Regarding Colombia Is In The Best Interest Of America
September 6, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 69:3
The already weak peace process has been essentially abandoned. Hatred toward Americans by many Colombians has grown. The Presidents of 12 South American countries rejected outright the American-backed military operation amendment aimed at the revolutionary groups in Colombia.
Colombia
Minding Our Own Business Regarding Colombia Is In The Best Interest Of America
September 6, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 69:4
This foolhardy effort to settle the Colombian civil war has clearly turned out to be a diplomatic failure. The best evidence of a seriously flawed policy is the departure of capital. Watching money flows gives us a market assessment of policy; and by all indication, our policy spells trouble.
Colombia
Minding Our Own Business Regarding Colombia Is In The Best Interest Of America
September 6, 2000 2000 Ron Paul 69:5
There is evidence of a recent large-scale exodus of wealthy Colombians to Miami. Tens of thousands of Colombians are leaving for the U.S., Canada, Costa Rica, Spain, Australia. These are the middle-class and upper-class citizens, taking their money with them. Our enhanced presence in Colombia has accelerated this exodus.
Colombia
CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC —
February 07, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 7:83
Many reasons given for our willingness to police the world sound reasonable: We need to protect our oil. We need to stop cocaine production in Colombia. We need to bring peace to the Middle East. We need to punish our adversaries. We must respond because we are the sole superpower and it’s our responsibility to maintain world order. It’s our moral obligation to settle disputes. We must follow up on our dollar diplomacy after sending foreign aid throughout the world. In the old days it was: we need to stop the spread of Communism. The excuses are endless!
Colombia
CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC —
February 07, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 7:98
The two areas in the world that currently present the greatest danger to the United States are Colombia and the Middle East. For decades, we have been engulfed in the ancient wars of the Middle East by subsidizing and supporting both sides. This policy is destined to fail. We are in great danger of becoming involved in a vicious war for oil, as well as being drawn into a religious war that will not end in our lifetime. The potential for war in this region is great, and the next one could make the Persian Gulf War look small. Only a reassessment of our entire policy will keep us from being involved in a needless and dangerous war in this region.
Colombia
CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC —
February 07, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 7:100
Our involvement in Colombia could easily escalate into a regional war. For over 100 years, we have been involved in the affairs of Central America, but the recent escalation of our presence in Colombia is inviting trouble for us.
Colombia
CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC —
February 07, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 7:101
Although the justification for our enhanced presence is the War on Drugs, protecting US oil interests and selling helicopters are the real reasons for last years’ $1.3 billion emergency funding. Already neighboring countries have expressed concern about our presence in Colombia. The US policymakers gave their usual response by promising more money and support to the neighboring countries that feel threatened.
Colombia
CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC —
February 07, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 7:102
Venezuela, rich in oil, is quite nervous about our enhanced presence in the region. Their foreign minister stated that if any of our ships enter the Gulf of Venezuela they will be expelled . This statement was prompted by an overly aggressive US Coast Guard vessel’s intrusion into Venezuelan territorial waters on a drug expedition. I know of no one who believes this expanded and insane drug war will do anything to dampen drug usage in the United States. Yet it will cost us plenty. Too bad our political leaders cannot take a hint. The war effort in Colombia is small now, but under current conditions it will surely escalate. This is a 30-year-old civil war being fought in the jungles of South America. We are unwelcome by many, and we ought to have enough sense to stay out of it. Recently new policy has led to the spraying of herbicides to destroy the coca fields. It’s already been reported that the legal crops in nearby fields have been destroyed as well. This is no way to win friends around the world.
Colombia
CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC —
February 07, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 7:130
An interventionist government, by its nature, uses any excuse to know what the people are doing. Drug laws are used to enhance the IRS agent’s ability to collect every dime owed the government. These laws are used to pressure Congress to spend more dollars for foreign military operations in places such as Colombia. Artificially high drug prices allow government to clandestinely participate in the drug trade to raise funds to fight the secret controversial wars with off-budget funding. Both our friends and foes depend on the drug war at times for revenue to pursue their causes, which frequently are the same as ours.
Colombia
POTENTIAL FOR WAR
February 08, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 10:9
Many reasons given for our willingness to police the world sound reasonable: We need to protect our oil; we need to stop cocaine production in Colombia; we need to bring peace in the Middle East; we need to punish our adversaries; we must respond because we are the sole superpower, and it is our responsibility to maintain world order; it is our moral obligation to settle disputes; we must follow up on our dollar diplomacy after sending foreign aid throughout the world. In the old days, it was, we need to stop the spread of communism.
Colombia
POTENTIAL FOR WAR
February 08, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 10:28
The two areas in the world that currently present the greatest danger to the United States are Colombia and the Middle East. For decades we have been engulfed in the ancient wars of the Middle East by subsidizing and supporting both sides. This policy is destined to fail. We are in great danger of becoming involved in a vicious war for oil, as well as being drawn into a religious war that will not end in our lifetime.
