Home Page

Contents

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul Congress Book of Ron Paul Congress Bombing Iraq Would Be The Result Of Flawed Foreign Policy 27 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 1:3 There was a time in our history that bombing foreign countries was considered an act of war, done only with a declaration by this Congress. Today, tragically, it is done at the whim of Presidents and at the urging of congressional leaders without a vote, except maybe by the UN Security Council. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, the first session of the 105th Congress has been completed and the third year of the conservative revolution has passed. Current Congressional leadership has declared victory and is now debating on how to spend the excess revenues about to flow into the Treasury. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:2 As the legislative year came to a close, the only serious debate was over the extent of the spending increases negotiated into the budget. The more things changed, the more they stayed the same. Control over the Congress is not seriously threatened, and there has been no clear-cut rejection of the 20th century welfare state. But that does not mean that there is no effort to change the direction of the country. It is just that it is not yet in progress. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:4 In contemplating what needs to be done and why we have not done better, we should consider several philosophic infractions in which Members of Congress participate that encourage a loss of liberty and endanger our national security and the republic while perpetuating the status quo. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:5 Following are some of the flaws or errors in thinking about issues that I find pervasive throughout the Congress: Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:6 Foreign affairs. Although foreign affairs was not on the top of the agenda in the last session, misunderstanding in this area presents one the greatest threats to the future of America. There is near conformity, uniformity of opinion in the Congress for endorsing the careless use of U.S. force to police the world. Although foreign policy was infrequently debated in the past year and there are no major wars going on or likely to start soon, the danger inherent in foreign entanglements warrants close scrutiny. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:8 Protecting personal liberties in any society is always more difficult during war. The uniformity of opinion in Congress is enshrined with the common cliches that no one thinks through, like foreign policy is bipartisan; only the President can formulate foreign policy; we must support the troops and, therefore, of course, the war, which is usually illegal and unwise but cannot be challenged; we are the only world’s superpower; we must protect our interests like oil. However, it is never admitted, although most know, our policy is designed to promote the military industrial complex and world government. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:9 Most recently, the Congress almost unanimously beat the drums for war, i.e., to kill Hussein; and any consideration of the facts involved elicited charges of anti-patriotism. Yet in the midst of the clamor to send our planes and bombs to Baghdad, cooler heads were found in, of all places, Kuwait. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:13 In spite of the reservations and reasons to go slow, the only criticism coming from congressional leaders was that Clinton should do more, quicker, without any serious thought as to the consequences, which would be many. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:21 So we must be prepared to pay, as we already have started to, through our foreign aid appropriations. This promotes on a grand scale a government business partnership that is dangerous to those who love liberty and detest fascism. And yet, most Members of Congress will say little, ask little, and understand little, while joining in the emotional outburst directed towards the local thugs running the Mideastern fiefdoms like Iraq and Libya. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:24 The large majority of House Members claim they want our troops out of Bosnia. Yet the President gets all the funding he wants. The Members of Congress get credit at home for paying lip service to a U.S. policy of less intervention, while the majority continue to support the troops, the President, the military industrial complex, and the special interests who drive our foreign policy, demanding more funding while risking the lives, property, peace, and liberty of American citizens. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:25 Congress casually passes resolution after resolution, many times nearly unanimously, condemning some injustice in the world, and for the most part there is a true injustice, but along with the caveat that threatens some unconstitutional U.S. military interference, financial assistance, or withdrawal of assistance, or sanctions in order to force our will on someone else. And it is all done in the name of promoting the United Nations and one-world government. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:26 Many resolutions on principle are similar to the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, which became equivalent to a declaration of war and allowed for a massive loss of life in the Vietnam fiasco. Most Members of Congress fail to see the significance of threatening violence against countries like Libya, Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia, Iraq, Iran, or Haiti. Yet our credibility suffers since our policies can never satisfy both sides of each regional conflict. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:39 I can understand a positive spin on events of the last three years by party leaders. That is what party leaders do. But the revolutionary members of the 104th Congress should not be taken in easily or quickly. But Washington has a strange way of dulling the senses, and no one enjoys peer rejection or lonely fights, where one is depicted as pursuing a fruitless adventure and appearing negative. Capitulating to the status quo is the road of least resistance, and rationalizations are generously offered up. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:40 It has been especially tempting for Members of Congress to accept the projection of higher revenues as a panacea to our budgetary problems. The prevailing attitude in Washington as 1997 came to a close was that the limited government forces had succeeded. The conservative revolution has won, and now it is time to move on and make government work more efficiently. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:42 The Republican Congress and President Clinton benefited, while the Democratic Congressional leaders could only ask why can’t more be spent on welfare if the country is doing so well? Fundamental problems like the size of the budget, the deficit, the debt, higher taxes, currency problems and excessive regulations were put on the back burner, if not ignored altogether. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:44 Under Reagan, as in the early parts of the Republican control of Congress, some signs of deceleration in the growth of government were seen. But even then, there was no pretense made to shrink the size of government. And, once again, the path of least resistance has been to capitulate and allow government to grow as it has been for decades. Heaven forbid, no one ever again wants to be blamed for closing down nonessential government services. Only cruel and heartless Constitution lists would ever suggest such a politically foolish stunt. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:48 That does not mean the fight for liberty is over, but the hope that came by reversing Congressional rule after 40 years has been dampened and a lot more work is necessary for success. The real battle is to win the hearts and minds of Americans outside of Washington to prepare the country for the day when the welfare state ceases to function due to an empty treasury and the dollar, not worth its weight, comes under attack. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:51 All these rosy projections are dependent on economic strength, steady low interest rates, and no supplemental appropriations. Every session of Congress gets supplementals, and if the economy takes a downturn, the higher the appropriation. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:52 The last three years are not much to brag about. Domestic spending has gone up by $183 billion. In the prior three years, when Democrats controlled the Congress, spending increased by $155 billion. Tax increases are now inevitably referred to as revenue enhancement and closing of loopholes. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:53 In spite of some wonderful IRS bashing by nearly everyone and positive hearings in exposing the ruthless tactics of the IRS, Congress and the President saw fit to give the IRS a whopping $729 million increase in its budget, hoping the IRS will become more efficient in their collection procession. Real spending cuts are not seriously considered. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:54 Congress continues to obfuscate by calling token cuts in previously proposed increases as budget cuts. The media and the proponents of big government and welfare obediently demagogue this issue by decrying why the slashes in the budget are inhumane and uncaring. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:58 Power is a corrupting influence, but, for now, at least, a Congressional power shift is not in the making. There are still a lot of recipients that are happily reassured that additional revenues can be found. The new management is welcomed, and it is hoped the new guys on the block can salvage for a while a system that many deep down in their hearts are convinced is not manageable for much longer. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:60 The great danger of all of this is the false sense of economic security Congress feels, that has prompted total abandonment of efforts to actually cut any spending and with plans being laid for spending increases. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:62 The international currency crisis: Congress lacks concern and understanding of the significance of the Asian currency crisis. Monetary policy has never excited many Members of the Committee on Banking, let alone other members of Congress. A handful of Members do consistently complain to the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, but inevitably it is to object to the high interest rates and not enough credit being available to either the poor or the rich beneficiaries of Central Bank credit largesse. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:64 IMF bailouts, just as our military foreign intervention, are generally supported by the leadership of both parties. The establishment has firm control in these two areas and who, out of ignorance or neglect, the Congress as a whole provides little resistance. When the stronger currencies, in this case the dollar, props up a weaker currency, it is nothing more than an example of an international transfer of payment that helps our banks and international corporate investors who have financial exposure in the country or currency under attack. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:67 Long-term, the average American citizen suffers through higher interest rates, rising prices, recessions and lower standard of living, but the cause and effect is conveniently hidden from the public and the Congress. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:71 The day before we adjourned the first session of the 105th Congress, the Committee on Banking and Financial Services held hearings on the Asian currency crisis, but it was more an attempt to reassure the financial community than to sort out the cause and do something about it. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:73 Currency issues are serious and a much bigger problem than Congress realizes. Even the Fed has convinced itself it is quite capable of managing our fiat currency and our financial markets through any crisis. The money managers are every bit as powerful as the Congress, which taxes and spends, but the Federal Reserve’s actions are much less scrutinized. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:76 Eventually, everyone though is threatened by the political disruption that can ensue with a currency mishap. Our greatest concern should be for our loss of liberties that so often accompany a currency crisis. Congressional attitude toward monetary policy is not likely to change soon, so we can expect a lot more turmoil in the currency markets in the months ahead. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:77 Two special areas. Congress in the past year capitulated in two significant areas by not only failing to cut spending, but massively increasing government’s role in medicine and in education. House Republicans bragged that 7 out of 8 educational initiatives passed the House, many of them being quite expensive. Charter schools cost over $100 million, funding for vouchers was increased, $3 billion was appropriated to extend student loans, and a new $210 million reading in excellence program was initiated. A program for high-tech training and one designed to help children with disabilities was also started. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:78 Clinton’s new health care program for children was accepted by Congress, which will eventually cost billions and further centralize medical care in Washington, while quality of care is diminished. Billions of dollars increased in NIH, AIDS research and preventative health care were also approved. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:79 The Federal Government has been involved in education and medicine more than in any other domestic area. This has caused a serious price inflection for these two services, while undermining the quality and results in both. The more we spend, the higher the cost, the worse the service, and the greater the regulations. So what did Congress do to solve the problems in the past year? Even in this so-called age of cutting back and a balanced budget, it expanded government precisely in the two areas that suffer the most from big government. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:85 At the same time these token efforts were made in welfare, education and human resources reform, Congress gave the Federal Government massive new influence over adoption and juvenile crime, education and medicine. Block grants to States for specific purposes after collecting the revenues at the Federal level is foreign to the concept that once was understood as States rights. This process, even if temporarily beneficial, will do nothing to challenge the underlying principle and shortcomings of the welfare State. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:86 Real battles. The real battles in the Congress are more often over power and personalities than philosophy. Both sides of most debates represent only a variation of some interventionist program. Moral and constitutional challenges are made when convenient and never follow a consistent pattern. These, along with the States rights arguments, are not infrequently just excuses used to justify opposing or approving a program supported for some entirely different reason. The person who makes any effort at consistency is said to be extreme or unyielding. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:88 Public relation debates. Oftentimes the big debates in Congress are more public relation efforts than debates on real issues. This is certainly true when it comes to preventing foreign aid funds from being used by any organization for abortions. I agree with and vote for all attempts to curtail the use of U.S. taxpayers’ funds for abortion within or outside the United States. But many in the pro-life movement are not interested in just denying all birth control, population control and abortion money to everyone, and avoid the very controversial effort to impose our will on other nations. Believing money allocated to any organization or country is not fungible is naive, to say the least. The biggest problem is that many who are sincerely right to life and believe the Mexico City language restriction on foreign aid will work are also philosophic believers in internationalism, both social and military. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:91 We have at least started to debate the merits of any money at all going to population control, the United Nations or the IMF. This is where the debate should be. Even though the restrictions that the Mexico City language might place on foreign expenditures probably will not change the number of abortions around the world, the vote itself does reflect, through Congress, the sentiment of the American people, and therefore, its importance cannot be denied. But I am convinced that if the American people had the option of whether or not to send any money at all, they would reject all the funding, making the restriction debate moot. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:92 Most would agree with the fungibility argument, even when funds are sent for reasons other than family planning and abortion like military assistance. The amazing thing is how important the debate can appear by threatening to withhold greatly sought after IMF funds for an argument that does not get to the heart of the issue. What should be debated is whether or not Congress has the moral and Constitutional authority to use force to take funds from American citizens for social engineering around the world, much of which results in resentment toward America. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:94 Corporatism. Congress and the administration is greatly influenced by corporate America. We truly have a system of corporatism that if not checked will evolve into a much more threatening form of fascism. Our welfare system provides benefits for the welfare poor and, in return, the recipients vote to perpetuate the entire system. Both parties are quite willing to continue the status quo in not questioning the authority upon which these programs are justified, but the general public is unaware of how powerful corporate America is in changing and influencing legislation. Even those programs said to be specific for the poor, like food stamps, housing, education and medicine, have corporate beneficiaries. These benefits to corporate America are magnified when it is realized that many of the welfare redistributionist programs are so often not successful in helping the poor. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:96 We should not expect campaign reform are reliable revelations of campaign fund-raising abuse in today’s political climate. There are strong bipartisan reasons to keep the debate on only a superficial level. All the rules in the world will never eliminate the motivation or the ability of the powerful special interests to influence Congress. Loopholes and illegal contributions will plague us for as long as Congress continues with the power to regulate, tax, or detax, or punishes essentially everyone participating in the economy. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:97 The most we can ever hope for is to demand full disclosure. Then, if influence is bought, at least it would be in the open. The other most difficult task, and the only thing that will ever dampen special interest control of government, would be to radically reduce the power of Congress over our lives and our economy. Taxpayer funding of campaigns would prove disastrous. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:98 The special areas of the budget that are of specific benefit to corporate America are literally too numerous to count, but there are some special programs benefiting corporations that usually prompt unconditional support from both parties. The military industrial complex is clearly recognized for its influence in Washington. This same group has a vested interest in our foreign policy that encourages policing the world, Nation building, and foreign social engineering. Big contracts are given to friendly corporations in places like Haiti, Bosnia and the Persian Gulf region. Corporations benefiting from these programs are unable to deal objectively with foreign policy issues, and it is not unusual for these same corporate leaders to lobby for troop deployments in worldwide military intervention. The U.S. remains the world’s top arms manufacturer and our foreign policy permits the exports to world customers subsidized through the Export-Import Bank. Foreign aid, Overseas Private Investment Corporation, Export-Import Bank, IMF, World Bank, development banks are all used to continue bailouts of Third World countries heavily invested in by our corporations and banks. Corporations can get special tax treatment that only the powerful and influential can achieve. For instance, pseudo-free trade legislation like NAFTA and GATT and the recent Fast Track legislation shows how much big business influences both congressional leaders and the administration. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:100 Both types of welfare expenditures benefit from a monetary system that creates credit out of thin air in order to monetize congressional deficits when needed and manipulate interest rates downward to nonmarket levels to serve the interests of big borrowers and lenders. Federal Reserve policy is an essential element in serving the powerful special interests. Monetary mischief of this type will not likely be ended by congressional action, but will be eventually stopped by market forces, just as has recently occurred in the Far East. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:101 Voluntary contracts. There is little understanding or desire in Congress to consistently protect voluntary contract. Many of our programs to improve race relations have come from government interference in the voluntary economic contract. Government’s role in a free society should be to enforce contracts, yet too often it does the opposite. All labor laws, affirmative action programs and consumer protection laws are based on the unconstitutional authority of government to regulate voluntary economic contracts. If the same process were applied to the press, it would be correctly condemned as prior restraint and ruled unconstitutional. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:102 Throughout the 20th century, economic and personal liberties have undergone a systematic separation. Rules applying to the media and personal relationships no longer apply to voluntary economic transactions. Some Members of Congress are quite vocal in defending the First Amendment and fight hard to protect freedom of expression by cautioning against any effort at prior restraint. They can speak eloquently on why V chip technology in the hands of the government may lead to bad things, even if proponents are motivated to protect our children from pornography. Likewise, these partial civil libertarians are quite capable of demanding the protection of all adult voluntary sexual activity. They mount respectable challenges to the social authoritarian who never hesitates to use government force to mold society and improve personal moral behavior. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:112 National sovereignty designed to protect liberty in a republic is challenged as our foreign operations are controlled by U.N. resolutions, not Congress. Under these conditions, our cities are more likely to be targeted by terrorists for the hatred our policies fuel. Draft registration remains in place just in case more bodies are needed for our standing U.N. armies. The draft remains the ultimate attack on volunteerism and represents the most direct affront to individual liberty. This is made that much worse when one realizes that it is highly unlikely that we will ever see American troops in action under anything other than a U.N.-sponsored war or military operation. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:114 Congress reflects the nation’s current obsession with political correctness. The strange irony is that this whole movement has been encouraged by groups and individuals who in the past have been seen as the champions of free expression and civil liberties. These efforts to interfere with freedom of expression come from a desire to punish those in economic superior positions. Political correctness encourages promotions or firings for casual and rude statements once ridiculed by merely ignoring them. The age of victimization demands political correctness be carried to an illogical conclusion and the plan for perfect economic equality demands language that reflect these goals. It’s truly an area that reflects a complete lack of understanding of the principles of liberty and is an understandable result of this century’s division of liberty into two parts. The motive seems to be to make people better by forcing them to use only correct language and to provide special benefits to groups that are economically disadvantaged. It’s not uncommon to hear of people losing their jobs and reputation over harmless comments or telling off-colored jokes. Talk about discrimination, this is the worst. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:124 The usual result is the various groups receiving benefits become highly competitive and bitter toward each other. Eventually, it leads to a time when compromise and government planning no longer look practical nor fair. In the next few years, we can expect this to become more evident as Congress will be forced to acknowledge that the budget has more problems than was admitted to in the closing days of the first session of the 105th Congress. Congress State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:133 The original challenge to the champions of freedom centuries ago was always to limit the powers of the king. Today the challenge, every bit as great but harder to define, is to limit the power of democratic parliaments and congresses. Democratic elections of leaders is one thing, but obsession with determining all rights by majority vote has now become liberty’s greatest enemy. Congress Congress Should Move Cautiously On Resolution Regarding Iraq 5 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 4:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, in 1964, a resolution passed this Congress which urged the President to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression, the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. Congress Congress Should Move Cautiously On Resolution Regarding Iraq 5 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 4:2 Today there is a resolution floating around this Congress that urges the President to take all necessary and appropriate actions to respond to the threat posed by Iraq. We should remember history. We lost 50,000 men after we passed that last resolution. We do not have a sensible policy with Iraq. We should move cautiously. Congress Supporting H.R. 2846 5 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 5:2 Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this rule; and I support H.R. 2846, which forbids the use of Federal funds to develop or implement a national test without explicit authorization from Congress. Congress Supporting H.R. 2846 5 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 5:3 Supporters of protecting the United States Constitution from overreaching by the executive branch should support this bill. The administration’s plan to develop and implement a national testing program without Congressional authorization is a blatant violation of the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers. Congress Supporting H.R. 2846 5 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 5:4 However, support of this bill should in no way be interpreted to imply that Congress has the power to authorize national testing. Education is not one of the powers delegated to the Federal Government. Congress Supporting H.R. 2846 5 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 5:6 I therefore urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 2846 which stops the administration from ultimately implementing national tests and oppose all legislation authorizing the creation of a national test. Instead, this Congress should work to restore control over their children’s education to the American people by shutting down the Federal education bureaucracy and cutting taxes on American parents so they may better provide for the education of their own children. Congress National Education Test 5 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 6:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of HR 2846, which forbids the use of federal funds to develop or implement a National Test without explicit authorization from Congress. Supporters of protecting the United States Constitution from overreaching by the Executive Branch should support this bill as the Administration’s plan to develop and implement a national education test without Congressional authorization is a blatant violation of the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers. Congress National Education Test 5 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 6:2 However, support for this bill should in no way be interpreted to imply that Congress has the power to authorize national testing. After all, Congress, like the Executive and the Judicial branches of government, must adhere to the limitations on its power imposed by the United States Constitution. Although many seem to have forgotten this, in our system, the limits set by the Constitution, rather than the will of any particular Congress, determine the legitimate authority of the United States Government. Congress National Education Test 5 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 6:8 The Executive Branch has no constitutional authority to implement and develop a national test and the Congress has no authority to authorize the test. I therefore urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 2846, which stops the Administration from ultimately implementing national tests and oppose all legislation authorizing the creation of a national test. Instead, this Congress should work to restore control over their children’s education to the American people by shutting down the federal education bureaucracy and cutting taxes on America’s parents so they may provide for the education of their own children. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:6 The IMF is another issue that I think is very important. This funding will be coming up soon. The Congress will be asked to appropriate $18 billion to bail out the Southeast Asian currencies and countries, and this is a cost; although we are told it does not cost anything, it does not add to the deficit, there is obviously a cost, and we cannot convince the American people that there is no cost just because of our method of budgeting and we do not add it into the deficit. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:11 Then, once again, we have this potential for going to war in Iraq, again, not because we follow the Constitution, not because we follow the rule of law, but because the United Nations has passed a resolution. Some have even argued that the U.N. resolution passed for the Persian Gulf War is enough for our President to initiate the bombings. Others claim that just the legislation, the resolution-type legislation passed in 1990 that endorsed this process is enough for us to go and pursue this war venture. But the truth is, if we followed the rules and if we followed the law, we would never commit an act of war, which bombing is, unless we have a declaration of war here in the Congress. Somebody told me just yesterday that yes, but that is so old fashioned. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:13 War should only be declared for moral reasons. The only moral war is a defensive war and when our country is threatened. Then it is legitimate to come to the people and the people then, through their Members in the House and Senate, and the President then declare war, and then they fight that war to win. But today that is considered very old fashioned, and the consensus here in this Congress is that it will not take much for Congress to pass a resolution. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:14 What worries me, though, somewhat is that this resolution will not be circulated among the Members for days and weeks and have real serious debate. There is always the possibility that a resolution like this will come up suddenly. There will be little debate, and then a vote, and an endorsement for this policy. The first resolution that has been discussed over in the Senate had language very, very similar to the same language used in the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which endorsed the expansion of the war in Vietnam, where 50,000 men were lost, and it was done not with a declaration of war, but by casual agreement by the Congress to go along. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:15 Congress should have and take more responsibility for these actions. It is only the Congress that should pursue an act of war. Bombing is an act of war, especially if it is a country halfway around the world and a country that has not directly threatened our national security. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:42 Well, I am not going to defend Iraq. I am not going to defend Hussein. But I do have a responsibility here for us in the Congress to obey the law, and under our law, under the Constitution, and with a sense of morality, we do not go around assassinating dictators. I think history shows that we were involved in that in South Vietnam and it did not help us one bit. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:60 I think the responsibility of the Members of Congress here is to protect the national interest, to provide national security, to take care of national defense, to follow the rules that say, we should not go to war unless the war is declared. If we go to war, we go to war to fight and win the war. But we do not go to war because we like one country over another country and we want to support them. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:69 It might not be identical to the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. But all I would like to do is point out to my colleagues that this is more important than it appears, and we should not be so glib as to give this authority, to give the cover for the President to say, well, the Congress said it was okay. I do not think the Congress should say it is okay, because I think it is the wrong thing to do. And I think it could lead to so many, so many more problems. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:73 Well, I do not think that is a legitimate argument. I do have a lot of reservation that we are so anxious to go along with getting authority elsewhere, and that is through the United Nations. When the Persian Gulf War was started, getting ready to start, it was said that we did not need the Congress to approve this because the authority came from the United Nations resolution. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:74 Well, that to me is the wrong way to go. If we are involved in internationalism, where international financing now is influencing our presidential election, if international finances demand that we take more money from the American taxpayers and bail out southeast Asian countries through the IMF and that we are willing to have our young men and women be exposed to war conditions and to allow them to go to war mainly under a U.N. resolution and a token endorsement by the Congress, I think this is the wrong way to go. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:102 There is nothing wrong with a foreign policy that is consistent based on a moral principle and on our Constitution. That means that the responsibility of the U.S. Congress is to provide for a strong national defense. There is nothing wrong with being friends with everybody who is willing to be friends with us. There is nothing wrong with trading with as many people that will trade with us, and there is nothing wrong with working for as low tariffs as possible. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:114 We here in the Congress should be talking about defending this country, providing national security, providing for a strong currency, not deliberately distorting the currency. We should be protecting private property rights and making sure that there is no incentive for the special interests of this country to come and buy their influence up here. Congress Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:115 We do not need any fancy campaign reform laws. There is no need for those. We need to eliminate the ability of the Congress to pass out favors. I do not get any PAC money because there is no attempt to come and ask me to do special favors for anybody. I get a lot of donations from people who want liberty. They want to be left alone, and they know, they know that they can take care of themselves. Congress Iraq 12 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 9:3 I would like to remind my colleagues that bombing a country, especially one halfway around the world that is not a direct threat to our security, is not a moral act. A moral war is one that is defensive and a legal war is one that is declared by Congress. We should only pursue an act of war when our national security is threatened. Congress Voter Eligibility Verification Act 12 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 10:2 The Social Security number was created solely for use in administering the Social Security system. Today, thanks to Congress, parents must get a Social Security number for their newborn babies. In addition, because of Congress, abuse of the Social Security system also occurs at the state level such in many states, one cannot get a driver’s license, apply for a job, or even receive a birth certificate for one’s child, without presenting their Social Security number to a government official. Congress Voter Eligibility Verification Act 12 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 10:3 Now Congress is preparing to authorize the use of the Social Security number to verify citizenship for purposes of voting. Opponents of this bill are right to point out that, whatever protections are written in this bill, allowing states to force citizens to present a Social Security number before they can vote will require the augmentation of a national data base — similar to those created in the Welfare Reform and the Immigration Bills of 1996. Congress Voter Eligibility Verification Act 12 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 10:6 In order to protect the privacy rights of America’s citizens, I plan to soon introduce the Privacy Protection Act, which will forbid the use of the Social Security number for any purpose other than for the administration of the Social Security system. I would urge my colleagues to support this bill when introduced and vote against the Voter Eligibility Act. It is time for Congress to protect the Constitutional rights of all Americans and stop using the Social Security number as a de facto national identification card. Congress Urging Caution On Action Taken In Iraq 12 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 11:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, obviously, I am not in the leadership; I do not speak for the leadership. But I do hope that I speak for a lot of people in America and other Members of Congress who may feel differently. I equally condemn the horrors going on in the country of Iraq. I have no desire at all to defend Hussein. I rise, though, to just urge some caution on what we do. Congress Urging Caution On Action Taken In Iraq 12 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 11:3 Morally, the only justifiable war is a war of defense, a war when our national security is threatened. A legal war in this country is one that is declared by the Congress acting for the people. Congress Urging Caution On Action Taken In Iraq 12 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 11:5 It is argued that the legislation passed in 1990 gives legitimacy for the President to pursue this adventure, but this really contradicts everything intended by the founders of this country that we could literally pass legislation which was not a declaration of war and to allow it to exist in perpetuity. And here it is 7 or 8 years later, and we are going to use legislation passed by Congress. Very few of us were even in that Congress at that time that are in the current Congress, but they want to use that. Congress The Folly Of Foreign Intervention — Part 1 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 15:4 Before we left about 10 days ago from the Congress, I think many Members and much of the Nation thought that within a short period of time, within a week or so, there would be additional bombing by the Americans over Baghdad. Congress The Folly Of Foreign Intervention — Part 1 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 15:6 We heard a gentleman earlier this evening from North Dakota mention when he was at home essentially nobody was telling him that they were in favor of the war. I think most Members of Congress on this past week on visiting home had the same message. Certainly there was a very loud message in Columbus at a town hall meeting. It was written off by those who wanted to go to war and wanted to drop the bombs by saying, well, no, this was just a very noisy bunch of hippies who are opposed to the war. There are a lot of people in this country who are opposed to the war and they are not hippies. I think to discredit people who oppose going and participating in an act of war and try to discredit them by saying that they belong to a hippie generation, I think they are going to lose out in the credibility argument in this regards. Congress The Folly Of Foreign Intervention — Part 1 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 15:10 So all of a sudden it is hard to understand why our policy changes. But once we embark on a policy of intervention and it is arbitrary, we intervene when we please or when it seems to help, it seems then that we can be on either side of any issue anytime, and so often we are on both sides of many wars. This does not serve us well. A policy design that is said to be pro-American and in defense of this country where we follow the rules and follow the laws and we do not get involved in war without a declaration by the Congress, I think it would be very healthy not only for us as Americans but it would be very healthy for the world as a whole. Congress The Folly Of Foreign Intervention — Part 2 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 17:8 So this, to me, is a really good time to make us stop and think should we do this? I certainly think that our foreign policy in the interests of the United States should be determined by us here in the Congress, and then some will argue, well, it is not up to Congress to deal in foreign policy. That is up to a President. But that is not what is in the Constitution. Congress The Folly Of Foreign Intervention — Part 2 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 17:9 As a matter of fact, foreign policy, those words do not even exist in the Constitution, and the Congress has all the responsibility of raising funds, spending funds, raising an army, declaring war, so the responsibilities are on us. Congress The Folly Of Foreign Intervention — Part 3 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 18:3 There are two very important reasons why one who espouses the constitutional viewpoint of nonintervention, they do it. One, we believe in the rule of law and we should do it very cautiously, and that is what we are bound by here in the Congress. So that is very important. Congress Introducing The Privacy Protection Act 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 20:4 There are not isolated incidents; in fact, since the creation of the Social Security number in 1934 there have been almost 40 congressionally-authorized uses of the Social Security number as an identification number for non-Social Security programs! Abuse of the Social Security system also occurs at the state level. Mr. Speaker, in many states. One cannot get a driver’s license, apply for a job, or even receive a birth certificate for one’s child, without presenting their Social Security number to a government official, and just X weeks ago 210 of my colleagues voted to allow States to require citizens to show their Social Security number in order to vote. Since the Social Security number is part of a federal program created by Congress, it is Congress’ responsibility to ensure it is not used to violate the privacy of America’s citizens. Congress Introducing The Privacy Protection Act 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 20:5 Perhaps the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the Congressionally-authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim them as a dependent. Mr. Speaker, forcing parents to register their newborn children with the state is more like something out of the nightmare of George Orwell than the dreams of a free Republic that inspired the nation’s founders. Congress Recommending An Article By R.C. Sproul, Jr. 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 21:4 BOMBING THE CONSTITUTION By R.C. Sproul, Jr. When was the last time the United States went to war? That’s not exactly an easy question to answer. If, however, the Constitution is in fact the law of the land, the answer is December 8, 1941. You see, the Constitution says that only the Congress has the power to declare war on another nation. That would seem to mean that without such a declaration, there is no war. Some kept this pretense the first time the United States went to war after World War II. Some called the Korean War a “police action.” Vietnam, though there was again no declaration of war, was known as a war. Congress Recommending An Article By R.C. Sproul, Jr. 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 21:6 Some argue that in an age of intercontinental ballistic missiles, that the requirement for a Congressional declaration is outdated. In none of the above “non-wars” however, have such missiles constituted a treat to American safety. And even if such were the case, why not change the Constitution to reflect the current situation? Congress Recommending An Article By R.C. Sproul, Jr. 