Colombia
POTENTIAL FOR WAR
February 08, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 10:31
Our involvement in Colombia could easily escalate into a regional war. For over 100 years, we have been involved in the affairs of Central America, but the recent escalation of our presence in Colombia is inviting trouble for us. Although the justification for our enhanced presence is the war on drugs, protecting U.S. oil interests and selling helicopters are the real reasons for the last year’s $1.3 billion emergency funding.
Colombia
POTENTIAL FOR WAR
February 08, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 10:32
Already neighboring countries have expressed concern about our presence in Colombia. The U.S. policymakers gave their usual response by promising more money and support to the neighboring countries that feel threatened.
Colombia
POTENTIAL FOR WAR
February 08, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 10:34
Too bad our political leaders cannot take a hint. The war effort in Colombia is small now, but under current conditions, it will surely escalate. This is a 30-year-old civil war being fought in the jungles of South America. We are unwelcome by many, and we ought to have enough sense to stay out of it.
Colombia
POTENTIAL FOR WAR
February 08, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 10:71
An interventionist government, by its nature, uses any excuse to know what the people are doing. Drug laws are used to enhance the IRS agent’s ability to collect every dime owed the government. These laws are used to pressure Congress to use more dollars for foreign military operations in places, such as Colombia. Artificially high drug prices allow governments to clandestinely participate in the drug trade to raise funds to fight the secret controversial wars with off-budget funding. Both our friends and foes depend on the drug war at times for revenue to pursue their causes, which frequently are the same as ours.
Colombia
Internationalizing SEC
13 June 2001 2001 Ron Paul 41:3
For one thing, cracking down more on foreign oil companies that are doing business in Sudan will not necessarily prohibit the benefits that may flow to the American oil companies if there is a change in government. We should not ignore that. We go to war over oil. We went to war over oil in the Persian Gulf, and certainly we had oil as an influence to send in many dollars and much equipment down into Colombia.
Colombia
A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS --
October 25, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 90:40
The drug war encourages violence. Government violence against nonviolent users is notorious and has led to the unnecessary prison overpopulation. Innocent taxpayers are forced to pay for all this so-called justice. Our drug eradication project (using spraying) around the world, from Colombia to Afghanistan, breeds resentment because normal crops and good land can be severely damaged. Local populations perceive that the efforts and the profiteering remain somehow beneficial to our own agenda in these various countries.
Colombia
Statement on Funding for the Export- Import Bank
October 31, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 91:7
The moral case against Eximbank is strengthened when one considers that the government which benefits most from Eximbank funds is communist China. In fact, Eximbank actually underwrites joint ventures with firms owned by the Chinese government! Whatever one’s position on trading with China, I would hope all of us would agree that it is wrong to force taxpayers to subsidize in any way this brutal regime. Unfortunately, China is not an isolated case: Colombia, Yemen, and even the Sudan benefit from taxpayer-subsidized trade courtesy of the Eximbank!
Colombia
Saddam Hussein
19 December 2001 2001 Ron Paul 107:7
My idea of national defense is minding our own business, being strong, and making sure our borders are secure. After 9/11, we had to go to Germany and ask them for help for AWACS airplanes to patrol our shores. I understand our ports are not necessarily secure, and yet we have Coast Guard cutters down in Colombia and in the Mediterranean Sea. I think if we learn anything it is that we ought to work harder to protect our country and not make us so vulnerable, yet we continue along this way.
Colombia
Statement on wasteful foreign aid to Colombia
March 6, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 14:2
This legislation represents a very serious and significant shift in United States policy toward Colombia. It sets us on a slippery slope toward unwise military intervention in a foreign civil war that has nothing to do with the United States.
Colombia
Statement on wasteful foreign aid to Colombia
March 6, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 14:3
Our policy toward Colombia was already ill-advised when it consisted of an expensive front in our failed “war on drugs.” Plan Colombia, launched nearly two years ago, sent $1.3 billion to Colombia under the guise of this war on drugs. A majority of that went to the Colombian military; much was no doubt lost through corruption. Though this massive assistance program was supposed to put an end to the FARC and other rebel groups involved in drug trafficking, two years later we are now being told- in this legislation and elsewhere- that the FARC and rebel groups are stronger than ever. So now we are being asked to provide even more assistance in an effort that seems to have had a result the opposite of what was intended. In effect, we are being asked to redouble failed efforts. That doesn’t make sense.
Colombia
Statement on wasteful foreign aid to Colombia
March 6, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 14:4
At the time Plan Colombia was introduced, President Clinton promised the American people that this action would in no way drag us into the Colombian civil war. This current legislation takes a bad policy and makes it much worse. This legislation calls for the United States “to assist the Government of Colombia protect its democracy from United States-designated foreign terrorist organizations . . .” In other words, this legislation elevates a civil war in Colombia to the level of the international war on terror, and it will drag us deep into the conflict.