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 21:7 Others suggest that we have no need for this old rule since we now have the “War Powers Act” which gives congressional approval for the President to use the military freely within a certain time frame. But that’s not at all the same thing. The Constitution no where gives the Congress the right to shirk their role as declarers of war. Congress Recommending An Article By R.C. Sproul, Jr. 25 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 21:8 Still others try to argue that the United Nations security council now serves that role. Again though, the Constitution says nothing about giving them this role. Neither does it say that a sufficient number of handshakes with Madelaine Albright shall be a substitute for Congressional action. Congress Birth Defects Prevention Act 10 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 24:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to S. 419, yet another circumvention of the enumerated powers clause and tenth amendment by this 105th Congress in its continued obliteration of what remains of our national government of limited powers. Congress Birth Defects Prevention Act 10 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 24:2 For most of the past thirty years, I have worked as physician specializing in obstetrics. In so doing, I delivered more than 4,000 infants. Despite what I believe to be a somewhat unique insight on the topic of birth defect prevention, today, I address the house as a Congressman rather than as a physician. Congress Birth Defects Prevention Act 10 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 24:3 As a Congressman, I have repeatedly come to the house floor to denounce the further expansion of the federal government into areas ranging from “toilet-tank-size mandates” to “public housing pet size;” areas, that is, where no enumerated power exists and the tenth amendment reserves to state governments and private citizens the exclusive jurisdiction over such matters. My visits to the floor have not gone uncontested — proponents of an enlarged federal government and more government spending have justified their pet spending and expansionist projects by distorting the meaning of the “necessary and proper” and “common defense and general welfare” clauses to encompass the constitutionally illegitimate activities they advocate. Even the Export-Import Bank and Overseas Private Investment Corporation during Foreign Operations Appropriations debate were constitutionally “justified” by the express power to “coin money and regulate the value thereof”? In other words, where money exists, credit exists — where credit exists, loans exist — where loans exist, defaulters exist — and from this, the federal government has a duty to bail-out (at taxpayer expense) politically connected corporations who make bad loans in political-risk-laden venues? Congress Birth Defects Prevention Act 10 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 24:4 In the Federalist Papers, Madison and Hamilton strongly denied such views with respect to the necessary and proper clause. Madison was similarly emphatic that the “defense and welfare” clause did not expand the enumerated powers granted to Congress. To the extent these clauses encompass the enumerated powers (rather than merely serve as their preamble), one must ask why then the federal powers were, in fact, enumerated in Article One, Section 8. Congress Birth Defects Prevention Act 10 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 24:5 Chiefly to resolve ambiguities about the national powers, the tenth amendment, proposed as part of the Bill of Rights by the Federalist-controlled first Congress, was added, declaring that the “powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” According to constitutional scholar Bernard Siegan, University of San Diego College of Law, the Constitution might never have been ratified had the Federalists’ representations in this regard not been accepted by a portion of the public. Siegan also reminds us that the Framers rejected the notion of empowering the national government to grant charters of incorporation; establish seminaries for the promotion of agriculture, commerce, trades, and manufactures; regulate stages on post roads; establish universities; encourage by premiums and provisions, the advancement of useful knowledge; and opening and establishing canals. Each notion was introduced during the convention and voted down or died in committee. Congress Birth Defects Prevention Act 10 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 24:7 Congress are [sic] authorized to defend the nation. Ships are necessary for defense, copper is necessary for ships; mines, necessary for copper; a company necessary to work the mines; and who can doubt this reasoning who has ever played at “This is the House that Jack Built”? under such a process of filiation of the necessities the sweeping clause makes clean work. [1 c. Warren, The Supreme Court United States History 501 (Rev. ed. 1926] Congress Birth Defects Prevention Act 10 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 24:8 Cleary, while engaging in such congressional activism makes “clean work,” it also makes for an oppressive national government involved in every aspect of its citizens’ lives. Remember that in engaging in such activism, the next liberty upon which the Congress infringes, may be your own. Congress U.S. Obsession With Worldwide Military Occupation Policy 10 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 25:8 But we cannot maintain two loyalties, one to a world government under the United Nations and the other to U.S. sovereignty protected by an American Congress. If we try, only chaos can result and we are moving rapidly in that direction. Congress U.S. Obsession With Worldwide Military Occupation Policy 10 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 25:9 Instead of bringing our troops home from Bosnia, as many Members of Congress have expressed an interest in doing, over the President’s objection, we are rapidly preparing for sending more troops into Kosova. This obsession with worldwide military occupation by U.S. troops is occurring at the very time our troops lack adequate training and preparation. Congress U.S. Obsession With Worldwide Military Occupation Policy 10 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 25:13 Concern for American security is a proper and necessary function of the U.S. Congress. The current policy, and one pursued for decades, threatens our security, drains our wallets, and worst of all, threatens the lives of young Americans to stand tall for Americans’ defense, but not for Kofi Annan and the United Nations. Congress Removing U.S. Armed Forces From Bosnia And Herzegovina 17 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 26:3 The troops should never have been sent there in the first place. There was a lot of controversy. It was far from unanimous consent from the Congress to send the troops there. They were sent there in 1995, and they were to be there for 18 months, and each time we came upon a date for removing the troops, they were extended. Congress Removing U.S. Armed Forces From Bosnia And Herzegovina 17 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 26:4 Currently, it is the President’s position that the troops will stay indefinitely. He has not set a date, although the Congress has set a date for this June for all funding to be removed as of June and the troops should come home. This resolution more or less states that same position. I strongly favor this, and I believe that the Congress should send a strong message that we should not casually and carelessly send troops around the world to police the world. This is a good way for us to get into trouble. Congress Removing U.S. Armed Forces From Bosnia And Herzegovina 17 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 26:7 So, under certain circumstances where there is political pressure made by certain allies or by interests of oil, then we are likely to get involved. But the principle of a noninterventionism foreign policy should make certain that we, the Congress, never condone, never endorse, never promote the placement of troops around the world in harm’s way because it is a good way for men to get killed and, for most purposes, the lives of our American soldiers are too valuable to be put into a situation where there is so much harm and danger. Congress Removing U.S. Armed Forces From Bosnia And Herzegovina 17 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 26:10 So I strongly urge my fellow colleagues to look carefully at this resolution tomorrow and assume congressional responsibility. It is not the responsibility of the President to wage war, to put troops around the world. That is a congressional responsibility. Congress Removing U.S. Armed Forces From Bosnia And Herzegovina 17 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 26:13 But at the same time we win those kind of votes, and there is a strong sentiment here in the Congress when we are required to vote and there is certainly a strong sentiment among the American people that we ought to be dealing with our problems here at home, we ought not to assume the role of world policemen, and we ought to mind our own business, and we ought to be concerned about the sovereignty of the United States, rather than sending our troops around the world under the auspices of the United Nations and NATO and literally giving up our sovereignty to international bodies. We were very confused as to who was really in charge of foreign policy in Iraq, whether it was Kofi Annan or whether it was our President. Congress Bombing Iraq 18 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 27:2 This is an immensely important constitutional issue and one that we should pay close attention to and obviously support. I would like this same principle, of course, to apply across the board, especially when it comes to bombing foreign countries, like Iraq, because we should not be involved in war efforts without the consent of the Congress. Congress Bombing Iraq 18 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 27:4 Usually it starts just with a little bit of advice that leads next to then sending troops in to follow up with the advice that we are giving. So I think this is very, very important, to get this out on the table, debate this, and for Congress to reassume the responsibility that they have given to an imperial presidency. Congress Bombing Iraq 18 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 27:7 The Persian Gulf War was fought with the assumption that the administration got the authority from the United Nations. If we are to express ourselves and to defend our national sovereignty, we should have the Congress vote positive on this resolution because it is so critical. Congress Bombing Iraq 18 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 27:9 We have a responsibility here. The Congress has a responsibility to the American people. We are here to defend the national sovereignty and the protection of the United States. Troops in Bosnia threatens our national security and threatens the lives of the American citizen who is protecting or fighting in this region. So it is up to us to assume this responsibility. Congress Conference Report on H.R. 1757, Foreign Affairs Reform And Restructuring Act Of 1998 26 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 28:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, last year’s attempts by some in Congress to tie the Mexico City Policy to the issues of funding for the United Nations (UN) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) this week come back to haunt those of us who believe in the sanctity of human life, the inviolability of US Sovereignty, and the rights of the U.S. taxpayers to keep the fruits of their own labor. This week, we see, the “grand deal” struck which will see liberals back down from their opposition to Mexico City Language in exchange for conservative members voting to support funding of the United Nations, affirmative action, peacekeeping activities, and the National Endowment for Democracy. Congress Conference Report on H.R. 1757, Foreign Affairs Reform And Restructuring Act Of 1998 26 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 28:2 MEXICO CITY POLICY DETAILED The Mexico City Policy was drafted in the Reagan years as an attempt to put some limitations on US foreign aide being used for certain abortions overseas. While I believe that those who put this policy forward were well-motivated, I believe that time has shown this policy to have little real effect. I have continued to vote for this policy when it came up as a stand alone issue in this Congress because, by itself, its effect tends to be positive rather than negative, as I say, I consider it largely ineffective. Congress Conference Report on H.R. 1757, Foreign Affairs Reform And Restructuring Act Of 1998 26 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 28:5 UNITED NATIONS The United Nations is an organization which frequently acts in a manner contrary to the sovereign interests of the United States. As such, I have sponsored legislation to get the United States out of this organization. Currently, the most pressing battle is to stop the US from paying phony “back dues” which we supposedly “owe” this organization. Congressman ROSCOE BARTLETT put forward a bill to stop any payment of this phony UN debt and I proudly cosponsored Mr. BARTLETT’s legislation. Congress Conference Report on H.R. 1757, Foreign Affairs Reform And Restructuring Act Of 1998 26 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 28:6 LINKING THESE TWO ISSUES We were able to put the breaks to the funding of the false UN debt and the IMF at the end of the last session of Congress by linking these items with the Mexico City Policy language. For political reasons President Clinton has steadfastly refused to sign any legislation which contains any anti-abortion language at all. Congress Conference Report on H.R. 1757, Foreign Affairs Reform And Restructuring Act Of 1998 26 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 28:12 Apparently contrary to the first amendment, the conference report contains language that the U.S. should recognize the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul, Turkey, as the spiritual center of the world’s 300 million Orthodox Christians and calls upon the Turkish government to reopen the Halki Patriarchal School of Theology formerly closed in 1971. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion * * * (Except abroad?) Congress Unfortunate Passage Of Foreign Affairs Conference Report 27 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 29:2 But, unfortunately, the process only adds to the cynicism that many Americans hold for the U.S. Congress. Nearly a billion dollars were appropriated for the controversial back dues to the United Nations, which for many of us was not owed. Congress Illegal Wars 31 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 30:2 Mr. Chairman, this is a very important part of this legislation. This is not BESTEA, but it is “best part.” By far Section 3002 of this bill is the best part of this entire bill. The only thing I would like to add is that the money being spent in Bosnia and Iraq, $1.8 billion, should not be spent there either, because I am frightened that we will put our men in harm’s way and then a situation will occur, and it will be virtually impossible for the Congress to turn down acceleration and amplification of the conflict over there. Congress Illegal Wars 31 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 30:3 Mr. Chairman, it has been stated that only five times we have declared war in our history. True. But who is going to stand here and say that men that died in Vietnam and in Korea were not in a war? They were illegal. They were unconstitutional. This is a very sound effort to bring back once again the constitutional responsibility of all of us to declare war, and only Congress can do that. Congress Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act 31 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 31:2 One of the truly positive aspects of H.R. 3579 is Sec. 3002 stating that “none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be made available for the conduct of offensive operations by United States Armed Forces against Iraq for the purpose of obtaining compliance by Iraq with United Nations Security Council Resolutions relating to inspection and destruction of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq unless such operations are specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act.” This language is virtually identical to H.R. 3208, a bill I introduced in February of this year to require Congressional consent prior to any offensive attack by the United States on the Republic of Iraq. Congress Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act 31 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 31:3 Unfortunately, Congress has refused to acknowledge anytime recently that the proper and constitutional role of the U.S. military is to provide for the national defense and not the security of all foreign entities against attacks by all other foreign entities. It was for this reason that I submitted amendments to defund the military appropriations in H.R. 3579. The proper amount of appropriations for unjustifiable United States peacekeeping missions around the world is zero. Instead, this bill rescinds funding from domestic programs such as airport funding to be spent on our “police-the-world” program. Congress Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act 31 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 31:4 It has become the accepted political notion in this century that war is a Presidential matter in which Congress may not meddle, and certainly never offer dissenting views. Yet, no place in the Constitution do we find a presidential fiat power to conduct war. To the contrary, we find strict prohibitions placed on the President when it comes to dealing with foreign nations. The Constitution is clear: No war may be fought without a specific declaration by the Congress. Congress Credit Union Membership Access Act 1 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 33:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, since I was the first one in this Congress to step forward and introduce legislation affirming the NCUA’s position allowing multiple common bonds for credit unions and signed on as a cosponsor of H.R. 1151 as originally written, I feel that I am in a disagreement among friends. I must oppose this bill because of the new regulations it imposes on credit unions and does nothing to address the legitimate concerns of the banks. Congress Credit Union Membership Access Act 1 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 33:2 While I strongly support the expansion of the field of membership for credit unions, the new regulations imposed upon them demonstrate a decision to follow the wrong path to “level the playing field” with banks and other financial institutions. A better approach would have been to lead the congress towards less taxes and less regulation. H.R. 1151, The Credit Union Membership Access Act, as amended by the committee, follows a path of more regulations and leads toward higher taxes on credit unions while the Financial Freedom Act, H.R. 1121, which I introduced a year ago, lowers taxes and regulations on banks. While H.R. 1151 does not impose new, direct taxes on credit unions, I fear that that day is just around the corner. Congress Building Highways Is State Function 1 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 34:2 I would like to remind my colleagues that in the 1950s when the Federal highway program started it was recognized that it was an improper function of the Federal Government. Therefore the Congress back then, they were still recognizing that the Constitution had some effect as well as the President; they had to come up for a reason for the highway projects, so they did it under national defense. Congress Random Drug Testing Of House Members And Staff Is Ill-Advised 21 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 35:8 If we embark on this course to check randomly all congressional personnel for possible drug usage, it might be noted that the two most dangerous and destructive drugs in this country are alcohol and nicotine. To not include these in the efforts to do good is inconsistent, to say the least. Unfortunately, the administration is now pursuing an anti-tobacco policy that will be even less successful than the ill-fated Federal war on drugs. Congress Follow The Constitution — Don’t Raise Taxes 22 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 36:3 Mr. Speaker, I would like to suggest to our side that if we all in the Congress did a better job in following the Constitution, we would not need this amendment. Because if we took our oath of office seriously, if we followed the doctrine of enumerated powers, if we knew the original intent of the Constitution, this government and this Congress would be very small and, therefore, we would not have to be worrying. Congress Follow The Constitution — Don’t Raise Taxes 22 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 36:7 We will limit the borrowing power. We will limit the ability of this Congress to inflate the currency to pay the bills. And we certainly will follow the rules of this House and this Constitution and not raise taxes. Congress Education In America Is Facing Crisis 22 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 37:5 What it does, it takes away taxation on any youngster who makes some money at one of these 4–H or Future Farmers of America fairs. When they sell their livestock, believe it or not, we go and tax them. Just think of this. The kids are out there trying to do something for themselves, earn some money, save some money and go to school; and what do we do as a Congress, we pick on the kids, we go and we tax these kids. Congress The Bubble 28 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 39:53 WASHINGTON MENTALITY Every politician I know in Washington is awestruck by Greenspan. The article in The New Republic reflects the way many Members of Congress feel about the “success” of Greenspan over the last ten years. Add to this the fact that there is no significant understanding of the Austrian business cycle in Washington, and the likelihood of adopting a solution to the pending crisis, based on such an understanding, is remote. Congress Social Security Numbers And Student Loans 29 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 41:6 Mr. Speaker, prior to coming to this Congress, I was an obstetrician delivering babies, and babies cannot leave the hospital these days without a Social Security number. So they are born, get a Social Security number, they do not leave the hospital without it, and do my colleagues know that one cannot have a death certificate without a Social Security number? They are everyplace. It is an intrusion on our privacy. We do not need to use a Social Security number. Congress Social Security Numbers And Student Loans 29 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 41:7 When I was in the Air Force, we used to have an identification number, but now, today, it is the Social Security number. Not too many years ago a law was passed here in the Congress that mandates that each State licensing agent for our automobile says that one has to have a Social Security number. So now they will be cross-checking with Social Security number and all of our driver’s license numbers. We are losing our privacy in this country. The American people know it. We do not need this number to be used in this program for it to be successful, and we should move very cautiously, and I hope I can get support for this amendment so that we do not use the Social Security number as the electronic personal identifier. Congress Amendment Number 3 Offered By Mr. Paul 29 April 1998    1998 Ron Paul 42:15 In the Privacy Act of 1974, in the findings, they made a comment which I think is very important, and this is in 1974 when it was not really bad. “The Congress finds the opportunities for an individual to secure employment, insurance and credit and his right to due process and other legal protections are endangered by the misuse of certain information systems.” Congress Federal War On Drugs Bad Idea 5 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 45:22 Why might it be that we dwell on the illegal drugs? Alcohol of course is legal, but why would it be that maybe this Congress might not be as aggressive against the abuses of alcohol and the deaths? If we have compassion, should we show less compassion to the 200,000 people dying of alcohol deaths or the 400,000 dying from cigarette deaths? But we do. Congress Federal War On Drugs Bad Idea 5 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 45:25 Also, one reason why we might not talk about the tremendous abuse with alcohol is the fact that, quite possibly, a few Members of Congress actually participate in using such a thing. There are now probably 13 million people in this United States suffering from abuse or alcoholism, a serious, serious number. Congress Wasting Money On War On Drugs 5 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 46:4 My goal today is just to suggest, just to bring it to the Congress’ attention, that possibly we are not doing the right things. If we would ever come to admitting that, then maybe we will not have to suffer the abuse of how the war on drugs goes awry. Congress Girl Arrested For Rescuing Classmate In Asthma Attack 5 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 47:2 But prohibition, obviously, when they passed that amendment to the Constitution, recognized that the Congress could not pass laws. And like I mentioned in 1937, when Roosevelt decided that we should attack medical marijuana, that he would do it through raising taxes. So it is only in recent history that we have decided that this is a Federal project. The record is just not very clear it has been very successful. Congress Support The National Right To Work Act 6 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 48:3 Compulsory unionism violates employers’ and employees’ constitutional rights of freedom of contract and association. Congress has no constitutional authority to force employees to pay union dues to a labor union as a condition of getting or keeping a job. Congress Support The National Right To Work Act 6 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 48:4 Passage of the National Right to Work Act would be a major step forward in ending Congress’ illegitimate interference in the labor markets and liberating America’s economy from heavy-handed government intervention. Since Congress created this injustice, we have the moral responsibility to work to end it, Mr. Speaker. Congress Support The National Right To Work Act 6 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 48:5 The 80 percent of Americans who support right-to-work deserve to know which Members of Congress support worker freedom. I, therefore, urge the congressional leadership, the majority of which have promised to place a National Right to Work Act on the floor, to fulfill their promise to the American people and schedule a time certain for a vote on H.R. 59. Congress Higher Education Amendments of 1998 6 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 49:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, Congress should reject HR 6, the Higher Education Amendments of 1998 because it furthers the federal stranglehold over higher education. Instead of furthering federal control over education, Congress should focus on allowing Americans to devote more of their resources to higher education by dramatically reducing their taxes. There are numerous proposals to do this before this Congress. For example, the Higher Education Affordability and Availability Act (HR 2847), of which I am an original cosponsor, allows taxpayers to deposit up to $5,000 per year in a pre-paid tuition plan without having to pay tax on the interest earned, thus enabling more Americans to afford college. This is just one of the many fine proposals to reduce the tax burden on Americans so they can afford a higher education for themselves and/or their children. Other good ideas which I have supported are the PASS A+ accounts for higher education included in last year’s budget, and the administration’s HOPE scholarship proposal, of which I was amongst the few members of the majority to champion. Although the various plans I have supported differ in detail, they all share one crucial element. Each allows individuals the freedom to spend their own money on higher education rather than forcing taxpayers to rely on Washington to return to them some percentage of their tax dollars to spend as bureaucrats see fit. Congress Higher Education Amendments of 1998 6 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 49:3 Federal spending, and thus federal control, are dramatically increased by HR 6. The entire bill has been scored as costing approximately $101 billion dollars over the next five years; an increase of over 10 billion from the levels a Democrat Congress Congress authorize for Higher Education programs in 1991!. Of course, actual spending for these programs may be greater, especially if the country experiences an economic downturn which increases the demand for federally-subsidized student loans. Congress Higher Education Amendments of 1998 6 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 49:5 The most objectionable program is “teacher training.” The Federal Government has no constitutional authority to dictate, or “encourage,” states and localities to adopt certain methods of education. Yet, this Congress is preparing to authorize the federal government to bribe states, with monies the federal government should never have taken from the people in the first place, to adopt teacher training methods favored by a select group of DC-based congressmen and staffers. Congress Higher Education Amendments of 1998 6 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 49:14 Mr. Chairman, the Higher Education Amendments of 1998 expand the unconstitutional role of the federal government in education by increasing federal control over higher education, as well as creating a new teacher training program. This bill represents more of the same, old “Washington knows best” philosophy that has so damaged American education over the past century. Congress should therefore reject this bill and instead join me in working to defund all unconstitutional programs and free Americans from the destructive tax and monetary policies of the past few decades, thus making higher education more readily available and more affordable for millions of Americans. Congress National Police State 12 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 50:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today the Congress will collectively move our nation two steps closer to a national police state by further expanding a federal crime and paving the way for a deluge of federal drug prohibition legislation. Of course, it is much easier to ride the current wave of federalizing every human misdeed in the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a Constitutional oath which prescribes a procedural structure by which the nation is protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism. Who, after all, and especially in an election year, wants to be amongst those members of Congress who are portrayed as soft on drugs or deadbeat parents irrespective of the procedural transgressions and individual or civil liberties one tramples in their zealous approach. Congress National Police State 12 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 50:2 Our federal government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers. Article one, Section eight, enumerates the legislative areas for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every other issue, the federal government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the state governments their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The tenth amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Of course, there will be those who will hang their constitutional “hats” on the interstate commerce general welfare clauses, both of which have been popular “headgear” since the FDR’s headfirst plunge into New Deal Socialism. Congress National Police State 12 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 50:4 Likewise, while the general welfare provides an additional condition upon each of the enumerated powers of the U.S. Congress detailed in Article I, Section eight, it does not, in itself, provide any latitude for Congress to legislatively take from A and give to B or ignore every other government-limiting provision of Constitution (of which there are many), each of which are intended to limit the central government’s encroachment on liberty. Congress National Police State 12 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 50:5 Nevertheless, rather than abide by our constitutional limits, Congress today will likely pass H. Res. 423 and H.R. 3811 under suspension of the rules meaning, of course, they are “non-controversial.” House Resolution 423 pledges the House to “pass legislation that provides the weapons and tools necessary to protect our children and our communities from the dangers of drug addiction and violence”. Setting aside for the moment the practicality of federal prohibition laws, an experiment which failed miserably in the so-called “Progressive era”, the threshold question must be: “under what authority do we act?” There is, after all, a reason why a Constitutional amendment was required to empower the federal government to share jurisdiction with the States in fighting a war on a different drug (alcohol) — without it, the federal government had no constitutional authority. One must also ask, “if the general welfare and commerce clause were all the justification needed, why bother with the tedious and time-consuming process of amending the Constitution?” Whether any governmental entity should be in the “business” of protecting competent individuals against themselves and their own perceived stupidity is certainly debatable — Whether the federal government is empowered to do so is not. Being stupid or brilliant to one’s sole disadvantage or advantage, respectively, is exactly what liberty is all about. Congress National Police State 12 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 50:8 The argument which springs from the criticism of a federalized criminal code and a federal police force is that states may be less effective than a centralized federal government in dealing with those who leave one state jurisdiction for another. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of state sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit clause allow states to exact judgments from those who violate their state laws. The Constitution even allows the federal government to legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow states to enforce their substantive laws without the federal government imposing its substantive edicts on the states. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one state to another. While not self-enacting, in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. There is, of course, a cost imposed upon states in working with one another than relying on a national, unified police force. At the same time, there is a greater cost to centralization of police power. Congress The Indonesia Crisis 19 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 52:15 Effort to prop up an ailing economy after the financial bubble has been popped, prolongs the agony and increases the severity of the correction. Japan’s bubble burst in 1989 and there is not yet any sign of the cleansing of the system of bad debt and mal-investment which is necessary before sound growth will resume. And Indonesia is embarking on the same predictable course. Restoration of free markets, and establishing sound monetary policy has not yet been considered. The people of Indonesia and the rest of the world should prepare for the worst as this crisis spreads. For Congress, the most important thing is to forget the notion that further taxing American workers to finance a bail-out, that won’t work, is the worst policy of all for us to pursue. Congress The Indonesia Crisis 19 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 52:19 Concern for personal liberty is not a subject associated with the crisis and is an ongoing casualty of past and current policy. A greater concern for individual liberty will be required if a positive outcome is to be expected from the fall-out of the Indonesian crisis. Let’s hope we can get our priorities straight. Congress has an obligation not to worsen the crisis by capitulating to more bail-outs and to remain vigilant enough to keep the administration from accomplishing the same bail-out through Executive Orders outside the law. Congress The Indonesia Crisis 19 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 52:20 MESSAGE What should the message be to the Congress and the American people regarding this sudden and major change in the economic climate in Indonesia? First and foremost is that since we operate with a fiat currency, as do all the countries of the world, we are not immune from a sudden and serious economic adjustment — at any time. Dollar strength and our ability to spend dollars overseas, without penalty, will not last forever. Confidence in the U.S. economy, and the dollar will one day be challenged. The severity of the repercussion is not predictable but it could be enormous. Our obligation, as Members of Congress, is to protect the value of the dollar, not to deliberately destroy it, in an attempt to prop up investors, foreign governments or foreign currencies. That policy will only lead to a greater crisis for all Americans. Congress The Indonesia Crisis 19 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 52:21 As the Asian crisis spreads, I would expect Europe to feel the crunch next. Unemployment is already at a 12% level in Germany and France. The events can be made worse and accelerated by outside events like a Middle Eastern crisis or a war between India and Pakistan both now rattling their nuclear weapons. Eventually though, our system of “crony capitalism” and fiat money system will come under attack. Our system of favoring industries is different than the family oriented favoritism of Suharto, but none-the-less is built on a system of corporate welfare that prompts constant lobbying of Congress and the Administration for each corporation’s special interests. We have little to talk about as we preach austerity, balanced budgets and sound money to the current victims. Our day will come when we will humble ourselves before world opinion as our house of cards comes crashing down. Congress United Nations Money Came From Defense Department 20 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 53:3 I think another point that we ought to make is, how did they get any money already? They got it from the Defense Department. We did not even appropriate the money. They have already started it. They have used American taxpayers’ money without a direct appropriation from this Congress, and it is about time we stopped that type of legislation. That is the point. Where did the money come from? The Defense Department. It goes over into the United Nations for meddling, meddling overseas. It is taken away, literally, from defense. Congress United Nations Money Came From Defense Department 20 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 53:8 It is up to the U.S. Congress to do something about that; that is, to take away the funding. This is a great amendment. I cannot conceive of anybody voting against this amendment and pretending that this is only a little bit. Congress The Indonesia Crisis 22 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 54:15 Effort to prop up an ailing economy after the financial bubble has been popped, prolongs the agony and increases the severity of the correction. Japan’s bubble burst in 1989, and there is not yet any sign of the cleansing of the system of bad debt and mal-investment which is necessary before sound growth will resume. And Indonesia is embarking on the same predictable course. Restoration of free markets, including the establishment of a sound monetary policy, has not yet been considered. The people of Indonesia and the rest of the world should prepare for the worst as this crisis spreads. For Congress, the most important thing is to forget the notion that further taxing American workers to finance a bail-out will work. It won’t work — it is the worst policy of all for us to pursue. Congress The Indonesia Crisis 22 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 54:19 Concern for personal liberty is not a subject associated with the crisis and is an ongoing casualty of past and current policy. A greater concern for individual liberty will be required if a positive outcome is to be expected from the fall-out of the Indonesian crisis. Let’s hope we can get our priorities straight. Congress has an obligation not to worsen the crisis by capitulating to more bail-outs and to remain vigilant enough to keep the administration from accomplishing a similar bail-out through Executive Orders outside the law. Congress The Indonesia Crisis 22 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 54:20 MESSAGE What should the message be to the Congress and the American people regarding this sudden and major change in the economic climate in Indonesia? First and foremost is that since we operate with a fiat currency, as do almost all the countries of the world. We are not immune from a sudden and serious economic adjustment — at any time. Dollar strength and our ability to spend dollars overseas, without penalty, will not last forever. Confidence in the U.S. economy, and the dollar, will one day be challenged. The severity of the repercussion is not predictable but it could be enormous. Our obligation, as Members of Congress, is to protect the value of the dollar, not to destroy it deliberately, in an attempt to prop up investors, foreign governments or foreign currencies. That policy will only lead to a greater crisis for all Americans. Congress The Indonesia Crisis 22 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 54:21 As the Asian crisis spreads, I would expect Europe to feel the crunch next. Unemployment is already at or approaching 12% in Germany and France. The events can be made worse and accelerated by outside events like a Middle Eastern crisis or a war between India and Pakistan both now rattling their nuclear sabers. Eventually though, our system of “crony capitalism” and fiat money system will come under attack. Our system of favoring industries is different than the family-oriented favoritism of Suharto, but none-the-less is built on a system of corporate welfare that prompts constant lobbying of Congress and the Administration for each corporation’s special interests. We have little room to talk as we preach austerity, balanced budgets and sound money to the current victims. Our day will come when we will humble ourselves before world opinion as our house of cards comes crashing down. Congress Can’t Vote For Amendment 4 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 55:8 This amendment further enables the Federal Government to do more mischief. The only solution is to shrink the government and raise a new generation of judges and Congressmen who understand the constitutional principles of original intent, the doctrine of enumerated powers, and property rights. If we do this, the First Amendment, freedom of religious expression, will be protected. Congress Can’t Vote For Amendment 4 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 55:9 Another recourse, less complicated than amending the Constitution, is for Congress to use its constitutional authority to remove jurisdiction from the courts in the areas where the courts have been the most abusive of free expression. Unfortunately, this amendment encourages a government solution to the problems by allowing the Federal Government and Federal courts to instruct States and local school districts on the use of their property. This is in direct contrast to the original purpose of the Constitution, to protect against a strong central government and in support of State and local government. Congress Can’t Vote For Amendment 4 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 55:10 Until our judges and even our Congress have a better understanding of the current Constitution and a willingness to follow it, new constitutional amendments will do little to help and will more likely make things worse. Congress Bankruptcy Hierarchy — Part 1 10 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 56:3 If we reverse the order, the local government gets the money first, the money that would be left over from the bankruptcy, then the State government, and then the Federal Government. This merely states the point, which I hope we can get across someday in this Congress, that the priority in government should be local government, not a big, strong Federal Government. Congress Bankruptcy Hierarchy — Part 2 10 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 57:2 Mr. Chairman, I would just like to respond by saying I certainly do recognize responsibility of the U.S. Congress in dealing with national legislation dealing with bankruptcy and that bankruptcy laws should be uniform and fair. But this does not preclude us from thinking about the particulars of a piece of legislation designating the importance of the different governmental bodies, so everything I say about emphasizing local government over Federal Government is certainly legitimate and does not contradict in any way the notion that we should not deal with this at all because certainly we have this authority to do so. Congress Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act 11 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 58:2 Mr. Chairman, today the Congress will collectively move our nation yet another step closer to a national police state by further expanding the notion of federal crimes and paving the way for a deluge of federal criminal justice activity. Of course, it is much easier to ride the current wave of federally “criminalizing” all human malfeasance in the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a Constitutional oath which prescribes a process by which the nation is protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism. Who, after all, and especially in an election year, wants to be amongst those members of Congress who are portrayed as soft on child-related sexual crime irrespective of the procedural transgressions and individual or civil liberties one tramples in their zealous approach. Congress Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act 11 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 58:3 In the name of the politically popular cause of protecting children against sex crimes, the Members of Congress will vote on whether to move the Nation further down the path of centralized-Government implosion by appropriating yet more Federal taxpayer money and brandishing more U.S. prosecutors at whatever problem happens to be brought to the floor by any Members of Congress hoping to gain political favor with those embracing some politically popular cause. The Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act of 1998 is no exception. Congress Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act 11 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 58:4 Who, after all, can stand on the house floor and oppose a bill which is argued to make the world safer for children with respect to crimes? It is a sad commentary when members of this body only embrace or even mention federalism when it serves their own political purposes and, at the same time, consciously ignore federalism’s implications for these politically popular causes. It seems to no longer even matter whether governmental programs actually accomplish their intended goals or have any realistic hope of solving problems. No longer does the end even justify the means. All that now seems to matter is that Congress pass a new law. Congress Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act 11 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 58:5 Crimes committed against children (as well as adults) are a problem that should concern all Americans. As a doctor of obstetrics I have enjoyed the privilege of bringing more than 3,000 new lives into the world. I know there are few things more tragic than crimes committed against young people. In fact, the types of crimes this bill attempts to federally punish are among the most despicable criminal acts committed. Undoubtedly, strong measures and penalties need to be imposed to deter and punish these criminal actors. Nevertheless, the threshold question in Congress must always be: “under what authority do we act?” Should we cease to concern ourselves about the Constitution in all that we do and moved by emotion speak only of vague theoretical outcomes? Congress Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act 11 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 58:8 Some will argue that federal legislation is necessary because communications cross state lines. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of state sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit clause allow states to exact judgments from those who violate their state laws. The Constitution even allows the federal government to legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow states to enforce their substantive laws without the federal government imposing its substantive edicts on the states. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one state to another and in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 16 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 59:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, campaign finance reform has been a major topic for months on the House floor and, I understand, will continue to be a major debate. The last time the Congress has passed any major reforms dealing with campaigning was in the 1970s, and every problem that we had back then we have today, only it is much worse. Today, in order to comply with the law, we fill out tens of thousands of pages of forms, there is total misunderstanding of what the rules and regulations are, there are numerous fines being levied against many Members and many candidates, there are many inaccuracies put into the record mainly because a lot of people cannot even understand the rules and regulations, and I would not be surprised if just about everybody who ever filled out a financial reform at one time or the other inadvertently had some inaccuracies. All the challenges to these records have always been done by opponents and usually politicized, and it has not been motivated for the best of reasons. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 16 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 59:3 But I disagree. Money is not the problem. The basic problem is that there is so much to be gained by coming to Washington, lobbying Congress and influencing legislation. The problem is not that we have too much freedom. The problem is that we have too much government, and if we think that just more regulations and more government will get rid of the problem, we are kidding ourselves. What we need is smaller government, less influence of the government on everything that we do in our personal lives as well as our economic lives. The Congress is always being involved. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 16 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 59:4 Not only domestically, but Congress is endlessly involved in many affairs overseas. We are involved by passing out foreign aid, getting involved in programs like the IMF and World Bank. We are interfering in internal affairs militarily in over a hundred countries at the present time. So there is a tremendous motivation for people to come here and try to influence us. They see it as a good investment. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 16 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 59:6 Under the conditions that we have today the only way we can avoid the influence is not ourselves, we, the Members of Congress, being a good investment. We should be independent, courageous and do the things that are right rather than being influenced by the money. But the rules and the regulations will not do very much to help solve this problem. Attacking basic fundamental rights would certainly be the wrong thing to do, and that is what so much of this legislation is doing. It is attacking the fundamental right to speak out to petition the government to spend one’s money the way he sees fit, and this will only make the problems much worse. Congress Individuals with Disabilities Act 16 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 60:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to express my opposition to H. Res. 399, the resolution calling for full-funding of the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). My opposition to this act should in no way be interpreted as opposition to increased spending on education. However, the way to accomplish this worthy goal is to allow parents greater control over education resources by cutting taxes, thus allowing parents to devote more of their resources to educating their children in such a manner as they see fit. Massive tax cuts for the American family, not increased spending on federal programs, should be this Congress’ top priority. Congress Individuals with Disabilities Act 16 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 60:3 Rather than increasing federal spending, Congress should focus on returning control over education to the American people by enacting the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 1816), which provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit to pay for K–12 education expenses. Passage of this act would especially benefit parents whose children have learning disabilities as those parents have the greatest need to devote a large portion of their income toward their child’s education. Congress Individuals with Disabilities Act 16 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 60:5 It is time for Congress to restore control over education to the American people. The only way to accomplish this goal is to defund education programs that allow federal bureaucrats to control America’s schools. Therefore, I call on my colleagues to reject H. Res. 399 and instead join my efforts to pass the Family Education Freedom Act. If Congress gets Washington off the backs and out of the pocketbooks of parents, American children will be better off. Congress Time To Reconsider Destructive Embargo Policies 17 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 61:3 Mr. Speaker, I am proud to represent a very rural, agriculturally-based district. My constituents are well aware of the importance of opening export markets for America’s agricultural producers. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to place in the RECORD this story from the Farm Bureau News in hopes that people in the Administration, as well as in this Congress will begin to reconsider destructive embargo policies which only harm our nation’s farmers and other producers including my constituents. Congress Parent And Student Saving Account Act 18 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 62:2 I certainly support the provision allowing parents to contribute up to $2,000 a year to education savings accounts without having to pay taxes on the interest earned by that account. This provision expands parental control of education, the key to true education reform as well as one of the hallmarks of a free society. Today the right of parents to educate their children as they see fit is increasingly eroded by the excessive tax burden imposed on America’s families by Congress. Congress then rubs salt in the wounds of America’s hardworking, taxpaying parents by using their tax dollars to fund an unconstitutional education bureaucracy that all too often uses its illegitimate authority over education to undermine the values of these same parents! Congress Parent And Student Saving Account Act 18 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 62:4 Returning control over educational resources to the American people ought to be among Congress’ top priorities. In fact, one of my objections to this bill is that is does not go nearly far enough in returning education dollars to parents. This is largely because the deposit to an education IRA must consist of after-tax dollars. Mr. Speaker, education IRAs would be so much more beneficial if parents could make their deposits with pretax dollars. Furthermore, allowing contributions to be made from pretax dollars would provide a greater incentive for citizens to contribute to education IRAs for others’ underprivileged children. Congress Parent And Student Saving Account Act 18 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 62:7 In order to offset the so-called “cost to government” (revenue loss) H.R. 2646 alters the rules by which businesses are taxed on employee vacation benefits. While I support efforts to ensure that tax cuts do not increase the budget deficit, the offset should come from cuts in wasteful, unconstitutional government programs, such as foreign aid and corporate welfare. Congress should give serious consideration to cutting unconstitutional programs such as “Goals 2000” which runs roughshod over the rights of parents to control their children’s education, as a means of offsetting the revenue loss to the treasury from this bill. A less than 3% cut in the National Endowment for the Arts budget would provide more funding than needed for the education IRA section of this legislation. Congress Parent And Student Saving Account Act 18 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 62:8 Mr. Speaker, we in Congress have no moral nor scientific means by which to determine which Americans are most deserving of tax cuts. Yet, this is precisely what Congress does when it raises taxes on some Americans to offset tax cuts for others. Rather than selecting some arbitrary means of choosing which Americans are more deserving of tax cuts, Congress should cut taxes for all Americans. Congress Parent And Student Saving Account Act 18 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 62:15 The issue is not whether local schools should use evidence of possessing a weapon as evidence in a discipline procedure. Before this Congress can even consider the merits of a policy, we must consider first whether or not the matter falls within our constitutional authority. The plain fact is as the tenth amendment to the Bill of Rights makes clear, Congress is forbidden from dictating policy to local schools. Congress Parent And Student Saving Account Act 18 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 62:16 The drafters of the United States Constitution understood that to allow the federal government to meddle in the governance of local schools, much less act as a national school board, would inevitably result in the replacement of parental control by federal control. Parents are best able to control education when the decision making power is located closest to them. Thus, when Congress centralized control over education, it weakens the ability of parents to control, or even influence, the educational system. If Congress was serious about restoring parental control on education, the last thing we would even consider doing is imposing more federal mandates on local schools. Congress Drug-Free Workplace Act 23 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 63:7 It should never go unnoticed that, as is so often the case in this Congress, constitutional authority is lacking for the further expansion of the Federal Government into the realm of small business and the means by which they hire reliable employees. The Report on H.R. 3583 cites Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 as the Constitutional authority. This clause reads “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Office thereof” (emphasis added). The authority cited requires a foregoing Power which not only is missing from the authority cited for this bill but in my close examination of Article I, Section 8, simply seems not to exist. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 23 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 64:5 Twenty-five years ago in the 1970s, after Watergate, the Congress wrote a lot of rules and regulations. Hundreds of candidates have filled out forms and have done all kinds of things that have been very complicated but have achieved very little. The problem is every bit as bad as it was before, and most people admit that. Congress Internet Tax Freedom Act 23 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 66:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express skepticism regarding H.R. 4105, The Internet Tax Freedom Act. The stated goal of H.R. 4105 certainly is noble: “A bill to establish a national policy against State and local interference with interstate commerce on the Internet, to exercise congressional jurisdiction over interstate commerce by establishing a moratorium on the imposition of exactions that would interfere with the free flow of commerce via the Internet, to establish a national policy against federal and state regulation of Internet access and online services, and for other purposes.” The bill’s name, “Tax Freedom,” also expresses a laudable notion. One must always be wary of misnomers in Washington — the Justice Department comes to mind as one quick example. The late economic historian, Murray N. Rothbard, Ph.D., so warned when he stated “when someone in government mentions the word ‘fairness’, grab your wallet and run for the hills.” Congress Issue Ads 14 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 67:5 So I think it is a very important amendment and we should pay close attention to this to make sure that we pass this amendment. The problem with attacking big money without knowing why there is big money involved in politics I think is the problem that we face. Big money is a problem. They are spending $100 million a month to lobby us in the Congress and hundreds of millions of dollars in the campaign, but nobody ever talks about why they are doing it. Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 15 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 75:2 This obscure provision, which was part of a major piece of legislation passed at the end of the 104th Congress, represents a major power grab by the Federal Government and a threat to the liberties of every American, for it would transform State drivers’ licenses into national ID cards. Congress The Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 15 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 76:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act, which repeals those sections of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 authorizing the establishment of federal standards for birth certificates and drivers’ licenses. This obscure provision, which was part of a major piece of legislation passed at the end of the 104th Congress, represents a major power grab by the federal government and a threat to the liberties of every American, for it would transform state drivers’ licenses into national ID cards. Congress The Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 15 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 76:7 If the disapproval of the Founders is not sufficient to cause my colleagues to support this legislation, then perhaps they should consider the reaction of the American people when they discover that they must produce a federally-approved ID in order to get a job or open a bank account. Already many offices are being flooded with complaints about the movement toward a national ID card. If this scheme is not halted, Congress and the entire political establishment could drown in the backlash from the American people. Congress The Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 15 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 76:8 National ID cards are a trademark of totalitarianism and are thus incompatible with a free society. In order to preserve some semblance of American liberty and republican government I am proud to introduce the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act. I thank Congressman BARR for joining me in cosponsoring this legislation. I urge my colleagues to stand up for the rights of American people by cosponsoring the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act. Congress Child Custody Protection Act 15 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 77:9 Our federal government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers. Article one, Section eight, enumerates the legislative areas for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every other issue, the federal government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the state governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The tenth amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Congress Child Custody Protection Act 15 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 77:10 Nevertheless, rather than abide by our constitutional limits, Congress today will likely pass H.R. 3682. H.R. 3682 amends title 18, United States Code, to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions. Should parents be involved in decisions regarding the health of their children? Absolutely. Should the law respect parents rights to not have their children taken across state lines for contemptible purposes? Absolutely. Can a state pass an enforceable statute to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions? Absolutely. But when asked if there exists constitutional authority for the federal criminalizing of just such an action the answer is absolutely not. Congress Child Custody Protection Act 15 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 77:12 The argument which springs from the criticism of a federalized criminal code and a federal police force is that states may be less effective than a centralized federal government in dealing with those who leave one state jurisdiction for another. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of state sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit clause allow states to exact judgments from those who violate their state laws. The Constitution even allows the federal government to legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow states to enforce their substantive laws without the federal government imposing its substantive edicts on the states. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one state to another. While not self-enacting, in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. There is, of course, a cost imposed upon states in working with one another rather than relying on a national, unified police force. At the same time, there is a greater cost to centralization of police power. Congress National Right To Work Act 15 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 78:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership on this important issue. I am pleased to have this opportunity to reiterate my strong support for the National Right to Work Act, HR 59. Unlike much of the legislation considered before this Congress, this bill expands freedom by repealing those sections of federal law that authorize compulsory unionism, laws that Congress had no constitutional authority to enact in the first place! Congress National Right To Work Act 15 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 78:2 Since the problem of compulsory unionism was created by Congress, only Congress can solve it. While state Right to Work laws provide some modicum of worker freedom, they do not cover millions of workers on federal enclaves, in the transportation industries, or on Indian Reservations. Contrary to the claims of Right to Work opponents, this bill in no way infringes on state autonomy. I would remind my colleagues that, prior to the passage of the National Labor Relations Act, no state had a law requiring workers to join a union or pay union dues. Compulsory unionism was forced on the people and the states when Congress nationalized labor policy in 1935. It strains logic to suggest that repeal of any federal law is somehow a violation of states’ rights. Congress National Right To Work Act 15 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 78:4 No wonder the overwhelming majority of the American people support the National Right to Work Act, as shown both by polling results and by the many postcards and petitions my office has received asking for Congressional action on this bill. Congress Exchange Stabilization Fund 16 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 79:14 So the original purpose under fixed exchange rate no longer exists. There is no need to prop up a dollar under floating currencies. This is used precisely to bail out special privileged people who have made loans overseas, special corporations around the country, special countries that are our competitors, and it is a way of getting around the Congress, it is a way of devaluing the dollar, putting more pressure on the dollar and hurting the American people. Congress Women’s, Infant, and Children’s Program 20 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 81:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Congress should reject H.R. 3874, a bill reauthorizing the Women’s, Infant, and Children’s (WIC) program and other childhood nutrition programs, and the flawed redistributionist, welfare state model that lies behind this bill. Although the goals of this legislation are noble, the means toward achieving the goals embodied therein are unconstitutional and ineffective. Congress Women’s, Infant, and Children’s Program 20 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 81:7 According to the Congressional Research Service, food vendors participating in WIC received 9.86 billion in Fiscal Year 1997 — 75% of the total funds spent on the WIC program! This fiscal year, producers of food products approved by the federal government for purchase by WIC participants are expected to receive $10 billion dollars in taxpayer dollars! Small wonder the lobbyists who came to my office to discuss WIC were not advocates for the poor, but rather well-healed spokespersons for corporate interests! Congress Women’s, Infant, and Children’s Program 20 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 81:10 The best way to help the poor is to dramatically cut taxes thus allowing individuals to devote more of their own resources to those charitable causes which better address genuine need. I am a cosponsor of HR 1338, which raises the charitable deduction and I believe Congress should make awakening the charitable impulses of the American people by reducing their tax burden one of its top priorities. In fact, Congress should seriously consider enacting a dollar-per-dollar tax credit for donations to the needy. This would do more to truly help the disadvantaged than a tenfold increase in spending on the programs in HR 3874. Congress Women’s, Infant, and Children’s Program 20 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 81:11 In conclusion, Congress should reject HR 3874 because the programs contained therein lack constitutional foundation, allow the federal government to control the lives of program recipients, and serve as a means of transferring monies from the taxpayers to big corporations. Instead of funding programs, Congress should return responsibility for helping those in need to those best able to effectively provide assistance; the American people acting voluntarily. Congress The Patient Privacy Act 21 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 82:7 The second, and most important reason, legislation “protecting” the unique health identifier is insufficient is that the federal government lacks any constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal health identifier, regardless of any attached “privacy protections.” Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty for it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate arbitrator of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress and the American people to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress Patient Protection Act of 1998 24 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 84:3 While I was not here in 1996 when the medical ID was authorized, it is my understanding that this provision was part of a large bill rushed through Congress without much debate. I am glad that Congress has decided to at least take a second look at this proposal and its ramifications. I am quite confident that, after Congress hears from the millions of Americans who object to a national ID, my colleagues will do the right thing and pass legislation forbidding the federal government from instituting a “uniform standard health identifier.” Congress Patient Protection Act of 1998 24 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 84:4 Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased that Congress is addressing the subject of health care in America, for the American health care system does need reform. Too many Americans lack access to quality health care while millions more find their access to medical care blocked by a “gatekeeper,” an employee of an insurance company or a Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) who has the authority to overrule the treatment decisions of physicians! Congress Patient Protection Act of 1998 24 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 84:14 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while the Patient Protection Act takes some good steps toward placing patients back in control of the health care system, it also furthers the federal role in overseeing the health system. It is my belief that the unintended, but inevitable, consequence of this bill, will require Congress to return to the issue of health care reform in a few years. I hope Congress gets it right next time. Congress Ballot Access — Part 1 30 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 86:8 Mr. Chairman, I want to make 4 points about the amendment. First, it is constitutional to do this. Article I, section 4, explicitly authorizes the U.S. Congress to, “At any time by law make or alter such regulations regarding the manner of holding elections.” This is the authority that was used for the Voters Rights Act of 1965. Congress Ballot Access — Part 2 30 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 91:2 We have been spending months, and I believe both sides of the aisle have been very sincere in their efforts to clarify and to improve our election process. I think this would be a tremendous benefit to the congressional candidates as well, because there would be more interest. People are not even listening to the debates. If they are not even willing to listen to the presidential debates, how can they get interested in Senate races and in House races? Congress Ballot Access — Part 2 30 July 1998    1998 Ron Paul 91:4 All I am asking for is for us to endorse the notion, and we have the authority, the money comes from congressional appropriations. We have written these laws. These are election laws. We have this authority. We have the authority under the Constitution and we have the authority under our laws to do this. Congress Banking Regulations 4 August 1998    1998 Ron Paul 93:8 Since I strongly support the expansion of the field of membership for credit unions and was the first one in this congress to introduce multiple common bonds for credit unions in the Financial Freedom Act, H.R. 1121, I am happy to speak in support of the passage of H.R. 1151 here today. Having argued forcefully against the imposition of new regulations imposed upon credit unions, I congratulate the senate for not increasing the regulatory burden on credit unions in an attempt to “level the playing field” with banks and other financial institutions. Congress Banking Regulations 4 August 1998    1998 Ron Paul 93:9 A better approach is to lead the congress toward lower taxes and less regulation — on credit unions, banks and other financial institutions. H.R. 1151, The Credit Union Membership Access Act, as amended by the senate, takes us one step in the right direction of less government regulation restricting individual choice. We must continue on the path of fewer regulations and lower taxes. Congress Banking Regulations 4 August 1998    1998 Ron Paul 93:10 These regulations add to the costs of operations of financial institutions. This cost is passed on to consumers in the form of higher interest rates and additional fees. These regulations impose a disproportionate burden on smallers institutions, stifles the possibility of new entrants into the financial sector, and contributes to a consolidation and fewer market participants of the industry. Consumers need additional choices, not congressionally-imposed limits on choices. Congress English Language Fluency Act 10 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 96:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to express my opposition to H.R. 3892, the English Language Fluency Act. Although I supported the bill when it was marked-up before the Education and Workforce Committee, after having an opportunity to study the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)’s scoring of H.R. 3892, I realized that I must oppose this bill because it increases expenditures for bilingual education. Thus, this bill actually increases the Federal Government’s role in education. Congress English Language Fluency Act 10 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 96:4 Although H.R. 3892 takes some small steps forward toward restoring local control of education, it takes a giant step backward by extending bilingual education programs for three years beyond the current authorization and according to CBO this will increase Federal spending by $719 million! Mr. Chairman, it is time that Congress realized that increasing Federal funding is utterly incompatible with increasing local control. The primary reason State and local governments submit to Federal dictates in areas such as bilingual education is because the Federal Government bribes States with moneys illegitimately taken from the American people to confer to Federal dictates. Since he who pays the piper calls the tune, any measures to take more moneys from the American people and give it to Federal educrats reduces parental control by enhancing the Federal stranglehold on education. Only by defunding the Federal bureaucracy can State, local and parental control be restored. Congress English Language Fluency Act 10 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 96:5 In order to restore parental control of education I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 1816), which provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit to pay for elementary and secondary education expenses. This bill places parents back in charge and is thus the most effective education reform bill introduced in this Congress. Congress Worldwide Financial Crisis 10 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 97:10 Protecting the dollar is our job here in the Congress, and we are not paying much attention. Although turmoil elsewhere in the world has given a recent boost to the dollar, signs are appearing that the dollar, unbacked by anything of real value, is vulnerable. Setting a standard for the dollar with real value behind it can restore trust to the system and will become crucial in solving our problems, soon to become more apparent. Congress Head Start Program 14 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 99:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to express my opposition to S. 2206, which reauthorizes the Head Start program, as well as the Community Services Block Grant program and the Low Income Housing Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). While the goals of Head Start and the Community Services Block Grant program are certainly noble, the means these programs use to accomplish these goals (confiscating monies from one group of citizens and sending them to another group of citizens in the form of federal funding for Washington-controlled programs) are immoral and ineffective. There is no constitutional authority for Congress to fund any programs concerning child-rearing or education. Under the constitutional system, these matters are left solely in the hands of private citizens, local government, and the individual states. Congress Head Start Program 14 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 99:2 In fact, the founders of this country would be horrified by one of the premises underlying this type of federal program: that communities and private individuals are unwilling and unable to meet the special needs of low-income children without intervention by the federal government. The truth is that the American people can and will meet the educational and other needs of all children if Congress gives them the freedom to do so by eliminating the oppressive tax burden fostered on Americans to fund the welfare-warfare state. Congress Head Start Program 14 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 99:4 Mr. Speaker, if programs such as Head Start where controlled by private charities, their staffers would not have to worry about diverting valuable resources away from their mission to fulfill the whims of Congress. Congress Head Start Program 14 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 99:6 Congress should also reject S. 2206 because it reauthorizes the Low Income Heating and Energy Program (LIHEAP). LIHEAP is an unconstitutional transfer program which has outlived its usefulness. LIHEAP was instituted in order to help low-income people deal with the high prices resulting from the energy crisis of the late seventies. However, since then, home heating prices have declined by 51.6% residential electricity prices have declined by 25% and residential natural gas prices have declined by 32.7%. Furthermore, the people of Texas are sending approximately $43 million more taxpayer dollars to Washington for LIHEAP than they are receiving in LIHEAP funds. There is no moral or constitutional justification for taking money from Texans, who could use those funds for state and local programs to provide low-income Texans with relief from oppressive heat, to benefit people in other states. Congress Head Start Program 14 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 99:7 Another provision in S. 2206 that should be of concern to believers in a free society is the provision making “faith-based organizations” eligible for federal funds under the Community Services Block Grant program. While I have little doubt that the services offered by churches and other religious institutions can be more effective in producing social services than many secular programs, I am concerned that allowing faith-based organizations’ access to federal taxpayer dollars may change those organizations into lobbyists who will compromise their core beliefs rather than risk alienating members of Congress and thus losing their federal funds. Thus, allowing faith-based organizations to receive federal funds may undermine future attempts to reduce federal control over social services, undermine America’s tradition of non-establishment of religion, and weaken the religious and moral component of the programs of “faith-based providers.” It would be a tragedy for America if religious organizations weakened the spiritual aspects that made their service programs effective in order to receive federal lucre. Congress The Failed War On Drugs 15 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 100:3 But the way we are going about this is wrong. I am rather surprised in our side of the aisle that champions limited government and States’ rights, that they use the FDA’s ability to regulate nicotine as an excuse and the legal loophole for the Federal Government to be involved in marijuana. I might remind them that 80 years ago when this country decided that we should not have alcohol, they did not come to the Congress and ask for a law. They asked for a constitutional amendment realizing the Congress had no authority to regulate alcohol. Today we have forgotten about that. Many of my colleagues might not know or remember that the first attack on the medicinal use of marijuana occurred under the hero of the left, F.D.R., in 1937. Prior to 1937, marijuana was used medicinally, and it was used with only local control. Congress Dollars To The Classroom Act 18 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 101:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to express my reservations about H.R. 3248, the Dollars to the Classroom Act. I take a back seat to no one in my opposition to Federal control of education. Unlike some of this bills most vocal supporters, I have consistently voted against all appropriations for the Department of Education. In fact, when I was serving in the House in 1979, I opposed the creation of the Education Department. I applaud the work Mr. Pitts and others have done to force Congress to debate the best means of returning power over education to the states, local communities and primarily parents. However, although H.R. 3248 takes a step toward shrinking the Federal bureaucracy by repealing several education programs, its long-term effect will likely be to strengthen the Federal Government’s control over education by increasing Federal spending. Therefore, Congress should reject this bill. Congress Dollars To The Classroom Act 18 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 101:3 The requirement that the states certify that 95% of Federal monies are spent “in the classroom,” (a term not defined in the act) and report to the Congress how they are using those monies to improve student performance imposes an unacceptable level of Federal management on the states. States are sovereign entities, not administrative units of the Federal Government, and should not have to account to the Federal Government for their management of educational programs. Congress Dollars To The Classroom Act 18 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 101:5 Under the revised version of H.R. 3248, states can only spend their block grant money on one or more of the programs supposedly repealed by the Federal Government! In fact, this bill is merely one more example of “mandate federalism” where states are given flexibility to determine how best to fulfill goals set by Congress. Granting states the authority to select a particular form of federal management of education may be an improvement over the current system, but it is hardly a restoration of state and local control over education! Congress Dollars To The Classroom Act 18 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 101:6 The federal government’s power to treat state governments as their administrative subordinates stems from an abuse of Congress’ taxing-and-spending power. Submitting to federal control is the only way state and local officials can recapture any part of the monies the federal government has illegitimately taken from a state’s citizens. Of course, this is also the only way state officials can tax citizens of other states to support their education programs. It is the rare official who can afford not to bow to federal dictates in exchange for federal funding! Congress Dollars To The Classroom Act 18 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 101:8 Since federal spending is the root of federal control, by increasing federal spending this bill lays the groundwork for future Congresses to fasten more and more mandates on the states. Because state and even local officials, not federal bureaucrats, will be carrying out these mandates, this system could complete the transformation of the state governments into mere agents of the federal government. Congress Dollars To The Classroom Act 18 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 101:9 Madam Chairman, those who doubt the likelihood of the above scenario should remember that the Education Committee could not even pass the initial block grant without “giving in” to the temptation to limit state autonomy in the use of education funds because “Congress cannot trust the states to do the right thing!” Given that this Congress cannot pass a clean block grant, who can doubt that some future Congress will decide that the States need federal “leadership” to ensure they use their block grants in the correct manner, or that states should be forced to use at least a certain percentage of their block grant funds on a few “vital” programs. Congress Dollars To The Classroom Act 18 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 101:10 I would also ask those of my colleagues who claim that block grant will lead to future reductions in expenditures how likely is this will occur when Congress had to increase expenditures in order to originally implement the block grant programs? Congress Dollars To The Classroom Act 18 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 101:13 Madam Chairman, while I applaud the attempt by the drafters of this bill to attempt to reduce the federal education bureaucracy, the fact is the Dollars to the Classroom Act represents the latest attempt of this Congress to avoid addressing philosophical and constitutional questions of the role of the Federal and State Governments by means of adjustments in management in the name of devolution. Devolution is said to be a return to state’s rights since it decentralized the management of federal program; this is a new 1990’s definition of the original concept of federalism and is a poor substitute for the original, constitutional definition of federalism. Congress Dollars To The Classroom Act 18 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 101:14 Rather than shifting responsibility for the management of federal funds, Congress should defund all unconstitutional programs and dramatically cut taxes imposed upon the American people, thus enabling American families to devote more of their resources to education. I have introduced a bill, the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 1816) to provide parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit for education expenses. This bill directly empowers parents, not bureaucrats or state officials, to control education and is the most important education reform idea introduced in this Congress. Congress Dollars To The Classroom Act 18 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 101:15 In conclusion, the Dollars to the Classroom Act may repeal some unconstitutional education programs but it continues the federal government’s equally unconstitutional taking of funds from the America people for the purpose of returning them in the form of monies for education only if a state obeys federal mandates. While this may be closer to the constitutional systems, it also lays the groundwork for future federal power grabs by increasing federal spending. Rather than continue to increase spending while pretending to restore federalism, Congress should take action to restore parents to the rightful place as the “bosses” of America’s education system. Congress Revamping The Monetary System 24 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 102:2 Today it was recorded in our newspapers and it was a consequence of a meeting held last night having to do with a company that went bankrupt, Long-Term Capital Management. I believe this has a lot of significance and is something that we in the Congress should not ignore. Congress Revamping The Monetary System 24 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 102:14 If we have an international Federal Reserve System that is permitted to do this without legislation and out of the realms of the legislative bodies around the world, it means that they can steal the value of the strong currencies. So literally an international central bank could undermine the value of the dollar without permission by the U.S. Congress, without an appropriation, but the penalty will fall on the American people by having a devalued dollar. Congress Revamping The Monetary System 24 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 102:17 But we go one step further. The Congress has reneged on its responsibility and has not maintained the responsibility of maintaining value in the dollar. It has turned it over to a very secretive body, the Federal Reserve System, that has no responsibility to the U.S. Congress. So I argue for the case of watching out for the dollar and argue for sound money, and not to allow this to progress any further. Congress Don’t Fast-Track Free Trade Deal 25 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 103:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today, the House is asked to vote to