Colombia
Statement on wasteful foreign aid to Colombia
March 6, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 14:5
Mr. Speaker, there is a world of difference between a rebel group fighting a civil war in a foreign country and the kind of international terrorist organization that targeted the United States last September. As ruthless and violent as the three rebel groups in Colombia no doubt are, their struggle for power in that country is an internal one. None of the three appears to have any intention of carrying out terrorist activities in the United States. Should we become involved in a civil war against them, however, these organizations may well begin to view the United States as a legitimate target. What possible reason could there be for us to take on such a deadly risk? What possible rewards could there be for the United States support for one faction or the other in this civil war?
Colombia
Statement on wasteful foreign aid to Colombia
March 6, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 14:6
As with much of our interventionism, if you scratch the surface of the high-sounding calls to “protect democracy” and “stop drug trafficking” you often find commercial interests driving U.S. foreign policy. This also appears to be the case in Colombia. And like Afghanistan, Kosovo, Iraq, and elsewhere, that commercial interest appears to be related to oil. The U.S. administration request for FY 2003 includes a request for an additional $98 million to help protect the Cano-Limon Pipeline- jointly owned by the Colombian government and Occidental Petroleum. Rebels have been blowing up parts of the pipeline and the resulting disruption of the flow of oil is costing Occidental Petroleum and the Colombian government more than half a billion dollars per year. Now the administration wants American taxpayers to finance the equipping and training of a security force to protect the pipeline, which much of the training coming from the U.S. military. Since when is it the responsibility of American citizens to subsidize risky investments made by private companies in foreign countries? And since when is it the duty of American service men and women to lay their lives on the line for these commercial interests?
Colombia
Statement on wasteful foreign aid to Colombia
March 6, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 14:7
Further intervention in the internal political and military affairs of Colombia will only increase the mistrust and anger of the average Colombian citizen toward the United States, as these citizens will face the prospect of an ongoing, United States-supported war in their country. Already Plan Colombia has fueled the deep resentment of Colombian farmers toward the United States. These farmers have seen their legitimate crops destroyed, water supply polluted, and families sprayed as powerful herbicides miss their intended marks. An escalation of American involvement will only make matters worse.
Colombia
Statement on wasteful foreign aid to Colombia
March 6, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 14:8
Mr. Speaker, at this critical time, our precious military and financial resources must not be diverted to a conflict that has nothing to do with the United States and poses no threat to the United States. Trying to designate increased military involvement in Colombia as a new front on the “war on terror” makes no sense at all. It will only draw the United States into a quagmire much like Vietnam. The Colombian civil war is now in its fourth decade; pretending that the fighting there is somehow related to our international war on terrorism is to stretch the imagination to the breaking point. It is unwise and dangerous.
Colombia
Export-Import Reauthorization Act
19 March 2002 2002 Ron Paul 17:8
The moral case against Eximbank is strengthened when one considers that the government which benefits most from Eximbank funds is communist China. In fact, Eximbank actually underwrites joint ventures with firms owned by the Chinese government! Whatever one’s position on trading with China, I would hope all of us would agree that it is wrong to force taxpayers to subsidize in any way this brutal regime. Unfortunately, China is not an isolated case: Colombia, Yemen, and even the Sudan benefit from taxpayer-subsidized trade courtesy of the Eximbank!
Colombia
Statement Opposing Export-Import Bank Corporate Welfare
May 1, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 31:9
The moral case against Eximbank is strengthened when one considers that the government which benefits most from Eximbank funds is communist China. In fact, Eximbank actually underwrites joint ventures with firms owned by the Chinese government! Whatever one’s position on trading with China, I would hope all of us would agree that it is wrong to force taxpayers to subsidize in any way this brutal regime. Unfortunately, China is not an isolated case: Colombia and Sudan benefit from taxpayer-subsidized trade, courtesy of the Eximbank!
Colombia
Don’t Force Taxpayers to Fund Nation-Building in Afghanistan
May 21, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 43:12
The drug war has been a failure. Plan Colombia, an enormously expensive attempt to reduce drug production in that Andean nation, has actually resulted in a 25 percent increase in coca leaf and cocaine production. Does anyone still think our war on drugs there has been successful? Is it responsible to continue spending money on policies that do not work?
Colombia
No More Taxpayer Funds for the Failed Drug War in Colombia
May 23, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 49:2
The interesting thing about what is going on right now, there is no politics in this. This is about war, and this is important, and this is about policy. It is said that we would like to get things like this through without a full discussion; but this, to me, is a key issue. This amendment is about whether or not we will change our policy in central America and, specifically, in Colombia.
Colombia
No More Taxpayer Funds for the Failed Drug War in Colombia
May 23, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 49:3
Mr. Chairman, a year or so ago we appropriated $1.6 billion, and we went into Colombia with the intent of reducing drug usage. Instead it is up 25 percent. Drug usage is going up! They sprayed 210,000 acres, and now there are 53,000 more acres than ever before. It reminds me of Afghanistan. We have been in Afghanistan for less than a year and drug production is going up! I just wonder about the effectiveness of our drug program in Colombia.
Colombia
No More Taxpayer Funds for the Failed Drug War in Colombia
May 23, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 49:4
But the theory is that we will be more effective if we change the policy. Pastrana tried to negotiate a peace and we were going too deal with the drugs, and we were going to have peace after 40 years of a civil war. Now Uribi is likely to become President and the approach is to different. He said, no more negotiations. We will be fighting and we want American help, and we want a change in policy, and we do not want spraying fields; we want helicopters to fight a war. That is what we are dealing with here. We should not let this go by without a full discussion and a full understanding, because in reality, there is no authority to support a military operation in Colombia.
Colombia
No More Taxpayer Funds for the Failed Drug War in Colombia
May 23, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 49:7
So I would say, please, take a close look at this. We do not need to be expanding our role in Colombia. The drug war down there has not worked, and I do not expect this military war that we are about to wage to work either. We need to talk about national defense, and this does not help our national defense. I fear this. I feel less secure when we go into areas like this, because believe me, this is the way that we get troops in later on. We already have advisory forces in Colombia. Does anybody remember about advisors and then eventually having military follow in other times in our history. Yes, this is a very risky change in policy. This is not just a minor little increase in appropriation.
Colombia
No More Taxpayer Funds for the Failed Drug War in Colombia
May 23, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 49:8
So I would ask, once again, where is the authority? Where does the authority exists for our President to go down and expand a war in Colombia when it has nothing to do with our national defense or our security? It has more to do with oil than our national security, and we know it. There is a pipeline down there that everybody complains that it is not well protected. It is even designated in legislation, and we deal with this at times. So I would say think about the real reasons behind us going down there.
Colombia
Oppose the "Supplemental" Spending Bill
May 24, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 50:3
Even much of the military spending in this bill has no relationship to legitimate national security needs. Instead it furthers an interventionist foreign policy which is neither constitutional nor in the best interests of the American people. For example, this supplemental contains a stealth attempt to shift our policy toward Colombia, expanding our already failed drug war to include direct participation in Colombia’s 38-year civil war. Though a bill on Colombia was scheduled for markup in the International Relations committee, for some reason it was pulled at the last minute. Therefore, the committee has not been able to debate this policy shift on Colombia. We are instead expected just not to notice, I suppose, that the policy shift has been included in this bill.
Colombia
Oppose the "Supplemental" Spending Bill
May 24, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 50:4
Our expanded interventionism in Colombia is called "counterterrorism," but no one has even attempted to demonstrate that Colombia’s civil war poses even a remote terrorist threat to the United States. In fact, the only terrorist threat from Colombia I have seen actually counsels against our deepening involvement. According to House International Relations Committee briefing materials made available last month:
Colombia
Oppose the "Supplemental" Spending Bill
May 24, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 50:5
"We have hundreds of temporary duty personnel in Colombia on any given day, in addition to our agents from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), military advisors, contractors, and embassy personnel. If U.S. presence expands to help Colombia fight terrorism as well, these alarming IRA explosives tactics could be used directly and intentionally against American facilities and employees."
Colombia
Oppose the "Supplemental" Spending Bill
May 24, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 50:6
If anything, this is an argument against getting more deeply involved in Colombia’s internal affairs, as it rightly recognizes that our involvement will only inflame the other side and thus open the door to retaliation against our interventionism.
Colombia
Oppose the "Supplemental" Spending Bill
May 24, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 50:7
The war on drugs in Colombia is failing miserably. Under "Plan Colombia," coca production has increased 25 percent in the period between 2000 and 2001. The production of cocaine increased by roughly the same amount. More cocaine was coming out of Colombia into the United States at the end of 2001, during Plan Colombia, than at the end of 2000, before Plan Colombia. Is this a reason to expand our involvement into Colombia’s civil war?
Colombia
Oppose the "Supplemental" Spending Bill
May 24, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 50:8
US commercial interests — not national security — are a big factor in our shifting policy toward Colombia. We have already seen an administration request for an additional $98 million to help protect the Caño-Limon Pipeline - jointly owned by the Colombian national oil company and Occidental Petroleum. This supplemental will provide for the first installment of this money to be paid to protect Occidental’s pipeline.
Colombia
Oppose the "Supplemental" Spending Bill
May 24, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 50:9
We are being dragged into a civil war in Colombia that has nothing to do with us and nothing to do with international terrorism. Those who want to send American money and troops into the Colombian quagmire do not want debate, because their claims that a 38 year civil war somehow has something to do with 9/11 ring hollow.
Colombia
Oppose the "Supplemental" Spending Bill
May 24, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 50:11
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, HR 4775 contains increases in unconstitutional spending on wide variety of welfare programs and foreign aid. It also ignores the true security interests of the American people by spending valuable resources on a flawed Colombian policy. This bill also creates conditions for further expansions in spending by providing a procedure to raise the debt ceiling safe from public scrutiny. HR 4775 thus threatens the liberty and prosperity of all Americans so I urge my colleagues to reject this bill.