approve H.R. 2621, a fast-track procedure under which international agreements might be approved as far into the future as October 1, 2005. The “fast track” procedure requires the President to submit draft international agreements, implementing legislation, and a statement of administrative action for congressional approval. Amendments to the legislation in Congress are not permitted once the bill is introduced and committee and floor action votes may consist only of “yes” or “no” votes on any potential agreement as it is introduced. Congress Don’t Fast-Track Free Trade Deal 25 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 103:4 Congress does have, amongst its enumerated powers, regulation of commerce with foreign nations. Imposing import tariffs, quotas, and embargoes, however economically detrimental to the macro economy of the United States, are, at least, amongst powers delegated to Congress by Article I of the Constitution. Regulating commerce, of course, refers to enacting domestic laws which effect voluntary exchanges between trading partners who happen to be citizens of different governments. International agreements between the governments of those trading partners cannot be construed to escape the stringent treaty ratification process established by the document’s framers just by suggesting Congress has the power to enact domestic regulation regarding foreign commerce. If this were an allowable justification for bypassing the constitutionally-mandated treaty process, Article I Congressional powers would almost completely undermine the necessity for the Constitutionally-mandated treaty process. Treaties regarding everything from international monetary policy to military policy would suddenly become “ripe” for the “treaty-making” power of the President and Congress. Instead, a bright line process exists whereby entering into agreements with foreign nations under which the U.S. government will do “X” if the government of Ruritania does “Y” must be understood to constitute an international agreement and, as such, require the more restrictive treaty process. Congress Don’t Fast-Track Free Trade Deal 25 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 103:5 Moreover, because international courts regard “treaties” and “agreements” as equally binding on signatory governments, a stronger case is made that they must be made subject to the same constitutional process. Insofar as H.R. 2621 ignores the lake of a congressional role in the international treaty process and instead attempts to make Congress an integral part of a procedure for which it lacks any constitutional authority, this bill can be opposed on constitutional grounds alone. Congress Don’t Fast-Track Free Trade Deal 25 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 103:6 Even if the procedure advocated by the bill were able to survive what should always be the Congressman’s initial threshold of constitutionality, the bill contains provisions which will likely continue our country down the ugly path of internationally-engineered, “managed trade” rather than that of free trade. As explained by economist Murray N. Rothbard: Congress Don’t Fast-Track Free Trade Deal 25 September 1998    1998 Ron Paul 103:11 Lastly, critics of the bill convincingly argue that language within H.R. 2621 regarding “Foreign Investment” would establish new rights for foreign investors and corporations and new obligations for the United States. H.R. 2621 attempts to eliminate artificial or trade-distorting barriers to trade-related foreign investment by reducing or eliminating exceptions to the principle of national treatment; free the transfer of funds relating to investments; reduce or eliminate performance requirements and other unreasonable barriers to the establishment and operation of investments; seeks to establish standards for expropriation and compensation for expropriation, consistent with United States legal principles and practice; and provide meaningful procedures for resolving investment disputes. It is argued that H.R. 2621 will congressionally activate the nearly completed Multilateral Agreement on Investment which covers 29 countries and forbids countries from regulating investment or capital flows and would establish new rights for foreign investors and corporations and new obligations for the United States. The MAI requires governments to pay investors for any action that directly or indirectly has an equivalent effect of expropriation. The MAI would be enforceable through international tribunals similar to those of the World Trade Organization without the due process protections of the United States. Congress World Financial Markets 1 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 104:9 A Federal Reserve orchestrated and arm-twisting bailout of LTCM associated with less than a coincidentally announced credit expansion only puts long-term pressure on the dollar. All Americans suffer when the dollar is debased. Congress’s responsibility is to the dollar and not foreign currencies, not foreign economies or international hedge funds which get in over their heads. Congress Iraq — Part 1 5 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 107:11 This policy makes no sense. Some day we have to think about the security of United States. We spend this money. We spent nearly $100 million bombing nobody and everybody for who knows what reason last week. At the same time our military forces are under trained and lack equipment, and we are wasting money all around the world trying to get more people, see how many people we can get to hate us. Some day we have to stop and say why are we pursuing this. Why do we not have a policy that says that we should, as a Congress, defend the United States, protect us, have a strong military, but not to police the world in this endless adventure of trying to be everything to everybody. We have been on both sides of every conflict since World War II. Even not too long ago they were talking about bombing in Kosovo. As a matter of fact, that is still a serious discussion. But a few months ago they said, well, we are not quite sure who the good guys are, maybe we ought to bomb both sides. It makes no sense. Why do we not become friends to both sides? Congress Iraq — Part 2 5 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 108:12 This is a policy we have been following for way too long. It costs a lot of money. It costs a lot of respect for law because, technically, it is not legal. Waging war should only occur when the Congress and the people decide this. But to casually give more and more authority to the President to do this and encourage him to bump off dictators is a dangerous precedent to set. Congress Iraq — Part 3 5 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 109:8 So do my colleagues think our policy over the last 10 years has actually helped to weaken Saddam Hussein? Every time he comes out of it stronger. And then those who say, “Well, we should march in,” we should all question. Those of us here in the Congress who are so anxious to take out this dictator, they should be willing to march themselves, or send their children and send their grandchildren. Is it worth that? No, no, we would not want to do that, we have to keep our troops safe, safe from harm, but we will just pay somebody to do it. We will pay somebody to do it and we will make wild promises. Promise the Kurds something. They will take care of Saddam Hussein. And sure enough, the promises never come through. Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Congress Iraq — Part 3 5 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 109:11 That is what we did in the 1980s. That is what the Congress did. They went to the taxpayers, they put a gun to their head, and said, you pay up, because we think bin Laden is a freedom fighter. Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, if the gentleman will further yield, it was just not handled correctly. Congress Lake Texana 7 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 111:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, moments ago, HR 4570 was described as a “delicate balance” not to be disturbed by votes against either the resolution or the rule. In fact, the primary justification presented for passage of the bill was the “brilliance” with which a compromise securing the necessary number of votes was “engineered.” Statements such as these are an unfortunate commentary on the state of affairs in the nation’s capital insofar as they represent not advancement of sound policy principles but rather a seriously flawed process by which federal government “favors” are distributed in a means which assures everyone gets a little something if they vote to give enough other districts a little something too. This is not the procedure by which Congress should be deciding matters of federal land disposition and acquisition. In fact, there appears to be no Constitutional authority for most of what HR 4570 proposes to do. Congress Lake Texana 7 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 111:2 Particularly frustrating is that in my attempt to return authority to the State of Texas for a water project located in the 14th District, I introduced HR 2161, The Palmetto Bend Title Transfer Project. Return of such authority comports with my Constitutional notion that local control is preferred to unlimited federal authority to dictate from Washington, the means by which a water project in Edna, Texas will be managed. I understand that certain Members of Congress may disagree with the notion of the proper and limited role of the federal government. The point here, however, is that the “political process” embracing the so-called “high virtue of compromise” means that in order for one to vote for less federal authority one must, at the same time, in this bill, vote for more. Political schizophrenia was never more rampant. One would have to vote to authorize the transfer of 377,000 acres of public land in Utah to the federal government (at taxpayer expense of $50 million for Utah’s public schools) in order to return Lake Texana to the State of Texas.Two unrelated issues; two opposite philosophies as to the proper role of the federal government — a policy at odds with itself (unless, of course, compromise is one’s ultimate end). Congress Lake Texana 7 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 111:5 Members of Congress must not be put in the position of having to support a massive federal land grab to secure for the residents of Texas more local control over their water supply. For these reasons, while I remain committed to the return of Lake Texana to Texas State authorities, I must reluctantly and necessarily oppose HR 4570. Congress National Provider ID 8 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 115:2 My amendment was drafted to ensure that the administration cannot take any steps toward developing or implementing a medical ID. This approach is necessary because if the administration is allowed to work on developing a medical ID it is likely to attempt to implement the ID on at least a “trial” basis. I would remind my colleagues of our experience with national testing. In 1997 Congress forbade the Department of Education from implementing a national test, however it allowed work toward developing national tests. The administration has used this “development loophole” to defy congressional intent by taking steps toward implementation of a national test. It seems clear that only a complete ban forbidding any work on health identifiers will stop all work toward implementation. Congress National Provider ID 8 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 115:12 Last September, NCVHS proposed guidelines for the development of the medical ID. Those guidelines required that all predecisional documents “should be kept in strict confidence and not be shared or discussed,” This is a direct violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires all working documents to be made public. Although NCVHS, succumbing to public pressure and possible legal action against it, recently indicated it will make its pre-decisional documents available in compliance with federal law, I hope my colleagues on the Rules Committee agree that the NCVHS attempt to evade the will of Congress and keep its work secret does not bode well for any future attempts to protect the medical ID from abuse by government officials. Congress National Provider ID 8 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 115:13 The most important reason, legislation “protecting” the unique health identifier is insufficient is that the federal government lacks any constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal health identifier, regardless of any attached “privacy protections.” Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty for it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate arbitrator of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress and the American people to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress National Provider ID 8 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 115:15 Mr. Chairman, all I ask is that Congress by given the change to correct the mistake made in 1996 when they authorized the National Health ID as part of the Kennedy-Kasebaum bill. The federal government has no authority to endanger the privacy of personal medical information by forcing all citizens to adopt a uniform health identifier for use in a national data base. A uniform health ID endangers the constitutional liberties, threatens the doctor-patient relationships, and could allow federal officials access to deeply personal medical information. There can be no justification for risking the rights of private citizens. I therefore urge the Rules Committee to take the first step toward protecting Americans from a medical ID by ruling my amendment to the Labor-HHS–Education Appropriations bill in order. Congress New Global Economic Plan 9 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 117:13 Free markets and stable money should be our goal, not further institutionalizing of world economic planning and fiat money at the sacrifice of personal liberty. Indeed, we need a serious discussion of the current crisis but so far no one should be encouraged by the direction in which the Group of 22 is going. Our responsibility here in the Congress is to protect the dollar, not to sit idly by as it’s being deliberately devalued. Congress Medicare Home Health And Veterans Health Care Improvement Act Of 1998 9 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 118:2 I am pleased that Congress is at last taking action to address the problems created by the IPS. Unless the IPS is reformed, efficient home care agencies across the country may be forced to close. This would raise Medicare costs, as more seniors would be forced to enter nursing homes or forced to seek care from a limited number of home health care agencies. In fact, those agencies that survive the IPS will have been granted a virtual monopoly over the home care market. Only in Washington could punishing efficient businesses and creating a monopoly be sold as a cost-cutting measure! Congress Medicare Home Health And Veterans Health Care Improvement Act Of 1998 9 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 118:3 Congress does need to act to ensure that affordable home care remains available to the millions of senior citizens who rely on home care. However, the proposal before us today does not address the concerns of small providers in states such as Texas. Instead, it increases the reimbursement rate of home care agencies in other states. I am also concerned that the reimbursement formula in this bill continues to saddle younger home health agencies with lower rates of reimbursement than similarly situated agencies who have been in operation longer. Any IPS reform worthy of support should place all health care agencies on a level playing field for reimbursements. Congress Medicare Home Health And Veterans Health Care Improvement Act Of 1998 9 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 118:4 A member of my staff has been informed by a small home health care operator in my district that passage of this bill would allow them only to provide an additional eight visits per year. This will not keep home health patients with complex medical conditions out of nursing homes and hospitals. Congress should implement a real, budget-neutral home health care reform rather than waste our time and the taxpayers’ money with the phony reform before us today. Congress Medicare Home Health And Veterans Health Care Improvement Act Of 1998 9 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 118:6 Now I know many of the bill’s supporters will claim that this is not a tax increase just an adjustment in the qualifications for a tax benefit or tightening a tax loophole. However, the fact is that by raising the threshold before a taxpayer can rollover their traditional IRA into a Roth IRA the federal government is forcing some people to pay higher taxes than they otherwise would, thus they are raising taxes. It is morally wrong for Congress to raise taxes on one group of Americans in order to provide benefits for another group of Americans. Congress Medicare Home Health And Veterans Health Care Improvement Act Of 1998 9 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 118:7 Instead of raising taxes Congress should “offset” these programs by cutting spending in other areas. In particular, Congress should finance veterans health care by reducing expenditures wasted on global adventurism, such as the Bosnia mission. Congress should stop spending Americans blood and treasure to intervene in quarrels that do not concern the American people. Congress Medicare Home Health And Veterans Health Care Improvement Act Of 1998 9 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 118:8 Similarly, Congress should seek funds for an increased expenditure on home care by ending federal support for institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which benefit wealthy bankers and powerful interests but not the American people. At a time when the federal government continues to grow to historic heights and meddles in every facet of American life I cannot believe that Congress cannot find expenditure cuts to finance the programs in this bill! Congress Medicare Home Health And Veterans Health Care Improvement Act Of 1998 9 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 118:9 Mr. Speaker, I must also note that the only time this Congress seems concerned with offsets is when we are either cutting taxes or increasing benefits to groups like veterans or senior citizens. The problem is not a lack of funds but a refusal of this Congress to set proper priorities and put the needs of the American people first. Congress Medicare Home Health And Veterans Health Care Improvement Act Of 1998 9 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 118:10 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I call upon this Congress to reject this bill and instead support an IPS reform that is fair to all home care providers and does not finance worthwhile changes in Medicare by raising taxes. Instead, Congress should offset the cost to these worthy programs by cutting programs that do not benefit the American people. Congress Rights Of The Individual 14 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 119:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I commend to my colleagues in Congress as well as citizens everywhere an article authored by Michael Kelly, National Journal editor. Mr. Kelly aptly describes how the notion of hate crimes undermines a pillar of a free and just society; that is, equal treatment under the law irrespective of which particular group or groups with whom an individual associates. Ours is a republic based upon the rights of the individual. Congress Rights Of The Individual 14 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 119:6 For Shepard’s sake, the cry arises, Wyoming must pass a hate-crime law, and Congress must pass a new, more sweeping, Federal Hate Crimes Protection Act, which would add to the roster of crimes made federal offenses those inspired by bigotry based on sex, disability and sexual orientation. “There is something we can do about this. Congress needs to pass our tough hate crimes legislation,” President Clinton declared Monday, the day Shepard died of his injuries. Congress Rights Of The Individual 14 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 119:7 At least he is consistent. No president has ever been more willing to assault liberty in the pursuit of political happiness than has this one. Clinton is always willing to embrace any new erosion of rights, as long as there is a group of voters or political contributors out there who wish it so. This is one area in which Clinton has been thoroughly bipartisan. In his five years in office, he has joined Republicans in Congress on quite a spree of liberty-bashing. He has signed laws that have stripped habeas corpus to its bones, vastly increased the number of crimes deemed federal offenses, established mindless mandatory sentencing and targeted certain classes of defendants — terrorists, drug pushers — for the special evisceration of rights. Congress Monetary Policy 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 120:2 For 2 years, I have called attention to this predictable event hoping the Congress would deal with it in a serious manner. Congress Monetary Policy 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 120:15 Second, Congress should legalize the Constitutional principle that gold and silver be legal tender by prohibiting sales and capital gains taxes from being placed on all American legal tender coins. Congress Education Debate 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 121:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to express my thoughts on the education debate that has consumed much of this Congress in recent days. For all the sound and fury generated by the argument over education, the truth is that the difference between the congressional leadership and the administration are not that significant; both wish to strengthen the unconstitutional system of centralized education. I trust I need not go into the flaws with President Clinton’s command-and-control approach to education. However, this Congress has failed to present a true, constitutional alternative to President Clinton’s proposals to further nationalize education. Congress Education Debate 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 121:6 Of course I applaud all efforts which move in this direction. the Gingrich/Coverdell education tax cut, The Granger/Dunn bill, and, yes, President Clinton’s college tax credits are good first steps in the direction I advocate. However, Congress must act boldly, we can ill afford to waste another year without a revolutionary change in our policy. I believe my bill sparks this revolution and I am disappointed that the leadership of this Congress chose to ignore this fundamental reform and instead focused on reauthorizing great society programs, creating new Federal education programs (such as those contained in the Reading Excellence Act and the four new Federal programs created by the Higher Education Act), and promoting the pseudo-federalism of block grants. Congress Education Debate 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 121:7 One area where this Congress was successful in fighting for a constitutional education policy was in resisting President Clinton’s drive for national testing. I do wish to express my support for the provisions banning the development of national testing and thank Mr. GOODLING for his leadership in this struggle. However, I wish this provision did no come at the price of $1.1 billion in new Federal spending. In addition, I note that this Congress is taking several steps toward creating a national curriculum, particularly through the Reading Excellence Act, which dictates teaching methodologies to every classroom in the Nation and creates a Federal definition of reading, thus making compliance with Federal standards the goal of education. Congress Education Debate 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 121:8 So, even when Congress resists one proposal to further nationalize education, it supports another form of nationalization. Some Members will claim they are resisting nationalization and even standing up for the 10th amendment by fighting to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on block grants. These Members say that the expenditure levels do not matter, it is the way the money that is spent which is important. Contrary to the view of these well-meaning but misguided members, the amount of taxpayer dollars spent on Federal education programs do matter. Congress Education Debate 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 121:10 Furthermore, the Federal Government’s power to treat State governments as their administrative subordinates stems from an abuse of Congress’ taxing-and-spending power. Submitting to Federal control is the only way State and local officials can recapture any part of the monies of the Federal Government has illegitimately taken from a State’s citizens. Of course, this is also the only way State officials can tax citizens of other States to support their education programs. It is the rare official who can afford not to bow to Federal dictates in exchange for Federal funding! Congress Education Debate 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 121:12 Since Federal spending is the root of Federal control, by increasing Federal spending this Congress is laying the groundwork for future Congresses to fasten more and more mandates on the States. Because State and even local officials, not Federal bureaucrats, will be carrying out these mandates, this system could complete the transformation of the State governments into mere agents of the Federal Government. Congress Education Debate 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 121:13 Congress has used block grants to avoid addressing philosophical and constitutional questions of the role of the Federal and State governments by means of adjustments in management in the name of devolution. Devolution is said to return to State’s rights by decentralizing the management of Federal programs. This is a new 1990’s definition of the original concept of federalism and is a poor substitute for the original, constitutional definition of federalism. Congress Education Debate 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 121:14 While it is true that lower levels of intervention are not as bad as micro-management at the Federal level, Congress’ constitutional and moral responsibility is not to make the Federal education bureaucracy “less bad.” Rather, we must act now to put parents back in charge of education and thus make American education once again the envy of the world. Congress Education Debate 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 121:15 Hopefully the next Congress will be more reverent toward their duty to the U.S. Constitution and America’s children. The price of Congress’ failure to return to the Constitution in the area of education will be paid by the next generation of American children. In short, we cannot afford to continue on the policy road we have been going down. The cost of inaction to our future generations is simply too great. Congress Hate Crimes And Individual Rights 16 October 1998    1998 Ron Paul 122:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I commend to my colleagues in Congress as well as citizens everywhere an article authored by Richard Sincere, Jr., President of Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty. Mr. Sincere aptly describes how the very essence of hate crimes undermines a pillar of a free and just society; that is, equal treatment under the law irrespective of which particular group or groups with whom an individual associates. Ours is a republic based upon the rights of the individual. Congress Resolution On Saddam Hussein 17 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 124:2 Mr. Speaker, it is clearly stated in the Constitution that only Congress has the authority to declare war. It is precisely because of the way we go to war these days that we are continuing to fight the Persian Gulf War. We did not win the Persian Gulf War because we did not declare war since there was no justification to because there was no national security interests involved. Congress Resolution On Saddam Hussein 17 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 124:10 One evident outcome of the anti-sovereignty philosophy is our dependence on institutions such as the United Nations. It is an affront to our nation’s sovereignty and our constitution that the President presently launches war on Iraq under the aegis of a UN resolution but without the Constitutionally required authorization by the United States Congress. Congress Resolution On Saddam Hussein 17 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 124:11 As Americans we are rightly offended by the notion that the Chinese Government has influenced our domestic elections. However, we are not free from hypocrisy. For recently this Congress passed legislation appropriating money for the sole and express purpose of changing the government of a sovereign nation. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of all four articles of impeachment against the President. There is neither pleasure nor vindictiveness in this vote and I have found no one else taking this vote lightly. It seems though many of our colleagues are not pleased with the investigative process; some believing it to have been overly aggressive and petty, while others are convinced it has been unnecessarily limited and misdirected. It certainly raises the question of whether or not the special prosecutor rather than the Congress itself should be doing this delicate work of oversight. Strict adherence to the Constitution would reject the notion that Congress undermine the separations of power by delivering this oversight responsibility to the administration. The long delays and sharp criticisms of the special prosecutor could have been prevented if the Congress had not been dependent on the actions of an Attorney General’s appointee. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:3 But there are many people in this country and some members of Congress who sincerely believe we have over concentrated on the Lewinsky event while ignoring many other charges that have been pushed aside and not fully scrutinized by the House. It must not be forgotten that a resolution to inquire into the possible impeachment of the President was introduced two months before the nation became aware of Monica Lewinsky. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:4 For nearly six years there has been a steady and growing concern about the legal actions of the President. These charges seem almost endless: possible bribery related to Webb Hubble, foreign government influence in the 1996 presidential election, military technology given to China, FBI files, travel office irregularities, and many others. Many Americans are not satisfied that Congress has fully investigated the events surrounding the deaths of Ron Brown and Vince Foster. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:5 The media and the administration has concentrated on the sexual nature of the investigation and this has done a lot to distract from everything else. The process has helped to make the President appear to be a victim of government prosecutorial overkill while ignoring the odious significance of the 1,000 FBI files placed for political reasons in the White House. If corruption becomes pervasive in any administration, yet no actual fingerprints of the president are found on indicting documents, there must come a time when the “CEO” becomes responsible for the actions of his subordinates. That is certainly true in business, the military, and in each congressional office. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:7 But the real irony is that the charges coming out of the Paula Jones sexual harassment suit stem from an unconstitutional federal law that purports to promote good behavior in the work place. It’s based entirely on ignoring the obligations of the states to deal with physical abuse and intimidation. This whole mess resulted from a legal system institutionalized by the very same people who are not the President’s staunchest defenders. Without the federal sexual harassment code of conduct — which the President repeatedly flaunted — there would have been no case against the President since the many other serious charges have been brushed aside. I do not believe this hypocrisy will go unnoticed in the years to come. Hopefully it will lead to the day when the Congress reconsiders such legislation in light of the strict limitations placed on it by the Constitution and to which many members of Congress are now publicly declaring their loyalty. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:9 The public’s acceptance of the President’s behavior may reflect the moral standards of our age, but I’m betting there’s a lot more to it. It is true that some conservative voters, demanding the Republicans in Congress hold the President to a greater accountability, “voted” by staying home. They did not want to encourage the Republicans who were seen as being soft on Clinton for his personal behavior and for capitulating on the big government agenda of more spending, and more taxes. But hopefully there is a much more profound reason for the seemingly inconsistent position of a public who condemns the President while not having the stomach for punishing him through impeachment. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:17 But the President, this Administration and the Congress have all been hypocritical for demanding privacy for themselves yet are the arch enemies of our privacy. Although other Administrations have abused the FBI and the IRS, this Administration has systematically abused these powers like none other. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:18 Let’s declare a victory in despite of the mess we’re in. The President is not likely to be removed from office. We’ll call it a form of “jury nullification” and hope someday this process will be used in our courts to nullify the unconstitutional tax, monetary, gun, anti-privacy, and seizure laws that are heaped upon us by Congress, the President, and perpetuated by a judicial system devoid of respect for individual liberty and the Constitution. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:21 Even though we might claim a victory of sorts, the current impeachment process reveals a defeat for our political system and our society. Since lack of respect for the Constitution is pervasive throughout the Administration, the Congress and the Courts and reflects the political philosophy of the past 60 years, dealing with the President alone, won’t reverse the course on which we find ourselves. There are days when I think we should consider “impeaching” not only the President, but the Congress and the Judiciary. But the desired changes will come only after the people’s attitudes change as to what form of government they desire. When the people demand privacy, freedom and individual responsibility for everyone alike, our government will reflect these views. Hopefully we can see signs in these current events that more Americans are becoming serious about demanding their liberty and rejecting the illusions of government largesse as a panacea. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:22 It’s sad but there is another example of a most egregious abuse of presidential power, committed by the President, that has gotten no attention by the special prosecutors or the Congress. That is the attempt by the President to distract from the Monica Lewinsky testimony to the Grand Jury by bombing with cruise missiles both Sudan and Afghanistan, and the now current war against Iraq. Congress Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:25 Yes, the President’s tawdry affair and the acceptance of it to a large degree by the American people is not a good sign for us as a nation. But, let’s hope that out of this we have a positive result by recognizing the public’s rejection of the snooping actions of Big Brother. Let’s hope there’s a renewed interest in the Constitution and that Congress pays a lot more attention to it on a daily basis especially when it comes to waging war. Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 1:2 The Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act halts the greatest threat to liberty today: the growth of the surveillance state. Unless Congress stops authorizing the federal bureaucracy to stamp and number the American people federal officials will soon have the power to arbitrarily prevent citizens from opening a bank account, getting a job, traveling, or even seeking medical treatment unless their “papers are in order!” Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 1:3 In addition to forbidding the federal government from creating national identifiers, this legislation forbids the federal government from blackmailing states into adopting uniform standard identifiers by withholding federal funds. One of the most onerous practices of Congress is the use of federal funds illegitimately taken from the American people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates. Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 1:4 Perhaps the most important part of the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act is the section prohibiting the use of the Social Security number as an identifier. Although it has not received as much attention as some of the other abuses this legislation addresses, the abuse of the Social Security number may pose an even more immediate threat to American liberty. For all intents and purposes, the Social Security number is already a national identification number. Today, in the majority of states, no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a drivers’ license, or even receive a birth certificate for one’s child without presenting their Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license! Even members of Congress must produce a Social Security number in order to vote on legislation. Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 1:5 One of the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the congressionally-authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim them as dependents. Forcing parents to register their children with the state is more like something out of the nightmares of George Orwell than the dreams of a free republic which inspired this nation’s founders. Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 1:6 Since the creation of the Social Security number in 1935, there have been almost 40 congressionally-authorized uses of the Social Security number as an identification number for non-Social Security programs! Many of these uses, such as the requirement that employers report the Social Security number of new employees to the “new hires data base,” have been enacted in the past few years. In fact, just last year, 210 members of Congress voted to allow states to force citizens to produce a Social Security number before they could exercise their right to vote. Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 1:10 Other members of Congress will claim that the federal government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that in a constitutional republic the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the job of government officials a little bit easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient. Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 1:11 Mr. Speaker, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure citizens’ rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the fact is the only solution is to forbid the federal government from using national identifiers. Legislative “privacy protections” are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for several reasons. First, federal laws have not stopped unscrupulous government officials from accessing personal information. Did laws stop the permanent violation of privacy by the IRS, or the FBI abuses by the Clinton and Nixon administrations? Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 1:12 Secondly, the federal government has been creating property interests in private information for certain state-favored third parties. For example, a little-noticed provision in the Patient Protection Act established a property right for insurance companies to access personal health care information. Congress also authorized private individuals to receive personal information from government data bases in last year’s copyright bill. The Clinton Administration has even endorsed allowing law enforcement officials’ access to health care information, in complete disregard of the fifth amendment. Obviously, “private protection” laws have proven greatly inadequate to protect personal information when the government is the one providing or seeking the information! Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 1:13 The primary reason why any action short of the repeal of laws authorizing privacy violation is insufficient is because the federal government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress Freedom And Privacy Restoration Act 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 1:14 Mr. Speaker, those members who are unpersuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act should consider the overwhelming opposition of the American people toward national identifiers. My office has been inundated with calls from around the country protesting the movement toward a national ID card and encouraging my efforts to thwart this scheme. I have also received numerous complaints from Texans upset that they have to produce a Social Security number in order to receive a state drivers’ license. Clearly, the American people want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Congress risks provoking a voter backlash if we fail to halt the growth of the surveillance state. Congress Honoring My Friend, Baseball Legend Nolan Ryan, On His Election To The Hall Of Fame 6 January 1999    1999 Ron Paul 2:2 Nolan was born in Refugio, Texas, a historic town in my congressional district, but he was destined for the national stage. His successful career spanned 27 years, taking him from rural Texas to the dug-outs of the New York Mets, the California Angels, the Houston Astros and the Texas Rangers. He pitched a record seven no-hitter games, but his real fame comes from having pitched 5,714 strikeouts. Congress How Long Will The War With Iraq Go On Before Congress Notices? 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 3:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I ask my fellow colleagues, how long will the war go on before Congress notices? We have been bombing and occupying Iraq since 1991, longer the occupation of Japan after World War II. Iraq has never committed aggression against the United States. Congress How Long Will The War With Iraq Go On Before Congress Notices? 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 3:2 The recent escalation of bombing in Iraq has caused civilian casualties to mount. The Clinton administration claims U.N. resolution 687, passed in 1991, gives him the legal authority to continue this war. We have perpetuated hostilities and sanctions for more than 8 years on a country that has never threatened our security, and the legal justification comes from not the U.S. Congress, as the Constitution demands, but from a clearly unconstitutional authority, the United Nations. Congress How Long Will The War With Iraq Go On Before Congress Notices? 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 3:3 In the past several months the airways have been filled with Members of Congress relating or restating their fidelity to their oath of office to uphold the Constitution. That is good, and I am sure it is done with the best of intentions. But when it comes to explaining our constitutional responsibility to make sure unconstitutional sexual harassment laws are thoroughly enforced, while disregarding most people’s instincts towards protecting privacy, it seems to be overstating a point, compared to our apathy toward the usurping of congressional power to declare and wage war. That is something we ought to be concerned about. Congress How Long Will The War With Iraq Go On Before Congress Notices? 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 3:4 A major reason for the American Revolution was to abolish the King’s power to wage war, tax, and invade personal privacy without representation and due process of law. For most of our history our presidents and our Congresses understood that war was a prerogative of the congressional authority alone. Even minimal military interventions by our early presidents were for the most part done only with constitutional approval. Congress How Long Will The War With Iraq Go On Before Congress Notices? 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 3:5 This all changed after World War II with our membership in the United Nations. As bad as it is to allow our presidents to usurp congressional authority to wage war, it is much worse for the President to share this sovereign right with an international organization that requires us to pay more than our fair share while we get a vote no greater than the rest. Congress How Long Will The War With Iraq Go On Before Congress Notices? 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 3:6 The constitution has been blatantly ignored by the President while Congress has acquiesced in endorsing the 8-year war against Iraq. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 has done nothing to keep our presidents from policing the world, spending billions of dollars, killing many innocent people, and jeopardizing the very troops that should be defending America. Congress How Long Will The War With Iraq Go On Before Congress Notices? 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 3:9 It is time for Congress to declare its interest in the Constitution and take responsibility on issues that matter, like the war powers. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:2 Madam Speaker, the relinquishing of the power to wage war by Congress to the President, although ignored or endorsed by many, raises serious questions regarding the status of our Republic, and although many Americans are content with their routine activities, much evidence demonstrating that our personal privacy is routinely being threatened. Crime still remains a concern for many with questions raised as to whether or not violent crimes are accurately reported, and ironically there are many Americans who now fear that dreaded Federal bureaucrat and possible illegal seizure of their property by the government more than they do the thugs in the street. I remain concerned about the economy, our militarism and internationalism, and the systemic invasion of our privacy in every aspect of our lives by nameless bureaucrats. I am convinced that if these problems are not dealt with. The republic for for which we have all sworn an oath to protect will not survive. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:5 Initially the Articles of Confederation spoke clearly of just who would be responsible for waging war. It gave the constitutional Congress, quote, sole and exclusive right and power of determining on peace and war. In the debate at the Constitutional Convention it was clear that this position was maintained as the power of the British king was not to be, quote, a proper guide in defining executive war powers, close quote, for the newly formed republic. The result was a Constitution that gave Congress the power to declare war, issue letters of mark and reprisal, call up the militia, raise and train an Army and Navy and regulate foreign commerce, a tool often used in international conflict. The President was also required to share power with the Senate in ratifying treaties and appointing ambassadors. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:6 Let there be no doubt. The President, according to the Constitution, has no power to wage war. However it has been recognized throughout our history that certain circumstances might require the President to act in self-defense if Congress is not readily available to act if the United States is attacked. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:7 Recent flagrant abuse of the power to wage war by modern-day Presidents, including the most recent episodes in Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan, should prompt this Congress to revisit this entire issue of war powers. Certain abuses of power are obviously more injurious than others. The use of the FBI and the IRS to illegally monitor and intimidate citizens is a power that should be easy to condemn, and yet it continues to thrive. The illegal and immoral power to create money out of thin air for the purpose of financing a welfare-warfare state serving certain financial interests while causing the harmful business cycle is a process that most in Washington do not understand nor care about. These are ominous powers of great magnitude that were never meant to be permitted under the Constitution. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:8 But as bad as these abuses are, the power of a single person, the President, to wage war is the most egregious of all presidential powers, and Congress deserves the blame for allowing such power to gravitate into the hands of the President. The fact that nary a complaint was made in Congress for the recent aggressive military behavior of our President in Iraq for reasons that had nothing to do with national security should not be ignored. Instead, Congress unwisely and quickly rubber stamped this military operation. We should analyze this closely and decide whether or not we in the Congress should promote a war powers policy that conforms to the Constitution or continue to allow our Presidents ever greater leverage to wage war any time, any place and for any reason. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:9 This policy of allowing our Presidents unlimited authority to wage war has been in place since the end of World War II, although abuse to a lesser degree has occurred since the beginning of the 20th century. Specifically, since joining the United Nations congressional authority to determine when and if our troops will fight abroad has been seriously undermined. From Truman’s sending of troops to Korea to Bush’s Persian Gulf War, we have seen big wars fought, tens of thousands killed, hundreds of thousands wounded and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted. U.S. security, never at risk, has been needlessly jeopardized by the so-called peacekeeping missions and police exercises while constitutional law has been seriously and dangerously undermined. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:11 The correction of this problem requires a concerted effort on the part of Congress to reclaim and reassert its responsibility under the Constitution with respect to war powers, and efforts were made to do exactly that after Vietnam in 1973 and more recently in 1995. Neither efforts were successful, and ironically the President emerged with more power, with each effort being undermined by supporters in the Congress of presidential authoritarianism and internationalism. Few objected to the Truman-ordered U.N. police actions in Korea in the 1950s, but they should have. This illegal and major war encouraged all subsequent Presidents to assume greater authority to wage war than was ever intended by the Constitution or assumed by all the Presidents prior to World War II. It is precisely because of the way we have entered in each military action since the 1940s without declaring war that their purposes have been vague and victory elusive, yet pain, suffering and long term negative consequences have resulted. The road on which this country embarked 50 years ago has led to the sacrifice of a lot of congressional prerogatives and citizen control over the excessive power that have fallen into the hands of Presidents quite willing to abuse this authority. No one person, if our society is to remain free, should be allowed to provoke war with aggressive military acts. Congress and the people are obligated to rein in this flagrant abuse of presidential power. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:12 Not only did we suffer greatly from the unwise and illegal Korean and Vietnam wars, Congress has allowed a continuous abuse of military power by our Presidents in an ever increasing frequency. We have seen troops needlessly die in Lebanon, Grenada, invaded for questionable reasons, Libya bombed with innocent civilians killed, persistent naval operations in the Persian Gulf, Panama invaded, Iraq bombed on numerous occasions, Somalia invaded, a secret and illegal war fought in Nicaragua, Haiti occupied, and troops stationed in Bosnia and now possibly soon in Kosovo. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:13 Even the Congressional permission to pursue the Persian Gulf War was an afterthought, since President Bush emphatically stated that it was unnecessary, as he received his authority from the United Nations. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:15 Great concern in the 1960’s over the excessive presidential war powers was expressed by the American people, and, thus, the interests of the U.S. Congress after Vietnam in the early 1970’s. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 resulted, but due to shrewd manipulation and political chicanery, the effort resulted in giving the President more authority, allowing him to wage war for 60 to 90 days without Congressional approval. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:16 Prior to the Korean War, when the Constitution and historic precedent had been followed, the President could not and for the most part did not engage in any military effort not directly defensive in nature without explicit Congressional approval. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:17 The result of the passage of the War Powers Resolution was exactly opposite to its authors’ intentions. More power is granted to the president to send troops hither and yon, with the various Presidents sometimes reporting to the Congress and sometimes not. But Congress has unwisely and rarely objected, and has not in recent years demanded its proper role in decisions of war, nor hesitated to continue the funding that the various presidents have demanded. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:18 Approval of presidential-directed aggression, disguised as “support for the troops,” comes routinely, and if any member does not obediently endorse every action a President might take, for whatever reason, it is implied the member lacks patriotism and wisdom. It is amazing how we have drifted from the responsibility of the Founders, imagine, the Congress and the people would jealously protect. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:21 The 1995 effort to repeal the War Powers Resolution failed because it was not a clean repeal, but one still requiring consultation and reporting to the Congress. This led to enough confusion to prevent its passage. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:23 The effort to curtail presidential powers while requiring consultation and reporting to the Congress implies that that is all that is needed to avoid the strict rules laid out by the Constitution. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:25 The message here is that clarification of the War Powers Resolution and a return to constitutional law are the only way presidential authority to wage war can be curtailed. If our presidents do not act accordingly, Congress must quickly and forcefully meet its responsibility by denying funds for foreign intervention and aggression initiated by the President. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:26 The basic problem here is that there are still too many Members of Congress who endorse a presidency armed with the authority of a tyrant to wage war. But if this assumption of power by the President with Congress’ approval is not reversed, the republic cannot be maintained. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:27 Putting the power in the hands of a single person, the president, to wage war, is dangerous and costly, and it destroys the notion that the people through their Congressional representatives decide when military action should start and when war should take place. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:29 A moral commitment to the principle of limited presidential war powers in the spirit of the republic is required. Even with the clearest constitutional restriction on the President to wage undeclared wars, buffered by precise legislation, if the sentiment of the Congress, the courts and the people or the President is to ignore these restraints, they will. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:30 The best of all situations is when the spirit of the republic is one and the same, as the law itself, and honorable men are in positions of responsibility to carry out the law. Even though we cannot guarantee the future Congress’ or our president’s moral commitment to the principles of liberty by changing the law, we still must make every effort possible to make the law and the Constitution as morally sound as possible. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:31 Our responsibility here in the Congress is to protect liberty and do our best to ensure peace and trade with all who do not aggress against us. But peace is more easily achieved when we reject the notion that some Americans must subsidize foreign nations for a benefit that is intended to flow back to a select few Americans. Maintaining an empire or striving for a world government while allowing excessive war powers to accrue to an imperial president will surely lead to needless military conflicts, loss of life and liberty, and a complete undermining of our constitutional republic. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:39 Although the voters in the 1990’s have cried out for a change in direction and demanded a smaller, less intrusive government, the attack on privacy by the Congress, the administration and the courts has, nevertheless, accelerated. Plans have now been laid or implemented for a national I.D. card, a national medical data bank, a data bank on individual MDs, deadbeat dads, intrusive programs monitoring our every financial transaction, while the Social Security number has been established as the universal identifier. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:48 Most of the Federal programs are unconstitutional to begin with, so eliminating waste and fraud and promoting efficiency for a program that requires a violation of someone else’s rights should not be a high priority of the Congress. But the temptation is too great, even for those who question the wisdom of the government programs, and compromise of the Fourth Amendment becomes acceptable. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:50 Believe me, most of the evil done by elected congresses and parliaments throughout all of history has been justified by good intentions. But that does not change anything. It just makes it harder to stop. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:60 The IRS and the DEA, with powers illegally given them by the Congress and the courts, have prompted a flood of seizures and forfeitures in the last several decades without due process and frequently without search warrants or probable cause. Victims then are required to prove themselves innocent to recover the goods seized. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:63 Hopefully, a similar reaction will occur in the area of privacy, but overcoming the intrusiveness of government into our privacy in nearly every aspect of our lives will be difficult. Home schooling is a relatively simple solution compared to avoiding the roving and snooping high of big brother. Solving the privacy problem requires an awakening by the American people with a strong message being sent to the U.S. Congress that we have had enough. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:66 Our job is to make a principled, moral, constitutional and practical case for respecting everyone’s privacy, even if it is suspected some private activities, barring violence, do not conform to our own private moral standards. We could go a long way to guaranteeing privacy for all Americans if we, as Members of Congress, would take our oath of office more seriously and do exactly what the Constitution says. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:74 The pain of market discipline is never acceptable when compared to the pleasure of postponing hard decisions and enjoying for a while longer the short-term benefits gained by keeping the financial bubble inflated. But the day is fast approaching when the markets and Congress will have to deal with the attack on the dollar, once it is realized that exporting our inflation is not without limits. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:79 Contributing to the bubble and the dollar strength has been the fact that even though the dollar has problems, other currencies are even weaker and thus make the dollar look strong in comparison. Budgetary figures are frequently stated in a falsely optimistic manner. In 1969 when there was a surplus of approximately $3 billion, the national debt went down approximately the same amount. In 1998, however, with a so-called surplus of $70 billion, the national debt went up $113 billion, and instead of the surpluses which are not really surpluses running forever, the deficits will rise with a weaker economy and current congressional plans to increase welfare and warfare spending. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:86 There is good reason why we in the Congress should be concerned. A dollar crisis is an economic crisis that will threaten the standard of living of many Americans. Economic crises frequently lead to political crises, as is occurring in Indonesia. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:87 Congress is responsible for the value of the dollar. Yet, as we have done too often in other areas, we have passed this responsibility on to someone else; in this case, to the Federal Reserve. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:88 The Constitution is clear that the Congress has responsibility for guaranteeing the value of the currency, and no authority has ever been given to create a central bank. Creating money out of thin air is counterfeiting, even when done by a bank that the Congress tolerates. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:89 It is easy to see why Congress, with its own insatiable desire to spend money and perpetuate a welfare and military state, cooperates with such a system. A national debt of $5.6 trillion could not have developed without a willing Federal Reserve to monetize this debt and provide for artificially low interest rates. But when the dollar crisis hits and it is clearly evident that the short-term benefits were not worth it, we will be forced to consider monetary reform. Congress Congress Relinquishing The Power To Wage War 2 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 4:91 Mr. Speaker, let me summarize. We in the Congress, along with the President, will soon have to make a decision that will determine whether or not the American republic survives. Allowing our presidents to wage war without the consent of Congress, ignoring the obvious significance of fiat money to a healthy economy, and perpetuating pervasive government intrusion into the privacy of all Americans will surely end the American experiment with maximum liberty for all unless we reverse this trend. Congress President Should Get Authority From Congress To Send Troops 9 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 5:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, since World War II, our presidents have been sending troops overseas without Congressional approval. Prior to World War II, it was traditional and constitutional that all presidents came to the Congress for authority to send troops. Congress President Should Get Authority From Congress To Send Troops 9 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 5:2 Recently, the President has announced that he will most likely be sending thousands of American troops under NATO command to Kosovo. I think this is wrong. I have introduced legislation today that says that the President cannot send these troops without Congressional approval, merely restating what the Constitution says and how we followed the rules up until World War II. Congress President Should Get Authority From Congress To Send Troops 9 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 5:4 We have been bombing and interfering with the security of Iraq for now over 8 years, and that continues, and we do not give Congressional approval of these acts. My legislation is simple. It just denies funding for sending troops into Kosovo without Congressional approval. Congress President Should Get Authority From Congress To Send Troops 9 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 5:5 This is not complicated. It is very precise and very clear and very important that we as a Congress restate our constitutional obligation to supervise the sending of troops around the world. Congress President Should Get Authority From Congress To Send Troops 9 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 5:6 It would be much better for us to spend this money that is being wasted in Bosnia and Iraq on our national defense. We spend less and less money every year on national defense but we spend more and more money on policing the world. I think that policy ought to change and it is the responsibility of the Congress, the body that has control of the purse strings, to do something about this. Congress President Should Get Authority From Congress To Send Troops 9 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 5:7 If the President is permitted to do this, he does it not because he has constitutional authority but because the Congress has reneged on their responsibility to supervise the spending. Congress President Should Get Authority From Congress To Send Troops 9 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 5:12 So, Mr. Speaker, I am asking my fellow colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this legislation just to say that it is not the prerogative of the President to send troops around the world whenever he pleases. That is the prerogative of the Congress. Congress Introducing Legislation To Prevent Expansion Of American Military Intervention Without Congressional Approval 11 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 6:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, we have troops in 144 countries of the world today. President Clinton has announced that he will now send troops to Kosovo. We are bombing in Iraq on a daily basis. We have been in Bosnia now for three years, although we were supposed to be there for six months. We should not go into Kosovo; we should not go there, absolutely, without congressional approval. Congress Introducing Legislation To Prevent Expansion Of American Military Intervention Without Congressional Approval 11 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 6:2 I have introduced legislation that will prevent the President from sending troops to further expand our intervention around the world without congressional approval. This is very, very important. We are spending so much money on intervention in so many countries around the world at the same time our national defense is being diminished. Worst of all, the President is planning to put these thousands of troops under a British commander. Congress Introducing The Davis-Bacon Repeal Act 11 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 7:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Davis-Bacon Repeal Act of 1999. The Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 forces contractors on all federally-funded contraction projects to pay the “local prevailing wage,” defined as “the wage paid to the majority of the laborers or mechanics in the classification on similar projects in the area.” In practice, this usually means the wages paid by unionized contractors. For more than sixty years, this congressionally-created monstrosity has penalized taxpayers and the most efficient companies while crushing the dreams of the most willing workers. Mr. Speaker, Congress must act now to repeal this 61-year-old relic of an era during which people actually believed Congress could legislate prosperity. Americans pay a huge price in lost jobs, lost opportunities and tax-boosting cost overruns on federal construction projects every day Congress allows Davis-Bacon to remain on the books. Congress Introducing The Davis-Bacon Repeal Act 11 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 7:7 The most compelling reason to repeal Davis-Bacon is to benefit to the American taxpayer. The Davis-Bacon Act drives up the cost of federal construction costs by as much as 50 percent. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office has reported that repealing Davis-Bacon would save the American taxpayer almost three billion dollars in four years! Congress President Has No Authority To Wage War Without Congressional Approval 24 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 8:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, the threats of bombing did not bring a peace agreement to Kosovo. The President has no authority to wage war, and yet Congress says nothing. Congress President Has No Authority To Wage War Without Congressional Approval 24 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 8:2 When will Congress assume its war power authority to rein in the President? An endless military occupation of Bosnia is ignored by Congress, and the spending rolls on, and yet there is no lasting peace. Congress President Has No Authority To Wage War Without Congressional Approval 24 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 8:4 Congress must assume its responsibility. It must be made clear that the President has no funds available to wage war without congressional approval. This is our prerogative. Therefore, the endless threats of bombing should cease. Congress should not remain timid. Congress Federal Communications Commission 25 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 9:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 514, and in support of the Wilson amendment. The passage of this legislation will, as does so much of the legislation we pass, move our nation yet another step close to a national police state by further expanding a federal crime and empowering more federal police—this time at the Federal Communications Commission. Despite recent and stern warnings by both former U.S. attorney general Edwin Meese III and current U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Congress seems compelled to ride the current wave of federally criminalizing every human misdeed in the name of saving the world from some evil rather than to uphold a Constitutional oath which prescribes a procedural structure by which the nation is protected from totalitarianism. Congress Federal Communications Commission 25 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 9:2 Our federal government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers. Article one, Section eight, enumerates the legislative areas for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every issue, the federal government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the state governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The tenth amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Of course, there will be those who will hand their constitutional “hats” on the interstate commerce or general welfare clauses, both of which have been popular “headgear” since the plunge into New Deal Socialism. Congress Federal Communications Commission 25 February 1999    1999 Ron Paul 9:4 The argument which springs from the criticism of a federalized criminal code and a federal police force is that states may be less effective than a centralized federal government in dealing with those who leave one state jurisdiction for another. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of state sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one state to another. While not self-enacting, in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. There is, of course, a cost imposed upon states in working with one another rather than relying on a national, unified police force. At the same time, there is a greater cost to centralization of police power. Congress Introducing The Education Improvement Tax Cut Act 2 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 10:2 I need not remind my colleagues that education is one of, if not the top priority of the American people. After all, many members of Congress have proposed education reforms and a great deal of their time is spent debating these proposals. However, most of these proposals either expand federal control over education or engage in the pseudo-federalism of block grants. I propose we go in a different direction by embracing true federalism by returning control over the education dollar to the American people. Congress Introducing The Education Improvement Tax Cut Act 2 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 10:5 Children in some communities may benefit most from the opportunity to attend private, parochial, or other religious schools. One of the most encouraging trends in education has been the establishment of private scholarship programs. These scholarship funds use voluntary contributions to open the doors of quality private schools to low-income children. By providing a tax credit for donations to these programs, Congress can widen the educational opportunities and increase the quality of education for all children. Furthermore, privately-funded scholarships raise none of the concerns of state entanglement raised by publicly-funded vouchers. Congress Introducing The Family Education Freedom Act 2 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 11:4 Loss of control is a key reason why so many of America’s parents express dissatisfaction with the educational system. According to a recent study by The Polling Company, over 70% of all Americans support education tax credits! This is just one of numerous studies and public opinion polls showing that Americans want Congress to get the federal bureaucracy out of the schoolroom and give parents more control over their children’s education. Congress Introducing The Family Education Freedom Act 2 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 11:5 Today, Congress can fulfill the wishes of the American people for greater control over their children’s education by simply allowing parents to keep more of their hard-earned money to spend on education rather than force them to send it to Washington to support education programs reflective only of the values and priorities of Congress and the federal bureaucracy. Congress Introducing The Teacher Tax Cut Act 2 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 12:3 Since America’s teachers are underpaid because they are overtaxed, the best way to raise teacher take-home pay is to reduce their taxes. Simply by raising teacher’s take-home pay via a $1,000 tax credit we can accomplish a number of important things. First, we show a true commitment to education. We also let America’s teachers know that the American people and the Congress respect their work. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, by raising teacher take-home pay, the Teacher Tax Cut Act encourages high-quality professionals to enter, and remain in, the teaching profession. Congress War Power Authority Should Be Returned To Congress 9 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 13:2 We, the Congress, have been informed through a public statement by the President that troops will be sent. We have not been asked to act in a constitutional fashion to grant the President permission to act. He is not coming to us to fully explain his intentions. The President is making a public statement as to his intentions and we are expected to acquiesce, to go along with the funding, and not even debate the issue, just as we are doing in Iraq. Congress War Power Authority Should Be Returned To Congress 9 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 13:3 That is not a proper constitutional procedure and it should be condemned. Silence in the past, while accommodating our Presidents in all forms of foreign adventurism from Korea and Vietnam to Iraq and Bosnia, should not be the standard the Congress follows. Congress War Power Authority Should Be Returned To Congress 9 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 13:4 The Constitution is clear: Our Presidents, from Washington to Roosevelt, all knew that initiating war was clearly the prerogative of the Congress, but our memories are flawed and our reading of the law is careless. The President should not be telling us what he plans to do, he should be giving us information and asking our advice. We are responsible for the safety of our troops, how taxpayers’ dollars are spent, the security of our Nation, and especially the process whereby our Nation commits itself to war. Congress War Power Authority Should Be Returned To Congress 9 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 13:5 Citing NATO agreements or U.N. resolutions as authority for moving troops into war zones should alert us all to the degree to which the rule of law has been undermined. The President has no war power, only the Congress has that. When one person can initiate war, by its definition, a republic no longer exists. Congress War Power Authority Should Be Returned To Congress 9 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 13:6 The war power, taken from the Congress 50 years ago, must be restored. If not, the conclusion must be that the Constitution of the United States can and has been amended by presidential fiat or treaty, both excluding the House of Representatives from performing its duty to the American people in preventing casual and illegal wars. Congress War Power Authority Should Be Returned To Congress 9 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 13:9 The war powers process was set early on by our Presidents in dealing with the North African pirates in the early 19th century. Jefferson and Madison, on no less than 10 occasions, got Congress to pass legislation endorsing each military step taken. It has clearly been since World War II that our Presidents have assumed power not granted to them by the Constitution, and Congress has been negligent in doing little to stop this usurpation. Congress War Power Authority Should Be Returned To Congress 9 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 13:10 In the case of Kosovo, no troops should be sent without the consent of Congress. Vague discussion about whether or not the money will come out of Social Security or the budget surplus or call for an exit strategy will not suffice. If the war power is taken from the President and returned to the Congress, we would then automatically know the funds would have to be appropriated and the exit strategy would be easy: when we win the war. Congress War Power Authority Should Be Returned To Congress 9 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 13:11 Vague police actions authorized by the United Nations or NATO, and implemented by the President without congressional approval, invites disasters with perpetual foreign military entanglements. The concept of national sovereignty and the rule of law must be respected or there is no purpose for the Constitution. Congress Honoring The Victoria High School Varsity Cheerleaders Of Victoria, Texas 10 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 14:6 I am proud to have these national champions in the 14th Congressional District of Texas, and trust all my colleagues join me in congratulating them on this impressive achievement. Congress Opposing Authorization for Kosovo Intervention 11 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 17:2 Since World War II we have not been diligent here in the Congress to protect our prerogatives with respect to the declaration of war. Korean and Vietnam wars were fought without a declaration of war. And these wars were not won. Congress Opposing Authorization for Kosovo Intervention 11 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 17:3 Since 1973, since the War Powers Resolution was passed, we have further undermined the authority of the Congress and delivered more authority to the President because the resolution essentially has given the President more power to wage war up to 90 days without the Congress granting authority. It is to our credit at least that we are bringing this matter up at this particular time. Congress Kosovo War Resolution 11 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 18:7 Where does the President claim he gets his authority? Does he come to us? Has he asked us for this? No, he assumes he has the authority. He has already threatened that what we do here will have no effect on his decision. He is going to do what he thinks he should do anyway. He does not come and ask for permission. Where does he get this authority? Sometimes the Presidents, since World War II, have assumed it comes from the United Nations. That means that Congress has reneged on its responsibility. Congress Kosovo War Resolution 11 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 18:9 After Vietnam there was a great deal of concern about this power to wage war. First, we had Korea. We did not win that war. Next we had Vietnam. And with very sincere intent, the Congress in 1973 passed the War Powers Resolution. The tragedy of the War Powers Resolution, no matter how well motivated, is that it did exactly the opposite of what was intended. Congress Kosovo War Resolution 11 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 18:10 What has actually happened is it has been interpreted by all our Presidents since then that they have the authority to wage war for 60–90 days before we can say anything. That is wrong. We have turned it upside down. So it is up to us to do something about getting the prerogative of waging war back into the hands of the Congress. Congress Kosovo War Resolution 11 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 18:11 It is said that we do not have this authority; that we should give it to the President; that he has it under the Constitution based on his authority to formulate foreign policy. It is not there. The Congress has the responsibility to declare war, write letters of marks and reprisals, call up the militia, raise and train army and regulate foreign commerce. The President shares with the Senate treaty power as well as appointment of ambassadors. The President cannot even do that alone. Congress Consumer Protection Legislation 11 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 19:6 Allowing American consumers access to information about the benefits of foods and dietary supplements will help America’s consumers improve their health. However, this bill is about more than physical health, it is about freedom. The first amendment forbids Congress from abridging freedom of all speech, including commercial speech. Congress Consumer Protection Legislation 11 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 19:7 My second bill, the Television Consumer Freedom Act, repeals federal regulations which interfere with a consumers ability to avail themselves of desired television programming. For the last several weeks, congressional offices have been flooded with calls from rural satellite TV customers who are upset because their satellite service providers have informed them that they will lose access to certain network television programs. Congress Consumer Protection Legislation 11 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 19:8 In an attempt to protect the rights of network program creators and affiliate local stations, a federal court in Florida properly granted an injunction to prevent the satellite service industry from making certain programming available to its customers. This is programming for which the satellite service providers had not secured from the program creator-owners the right to rebroadcast. At the root of this problem, of course, is that we have a so-called marketplace fraught with interventionism at every level. Cable companies have historically been granted franchises of monopoly privilege at the local level. Government has previously intervened to invalidate “exclusive dealings” contracts between private parties, namely cable service providers and program creators, and have most recently assumed the role of price setter. The Library of Congress, if you can imagine, has been delegated the power to determine prices at which program suppliers must make their programs available to cable and satellite programming service providers. Congress Consumer Protection Legislation 11 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 19:9 It is, of course, within the constitutionally enumerated powers of Congress to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” However, operating a clearing-house for the subsequent transfer of such property rights in the name of setting a just price or “instilling competition” via “central planning” seems not to be an economically prudent nor justifiable action under this enumerated power. This process is one best reserved to the competitive marketplace. Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, last week the House narrowly passed a watered-down House concurrent resolution originally designed to endorse President Clinton’s plan to send U.S. troops to Kosovo. A House concurrent resolution, whether strong or weak, has no effect of law. It is merely a sense of Congress statement. Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:2 If last week’s meager debate and vote are construed as merely an endorsement, without dissent, of Clinton’s policy in Yugoslavia, the procedure will prove a net negative. It will not be seen as a Congressional challenge to unconstitutional presidential war power. If, however, the debate is interpreted as a serious effort to start the process to restore Congressional prerogatives, it may yet be seen as a small step in the right direction. We cannot know with certainty which it will be. That will depend on what Congress does in the future. Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:3 Presently, those of us who argued for Congressional responsibility with regards to declaring war and deploying troops cannot be satisfied that the trend of the last 50 years has been reversed. Since World War II, the war power has fallen into the hands of our presidents, with Congress doing little to insist on its own constitutional responsibility. From Korea and Vietnam, to Bosnia and Kosovo, we have permitted our presidents to “wag the Congress,” generating a perception that the United States can and should police the world. Instead of authority to move troops and fight wars coming from the people through a vote of their Congressional representatives, we now permit our presidents to cite NATO declarations and U.N. resolutions. Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:5 Today it is erroneously taken for granted that the President has authority to move troops and fight wars without Congressional approval. It would be nice to believe that this vote on Kosovo was a serious step in the direction of Congress once again reasserting its responsibility for committing U.S. troops abroad. But the President has already notified Congress that, regardless of our sense of Congress resolution, he intends to do what he thinks is right, not what is legal and constitutional, only what he decides for himself. Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:6 Even with this watered-down endorsement of troop deployment with various conditions listed, the day after the headlines blared “the Congress approves troop deployments to Kosovo.” Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:7 If Congress is serious about this issue, it must do more. First, Congress cannot in this instance exert its responsibility through a House concurrent resolution. The President can and will ignore this token effort. If Congress decides that we should not become engaged in the civil war in Serbia, we must deny the funds for that purpose. That we can do. Our presidents have assumed the war power, but as of yet Congress still controls the purse. Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:13 It was hoped that the War Powers Resolution of 1973 would reign in our president’s authority to wage war without Congressional approval. It has not happened because all subsequent Presidents have essentially ignored its mandates. And unfortunately the interpretation since 1973 has been to give the President greater power to wage war with Congressional approval for at least 60 to 90 days as long as he reports to the Congress. These reports are rarely made and the assumption has been since 1973 that Congress need not participate in any serious manner in the decision to send troops. Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:14 It could be argued that this resulted from a confused understanding of the War Powers Resolution but more likely it’s the result of the growing imperial Presidency that has developed with our presidents assuming power, not legally theirs, and Congress doing nothing about it. Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:15 Power has been gravitating into the hands of our presidents throughout this century, both in domestic and foreign affairs. Congress has created a maze of federal agencies, placed under the President, that have been granted legislative, police, and judicial powers, thus creating an entire administrative judicial system outside our legal court system where constitutional rights are ignored. Congress is responsible for this trend and it’s Congress’ responsibility to restore Constitutional government. Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:17 We are at a crossroads and if the people and the Congress do not soon insist on the reigning in of presidential power, both foreign and domestic, individual liberty cannot be preserved. Congress War Powers Resolution 17 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 20:18 Presently, unless the people exert a lot more pressure on the Congress to do so, not much will be done. Specifically, Congress needs a strong message from the people insisting that the Congress continues the debate over Kosovo before an irreversible quagmire develops. The President today believes he is free to pursue any policy he wants in the Balkans and the Persian Gulf without Congressional approval. It shouldn’t be that way. It’s dangerous politically, military, morally, and above all else undermines our entire system of the rule of law. Congress Everybody Supports the Troops 24 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 21:4 Now, if we really want to support our troops, I think we would defend the sovereignty of this country, we should provide for a strong national defense and we certainly should avoid putting our troops in harm’s way. The real question that comes up is by putting the troops in this region right now, we are invading the sovereignty of a nation which is very questionable. This is not done very often. Yet Serbia is a sovereign nation. They are involved in a civil war, and there are bad guys on both sides. For us here in the Congress to decide who the good guys and who the bad guys are is not possible, nor is it our job. Congress U.S. Military Action Taking Place in Serbia is Unconstitutional 24 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 22:4 Our responsibility as U.S. Members of Congress is to preserve liberty here at home and uphold the rule of law. Meddling in the internal and dangerous affairs of a nation involved in civil war is illegal and dangerous. Congress has not given the President authority to wage war. Congress U.S. Military Action Taking Place in Serbia is Unconstitutional 24 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 22:6 The Senate resolution, now claimed to be congressional consent for the President to wage war, is not much better. It, too, was a sense of Congress resolution without the force of law. It implies the President can defer to NATO for authority to pursue a war effort. Congress U.S. Military Action Taking Place in Serbia is Unconstitutional 24 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 22:7 Only Congress can decide the issue of war. Congress cannot transfer the constitutional war power to the President or to NATO or to the United Nations. The Senate resolution, however, specifically limits the use of force to air operations and missile strikes, but no war has ever been won with air power alone. The Milosevic problem will actually get worse with our attacks, and ground troops will likely follow. Congress Crisis in Kosovo 14 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 25:2 A legal war in this country is one that is declared, declared by the Congress. Any other war is illegal. The war in Yugoslavia now pursued by our administration and with NATO is both immoral and illegal and it should not be pursued. We will be soon voting on an appropriation, probably next week. There may be a request for $5 billion to pursue the war in Yugoslavia. I do not believe that we should continue to finance a war that is both immoral and illegal. Congress Crisis in Kosovo 14 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 25:5 I believe that our colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. CAMPBELL), deserves to be complemented because he is making a determined effort to put the burden on the Members of Congress to vote one way or the other. Since World War II we have fought numerous wars, and they have never been fought with a declaration of war, and it is precisely for that reason, because they have not been fought for truly national security reasons, that we have not won these wars. If a war is worth fighting, it is worth declaring, and it is worth winning. Congress Crisis in Kosovo 14 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 25:6 I am delighted that this effort is being made by the gentleman from California (Mr. CAMPBELL) and others here in the Congress because for so long, for 50 years now, we have permitted our Presidents to casually and carelessly involve our troops overseas. So I see this trend as putting more pressure on the Congress to respond to their responsibilities. I think this is a very, very good move and going in the right direction. Congress Crisis in Kosovo 14 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 25:10 There is talk now of calling up all our Reserves or many of our Reserves at the same time there are hints now that there may be the institution of the draft. So this is a major problem that this country is facing, the world is facing, and up until now we, the Congress, have not spoken. Congress The Bombing in Serbia Must Stop 15 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 26:3 There are just too many uncanny accidents. The refugee problem, which was minimal before the bombing, is now catastrophic as a result. Congress should not fund this war and if we do, we have become an accomplice and morally responsible for the killing and the spread of this conflict that will surely occur if this bombing is not stopped. Congress Opposing Congressional Medal of Honor for Rosa Parks 20 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 28:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 573. At the same time, I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies. However, I oppose the Congressional Gold Medal for Rosa Parks Act because authorizing $30,000 of taxpayer money is neither constitutional nor, in the spirit of Rosa Parks who is widely recognized and admired for standing up against an overbearing government infringing on individual rights. Congress Opposing Congressional Medal of Honor for Rosa Parks 20 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 28:2 Because of my continuing and uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, I must remain consistent in my defense of a limited government whose powers are explicitly delimited under the enumerated powers of the Constitution—a Constitution, which only months ago, each Member of Congress, swore to uphold. Congress U.S. Foreign Policy and NATO’s Involvement in Yugoslavia and Kosovo 21 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 29:13 This policy of intervention is paid for by the U.S. taxpayer and promoted illegally by our President without congressional authority, as is required by the Constitution. Congress U.S. Foreign Policy and NATO’s Involvement in Yugoslavia and Kosovo 21 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 29:33 Likewise, the legislative history and congressional testimony maintained NATO could not usurp from Congress and the people the power to wage war. We have drifted a long way from that acknowledgment, and the fears expressed by Robert Taft and others in 1949 were certainly justified. Congress U.S. Foreign Policy and NATO’s Involvement in Yugoslavia and Kosovo 21 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 29:55 What does this hodgepodge philosophy here in the Congress mean for the future of peace and prosperity in general and NATO and the United Nations in particular? Pragmatism cannot prevail. Economically and socially it breeds instability, bankruptcy, economic turmoil and factionalism here at home. Internationally it will lead to the same results. Congress U.S. Foreign Policy and NATO’s Involvement in Yugoslavia and Kosovo 21 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 29:57 Our more immediate problem is the financing of the ongoing war in Yugoslavia. On February 9 of this year I introduced legislation to deny funds to the President to wage war in Yugoslavia. The Congress chose to ignore this suggestion and missed an opportunity to prevent the fiasco now ongoing in Yugoslavia. Congress U.S. Foreign Policy and NATO’s Involvement in Yugoslavia and Kosovo 21 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 29:58 The President, as so many other presidents have done since World War II, took it upon himself to wage an illegal war against Yugoslavia under NATO’s authority, and Congress again chose to do nothing. By ignoring our constitutional responsibility with regards to war power, the Congress implicitly endorsed the President’s participation in NATO’s illegal war against Yugoslavia. We neither declared war nor told the President to cease and desist. Congress U.S. Foreign Policy and NATO’s Involvement in Yugoslavia and Kosovo 21 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 29:59 Now we have a third chance, and maybe our last, before the war gets out of control. We are being asked to provide all necessary funding for the war. Once we provide funds for the war, the Congress becomes an explicit partner in this ill-conceived NATO-inspired intervention in the civil war of a sovereign nation, making Congress morally and legally culpable. Congress U.S. Foreign Policy and NATO’s Involvement in Yugoslavia and Kosovo 21 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 29:60 Appropriating funds to pursue this war is not the way to peace. We have been bombing, boycotting and killing thousands in Iraq for 9 years with no end in sight. We have been in Bosnia for 3 years, with no end in sight. And once Congress endorses the war in Yugoslavia with funding, it could take a decade, billions of dollars, and much suffering on both sides, before we put it to an end. Congress On Regulating Satellite TV 27 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 32:3 This bill’s title includes the word “competition” but ignores the market processes’ inherent and fundamental cornerstones of property rights (to include intellectual property rights) and voluntary exchange unfettered by government technocrats. Instead, we have a so-called marketplace fraught with interventionism at every level. Cable companies are granted franchises of monopoly privilege at the local level. Congresses have previously intervened to invalidate exclusive dealings contracts between private parties (cable service providers and program creators), and have most recently assumed the role of price setter — determining prices at which program suppliers must make their programs available to satellite programing service providers under the “compulsory license.” Congress On Regulating Satellite TV 27 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 32:5 While it is within the Constitutionally enumerated powers of Congress to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries,” operating a clearinghouse for the subsequent transfer of such property rights in the name of setting a just price or instilling competition seems not to be an economically prudent nor justifiable action under this enumerated power. This can only be achieved within the market process itself. Congress On Debating War Resolution 28 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 33:3 This is taking more authority away from the Congress and giving more authority to the President and to the administration and for us not to have a say. The whole issue of war should be decided here in this Congress, and we are here today because we have been negligent on assuming our responsibilities. Congress On Debating War Resolution 28 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 33:5 But we do not need to be once again taking more responsibility from the Congress and giving it to the President. We have a policy problem, we do not have a resolution problem. We have a foreign policy that endorses intervention any time, anyplace, assuming that our Presidents know when to insert troops around the world. That is our basic problem. Until we in the Congress take it upon ourselves to assume our responsibility with the issue of war, this problem will continue. Congress Whether, And How, To Go To War 28 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 34:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, there have clearly been set two goals among a group of us. We have been striving to make sure this Congress follows procedure, that is, if we go to war, that we do it properly. It is pretty difficult to achieve this, especially when a president is willing to go to war and then we have to do this as a second thought. I am pleased that, at least today, we are trying to catch up on this. The second issue is whether it is wise to go to war. Congress Moral And Constitutional Wars Must Be Fought In Self Defense 28 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 35:2 Today’s legislative process was chaotic, but I think it was chaotic for a precise reason. We are trying to rectify something that has been going on for more than 50 years, and it is not just this President. It is every President that we have had since World War II. We have in the Congress permitted our Presidents too much leeway in waging war. Congress Moral And Constitutional Wars Must Be Fought In Self Defense 28 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 35:8 I think there are too many Members in this House who have enjoyed the fact that they have delivered the responsibility to the President. They do not want war, but they want war. They do not want a legal war, they want an illegal war. They do not want a war to win, they want a war that is a half of a war. They want the President to do the dirty work, but they do not want the Congress to stand up and decide one way or the other. Congress Moral And Constitutional Wars Must Be Fought In Self Defense 28 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 35:9 Today we saw evidence that the Congress was willing to stand up to some degree and vote on this and take some responsibility. For this reason I am pleased with what happened. So voting against the war that has no significant national security interest makes a lot of sense to me. Congress Moral And Constitutional Wars Must Be Fought In Self Defense 28 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 35:10 Another vote, the vote to withhold ground troops unless Congress authorizes the funding for this; this is not micromanaging anything. This is just the Congress standing up and accepting their responsibilities. So this in many ways was very good. This means that the people in this country, as they send their messages to the Members of Congress, are saying that this war does not make a whole lot of sense. If the people of this country were frightened, if they felt like they were being attacked, if they felt like their liberties were threatened, believe me the vote would have been a lot different. Congress Moral And Constitutional Wars Must Be Fought In Self Defense 28 April 1999    1999 Ron Paul 35:15 Likewise, when we come to the endorsement of the military bombing, fortunately it went down narrowly. But it in itself, too, does not have any legal effect. That is a House Concurrent Resolution that has no effect of law other than the public relations effect of what the Congress is saying. Congress Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) 4 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 36:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to express my opposition to H. Con. Res. 84, the resolution calling for full-funding of the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). My opposition to this act should in no way be interpreted as opposition to increased spending on education. However, the way to accomplish this worthy goal is to allow parents greater control over education resources by cutting taxes, thus allowing parents to devote more of their resources to educating their children in such a manner as they see fit. Massive tax cuts for the American family, not increased spending on federal programs should be this Congress’ top priority. Congress Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) 4 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 36:3 This bill further assures that control over the education dollar will remain centered in Washington by calling for Congress to “meet the commitment to fund existing Federal education programs.” Thus, this bill not only calls on Congress to increase funding for IDEA, it also calls on Congress to not cut funds for any program favored by Congress. The practical effect of this bill is to place yet another obstacle in the road of fulfilling Congress’ constitutional mandate to put control of education back into the hands of the people. Congress Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) 4 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 36:4 Rather than increasing federal spending, Congress should focus on returning control over education to the American people by enacting the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935), which provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit to pay for K–12 education expenses. Passage of this act would especially benefit parents whose children have learning disabilities as those parents have the greatest need to devote a large portion of their income toward their child’s education. Congress Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) 4 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 36:6 It is time for Congress to restore control over education to the American people. The only way to accomplish this goal is to defund education programs that allow federal bureaucrats to control America’s schools. Therefore, I call on my colleagues to reject H. Con. Res. 84 and instead join my efforts to pass the Family Education Freedom Act. If Congress gets Washington off the backs and out of the pocketbooks of parents, American children will be better off. Congress Pell Grants 4 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 37:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I oppose H. Con. Res. 88, which expresses the sense of the Congress that funding for the Pell Grant Program should be increased by $400 per grant and calls on Congress ton increase funding for other existing education programs prior to authorizing or appropriating funds for new programs. While I certainly do oppose creating any new federal education programs, I also oppose increasing funds for any programs, regardless of whether or not the spending is within the constraints of the so-called balanced budget agreement. Mr. Speaker, instead of increasing unconstitutional federal spending, Congress should empower the American people to devote more of their own resources to higher education by cutting their taxes. Cutting taxes, not increasing federal spending, should be Congress’ highest priority. Congress Pell Grants 4 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 37:4 Instead of increasing federal expenditures, Mr. Speaker, this Congress should respond to the American people’s demand for increased support of higher education by working to pass bills giving Americans tax relief. For example, Congress should pass H.R. 1188, a bill I am cosponsoring which provides a tax deduction of up to $20,000 for the payment of college tuition. I am also cosponsoring several pieces of legislation to enhance the tax benefit for education savings accounts and pre-paid tuition plans to make it easier for parents to save for their children’s education. Although the various plans I have supported differ in detail, they all share one crucial element. Each allows individuals the freedom to spend their own money on higher education rather than forcing taxpayers to rely on Washington to return to them some percentage of their own tax dollars to spend as bureaucrats see fit. Congress Honoring The Jack C. Hays High School Rebel Band 4 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 38:4 Mr. Speaker, it is indeed an honor to have such an outstanding high school band in the 14th Congressional District. I am delighted to extend my hearty congratulations to them. Their hard work and dedication is an inspiration to us all. Congress Kosovo War Is Illegal 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 40:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, it is time to stop the bombing. NATO’s war against Serbia left the Congress and the American people in a quandary, and no wonder. The official excuse for NATO’s bombing war is that Milosevic would not sign a treaty drawn up by NATO, which would have taken Kosovo away from the Serbs after the KLA demanded independence from Serbia. Congress Kosovo War Is Illegal 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 40:2 This war is immoral because Serbia did not commit aggression against us. We were not attacked and there has been no threat to our national security. This war is illegal. It is undeclared. There has been no congressional authorization and no money has been appropriated for it. The war is pursued by the U.S. under NATO’s terms, yet it is illegal even according to NATO’s treaty as well as the U.N. charter. The internationalists do not even follow their own laws and do not care about the U.S. Constitution. Congress Kosovo War Is Illegal 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 40:14 Number eleven. Billions of dollars are thrown down a rat hole and Congress is about to vote for more. Congress Kosovo War Is Illegal 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 40:16 Up until now, general defense funds have been spent to wage this war without permission. The President wants to catch up and is asking for $6 billion, but Congress, in its infinite wisdom, wants to give him $13 billion for a war Congress rejects. Once we directly fund the war we will be partners in this mis-adventure. The votes last week were symbolic. They had no effect of law, but appropriations do. Congress Kosovo War Is Illegal 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 40:17 Saying the new appropriations will be used to beef up a neglected defense does not make it so. Defense funds are fungible. The President has proven this by waging a war for a month without any authorization or appropriation. Congress will no more control the next $13 billion than the money the President has already spent on the war. Congress Kosovo War Is Illegal 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 40:18 Appropriating funds to fight a war, even without a declaration, provides a much more powerful legal and political endorsement of the war than the public statements made against it by non-binding resolutions passed by the House last week. Declaring war and funding war are two powerful tools of the Congress to restrain a president from waging an unwise and illegal war. If the President pursues an undeclared war and we fund it, we become partners, no matter what justification is given for the spending. Congress Kosovo War Is Illegal 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 40:19 Only chaos can come from ignoring the strict prohibition by the Constitution of a president unilaterally waging war. If a president ignores the absence of a declaration, and we are serious, the only option left to Congress is the power of the purse, which is clearly the responsibility of the Congress. We should not fund this illegal and immoral NATO war. Congress Opposing National Teacher Certification Or National Teacher Testing 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 41:3 Many educators are already voicing opposition to national teacher cerification and testing. The Coalition of Independent Education Associations (CIEA), which represents the majority of the over 300,000 teachers who are members of independent educators associations, has passed a resolution opposing the nationalization of teacher certification and testing; I have attached a copy of this resolution for insertion into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. As more and more teachers realize the impact of this proposal, I expect opposition from the education community to grow. Teachers want to be treated as professionals, not as minions of the federal government. Congress Opposing National Teacher Certification Or National Teacher Testing 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 41:4 Legislation has already been introduced in the Texas State Legislature prohibiting the use of any national certification or national examination to determine if someone is qualified to teach in Texas. While I applaud this legislation, I wonder if Texas would change its’ policies if the Department of Education threatened to deny Texas federal funds if Texas failed to adopt the Department’s chosen method of teacher certification and testing. It is up to Congress to see that the Department of Education does not bully the states into adopting the method of teacher certification and testing favored by DC-based bureaucrats. Congress Opposing National Teacher Certification Or National Teacher Testing 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 41:11 Congress should oppose any movement toward federalizing educator licensure, teacher appraisal, and employment contracts. Congress Opposing National Teacher Certification Or National Teacher Testing 5 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 41:12 The undersigned representatives of the Coalition of Independent Education Associations strongly urge our members of the Congress and the Senate to vigorously defend the rights of states to control their educational destiny. Congress Supporting Istook Amendment 6 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 43:4 I think it is interesting, I think we have an interesting constitutional question here, because I agree with the chairman of the committee and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. OBEY) that it is not the prerogative of the Congress to micromanage a war. That is correct. It is the job of the Congress to declare the war. But here we have a Congress involved in diplomacy and micromanaging a war that has not been declared. That is the issue. The issue is not the micromanaging. Congress Supporting Istook Amendment 6 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 43:6 But today we have things turned upside down. We have the President declaring where and we say nothing and the Congress micromanaging the war that should not exist. We need to consider that. And we can straighten this mess out by rejecting these funds. Congress Supporting Istook Amendment 6 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 43:9 This is why I have been encouraged in the last couple weeks that this debate has been going on, because it is an important debate. I have finally seen this Congress at least addressing the subject on whether or not they should take back the prerogatives of war and not allow it to remain in the hands of the President. Congress Supporting Istook Amendment 6 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 43:10 This is very, very good. I have come to the House floor on numerous occasions since February, taking this position that we should not be involved. As a matter of fact, we had a couple dozen, maybe three dozen Members in this Congress who signed on a bill in February, a month or so before we even saw the bombs dropping in Yugoslavia, that would have prevented this whole mess if we would have stood up and assumed our responsibilities. Congress Supporting Istook Amendment 6 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 43:15 They say, well, no, they are in a quagmire and we have to help them and this is the only way we can do it. So the President comes and asks us for $6 billion and then, in Congress’s infinite wisdom, we give him $13 billion. And yet, we do not declare war. Congress Tribute To Teachers 6 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 44:2 I have also introduced the Teacher Tax Cut Act (HR 937) which provides every teacher in America with a $1,000 tax credit. The Teacher Tax Cut Act thus increases teachers’ salaries without raising federal expenditures. It lets America’s teachers know that the American people and the Congress respect their work. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, by raising teacher take-home pay, the Teacher Tax Cut Act encourages high-quality people to enter, and remain in, the teaching profession. Congress Tribute To Teachers 6 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 44:3 Mr. Speaker, these two bills send a strong signal to America’s teachers that we in Congress are determined to encourage good people to enter and remain in the teaching profession and that we want teachers to be treated as professionals, not as Education Department functionaries. I urge my colleagues to support my legislation to prohibit the use of federal funds for national teacher testing and to give America’s teachers a $1,000 tax credit. Congress Honoring Jack C. Hays High School Rebel Band 6 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 45:4 Mr. Speaker, it is indeed an honor to have such an outstanding high school band in the 14th Congressional District. I am delighted to extend my hearty congratulations to them. Their hard work and dedication is an inspiration to us all. Congress Supplemental Appropriations 18 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 47:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, we will later today vote on the conference report to H.R. 1141, the bill to further fund NATO’s aggression in Yugoslavia. The President has requested $7.9 billion but Congress has felt compelled to give him $15 billion. Congress Supplemental Appropriations 18 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 47:2 Congress does not endorse the war. We voted overwhelmingly against declaring war and yet we are giving the President twice the amount he requested to wage the war. It does not make any sense. Congress Supplemental Appropriations 18 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 47:3 We are asking the President to seek reimbursement from NATO members since we have assumed the financial burden for fighting this war. This has tremendous appeal but cannot compensate for the shortsightedness of spending so much in the first place. The money may well never be recouped from our allies, and even if some of it is it only encourages a failed policy of military adventurism. If this policy works, the United States, at Congress’ urging, becomes a hired gun for the international order, a modern day government mercenary. This is not constitutional and it is a bad precedent to set. Congress Supplemental Appropriations 18 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 47:17 There’s nothing America can be proud of in this effort and if we don’t quickly get out of it, it could very well escalate and the getting out made impossible. The surest and quickest way to do this is for Congress today to reject the funding for this war. Congress Opposing Supplemental Appropriation 18 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 48:2 The President came to us and asked us to fund the NATO war, asked for $7.9 billion, but we in the conservative Congress have decided that not only would we give it to him, but we would bump that up to $15 billion, which does not make a whole lot of sense, especially if Congress has spoken out on what they think of the war. Congress Opposing Supplemental Appropriation 18 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 48:3 And Congress has. We have had several votes already. We have voted and said that we did not think that ground troops should be sent in. And most military people tell us that the only way we are going to win the war is with ground troops. So we have taken a strong position. We have had a chance to vote on declaration of war and make a decision one way or the other. We have strongly said we are not going to declare war. Congress Honoring The Victoria High School Victoriadores, Victoria, TX 19 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 50:5 I am proud to have these national and international championships in the 14th Congressional District of Texas. I am proud of the commitment to excellence and perserverance shown by each student which was necessary to reach these goals. I am proud of the support shown by the parents and guardians of these students which helped them reach their goals. Congress National Center For Missing And Exploited Children 25 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 51:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, organizations like the Center for Missing and Exploited Children should be commended and supported for their work on this critical issue. However, I must oppose this legislation as it is outside the proper Constitutional role for the federal government to spend money in this way; such spending is more appropriate coming from the states and private donations. As always, I am amazed that Members of Congress are so willing to be generous with their constituent’s tax dollars, yet do not seem willing to support such causes out of their own pockets. Congress National Center For Missing And Exploited Children 25 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 51:2 This legislation would spend more than $268 million on issues that are simply outside the constitutional jurisdiction of the federal government. In addition, legislation like this blurs the lines between public and private funds, and opens good organizations to needless regulatory control for Congress. The legislation even opens the door to public money being used to support sectarian organizations, in direct violation of the First Amendment. Congress The Mailbox Privacy Protection Act 25 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 52:2 The receiving agency must then send the information to the Post Office, which will maintain the information in a database. Furthermore, the Post Office authorizes the Commercial Mail Receiving Agencies to collect and maintain photocopies of the forms of identification presented by the box renter. My colleagues might be interested to know that the Post Office is prohibited from doing this by the Privacy Act of 1974. I hope my colleagues are as outraged as I am by the Post Office’s mandating that their competitors do what Congress has forbidden the Post Office to do directly. Congress The Mailbox Privacy Protection Act 25 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 52:8 I have introduced this joint resolution in hopes that it will be considered under the expedited procedures established in the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996. This procedure allows Congress to overturn onerous regulations such as the subject of this bill. Mr. Speaker, the entire point of this procedure to provide Congress with a means to stop federal actions which pose an immediate threat to the rights of Americans. Thanks to these agency review provisions, Congress cannot hide and blame these actions on the bureaucracy. I challenge my colleagues to take full advantage of this process and use it to stop this outrageous rule. Congress The Mailbox Privacy Protection Act 25 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 52:9 In conclusion Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring the Mailbox Privacy Protection Act, which uses the Agency Review Procedures of the Contract with America Advancement Act to overturn Post Office’s regulations requiring customers of private mailboxes to give the Post Office their name, address, photographs and social security number. The Federal Government should not force any American citizen to divulge personal information as the price for receiving mail. I further call on all my colleagues to assist me in moving this bill under the expedited procure established under the Congressional Review Act. Congress A Positive Spin On An Ugly War 7 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 54:8 Number seven, the issue of whether or not a President can initiate and wage an unconstitutional war without declaration and in violation of the War Powers Resolution has prompted a positive and beneficial debate in the Congress and throughout the Nation. This is a necessary first step to get Congress to regain its prerogatives over the issue of war. Congress H.J. Res. 55, The Mailbox Privacy Protection Act 7 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 55:4 Mr. Speaker, Congress must do more than talk about how it appreciates small business, it must work to lift the burden of big government from America’s job-creating small businesses. Passing HJ Res 55 and protecting Commercial Mail Receiving Agencies from the Post Offices’ costly and anti-competitive regulations would be a great place to start. Congress Increasing The Minimum Wage Decreases Opportunities For Our Nation’s Youth 10 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 57:3 MINIMUM WAGE HIKES HELP POLITICIANS, NOT THE POOR (By Bruce Bartlett) It now appears likely that the Republican Congress will soon raise the minimum wage for the second time in three years. In 1996 the minimum increased to the present $5.15 an hour from $4.25; the increase now being considered would bring the figure up to $6.15 by 2002. This is bad news, for as many as 436,000 jobs may disappear as a result of the increase. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 58:3 There is tremendous incentive for every special interest group to influence government. Every individual, bank or corporation that does business with government invests plenty in influencing government. Lobbyists spend over $100 million per month trying to influence Congress. Taxpayers’ dollars are endlessly spent by bureaucrats in their effort to convince Congress to protect their own empires. Government has tremendous influence over the economy and financial markets through interest rate controls, contracts, regulations, loans and grants. Corporations and others are forced to participate in the process out of greed, as well as self defense, since that is the way the system works. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 58:5 The reformers argue only that the fault is those who are trying to influence government and not the fault of the members who yield to the pressure of the system that generates the abuse. This allows Members of Congress to avoid assuming responsibility for their own acts and instead places the blame on those who exert pressure on Congress through the political process, which is a basic right bestowed on all Americans. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 58:12 Only changing the nature of government will eliminate the motive for so many to invest so much in the political process, but we should not make a bad situation worse by passing more laws. We should demand disclosure so voters can decide if their representatives in Congress are duly influenced or unduly influenced, but the best thing we could do is to encourage competition, which will be made worse if the reformers have their way. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 58:16 There’s tremendous incentive for every special interest group to influence government. Every individual, bank or corporation that does business with government invests plenty in influencing government. Lobbyists spend over a hundred million dollars per month trying to influence Congress. Taxpayers dollars are endlessly spent by bureaucrats in their effort to convince Congress to protect their own empires. Government has tremendous influence over the economy, and financial markets through interest rate controls, contracts, regulations, loans, and grants. Corporations and others are “forced” to participate in the process out of greed as well as self defense— since that’s the way the system works. Equalizing competition and balancing power such as between labor and business is a common practice. As long as this system remains in place, the incentive to buy influence will continue. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 58:18 It’s naive to believe stricter rules will make a difference. If enough honorable men and women served in Congress and resisted the temptation to be influenced by any special interest group, of course this whole discussion would be unnecessary. Because Members do yield to the pressure, the reformers believe that more rules regulating political speech will solve the problem. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 58:19 The reformers argue that it’s only the fault of those trying to influence government and not the fault of the Members who yield to the pressure or the system that generates the abuse. This allows Members of Congress to avoid assuming responsibility for their own acts and instead places the blame on those who exert pressure on Congress through the political process which is a basic right bestowed on all Americans. The reformer’s argument is “stop us before we capitulate to the special interest groups.” Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 58:29 We should demand disclosure so voters can decide if their Representatives in Congress are unduly influenced. But the best thing we could do is to encourage competition, which will be made worse if the reformers have their way. The majority of Americans are turned off with the system and don’t vote because they don’t believe they have a real choice. Signature requirements, filing fees, and rules written by the two major parties make it virtually impossible for alternative parties to compete if not independently rich or a celebrity. We should change these obstructive rules to encourage the majority of Americans, who now sit out the elections, to participate in the electoral process. Restricting political money and speech will only further hamper competition and discourage citizens from voting. Congress Only A Moral Society Will Make Our Citizens And Their Guns Less Violent 15 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 60:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, we will this week fully debate the issue of school violence. If we had remained a constitutional republic, this debate would not be going on. I sincerely believe this kind of violence would be greatly reduced, and for the violence that did occur, it would be dealt with as a local and school issue. Responding emotionally with feel-good legislation in the Congress serves no worthwhile purpose, but makes the politician feel like he is doing something beneficial. Congress Only A Moral Society Will Make Our Citizens And Their Guns Less Violent 15 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 60:2 In dealing with the problem of violence, there is a large group here in the Congress quite willing to attack the first amendment while defending the second. Likewise, there is a strong contingency here for attacking the second amendment while defending the first. Congress Don’t Undermine First And Second Amendment 16 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 61:3 However, I am not optimistic that much good will come out of the next days of debate. I think there is a lot of mischief going on here. I see that one-half of this Congress is quite capable and anxious to defend the First Amendment, and I think that is good. I see the other half of the Congress is quite anxious and capable of defending the second amendment, and I think that is good. But it seems strange because see these two groups coming together in a coalition to pass a bill that will undermine the first amendment and undermine the second amendment. Congress Don’t Undermine First And Second Amendment 16 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 61:4 That does not make a whole lot of sense to me because I think that we are obligated here in the Congress to defend both the first and the second amendment and were not here for the purpose of undermining both amendments. Congress Don’t Undermine First And Second Amendment 16 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 61:5 We should be reminded, though, that traditionally, up until the middle part of this century, crime control was always considered a local issue. That is the way the Constitution designed it. That is the way it should be. But every day we write more laws here in the Congress building a national police force. We now have more than 80,000 bureaucrats in this country carrying guns. We are an armed society, but it is the Federal Government that is armed. Congress Don’t Undermine First And Second Amendment 16 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 61:7 Recently there was a bipartisan study put out and chaired by Ed Meese, and he is not considered a radical libertarian. He was quoted in an editorial in the Washington Post as to what we here in the Congress are doing with nationalizing our police force. The editorial states: “The basic contention of the report, which was produced by a bipartisan group headed by former Attorney General Edward Meese, is that Congress’ tendency in recent decades to make Federal crimes out of offenses that have historically been State matters has dangerous implications both for the fair administration of justice and for the principle that States are something more than mere administrative districts of a national government.” Congress Consequences Of Gun Control 16 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 62:2 DISARMING GOOD PEOPLE Editor’s note: The following is an open letter from 287 economists, law-school professors and other academics to Congress, regarding gun-control legislation before the House of Representatives. Some but not all of the names of the signatories appear here. Congress Consequences Of Gun Control 16 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 62:6 The laws currently being considered by Congress ignore the importance of deterrence. Police are extremely important at deterring crime, but they simply cannot be everywhere. Individuals also benefit from being able to defend themselves with a gun when they are confronted by a criminal. Congress Consequences Of Gun Control 16 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 62:12 With the 20,000 gun laws already on the books, we advise Congress, before enacting yet more new laws, to investigate whether many of the existing laws may have contributed to the problems we currently face. The new legislation is ill-advised. Congress What We Would Be Doing By Amending The Constitution To Make It Illegal To Desecrate The American Flag 22 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 63:10 Mr. Speaker, in recent weeks we have had many Members in this Congress cite the Constitution. As a matter of fact, the Constitution is cited all the time. Sometimes I see it inconsistently cited, because when it pleases one to cite the Constitution, they do; and when it does not, they forget about it. But just recently we have heard the citing of the Constitution quite frequently. In the impeachment hearings: We have to uphold the Constitution, we have to live by our traditions and our ideals. Just last week we were citing the Constitution endlessly over the second amendment which I strongly support, and which I said the same thing. We must uphold the Constitution to defend the second amendment. But all of a sudden here we have decided to change the Constitution that we are in some way going to restrict the freedom of expression. Congress What We Would Be Doing By Amending The Constitution To Make It Illegal To Desecrate The American Flag 22 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 63:13 It is expected that this will be passed overwhelmingly, and in the Senate possibly as well, and then throughout the country, but I do not see this as a positive step. We here in the Congress should think seriously before we pass this amendment. Congress Opposing Flag Burning Amendment 23 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 65:3 But it does not stop there. On an annual basis we, the Congress, require the State Department to report to us any human rights violations around the world. The human rights violations in Red China are used specifically to decide whether or not they will get Most Favored Nation status. Last year, in 1998, the report came to the Congress in April of this year, and it reported that indeed there were violations of human rights. What were the human rights violations that we are condemning by this report and we are going to use against the Red Chinese? Two individuals burned the Hong Kong or the Red Chinese flag. Congress Opposing Flag Burning Amendment 23 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 66:4 Let me just emphasize how the first amendment is written. “Congress shall write no law.” That was the spirit of our Nation at that time. “Congress shall write no laws.” Congress Opposing Flag Burning Amendment 23 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 66:9 I want to emphasize once again that one of the very first laws that Red China passed on Hong Kong was to make flag burning illegal. The very first law by Red China on Hong Kong was to make sure they had a law on the books like this. Since that time they have prosecuted some individuals. Our State Department tallies this, keeps records of this as a human rights violation, that if they burn the flag, they are violating human rights. Our State Department reports it to our Congress as they did in April of this year and those violations are used against Red China in the argument that they should not gain most-favored-nation status. There is just a bit of hypocrisy here, if they think that this law will do so much good and yet we are so critical of it when Red China does it. Congress Privacy Project Act 24 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 68:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Privacy Protection Act, which repeals those sections of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 authorizing the establishment of federal