Colombia
Unintended Consequences of the Drug War
June 27, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 65:16
It was bad when drug laws gave the Mafia an opportunity to do big business. It was worse when the laws encouraged Colombian and Mexican drug cartels to obtain aircraft and heavy weapons. Now that the drug laws provide profits to people who want to kill Americans wholesale instead of retail, it’s time to change the laws.
Colombia
Republic Versus Democracy
29 January 2003 2003 Ron Paul 6:53
Ever since 1913, all our Presidents have endorsed meddling in the internal affairs of other nations and have given generous support to the notion that a world government would facilitate the goals of democratic welfare or socialism. On a daily basis we hear that we must be prepared to send our money and use our young people to police the world in order to spread democracy. Whether it is Venezuela or Colombia, Afghanistan or Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Korea or Vietnam, our intervention is always justified with the tone of moral arrogance that it is for their own good. Our policymakers promote democracy as a cure-all for the various complex problems of the world. Unfortunately, the propaganda machine is able to hide the real reasons for our empire-building.
Colombia
War No Excuse For Frivolous Spending
3 April 2003 2003 Ron Paul 46:5
Incredibly, this bill sends 175 million dollars in aid to Pakistan even though it was reported in April that Pakistan purchased ballistic missiles from North Korea! Furthermore, it is difficult to understand how $100 million to Colombia, $50 million to the Gaza Strip, and $200 million for “Muslim outreach” has anything to do with the current war in Iraq. Also, this bill spends $31 million to get the federal government into the television broadcasting business in the Middle East. With private American news networks like CNN available virtually everywhere on the globe, is there any justification to spend taxpayer money to create and fund competing state-run networks? Aren’t state-run news networks one of the features of closed societies we have been most critical of in the past?
Colombia
Conference Report On H.R. 2417 Intelligence Authorization Act For Fiscal year 2004
20 November 2003 2003 Ron Paul 121:4
I am also concerned that our scarce resources are again being squandered pursuing a failed drug war in Colombia, as this bill continues to fund our disastrous Colombia policy. Billions of dollars have been spent in Colombia to fight this drug war, yet more drugs than ever are being produced abroad and shipped into the United States — including a bumper crop of opium sent by our new allies in Afghanistan. Evidence in South America suggests that any decrease in Colombian production of drugs for the US market has only resulted in increased production in neighboring countries. As I have stated repeatedly, the solution to the drug problem lies not in attacking the producers abroad or in creating a militarized police state to go after the consumers at home, but rather in taking a close look at our seemingly insatiable desire for these substances. Until that issue is addressed we will continue wasting billions of dollars in a losing battle.
Colombia
Foreign Aid
28 June 2005 2005 Ron Paul 81:4
One gentleman asked the question, what are we for if we are against this program down in Colombia, Plan Colombia? Well, I’ll tell my colleagues what I am for. I am for the American taxpayer, and I will tell my colleagues one thing. I will bet them I am right on this. I will bet my colleagues, on either side of the aisle ever goes home and ever puts it into their campaign brochure and say, you know what, I voted $20 billion for foreign aid; and I know nobody over here will go home and brag about $100 million that they were able to vote against cutting from this side of the aisle. They will not do it.
Colombia
Foreign Aid
28 June 2005 2005 Ron Paul 81:5
I was here in 2000 when this debate was going on and strongly opposed it for various reasons, but I remember the pretext for Plan Colombia. The pretext was the drug war and this is what we have heard about today. The evidence is very flimsy. If there was any success on the drug war, production would be down and prices would be up. Production is up and prices are down, and that is an economic absolute.
Colombia
Foreign Aid
28 June 2005 2005 Ron Paul 81:7
Does anybody remember oil companies coming here to get their oil pipelines protected, and we still protect them? This is a little private army that we sent down there. We have 800 troops and advisers in Colombia and spending these huge sums of money. Who else lobbied for Plan Colombia? Do my colleagues remember the debate on who would get to sell the helicopters? Would they be Black Hawks or Hueys?
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the following article detailing the complete failure of “Plan Colombia” into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. As the article points out, despite more than 4 billion dollars being sent to Colombia to fight the “war on drugs,” the coca crop grew by 21 percent last year. After six years of massive wealth transfers from U.S. taxpayers to the Colombian government, not only has no progress been made, but in fact things are getting worse. Unfortunately, with the way things are done in Washington, this failure of “Plan Colombia” will likely result in calls for even more money to be tossed in the black hole of the drug war. It would be far better to learn from our mistakes and abandon the failed “Plan Colombia.”