standards for birth certificates and drivers’ licenses. This obscure provision, which was part of a major piece of legislation passed at the end of the 104th Congress, represents a major power grab by the federal government and a threat to the liberties of every American, for it would transform state drivers’ licenses into national ID cards. Congress Privacy Project Act 24 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 68:4 Any member who is reluctant to support this legislation should consider the reaction of the American people when they discover that they must produce a federally-approved ID in order to get a job or open a bank account. Already many offices are being flooded with complaints about the movement toward a national ID card. If this scheme is not halted, Congress and the entire political establishment could drown in the backlash from the American people. In fact, I am holding in my hand a letter from almost all citizens’ groups from across the political spectrum, representing thousands of Americans, opposing the plans to implement a national ID. Congress Privacy Project Act 24 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 68:5 Although the Transportation Appropriations bill restricts the Department of Transportation from implementing a final rule regarding this provision, the fact is that unless the House acts this year to repeal the provision, states will begin implementing the law so as to be in compliance with the mandate. Therefore, Congress must repeal Section 656 in order to comply with the Constitution and the wishes of the vast majority of the American people who do not want to be forced to carry a national ID card. Congress Privacy Project Act 24 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 68:7 NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATURES [NCSL]; AND AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION [ACLU]; ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER [EPIC]; NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA [NCLR]; EAGLE FORUM; ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION; FREE CONGRESS FOUNDATION/COALITION FOR CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTIES; AND AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM We represent a broad-based coalition of state legislators, county officials, public policy groups, civil libertarians, privacy experts, and consumer groups from across the political spectrum. We urge the Congress to repeal Section 656 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibilities Act of 1996 that requires states to collect, verify and display social security numbers on state-issued driver’s licenses and conform with federally-mandated uniform features for driver’s license. The law preempts state authority over the issuance of the state driver’s licenses, violates the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1994 (UMRA) and poses a threat to the privacy of citizens. Opposition to the law and the preliminary regulation issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has been overwhelmingly evidence by the more than 2,000 comments submitted by individuals, groups, state legislators, and state agencies to NHTSA. Congress Privacy Project Act 24 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 68:11 The law raises a number of privacy concerns relating to the expanded use and dissemination of the Social Security Number (SSN), the creation of a national ID cared, and the violation of federal rules of privacy. The law and proposed rule require that each license contain either in visual or electronic form the individual’s SSN unless the state goes through burdensome and invasive procedures to check each individuals’s identify with the Social Security Administration. This will greatly expand the dissemination and misuse of the SSN at a time that Congress; the states, and the public are actively working to limit its dissemination over concerns of fraud and privacy. Many states are taking measures to reduce the use of SSNs as the driver’s identify number. Only a few states currently require the SSN to be used as an identifier on their driver’s licenses. Congress Privacy Project Act 24 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 68:12 While the impact of Section 656 may not been fully comprehended in 1996, we urge the Congress now to act swiftly to repeal this provision of law that has been challenged by many diverse groups. If you or your staff have any further questions, please contact Dawn Levy of the National Conference of State Legislatures at (202) 624–8687. Congress Child Custody Protection Act 30 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 69:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, in the name of a truly laudable cause (preventing abortions and protecting parental rights), today the Congress could potentially move our nation one step closer to a national police state by further expanding the list of federal crimes and usurping power from the states to adequately address the issue of parental rights and family law. Of course, it is much easier to ride the current wave of criminally federalizing all human malfeasance in the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a Constitutional oath which prescribes a procedural structure by which the nation is protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism carried out by a centralized government. Who, after all, wants to be amongst those members of Congress who are portrayed as trampling parental rights or supporting the transportation of minor females across state lines for ignoble purposes. Congress Child Custody Protection Act 30 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 69:3 Our federal government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers. Article one, Section eight, enumerates the legislative areas for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every other issue, the federal government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the state governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The tenth amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Congress Child Custody Protection Act 30 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 69:4 Nevertheless, rather than abide by our constitutional limits, Congress today will likely pass H.R. 1218. H.R. 1218 amends title 18, United States Code, to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions. Should parents be involved in decisions regarding the health of their children?? Absolutely. Should the law respect parents rights to not have their children taken across state lines for contemptible purposes?? Absolutely. Can a state pass an enforceable statute to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions?? Absolutely. But when asked if there exists constitutional authority for the federal criminalizing of just such an action the answer is absolutely not. Congress Child Custody Protection Act 30 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 69:6 Most recently, we have been reminded by both Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese that more federal crimes, while they make politicians feel good, are neither constitutionally sound nor prudent. Rehnquist stated in his year-end report “The trend to federalize crimes that traditionally have been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our federal system.” Meese stated that Congress’ tendency in recent decades to make federal crimes out of offenses that have historically been state matters has dangerous implications both for the fair administration of justice and for the principle that states are something more than mere administrative districts of a nation governed mainly from Washington. Congress Child Custody Protection Act 30 June 1999    1999 Ron Paul 69:7 The argument which springs from the criticism of a federalized criminal code and a federal police force is that states may be less effective than a centralized federal government in dealing with those who leave one state jurisdiction for another. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of state sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit clause allow states to exact judgments from those who violate their state laws. The Constitution even allows the federal government to legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow states to enforce their substantive laws without the federal government imposing its substantive edicts on the states. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one state to another. While not self-enacting, in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. There is, of course, a cost imposed upon states in working with one another rather than relying on a national, unified police force. At the same time, there is a greater cost to centralization of police power. Congress H.R. 1691 And Religious Freedom 15 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 74:2 Mr. Speaker, as a legislature of enumerated powers, Congress may enact laws only for constitutionally authorized purposes. Despite citing the general welfare and commerce clause, the purpose of H.R. 1691 is obviously to “protect religious liberty.” However, Congress has been granted no power to protect religious liberty. Rather, the first amendment is a limitation on congressional power. The first amendment of the United States Constitution provides that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion, yet H.R. 1691 specifically prohibits the free exercise of religion because it authorizes a government to substantially burden a person’s free exercise if the government demonstrates some nondescript, compelling interest to do so. Congress H.R. 1691 And Religious Freedom 15 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 74:3 The U.S. Constitution vests all legislative powers in Congress and requires Congress to define government policy and select the means by which that policy is to be implemented. Congress, in allowing religious free exercise to be infringed using the least restrictive means whenever government pleads a compelling interest without defining either what constitutes least restrictive or compelling interest delegates, to the courts legislative powers to make these policy choices constitutionally reserved to the elected body. Congress Mail Receiving Agencies 15 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 75:2 I have a House joint resolution under the Congressional Review Act, H.J. Res. 55. If that were to pass, we could rescind all those regulations. Currently, it is my understanding that these regulations have been put on hold. They will not go into effect soon. But the problem still exists, and I see it as a serious problem. Congress Mail Receiving Agencies 15 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 75:10 We as a Congress have the ability, and the authority, to undo regulations. For too long, we have allowed our regulatory bodies to write law, and we do nothing about it. Since 1994, we have had this authority, but we never use it. This is a perfect example of a time that we ought to come in and protect the people, try to neutralize this government monopoly and help these people who deserve this type of protection and privacy. Congress Exchange Stabilization Fund 15 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 76:4 The Exchange Stabilization Fund was set up, I think in error; but it was set up for the purpose of stabilizing the dollar in the Depression. How did that come about? Well, it started with an Executive order. It started with an Executive order to take gold forcefully from the people. And then our President then revalued gold from $20 an ounce to $35 an ounce, and there was a profit and they took this profit and used some of those profits to start the Exchange Stabilization Fund. They set it up with $200 million. It does not seem like a whole lot of money today. How did it come about over these many years that this fund has been allowed to exist without supervision of this Congress, and now has reached to the size of $34 billion and we give it no oversight? It is supposed to send reports to us, very superficial reports to the Congress. We don’t know how they got $34 billion. They earned interest on some of the loans, and all the loans are paid back because the countries who get the loans borrow more money. Congress Exchange Stabilization Fund 15 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 76:5 Mr. Chairman, the Mexico bailout did not solve the Mexico problem. It is ongoing. The peso is in trouble again. They are in more debt than before. We only encourage the financial bubble around the world. This is a dangerous notion that we can take something that was set up to stabilize the dollar, and now we are pretending we can stabilize all the currencies in the world and use it as foreign aid to boot without the congressional approval. There is something seriously flawed with this. Congress Exchange Stabilization Fund 15 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 76:8 So, yes, we tide Mexico over for a year or two, but what are we going to say next year when there is another peso crisis? Are we going to close our eyes and say we will do whatever we want, it is a major crisis? Our obligation here in the Congress is to have a sound dollar, not to dilute the value of the dollar without our permission and for our President and our Treasury Department and the IMF and the World Bank and the internationalists to destroy the value of the dollar. That is not permissible under the rule of law, and yet we have casually permitted this to happen and we do not even ask the serious questions. Congress Exchange Stabilization Fund 15 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 76:9 We should make it certain that all loans, all use of that is reviewed by the Congress. This is a very, very modest request by the gentleman from Vermont. It should be absolutely approved. But then some day we ought to give a serious study about how we as a Congress allow these kind of things to happen without our supervision. Congress Exchange Stabilization Fund 15 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 76:10 What is the purpose of having a Congress? What is the purpose of the Constitution if we have an obligation to guarantee the value of the dollar and if we permit somebody not under our control to do whatever they want to the dollar under the pretense that we are going to protect the value of all the currencies of Asia? Congress Africa Growth And Opportunity Act 16 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 77:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, once again Congress demonstrates that it has no fundamental understanding of free trade or the best interests of the taxpayer. The Africa Growth & Opportunity Act is heavy-laden with the Development Assistance (foreign aid), debt forgiveness (so much for the balanced budget), OPIC expansion (thus putting the taxpayers further at risk), and of course a new international regulatory board to be funded with “such sums as may be necessary.” Additionally, the costs of this bill are paid by raising taxes on charity. Free trade, Washington style, is evidently not free for the taxpayer! Congress Africa Growth And Opportunity Act 16 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 77:4 An example of what now constitutes “free trade” Washington style can be found within the US ENGAGE Congressional Scorecard. It is insightful to consider what USA ENGAGE regards as pro-free trade against the backdrop of the non-interventionist notion of free trade outlined above. Congress Africa Growth And Opportunity Act 16 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 77:7 The Fast Track initiative highlighted in USA ENGAGE’s Congressional scorecard has its own particular set of Constitutional problems, but the free-trade arguments are most relevant and illustrative here. The fast-track procedure bill sets general international economic policy objectives, re-authorizes “Trade Adjustment Assistance” welfare for workers who lose their jobs and for businesses which fail (a gentler, kinder “welfarist” form of protectionism), and creates a new permanent position of Chief Agriculture Negotiator within the office of the United States Trade Representative. Lastly, like today’s legislative mishap, the bill “pays” the government’s “cost” of free trade by increasing taxes on a set of taxpayers further removed from those corporatists who hope to gain by engineering favorable international trade agreements. Congress Africa Growth And Opportunity Act 16 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 77:12 The harmonization language in the last Congress’ Food and Drug Administration reform bill constitutes a perfect example. Harmonization language in this bill has the Health and Human Services Secretary negotiating multilateral and bilateral international agreements to unify regulations in this country with those of others. The bill removes from the state governments the right to exercise their police powers under the tenth amendment to the constitution and, at the same time, creates a corporatist power elite board of directors to review medical devices and drugs for approval. This board, of course, is to be made up of “objective” industry experts appointed by national governments. Instead of the “national” variety, known as the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 (enacted for the “good reason” of protecting railroad consumers from exploitative railroad freight rates, only to be staffed by railroad attorneys who then used their positions to line the pockets of their respective railroads), we now have the same sham imposed upon worldwide consumers on an international scale soon to be staffed by heads of multinational pharmaceutical corporations. Congress On The United Nations And Embassy Security 19 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 78:4 There are many in this Congress who readily admit they are internationalists. I readily admit that I am not an internationalist when it comes to political action and warmongering. Therefore, I think much of what we do in foreign policy makes ourselves more vulnerable. If we look at the two most recent bombings in Africa, these were brought about by our own foreign policy. Congress Teacher Empowerment Act 20 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 81:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I rise reluctantly to express my opposition to the Teacher Empowerment Act (H.R. 1995). Although H.R. 1995 does provide more flexibility to states than the current system or the Administration’s proposal, it comes at the expense of increasing federal spending on education. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that if Congress appropriates the full amount authorized in the bill, additional outlays would be $83 million in Fiscal Year 2000 and $6.9 billion over five years. Congress Teacher Empowerment Act 20 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 81:3 Furthermore, this bill provides increased ability for state and local governments to determine how best to use federal funds. However, no one should confuse this with true federalism or even a repudiation of the modern view of state and local governments as administrative agencies of the Federal Government. After all, the very existence of a federal program designed to “help” states train teachers limits a state’s ability to set education priorities since every dollar taken in federal taxes to fund federal teacher training programs is a dollar a state cannot use to purchase new textbooks or computers for students. This bill also dictates how much money the states may keep versus how much must be sent to the local level and limits the state government’s use of the funds to activities approved by Congress. Congress Teacher Empowerment Act 20 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 81:6 Furthermore, this bill requires localities to use a certain percentage of their funds to meet the professional development needs of math and science teachers. As an OB–GYN, I certainly understand the need for quality math and science teachers, however, for Congress to require local education agencies to devote a disproportionate share of resources to one particular group of teachers is a form of central planning — directing resources into those areas valued by the central planners, regardless of the diverse needs of the people. Not every school district in the country has the same demand for math and science teachers. There may be some local school districts that want to devote more resources to English teachers or foreign language instructors. Some local schools districts may even want to devote their resources to provide quality history and civics teachers so they will not produce another generation of constitutionally-illiterate politicians! Congress Teacher Empowerment Act 20 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 81:7 In order to receive funding under this bill, states must provide certain guarantees that the state’s use of the money will result in improvement in the quality of the state’s education system. Requiring such guarantees assumes that the proper role for the Federal Government is to act as overseer of the states and localities to ensure they provide children with a quality education. There are several flaws in this assumption. First of all, the 10th amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the Federal Government from exercising any control over education. Thus, the Federal Government has no legitimate authority to take money from the American people and use that money in order to bribe states to adopt certain programs that Congress and the federal bureaucracy believes will improve education. The prohibition in the 10th amendment is absolute; it makes no exception for federal education programs that “allow the states flexibility!” Congress Teacher Empowerment Act 20 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 81:9 In order to put the American people back in charge of education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935) which provides parents with a $3,000 tax credit for K–12 education expenses and the Education Improvement Tax Cut Act (H.R. 936), which provides all citizens with a $3,000 tax credit for contributions to K–12 scholarships and for cash or in-kind donations to schools. I have also introduced the Teacher Tax Cut Act, which encourages good people to enter and remain in the teaching profession by providing teachers with a $1,000 tax credit. By returning control of the education dollar to parents and concerned citizens, my education package does more to improve education quality than any other proposal in Congress. Congress Free Trade 27 July 1999    1999 Ron Paul 82:5 Our biggest problem here in the Congress is that we seemingly never have a chance to vote for genuine free trade. The choice is almost always between managed-plus-subsidized trade or sanctions-plus-protectionism. Our careless use of language (most likely deliberate) is deceitful. Congress Selective Service System 8 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 92:11 Conscription is not part of the American dream. It is not part of the American philosophy. It is not part of liberty. It is a totalitarian notion. Congress has the authority to raise an army, but it does not have the constitutional authority to enslave a certain group to bear the brunt of the fighting. A society that cherishes liberty will easily find its volunteer defenders if it is attacked. A free society that cannot find those willing to defend itself without coercion cannot survive, and probably does not deserve to. Congress Selective Service System 8 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 92:13 We gradually lost our love for individual liberty throughout the 20th century as the people and the Congresses capitulated to the notion of the military draft. The vote on the Selective Service System funding will determine whether or not we are willing to take a very welcome, positive step in the direction of more liberty by rejecting the appropriations for the Selective Service System. Congress Selective Service System 8 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 92:14 There is no other vote that a Member of Congress can cast that defines one’s belief and understanding regarding the principle of personal liberty than a vote supporting or rejecting the draft. This vote gives us a rare opportunity to reverse the trend toward bigger and more oppressive government. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 97:3 There’s tremendous incentive for every special interest group to influence government. Every individual, bank or corporation that does business with government invests plenty in influencing government. Lobbyists spend over a hundred million dollars per month trying to influence Congress. Taxpayers dollars are endlessly spent by bureaucrats in their effort to convince Congress to protect their own empires. Government has tremendous influence over the economy, and financial markets through interest rate controls, contracts, regulations, loans, and grants. Corporations and others are ‘forced’ to participate in the process out of greed as well as self-defense — since that’s the way the system works. Equalizing competition and balancing power such as between labor and business is a common practice. As long as this system remains in place, the incentive to buy influence will continue. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 97:5 It’s naive to believe stricter rules will make a difference. If enough honorable men and women served in Congress and resisted the temptation to be influenced by any special interest group, of course this whole discussion would be unnecessary. Because Members do yield to the pressure, the reformers believe that more rules regulating political speech will solve the problem. Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 97:6 The reformers argue that it’s only the fault of those trying to influence government and not the fault of the Members who yield to the pressure or the system that generates the abuse. This allows Members of Congress to avoid assuming responsibility for their own acts and instead places the blame on those who exert pressure on Congress through the political process which is a basic right bestowed on all Americans. The reformer’s argument is “stop us before we succumb to the special interest groups.” Congress Campaign Finance Reform 14 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 97:13 Additionally, the legislative debate over campaign finance reform has seemingly focused upon the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech, as interpreted and applied by the courts. The constitutional issues, however, are not limited to the First Amendment. To the contrary, pursuant to their oaths of office, members of Congress have an independent duty to determine the constitutionality of legislation before it and to decide, before ever reaching the First Amendment, whether they have been vested by the Constitution with any authority, at all, to regulate federal election campaigns. Congress has no authority except that which is “granted” in the Constitution. Thus, the threshold question concerning H.R. 417 is whether the Constitution has conferred upon Congress any authority to regular federal election campaigns. The authority to regulate such campaigns is not found among any enumerated power conferred upon Congress. Congress East Timor 28 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 99:14 This is a major commitment. This is not just a resolution that is saying that we support humanitarian aid. This is big stuff. The American people ought to know it, the Members of Congress ought to know it. Congress East Timor 28 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 99:15 This resolution became available to me just within the last 20 minutes. It has been difficult to know exactly what is in it, and yet it is very significant, very important; and we in the Congress should not vote casually and carelessly on this issue. This is a major commitment. I think it is going in the wrong direction, and we should consider the fact that there are so often unintended consequences from our efforts to do what is right. Congress East Timor 28 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 99:16 I understand the motivation behind this, but tragically this type of action tends to always backfire because we do not follow the rule of law. And the rule of law says if we commit troops, we ought to get the direct and explicit authority from the Congress with a war resolution. This, in essence, is a baby war resolution, but it is a war resolution. Congress War On East Timor 28 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 101:2 In World War II there was a serious problem around the world. It was brought to this Congress. We voted on a war resolution. We went to war. The country was unified, and we won. That is what I endorse, that procedure. What I do not endorse is us getting involved the back-door way; getting involved carelessly and casually. Not realizing what we are doing. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 30 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 102:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, pro-life Members of Congress are ecstatic over the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, touting it as a good step toward restoring respect for life, and once again criminalizing abortion. This optimism and current effort must be seriously challenged. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 30 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 102:13 Mr. Chairman, today Congress will vote to further instill and codify the ill-advised Roe versus Wade decision. While it is the independent duty of each branch of the federal government to act Constitutionally, Congress will likely ignore not only its Constitutional limits but earlier criticisms from Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as well. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 30 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 102:15 Of course, it is much easier to ride the current wave of federalizing every human misdeed in the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a Constitutional oath which prescribes a procedural structure by which the nation is protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism. Who, after all, wants to be amongst those members of Congress who are portrayed as soft on violent crimes initiated against the unborn? Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 30 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 102:16 Nevertheless, our federal government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers. Article one, section eight, enumerates the legislative areas for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every other issue, the federal government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the state governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The tenth amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 30 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 102:17 However, Congress does more damage than just expanding the class to whom federal murder and assault statutes apply — it further entrenches and seemingly concurs with the Roe versus Wade decision (the Court’s intrusion into rights of states and their previous attempts to protect by criminal statute the unborn’s right not to be aggressed against). By specifically exempting from prosecution both abortionists and the mothers of the unborn (as is the case with this legislation), Congress appears to say that protection of the unborn child is not a federal matter but conditioned upon motive. In fact, the Judiciary Committee in marking up the bill, took an odd legal turn by making the assault on the unborn a strict liability offense insofar as the bill does not even require knowledge on the part of the aggressor that the unborn child exists. Murder statutes and common law murder require intent to kill (which implies knowledge) on the part of the aggressor. Here, however, we have the odd legal philosophy that an abortionist with full knowledge of his terminal act is not subject to prosecution while an aggressor acting without knowledge of the child’s existence is subject to nearly the full penalty of the law. (The bill exempts the murderer from the death sentence — yet another diminution of the unborn’s personhood status.) It is becoming more and more difficult for Congress and the courts to pass the smell test as government simultaneously treats the unborn as a person in some instances and as a non-person in others. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 30 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 102:18 In this first formal complaint to Congress on behalf of the federal Judiciary, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist said “the trend to federalize crimes that have traditionally been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our federal system.” Rehnquist further criticized Congress for yielding to the political pressure to “appear responsive to every highly publicized societal ill or sensational crime.” Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 30 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 102:20 Occasionally the argument is put forth that states may be less effective than a centralized federal government in dealing with those who leave one state jurisdiction for another. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of state sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit clause allow states to exact judgments from those who violate their state laws. The Constitution even allows the federal government to legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow states to enforce their substantive laws without the federal government imposing its substantive edicts on the states. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one state to another. While not self-enacting, in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. There is, of course, a cost imposed upon states in working with one another rather than relying on a national, unified police force. At the same time, there is a greater cost to centralization of a police power. Congress Health Care Reform: Treat The Cause, Not The Symptom 4 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 103:5 Only true competition assures that the consumer gets the best deal at the best price possible by putting pressure on the providers. Once one side is given a legislative advantage in an artificial system, as it is in managed care, trying to balance government-dictated advantages between patient and HMOs is impossible. The differences cannot be reconciled by more government mandates, which will only make the problem worse. Because we are trying to patch up an unworkable system, the impasse in Congress should not be a surprise. Congress Health Care Reform: Treat The Cause, Not The Symptom 4 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 103:15 For anyone understanding economics, the results are predictable: Quality of medical care will decline, services will be hard to find, and the three groups, patients, doctors and HMOs will blame each other for the problems, pitting patients against HMOs and government, doctors against the HMOs, the HMOs against the patient, the HMOs against the doctor and the result will be the destruction of the cherished doctor-patient relationship. That’s where we are today and unless we recognize the nature of the problem Congress will make things worse. More government meddling surely will not help. Congress Health Care Reform: Treat The Cause, Not The Symptom 4 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 103:23 The ERISA law requiring businesses to provide particular programs for their employees should be repealed. The tax codes should give equal tax treatment to everyone whether working for a large corporation, small business, or is self employed. Standards should be set by insurance companies, doctors, patients, and HMOs working out differences through voluntary contracts. For years it was known that some insurance policies excluded certain care and this was known up front and was considered an acceptable provision since it allowed certain patients to receive discounts. The federal government should defer to state governments to deal with the litigation crisis and the need for contract legislation between patients and medical providers. Health care providers should be free to combine their efforts to negotiate effectively with HMOs and insurance companies without running afoul of federal anti-trust laws — or being subject to regulation by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Congress should also remove all federally-imposed roadblocks to making pharmaceuticals available to physicians and patients. Government regulations are a major reason why many Americans find it difficult to afford prescription medicines. It is time to end the days when Americans suffer because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prevented them from getting access to medicines that where available and affordable in other parts of the world! Congress Health Care Reform: Treat The Cause, Not The Symptom 4 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 103:24 The most important thing Congress can do is to get market forces operating immediately by making Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs) generously available to everyone desiring one. Patient motivation to save and shop would be a major force to reduce cost, as physicians would once again negotiate fees downward with patients — unlike today where the government reimbursement is never too high and hospital and MD bills are always at maximum levels allowed. MSAs would help satisfy the American’s people’s desire to control their own health care and provide incentives for consumers to take more responsibility for their care. Congress Quality Care For The Uninsured Act 6 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 104:2 Contrary to the claims of many advocates of increased government regulation of health care, the problems with the health care system do not represent market failure, rather they represent the failure of government policies which have destroyed the health care market. In today’s system, it appears on the surface that the interest of the patient is in conflict with rights of the insurance companies and the Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs). In a free market this cannot happen. Everyone’s rights are equal and agreements on delivering services of any kind are entered into voluntarily, thus satisfying both sides. Only true competition assures that the consumer gets the best deal at the best price possible, by putting pressure on the providers. Once one side is given a legislative advantage, in an artificial system, as it is in managed care, trying to balance government dictated advantages between patient and HMOs is impossible. The differences cannot be reconciled by more government mandates which will only makes the problem worse. Because we are trying to patch up an unworkable system, the impasse in Congress should not be a surprise. Congress Quality Care For The Uninsured Act 6 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 104:10 For anyone understanding economics, the results are predictable: Quality of medical care will decline, services will be hard to find, and the three groups, patients, doctors and HMOs will blame each other for the problems, pitting patients against HMOs and government, doctors against the HMOs, the HMOs against the patient, the HMOs against the doctor and the result will be the destruction of the cherished doctor-patient relationship. That’s where we are today and unless we recognize the nature of the problem Congress will make things worse. More government meddling surely will not help. Congress Quality Care For The Uninsured Act 6 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 104:19 The ERISA laws requiring businesses to provide particular programs for their employees should be repealed. The tax codes should give equal tax treatment to everyone whether working for a large corporation, small business, or is self employed. Standards should be set by insurance companies, doctors, patients, and HMOs working out differences through voluntary contracts. For years it was known that some insurance policies excluded certain care and this was known up front and was considered an acceptable provision since it allowed certain patients to receive discounts. The federal government should defer to state governments to deal with the litigation crisis and the need for contract legislation between patients and medical providers. Health care providers should be free to combine their efforts to negotiate effectively with HMOs and insurance companies without running afoul of federal anti-trust laws — or being subject to regulation by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Congress should also remove all federally-imposed roadblocks to making pharmaceuticals available to physicians and patients. Government regulations are a major reason why many Americans find it difficult to afford prescription medicines. It is time to end the days when Americans suffer because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prevented them from getting access to medicines that were available and affordable in other parts of the world! Congress Quality Care For The Uninsured Act 6 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 104:20 The most important thing Congress can do is to get market forces operating immediately by making Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs) generously available to everyone desiring one. Patient motivation to save and shop would be a major force to reduce cost, as physicians would once again negotiate fees downward with patients — unlike today where the government reimbursement is never too high and hospital and MD bills are always at maximum levels allowed. MSAs would help satisfy the American’s people’s desire to control their own health care and provide incentives for consumers to take more responsibility for their care. Congress Paul-Doolittle Amendment To H.R. 3037 14 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 105:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today I am placing in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD an amendment I, along with my colleague, Mr. DOOLITTLE of California, are offering to H.R. 3037, the Labor/HHS/Education Appropriations bill, to reduce funding for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) by $30,000,000, increase funding for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) by $25,000,000 and apply $5,000,000 toward debt reduction. Our amendment provides an increase in financial support to help local schools cope with the federal IDEA mandates by reducing funding for an out-of-control bureaucracy that is running roughshod over the rights of workers, and even defying the Supreme Court! Congress Paul-Doolittle Amendment To H.R. 3037 14 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 105:4 Congress must make funding for schools and disabled children a greater priority than funding for a rogue federal agency. Therefore, hope all my colleagues will support the Paul-Doolittle amendment to H.R. 3037. Congress No Neeed for Federal Animal Cruelty Laws 19 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 106:1 Mr. PAUL. I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. If ever there were a bill unnecessary, this is one. It is an example of us here in the Congress looking for dragons to slay. This is absolutely unnecessary. There is no real purpose in passing this legislation. As has been said, all 50 States have laws against violence and cruelty to animals. That should be adequate. But the way this bill is written really opens up a Pandora’s box. It is a can of worms. Congress Stop Federal Funding for Schools 20 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 107:2 Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to this legislation. I know that the goal of everyone here is to have quality education for everyone in this country. I do not like the approach. The approach has been going on for 30 years with us here in the Congress at the national level controlling and financing education. But the evidence is pretty clear there has been no success. It is really a total failure. Yet the money goes up continuously. This year it is an 8 percent increase for Title I over last year. Congress Elementary and Secondary Education Act (SEA) 21 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 108:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, Congress is once again preparing to exceed its constitutional limits as well as ignore the true lesson of the last thirty years of education failure by reauthorizing Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (SEA). Like most federal programs, Title I was launched with the best of intentions, however, good intentions are no excuse for Congress to exceed its constitutional limitations by depriving parents, local communities and states of their rightful authority over education. The tenth amendment does not contain an exception for “good intentions!” Congress Elementary and Secondary Education Act (SEA) 21 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 108:2 The Congress that created Title I promised the American public that, in exchange for giving up control over their schools and submitting to increased levels of taxation, federally-empowered “experts” would create an educational utopia. However, rather than ushering in a new golden age of education, increased federal involvement in education has, not coincidently, coincided with a decline in American public education. In 1963, when federal spending on education was less than nine hundred thousand dollars, the average Scholastic Achievement Test (SAT) score was approximately 980. Thirty years later, when federal education spending ballooned to 19 billion dollars, the average SAT score had fallen to 902. Furthermore, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 1992 Survey, only 37% of America’s 12th graders were actually able to read at a 12th grade level! Congress Elementary and Secondary Education Act (SEA) 21 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 108:3 Supporters of a constitutional education policy should be heartened that Congress has finally recognized that simply throwing federal taxpayer money at local schools will not improve education. However, too many in Congress continue to cling to the belief that the “right federal program” conceived by enlightened members and staffers will lead to educational nirvana. In fact, a cursory review of this legislation reveals at least five new mandates imposed on the states by this bill; this bill also increases federal expenditures by $27.7 billion over the next five years — yet the drafters of this legislation somehow manage to claim with a straight face that this bill promotes local control! Congress Elementary and Secondary Education Act (SEA) 21 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 108:11 Instead of fighting over what type of federal intervention is best for education, Congress should honor their constitutional oath and give complete control over America’s educational system to the states and people. Therefore, Congress should reject this legislation and instead work to restore true accountability to America’s parents by defunding the education bureaucracy and returning control of the education dollar to America’s parents. Congress Academic Achievement for All Students Freedom and Accountability Act (STRAIGHT “A’s”) 21 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 109:3 However, there are a number of both practical and philosophical concerns regarding this bill. While the additional flexibility granted under this bill will be welcomed by the ten states allowed by the federal overseers to participate in the program, there is no justification to deny this flexibility to the remaining forty states. After all, federal education money represents the return of funds illegitimately taken from the American taxpayers to their states and communities. It is the pinnacle of arrogance for Congress to pick and choose which states are worthy of relief from federal strings in how they use what is, after all, the people’s money. Congress Academic Achievement for All Students Freedom and Accountability Act (STRAIGHT “A’s”) 21 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 109:10 Since the STRAIGHT “A’s” bill does give states an opportunity to break free of some federal mandates, supporters of returning the federal government to its constitutional limits should support it. However, they should keep in mind that this bill represents a minuscule step forward as it fails to directly challenge the federal government’s usurpation of control over education. Instead, this bill merely gives states greater flexibility to fulfill federally-defined goals. Therefore, Congress should continue to work to restore constitutional government and parental control of education by defunding all unconstitutional federal programs and returning the money to America’s parents so that they may once again control the education of their children. Congress Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999 (H.R. 2260) 27 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 111:5 This bill should be opposed. I think it will backfire. If we can come here in the Congress and decide that the Oregon law is bad, what says we cannot go to Texas and get rid of the Texas law that protects life and prohibits euthanasia. That is the main problem with this bill. Congress Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999 (H.R. 2260) 27 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 111:13 However, I believe that if we are not careful in our attempt to clarify this situation we also could participate in a slippery slope unbeknownst to us and just as dangerous. Roe vs. Wade essentially has nationalized an issue that should have been handled strictly by the states. Its repeal of a Texas State law set the stage for the wholesale of millions of innocent unborn. And yet, we once again are embarking on more nationalization of law that will in time backfire. Although the intention of H.R. 2260 is to repeal the Oregon law and make a statement against euthanasia it may well just do the opposite. If the nationalization of law dealing with abortion was designed to repeal state laws that protected life there is nothing to say that once we further establish this principle that the federal government, either the Congress or the Federal Courts, will be used to repeal the very laws that exist in 49 other states than Oregon that prohibit euthanasia. As bad as it is to tolerate an unsound state law, it’s even worse to introduce the notion that our federal congresses and our federal courts have the wisdom to tell all the states how to achieve the goals of protecting life and liberty. Congress Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999. 