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:2
[From the Houston Chronicle, April 16, 2006] COCA CROP JUMPS DESPITE U.S. AID (By John Otis) BOGOTA, COLOMBIA. — In a blow to the United States’ anti-drug campaign here, which cost more than $4 billion, new White House estimates indicate that Colombia’s coca crop expanded by nearly 21 percent last year.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:3
Figures released late Friday by the Office of National Drug Control Policy indicate Colombian farmers last year grew 355,680 acres of coca, the raw material for cocaine. That represents a jump of nearly 74,000 acres from 2004 even though U.S. funded cropdusters destroyed record amounts of coca plants in 2005.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:4
Washington has provided the Bogota government with more than $4 billion, mostly in anti-drug aid since 2000 for a program known as Plan Colombia — which was supposed to cut coca cultivation by half within six years.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:5
Yet according to the new figures, more coca is now being grown here than when Plan Colombia started. “This is going to turn heads” on Capitol Hill, said Adam Isacson, a Colombia expert at the Center for International Policy in Washington and a longtime critic of U.S. counterdrug strategies in Latin America.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:6
“You’re talking about $4.7 billion spent on Plan Colombia, and this is all we have to show for it?”
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:7
The Bush administration downplayed the significance of the coca crop survey, an annual study of parts of Colombia carried out by the CIA using satellite imagery and on- the-ground inspections.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:8
Rather than an increase in the crop’s size, the higher numbers may reflect a more thorough job of surveying the Colombian countryside, the White House said in a news release.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:9
The statement said the area of Colombia sampled for the 2005 coca estimate was 81 percent larger than in 2004.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:12
In 2002, for example, the CIA survey showed a drop in coca production and White House drug czar John Walters declared: “These figures capture the dramatic improvement. . . . Our anti-drug efforts in Colombia are now paying off.”
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:13
But some U.S. officials and drug policy analysts claim that Colombia has likely been producing far more coca over the past five years than the CIA surveys have indicated.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:15
What’s more, she said, cheap, potent cocaine remains readily available on U.S. streets, indicating that the drug war in Colombia is having little real impact.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:16
Some U.S. officials have forecast a gradual reduction in assistance for Colombia, starting in 2008. This year, Washington will send about $750 million in aid to Colombia, the source of 90 percent of the cocaine sold on U.S. streets.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:17
The centerpiece of the U.S. anti-drug strategy here is a controversial aerial-eradication program in which crop-dusters, escorted by helicopter gunships, bombard coca plants with chemical defoliants. But the program costs about $200 million annually and many critics say the money would be better spent elsewhere. The idea of eradication is to persuade peasant farmers to give up growing coca and to plant legal crops. But funding by the U.S. and Colombian governments for crop-substitution programs pale in comparison to the eradication budget and most efforts to develop alternatives have failed.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:19
In 2000, Colombian farmers attempted to grow about 450,000 acres of coca, about one- third of which was wiped out by the spray planes, according to U.S. government figures. Last year, by contrast, they tried to grow a whopping 780,000 acres. “People with no economic alternatives have not been deterred by fumigation,” said Isacson of the Center for International Policy. “Fumigating an area is no substitute for governing it.”
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:20
Despite the rise in coca cultivation, Anne Patterson, a former U.S. ambassador to Colombia who heads the State Department bureau that runs the eradication program, told a congressional hearing in Washington last month that the Bush administration was considering “stepping up” the crop-dusting campaign.
Colombia
Plan Colombia
25 April 2006 2006 Ron Paul 24:21
Beyond the drug war, Patterson said, the overall U.S. aid program “has benefited Colombia in ways we had not anticipated.”
Colombia
National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2007
11 May 2006 2006 Ron Paul 35:5
This legislation will send almost two billion American taxpayer dollars to Central and South America in the hopes that the production of drugs overseas will be curtailed. We do know that much of the money spent on Plan Colombia and similar programs over the past few years has not made much of a dent on drug cultivation, but that much of it is likely being skimmed off by corrupt leaders overseas. There must be a better — and less expensive — way to deal with this problem than sending this much money overseas.
Colombia
H.R. 5068, the Export-Import Reauthorization Act
25 July 2006 2006 Ron Paul 69:8
Unfortunately, China is not an isolated case. Colombia and Sudan benefit from taxpayer subsidized trade as well, courtesy of the Ex-Im Bank. At a time when the Federal Government is running huge deficits and Congress is once again preparing to raid Social Security and Medicare trust funds, does it really make sense to use taxpayers’ funds to benefit future Enrons, Fortune 500 companies, and Communist China?
Colombia
Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work
7 september 2006 2006 Ron Paul 74:45
We spend billions of dollars in Afghanistan and Colombia to curtail drug production. No evidence exists that it helps. In fact, drug production and corruption have increased in both countries. We close our eyes to it because the reasons we are in Colombia and Afghanistan are denied.
Colombia
The Cost of War
01 May 2000 Texas Straight Talk 01 May 2000 verse 13 ... Cached
You may ask, how does this impact me? Well, first let's not forget that these bombs were primarily funded using U.S. taxpayer funds, money that could have been used to help bolster the Social Security trust fund or meet the so-called "pay-go" requirements of tax cut legislation. In fact, we are continuing to shell out funds for this policy. Just a few weeks ago I put forward an amendment to cut of funds for further operations in Kosovo and new adventures involving the US military in Colombia, but it was defeated.
Colombia
Privacy Takes Center Stage
22 May 2000 Texas Straight Talk 22 May 2000 verse 8 ... Cached
Ever since Vietnam, the government has been sucking dollars out of the Social Security trust fund to pay for government programs, including foreign adventurism. Whenever we vote to spend more money in Bosnia or Kosovo or Colombia, we are tapping funds that could be used to repay the Social Security trust fund for years of unrelated expenses. This spending must stop.
Colombia
Last-Minute Supplemental Spending is Dangerous and Unnecessary
10 July 2000 Texas Straight Talk 10 July 2000 verse 6 ... Cached
Worse yet, much of the spending contained in the supplemental bill goes overseas. Several South American countries, including Colombia, Bolivia, and Ecuador receive a total of $1.3 billion taxpayer dollars. Colombia alone receives approximately half a billion dollars for costly helicopters and U.S. training of its police and military forces in "counternarcotics" activities. I find this a particularly dangerous and expensive proposition. Our nation should not be spending billions of dollars and sending 60 military helicopters to the Colombian Army and National Police to escalate our failed drug war. We risk another Nicaragua when we meddle in the internal politics and military activities of a foreign nation. Sending expensive helicopters to Colombia is the worst kind of pork-barrel politics- helicopters are ineffective weapons of war, as we have seen in Vietnam and Somalia. The American people are tired of paying their tax dollars to fund expensive toys for foreign governments. Taxpayers should demand that Congress demonstrate the national interest served before it sends billions to foreign nations.
Colombia
The Danger of Military Foreign Aid to Colombia
11 September 2000 Texas Straight Talk 11 September 2000 verse 2 ... Cached
The Danger of Military Foreign Aid to Colombia
Colombia
The Danger of Military Foreign Aid to Colombia
11 September 2000 Texas Straight Talk 11 September 2000 verse 3 ... Cached
The President recently visited Colombia, touting a 1.3 billion-dollar military aid package for the South American region. The big spenders in Congress authorized the package by passing an "emergency supplemental" spending bill earlier this summer during eleventh-hour voting. The spending package, termed "Plan Colombia," authorizes nearly half a billion dollars for Colombia alone. Not surprisingly, the administration used convenient "war on drugs" rhetoric to convince Congress and the American people that this massive spending on foreign military interdiction was justified. The President promised that America would never be dragged into Colombia's civil war, yet virtually all of the aid dollars were spent on weapons of war and military training.
Colombia
The Danger of Military Foreign Aid to Colombia
11 September 2000 Texas Straight Talk 11 September 2000 verse 4 ... Cached
Specifically, Colombia received 60 high-tech military helicoptors, along with hundreds of millions for training its police and military forces in "counternarcotics" activities. Clearly, this amounts to an escalation of the dangerous situation in Colombia. Time and time again we have witnessed the inevitable results of spending U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund internal conflicts in foreign nations. Apparently the current administration has not learned the lessons of Korea, Vietnam, El Salvador, or Kosovo. When we meddle in the politics (and warfare) of a foreign nation, we risk an open-ended conflict that costs billions and risks the lives of our soldiers. Obviously, U.S. military personnel will be needed to fly (and train others to fly) our modern helicopters. U.S. soldiers will train the Colombian army and national police. Despite the "war on drugs" justification, the truth is that the distinction between fighting drugs and waging war in Colombia is murky at best. We will send more money, more weapons, and more soldiers to Colombia, yet what will we receive in return? Do we really want to place our sons and daughters in harm's way so that we can influence another country's internal politics? What national interest is served by our involvement in this conflict?
Colombia
The Danger of Military Foreign Aid to Colombia
11 September 2000 Texas Straight Talk 11 September 2000 verse 5 ... Cached
In recent months, we have seen increased killing in Colombia relating to its upcoming elections. As the U.S. steps up its drug interdiction, some drug cartels simply have begun to move their capital elsewhere, including Miami, according to newspaper reports. In the U.S., certain special interest groups such as helicopter manufacturers and big oil companies (who want protection for their oil interests in the region) have been supporting the administration through their lobbyists.
Colombia
The Danger of Military Foreign Aid to Colombia
11 September 2000 Texas Straight Talk 11 September 2000 verse 6 ... Cached
Fortunately, however, many Americans agree that military aid for Colombia is a bad idea. "Plan Colombia" has received harsh criticism from members of Congress, while various human rights activists have condemned the President's visit. Normally, the government of a country must meet certain humanitarian standards to qualify for U.S. foreign aid. Although Colombia does not meet such standards, the administration and Congress chose to waive the requirements on "national security" grounds. As Robert White, former ambassador to El Salvador, stated: "There is a very great danger that this kind of thing can increase little by little, and all of a sudden you will be in far more deeply than you ever wished to be. This could aggravate and prolong the three-decade old Colombian civil war."
Colombia
The Danger of Military Foreign Aid to Colombia
11 September 2000 Texas Straight Talk 11 September 2000 verse 7 ... Cached
The American people do not support our actions in Colombia. Polls have shown that approximately 70% of Americans do not support defending foreign countries if U.S. soldiers are put in jeopardy. Our primary concern in military affairs should be maintaining a strong national defense and protecting our national security interests. Our actions in Colombia have nothing to with our national defense, and they undermine our national security by creating resentment from factions we do not support. We must remember that money spent in Colombia necessarily reduces spending on a variety of more important issues. We should build up our military, providing our soldiers with better salaries, housing, and medical care. Similarly, foreign aid dollars could be spent on education, Social Security, or Medicare. My constituents do not support our dangerous and expensive involvement in Colombia, and I intend to continue working to eliminate wasteful foreign aid in our next budget.
Colombia
A Legislative Agenda for 2001
01 January 2001 Texas Straight Talk 01 January 2001 verse 3 ... Cached
Spending reform should be the foremost priority for the new Congress. The fiscal year 2001 budget is bloated with billions of dollars in unnecessary and counterproductive spending. The Clinton administration successfully pushed through spending increases far beyond those of the previous year. Several federal agencies and bureaucracies received even more in funding than originally requested in the Clinton budget. Dangerous foreign aid spending also grew, sending more of your tax dollars overseas and intensifying conflicts in trouble spots like Colombia, Kosovo, and the Middle East. Despite rosy predictions about the federal "surplus," the truth is that Congress cannot continue to increase spending each year and expect tax revenues to keep pace. Deficit spending and tax increases will be the inevitable consequences. No reasonable person can argue that our current $2 trillion budget does not contain huge amounts of special interest spending that can and should be cut by Congress. Government spending not only affects our fiscal health as a nation; it also determines the size and scope of government power over our lives. Congress must show the resolve needed to challenge business as usual in Washington and dramatically cut spending.
Colombia
Congress Sends Billions Overseas
23 July 2001 Texas Straight Talk 23 July 2001 verse 7 ... Cached
o $676 million to continue the failed drug war in Colombia. Time and time again, we have seen our drug interdiction escalate violence in Latin American countries. Our military aid could easily spark a war.
Colombia
U.S. Armed Forces Should Protect American Soil
22 October 2001 Texas Straight Talk 22 October 2001 verse 5 ... Cached
We must understand that U.S. troops currently are permanently or semi-permanently stationed in more than one hundred countries. As one prominent columnist recently noted, the 15 years since the collapse of the Soviet empire and the end of the Cold War have hardly been peaceful for the United States. Our armed forces have been engaged in dozens of conflicts, including Iraq, Somalia, Haiti, and Kosovo. We currently maintain active military commitments throughout the Middle East, Colombia and Central America, the Balkans, Eastern Europe, central Asia, and the Taiwan Strait. We undoubtedly are involved in more regional conflicts than any other time in our history; in fact, our present obligations make the east vs.west Cold War seem relatively manageable! Yet our military is only half the size it was during the Reagan era. This imbalance between our shrinking armed forces and our ever-growing military role in foreign disputes leaves our own borders woefully unprotected.
Colombia
U.S. Armed Forces Should Protect American Soil
22 October 2001 Texas Straight Talk 22 October 2001 verse 6 ... Cached
Examples of the ill effects of our misguided policies are not hard to find. Consider the Coast Guard, whose seemingly obvious mission is to secure America's coastlines. So why are Coast Guard vessels busy patrolling Mediterranean waters and the shoreline of Colombia? Similarly, why do we need the help of German NATO AWACS planes to patrol American skies when we have 33 of our own? Are all 33 being used overseas?
Colombia
The War on Drugs is a War on Doctors
17 May 2004 Texas Straight Talk 17 May 2004 verse 5 ... Cached
Those who support the war on drugs may well change their views if one day they find themselves experiencing serious pain because of an accident or old age. By creating an atmosphere that regards all powerful pain medication as suspect, the drug warriors have forced countless Americans to live degraded, bedridden lives. Even elderly deathbed patients sometimes are denied adequate pain relief from reluctant doctors and nurses. It’s one thing to support a faraway drug campaign in Colombia or Afghanistan, but it’s quite another to watch a loved one suffering acute pain that could be treated. A sane, compassionate society views advances in medical science- particularly advances that relieve great suffering- as heroic. Instead, our barbaric drug war treats pain patients the same way it treats street junkies.
Texas Straight Talk from 20 December 1996 to 23 June 2008 (573 editions) are included in this Concordance. Texas Straight Talk after 23 June 2008 is in blog form on Rep. Paul’s Congressional website and is not included in this Concordance.
Remember, not everything in the concordance is Ron Paul’s words. Some things he quoted, and he added some newspaper and magazine articles to the Congressional Record. Check the original speech to see.