27 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 112:7 I am pro-life. I am against abortion. I am absolutely opposed to euthanasis. But euthanasis is killing. Under our Constitution, that is a State issue, not a congressional issue. Congress Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999. 27 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 112:9 Mr. Chairman, today Congress will take a legislative step which is as potentially dangerous to protecting the sanctity of life as was the Court’s ill-advised Roe versus Wade decision. Congress Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999. 27 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 112:11 Our federal government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers. Article one, section eight, enumerates the legislative areas for which the U.S. Congress is allowed enact legislation. For every other issue, the federal government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the state governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The tenth amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Congress Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999. 27 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 112:12 In his first formal complaint to Congress on behalf of the federal Judiciary, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist said “the trend to federalize crimes that have traditionally been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our federal system.” Rehnquist further criticized Congress for yielding to the political pressure to “appear responsive to every highly publicized societal ill or sensational crime.” Congress Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999. 27 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 112:13 However, Congress does significantly more damage than simply threatening physicians with penalties for improper prescription of certain drugs — it establishes (albeit illegitimately) the authority to dictate the terms of medical practice and, hence, the legality of assisted suicide nationwide. Even though the motivation of this legislation is clearly to pre-empt the Oregon Statute and may be protective of life in this instance, we mustn’t forget that the saw (or scalpel) cuts both ways. The Roe versus Wade decision — the Court’s intrusion into rights of states and their previous attempts to protect by criminal statute the unborn’s right not to be aggressed against — was quite clearly less protective of life than the Texas statute it obliterated. By assuming the authority to decide for the whole nation issues relating to medical practice, palliative care, and assisted suicide, the foundation is established for a national assisted suicide standard which may not be protective of life when the political winds shift and the Medicare system is on the verge of fiscal collapse. Then, of course, it will be the federal government’s role to make the tough choices of medical procedure rationing and for whom the cost of medical care doesn’t justify life extension. Current law already prohibits private physicians from seeing privately funded patients if they’ve treated a Medicaid patient within two years. Congress Good Time For Congress To Reassess Antitrust Laws 8 November 1999    1999 Ron Paul 114:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, by now, the Microsoft antitrust case should have caught every Member’s attention. This is a good time for Congress to reassess the antitrust laws. Congress Good Time For Congress To Reassess Antitrust Laws 8 November 1999    1999 Ron Paul 114:8 Blind to the fact that there is no conflict between the self-interest of a capitalist and the consumers’ best interests, the trust busters go their merry way without a complaint from the Congress which could change these laws. Congress Good Time For Congress To Reassess Antitrust Laws 8 November 1999    1999 Ron Paul 114:11 To help rectify the situation, Congress should first stop all assistance to business, no more corporate welfare, no bailouts like we saw to Lockheed, Chrysler, Long-Term Capital Management and many others. Congress U.S. Foreign Policy of Military Interventionism Brings Death, Destruction and Loss of Life 17 November 1999    1999 Ron Paul 115:11 The recent military takeover of Pakistan and the subsequent anti-American demonstration in Islamabad should not be ignored. It is time we in Congress seriously rethink our role in the region and in the world. We ought to do more to promote peace and trade with our potential enemies, rather than resorting to bombing and sanctions. Congress Allow Hi-Tech Supervision of Home Health Agency Branch Offices 18 November 1999    1999 Ron Paul 116:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I wish to take this opportunity to express my agreement with language contained in the report accompanying H.R. 3075, which was included in the Omnibus Appropriations bill, encouraging the Secretary of Health and Human Services to allow home health agencies to use technology to supervise their branch offices. This language also calls on the government to allow home health agencies to determine the adequate level of on-site supervision of their branch offices based on quality outcomes. I need not remind my colleagues that Congress is expecting home health agencies to operate efficiently under greatly reduced Interim Payment System (IPS) and Prospective Payment System (PPS) reimbursement. It is therefore necessary that home health agencies be allowed the flexibility to establish and serve large service areas by utilizing cost efficient branch offices. Congress Statement on OSHA Home Office Regulations January 28, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 1:1 Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to express my concerns regarding the possibility that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) will attempt to exercise regulatory authority over home-based worksites and hold employers responsible for accidents occurring in such worksites. Although OSHA has announced that it will only hold employers liable for conditions at home-based worksites if the employee is performing “hazardous manufacturing work,” this proposal still raises serious concerns. This is because any expansion of OSHAs regulatory authority in the homes represents a major expansion of federal authority far beyond anything intended by Congress when it created OSHA in the 1970s. Furthermore, OSHA regulation of any type of work in the private residence opens the door to the eventual regulation of all home worksites. In order to ensure home-based workers are protected from overzealous federal bureaucrats, Congressman J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) and myself have introduced legislation, the Home Office Protection Enhancement (HOPE) Act, amending the Occupational Safety and Health Act to clarify that OSHA has no authority over worksites located in an employee’s residence. Congress Statement on OSHA Home Office Regulations January 28, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 1:4 Mr. Chairman, the fact that OSHA would even consider exercising regulatory authority over any part of a private home shows just how little respect OSHA has for private property. Private property, of course, was considered one of the bulwarks of liberty by our nation’s founding fathers, and has been seriously eroded in this country. While it is heartening that so many members of Congress have expressed their displeasure with OSHA over this issue, I am concerned that most of the debate has focused on the negative consequences of this regulation instead of on the question of whether OSHA has the constitutional authority to regulate any part of a private residence (or private business for that matter). The economic and social consequences of allowing federal bureaucrats to regulate home offices certainly should be debated. However, I would remind my colleagues that conceding the principle that the only way to protect worker safety is by means of a large bureaucracy with the power to impose a “one-size fits all” model on every workplace in America ensures that defenders of the free market will be always on the defensive, trying to reign in the bureaucracy from going “too far” rather than advancing a positive, pro-freedom agenda. Furthermore, many companies are experiencing great success at promoting worker safety by forming partnerships with their employees to determine how best to create a safe workplace. This approach to worker safety is both more effective, and constitutionally sound, than giving OSHA bureaucrats the power to, for example, force landscapers to use $200 gas cans instead of $5 cans or fining a construction company $7,000 dollars because their employees jumped in a trench to rescue a trapped man without first putting on their OSHA-approved hard hats; or fine a company because it failed to warn employees not to eat copier toner! Congress Statement on OSHA Home Office Regulations January 28, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 1:7 This is why I have supported several legislative efforts to encourage more cooperative approach to workplace safety. I hope Congress will continue to work to replace the old “command-and control” model with one that respects the constitution and does not treat Americans like children in need of the protection of “big brother” government. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:16 The founders often spoke of divine providence and that God willed us this great Nation. It has been a grand experiment, but it is important that the fundamental moral premises that underpin this Nation are understood and maintained. We, as Members of Congress, have that responsibility. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:48 Where the General Welfare clause once had a clear general meaning, which was intended to prohibit special interest welfare and was something they detested and revolted against under King George, it is now used to justify any demand of any group as long as a majority in the Congress votes for it. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:53 This understanding of the Constitution, as described by the Father of the Constitution, has been lost in this century. Jefferson was just as clear, writing in 1798 when he said, “Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated.” Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:55 The goal of strictly limiting the power of our national Government as was intended by the Constitution is impossible to achieve as long as it is acceptable for Congress to redistribute wealth in an egalitarian welfare state. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:60 In 1936, the New Deal Supreme Court told Congress and the American people that the Constitution is irrelevant when it comes to limits being placed on congressional spending. In a ruling justifying the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the Court pronounced, “The power of Congress to authorize appropriations of public money for public purposes is not limited by the grants of legislative power found in the Constitution.” Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:65 No wonder lobbyists are willing to spend $125 million per month influencing Congress; it is a good investment. No amount of campaign finance reform or regulation of lobbyists can deal with this problem. The problem lies in the now accepted role for our Government. Government has too much control over people and the market, making the temptation and incentive to influence government irresistible and, to a degree, necessary. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:68 Once it is clear that it is not nearly as wealthy as it appears, this will become a serious problem and it will get the attention it deserves, even here in the Congress. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:75 Federal funding for education grows every year, hitting $38 billion this year, $1 billion more than requested by the administration and 7 percent more than last year. Great congressional debates occur over the size of the classroom, student and teacher testing, bilingual education, teacher salaries, school violence and drug usage. And it is politically incorrect to point out that all these problems are not present in the private schools. Every year, there is less effort at the Federal level to return education to the people, the parents and the local school officials. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:77 Talk of returning some control of Federal programs to the States is not the same as keeping the Federal Government out of education as directed by the Constitution. Of the 20 congressionally authorized functions granted by the Constitution, education is not one of them. That should be enough of a reason not to be involved. There is no evidence of any benefit and statistics show that great harm has resulted. It has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars, yet we continue the inexorable march toward total domination of our educational system by Washington bureaucrats and politicians. It makes no sense. It is argued that if the Federal funding for education did not continue, education would suffer even more. Yet we see poor and middle-class families educating their children at home or at private school at a fraction of the cost of a government school education, with results fantastically better, and all done in the absence of violence and drugs. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:78 A case can be made that there would be more money available for education if we just left the money in the States to begin with and never brought it to Washington for the bureaucrats and the politicians to waste. But it looks like Congress will not soon learn this lesson, so the process will continue and the results will get worse. The best thing we could do now is pass a bill to give parents a $3,000 tax credit for each child they educate. This would encourage competition and allow a lot more choice for parents struggling to help their children get a decent education. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:84 Recently, the Secretary of HUD, using public funds to sue gun manufacturers, claimed this is necessary to solve the problems of crime which government housing perpetuates. If a government agency, which was never meant to exist in the first place under the Constitution, can expand their role into the legislative and legal matters without the consent of the Congress, we indeed have a serious problem on our hands. The programs are bad enough in themselves but the abuse of the rule of law and ignoring the separation of powers makes these expanding programs that much more dangerous to our entire political system and is a direct attack on personal liberty. If one cares about providing the maximum best housing for the maximum number of people, one must consider a free market approach in association with a sound, nondepreciating currency. We have been operating a public housing program directly opposite to this and along with steady inflation and government promotion of housing since the 1960s, the housing market has been grossly distorted. We can soon expect a major downward correction in the housing industry prompted by rising interest rates. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:85 Our attitude toward foreign policy has dramatically changed since the beginning of the century. From George Washington through Grover Cleveland, the accepted policy was to avoid entangling alliances. Although we spread our wings westward and southward as part of our manifest destiny in the 19th century, we accepted the Monroe Doctrine notion that European and Asians should stay out of our affairs in this hemisphere and we theirs. McKinley, Teddy Roosevelt, and the Spanish American war changed all that. Our intellectual and political leaders at the turn of the last century brought into vogue the interventionist doctrine setting the stage for the past 100 years of global military activism. From a country that once minded its own business, we now find ourselves with military personnel in more than 130 different countries protecting our modern day American empire. Not only do we have troops spread to the four corners of the Earth, we find Coast Guard cutters in the Mediterranean and around the world, our FBI in any country we choose, and the CIA in places Congress does not even know about. It is a truism that the state grows and freedom is diminished in times of war. Almost perpetual war in the 20th century has significantly contributed to steadily undermining our liberties while glorifying the state. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:88 Throughout our early history and up to World War I, our wars were fought with volunteers. There was no military draft except for a failed attempt by Lincoln in the Civil War which ended with justified riots and rebellion against it. The attitudes toward the draft definitely changed over the past century. Draftees were said to be necessary to fight in World War I and World War II, Korea and Vietnam. This change in attitude has definitely satisfied those who believe that we have an obligation to police the world. The idiocy of Vietnam served as a catalyst for an antidraft attitude which is still alive today. Fortunately we have not had a draft for over 25 years, but Congress refuses to address this matter in a principled fashion by abolishing once and for all the useless selective service system. Too many authoritarians in Congress still believe that in times of need, an army of teenage draftees will be needed to defend our commercial interests throughout the world. A return to the spirit of the republic would mean that a draft would never be used and all able-bodied persons would be willing to volunteer in defense of their liberty. Without the willingness to do so, liberty cannot be saved. A conscripted army can never substitute for the willingness of freedom-loving Americans to defend their country out of their love for liberty. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:93 We will surely pay the price for this negligence. The relative soundness of our currency that we enjoy as we move into the 21st Century will not persist. The instability in world currency market because of the dollar’s acceptance for so many years as the world’s currency, will cause devastating adjustments that Congress will eventually be forced to address. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:98 The reasons for rejecting gold and promoting paper are not mysterious, since quite a few special interests benefit. Deficit financing is much more difficult when there is no Central Bank available to monetize government debt. This gives license to politicians to spend lavishly on the projects that are most likely to get them reelected. War is more difficult to pursue if government has to borrow or tax the people for its financing. The Federal Reserve’s ability to create credit out of thin air to pay the bills run up by Congress establishes a symbiosis that is easy for the politician to love. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:105 All the price inflation, all the distortions, all the recessions and unemployment should be laid at the doorstep of the Federal Reserve. The Fed is an accomplice in promoting all unnecessary war, as well as the useless and harmful welfare programs, with its willingness to cover Congress’ profligate spending habits. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:114 Congress must someday restore sound money to America. It is mandated in the Constitution, it is economically sound to do so, and it is morally right to guarantee a standard of value for the money. Our oath of office obligates all Members of Congress to pay attention to this and participate in this needed reform. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:118 Congress has been derelict in creating the agencies in the first place and ceding to the Executive the power to write regulations and even tax without Congressional approval. These agencies enforce their own laws and supervise their own administrative court system where citizens are considered guilty until proven innocent. The Constitution has been thrown out the window for all practical purposes, and although more Americans every day complain loudly, Congress does nothing to stop it. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:121 Congress’ careless attitude about the Federal bureaucracy and its penchant for incessant legislation have prompted serious abuse of every American citizen. Last year alone there were more than 42,000 civil forfeitures of property occurring without due process of law or conviction of a crime, and oftentimes the owners were not even charged with a crime. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:127 If the steady growth of the Federal police power continues, the American republic cannot survive. The Congresses of the 20th Century have steadily undermined the principle that the government closest to home must deal with law and order, and not the Federal Government. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 2:130 Throughout the 20th Century, with Congress’ obsession for writing laws for everything, the Federal courts were quite willing to support the idea of a huge interventionist Federal Government. The fact that the police officers in the Rodney King case were tried twice for the same crime, ignoring the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy, was astoundingly condoned by the courts, rather than condemned. It is not an encouraging sign that the concept of equal protection under the law will prevail. Congress The Hillory J. Farias Date Rape Prevention Drug Act of 1999 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 3:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today the Congress will collectively move our nation yet another step closer to a national police state by further expanding a federal crime to include amongst the list of controlled substances that of GHB, a nutrient used for 25 years with beneficial effects for those suffering from cataplexy, insomnia, narcolepsy, depression, alcoholism, opiate addiction and numerous other conditions. Of course, it is much easier to ride the current wave of federalizing every human misdeed in the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a Constitutional oath which prescribes a procedural limitation by which the nation is protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism. Who, after all, and especially in an election year, wants to be amongst those members of Congress who are portrayed as being soft on drugs or rape, irrespective of the procedural transgressions and individual or civil liberties one tramples in their overzealous approach. Congress The Hillory J. Farias Date Rape Prevention Drug Act of 1999 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 3:2 Our federal government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers. Article one, Section eight, enumerates the legislative areas for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every other issue, the federal government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the state governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The tenth amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Congress The Hillory J. Farias Date Rape Prevention Drug Act of 1999 31 January 2000    2000 Ron Paul 3:3 In his first formal complaint to Congress on behalf of the federal Judiciary, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist said “the trend to federalize crimes that have traditionally been handled in state courts * * * threatens to change entirely the nature of our federal system.” Rehnquist further criticized Congress for yielding to the political pressure to “appear responsive to every highly publicized societal ill or sensational crime.” Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:3 Although nearly 100,000 American battle deaths have occurred since World War II and both big and small wars have been fought almost continuously, there has not been a congressional declaration of war since 1941. Our Presidents now fight wars not only without explicit congressional approval but also in the name of the United Nations, with our troops now serving under foreign commanders. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:4 Our Presidents have assured us that U.N. authorization is all that is needed to send our troops into battle. The 1973 War Powers Resolution meant to restrict presidential war powers has either been ignored by our Presidents or used to justify war up to 90 days. The Congress and the people too often have chosen to ignore this problem, saying little about the recent bombing in Serbia. The continual bombing of Iraq which has now been going on for over 9 years is virtually ignored. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:5 If a President can decide on the issue of war without a vote of the Congress, a representative republic does not exist. Our President should not have the authority to declare national emergencies and they certainly should not have authority to declare martial law, a power the Congress has already granted to any future emergency. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:6 Economic and political crises can develop quickly and overly aggressive Presidents are only too willing to enhance their own power in dealing with them. Congress sadly throughout this century has been only too willing to grant authority to our Presidents at the sacrifice of its own. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:7 The idea of separate but equal branches of government has been forgotten and the Congress bears much of the responsibility for this trend. Executive powers in the past 100 years have grown steadily with the creation of agencies that write and enforce their own regulations and with Congress allowing the President to use executive orders without restraint. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:8 But in addition, there have been various other special vehicles that our Presidents use without congressional oversight. For example, the exchange stabilization fund set up during the depression has over $34 billion available to be used at the President’s discretion without congressional approval. This slush fund grows each year as it is paid interest on the securities it holds. It was instrumental in the $50 billion Mexican bailout in 1995. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:9 The CIA is so secretive that even those Congressmen privy to its operation have little knowledge of what this secret government actually does around the world. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:10 We know, of course, it has been involved in the past 50 years in assassinations and government overthrows on frequent occasions. The Federal Reserve operation, which works hand in hand with the administration, is not subject to congressional oversight. The Fed manipulates currency exchange rates, controls short-term interest rates, and fixes the gold price, all behind closed doors. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:11 Bailing out foreign governments, financial corporations and huge banks can all be achieved without congressional approval. One hundred years ago when we had a gold standard, credit could not be created out of thin air, and, because a much more limited government philosophy prevailed, this could not have been possible. Today it is hard to even document what goes on, let alone expect Congress to control it. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:15 For national security purposes, the Echelon system of monitoring all overseas phone calls has been introduced, yet the details of this program are not available to any inquiring Member of Congress. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:16 The Government knew very little about each individual American citizen in 1900. But, starting with World War I, there has been a systematic growth of Government surveillance of everyone’s activities, with multiple records being kept. Today, true privacy is essentially a thing of the past. The FBI and the IRS have been used by various administrations to snoop and harass political opponents, and there has been little effort by Congress to end this abuse. A free society, that is, a constitutional republic, cannot be maintained if privacy is not highly cherished and protected by the Government, rather than abused by it. We can expect it to get worse. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:27 Last year the House made a serious error by trying to federalize the crime of killing a fetus occurring in an act of violence. The stated goal was to emphasize that the fetus deserved legal protection under the law, and, indeed, it should and does at the State level. Federalizing any act of violence is unconstitutional. Essentially, all violent acts should be dealt with by the States, and, because we have allowed the courts and Congress to federalize such laws, we find more good State laws are overridden than good Federal laws written. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:29 The responsibility of Congress is twofold: first, we should never fund abortions. Nothing could be more heinous than forcing those with strong rightto- life beliefs to pay for abortions. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:90 A common debate that we hear occurs over how we can write laws protecting normal speech and at the same time limiting commercial speech, as if they were two entirely different things. Many Americans wonder why Congress pays so little attention to the Constitution and are bewildered as to how so much inappropriate legislation gets passed. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:93 That is how we have arrived at the close of this century without a clear understanding or belief in the cardinal principles of the Constitution: the separation of powers and the principle of Federalism. Instead, we are rushing toward a powerful executive, centralized control, and a Congress greatly diminished in importance. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:94 Executive orders, agency regulations, Federal court rulings, unratified international agreements, direct government, economy, and foreign policy. Congress has truly been reduced in status and importance over the past 100 years. When the people’s voices are heard, it is done indirectly through polling, allowing our leaders to decide how far they can go without stirring up the people. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:101 I have good friends who are in basic agreement with my analysis of the current state of the American republic, but argue it is a waste of time and effort to try and change the direction in which we are going. No one will listen, they argue. Besides, the development of a strong, centralized, authoritarian government is too far along to reverse the trends of the 20th century. Why waste time in Congress when so few people care about liberty, they ask? The masses, they point out, are interested only in being taken care of, and the elite want to keep receiving the special benefits allotted to them through special interest legislation. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:114 There are precise goals Congress should work for, even under today’s difficult circumstances. It must preserve in the best manner possible voluntary options to failed government programs. Congress A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:123 8. Foreign military intervention by our Presidents in recent years to police the American empire is a costly failure. Foreign military intervention should not be permitted without explicit congressional approval. Congress ON INTRODUCTION OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL FREEDOM ACT OF 2000 February 10, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 6:2 * The first provision of my legislation provides seniors a tax credit equal to 80 percent of their prescription drug costs. As many of my colleagues have pointed out, our nation’s seniors are struggling to afford the prescription drugs they need in order to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle. Yet, the Federal Government continues to impose taxes on Social Security benefits and limits senior citizens’ ability to earn additional income by reducing Social Security benefits if a senior exceeds the ‘earnings limitation.’ Meanwhile, Congress continually raids the Social Security trust fund to finance unconstitutional programs! It is long past time for Congress to choose between helping seniors afford medicine or using the Social Security trust fund as a slush fund for big government and pork-barrel spending. Congress ON PRESENTING CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL TO JOHN CARDINAL O’CONNOR February 15, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 8:3 Because of my continuing and uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, several of my colleagues felt compelled to personally challenge me as to whether, on this issue, I would maintain my resolve and commitment to the Constitution — a Constitution, which only last year, each Member of Congress, swore to uphold. In each of these instances, I offered to do a little more than uphold my constitutional oath. Congress THE AGRICULTURE EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT February 16, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 10:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Agriculture Education Freedom Act. This bill addresses a great injustice being perpetrated by the Federal Government on those youngsters who participate in programs such as 4-H or the Future Farmers of America. Under current tax law, children are forced to pay federal income tax when they sell livestock they have raised as part of an agricultural education program. Think of this for a moment. These kids are trying to better themselves, earn some money, save some money, and what does Congress do? We pick on these kids by taxing them. Congress THE AGRICULTURE EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT February 16, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 10:2 It is truly amazing that with all the hand-wringing in this Congress over the alleged need to further restrict liberty and grow the size of government “for the children” we would continue to tax young people who are trying to lead responsible lives and prepare for the future. Even if the serious social problems today’s youth face could be solved by new federal bureaucracies and programs, it is still unfair to pick on those kids who are trying to do the right thing. Congress SENIOR CITIZENS’ FREEDOM TO WORK ACT OF 1999 March 1, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 11:4 The underlying issue of the earnings limitation goes back to the fact that money from the trust fund is routinely spent for things other than paying pensions to beneficiaries. This is why the first bill I introduced in the 106th Congress was the Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which forbids Congress from spending Social Security funds on anything other than paying Social Security pensions. Congress INTRODUCING LEGISLATION CALLING FOR THE UNITED STATES TO WITHDRAW FROM THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION March 1, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 12:4 At last reading, the Constitution required that all appropriation bills originate in the House, and specified that only Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes. Taxation without representation was a predominant reason for America’s fight for independence during the American Revolution. Yet, now we face an unconstitutional delegation of taxing authority to an unelected body of international bureaucrats. Congress INTRODUCING LEGISLATION CALLING FOR THE UNITED STATES TO WITHDRAW FROM THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION March 1, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 12:5 Let me assure Members that this Nation does not need yet another bureaucratic hurdle to tax reduction. Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution reserves to Congress alone the authority for regulating foreign commerce. According to Article II, section 2, it reserves to the Senate the sole power to ratify agreements, namely, treaties, between the United States government and other governments. Congress INTRODUCING LEGISLATION CALLING FOR THE UNITED STATES TO WITHDRAW FROM THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION March 1, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 12:9 As a representative of the people of the 14th District of Texas and a Member of the United States Congress sworn to uphold the Constitution of this country, it is not my business to tell other countries whether or not they should be in the World Trade Organization. They can toss their own sovereignty out the window if they choose. I cannot tell China or Britain or anybody else that they should or should not join the World Trade Organization. That is not my constitutional role. Congress TRIBUTE TO THE VICTORIA HIGH SCHOOL VARSITY CHEERLEADERS OF VICTORIA, TEXAS March 2, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 13:7 I am proud to have these two-time national champions in the 14th Congressional District of Texas, and trust all my colleagues join me in congratulating them on this impressive achievement. Congress MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE ACT March 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 15:1 * Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I oppose the H.R. 3846, a bill to raise the federally-mandated minimum wage. Raising living standards for all Americans is an admirable goal, however, to believe that Congress can raise the standard of living for working Americans by simply forcing employers to pay their employees a higher wage is equivalent to claiming that Congress can repeal gravity by passing a law saying humans shall have the ability to fly. Congress MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE ACT March 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 15:5 * Mr. Speaker, I do not wish my opposition to this bill to be misconstrued as counseling inaction. Quite the contrary, Congress must enact ambitious program of tax cuts and regulatory reform to remove government-created obstacles to job growth. For example, I would have supported the reforms of the Fair Labor Standards Act contained in this bill had those provisions been brought before the House as separate pieces of legislation. Congress should also move to stop the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) from implementing its misguided and unscientific ‘ergonomics’ regulation. Congress should also pass my H.J. Res. 55, the Mailbox Privacy Protection Act, which repeals Post Office regulations on the uses of Commercial Mail Receiving Agencies (CMRAs). Many entrepreneurs have found CMRAs a useful tool to help them grow their businesses. Unless Congress repeals the Post Office’s CMRA regulations, these businesses will be forced to divert millions of dollars away from creating new jobs into complying with postal regulations! Congress MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE ACT March 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 15:6 * Because one of the most important factors in getting a good job is a good education, Congress should also strengthen the education system by returning control over the education dollar to the American people. A good place to start is with the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935), which provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit for K-12 education expenses. I have also introduced the Education Improvement Tax Cut (H.R. 936), which provides a tax credit of up to $3,000 for donations to private school scholarships or for cash or in-kind contributions to public schools. Congress MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE ACT March 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 15:8 * My education agenda will once again make America’s education system the envy of the world by putting the American people back in control of education and letting them use more of their own resources for education at all levels. Combining education tax cuts, for K-12, higher education and job training, with regulatory reform and small business tax cuts such as those Congress passed earlier today is the best way to help all Americans, including those currently on the lowest rung of the economic ladder, prosper. Congress MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE ACT March 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 15:9 * However, Mr. Speaker, Congress should not fool itself into believing that the package of small business tax cuts will totally compensate for the damage inflicted on small businesses and their employees by the minimum wage increase. This assumes that Congress is omnipotent and thus can strike a perfect balance between tax cuts and regulations so that no firm, or worker, in the country is adversely effected by federal policies. If the 20th Century taught us anything it was that any and all attempts to centrally plan an economy, especially one as large and diverse as America’s, are doomed to fail. Congress MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE ACT March 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 15:10 * In conclusion, I would remind my colleagues that while it may make them feel good to raise the federal minimum wage, the real life consequences of this bill will be vested upon those who can least afford to be deprived of work opportunities. Therefore, rather than pretend that Congress can repeal the economic principles, I urge my colleagues to reject this legislation and instead embrace a program of tax cuts and regulatory reform to strengthen the greatest producer of jobs and prosperity in human history: the free market. Congress PRAISING PARENTS AND TEACHERS DURING TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS WEEK March 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 16:2 * Unfortunately, Congress and the federal bureaucracy continue to strip authority away from parents, teachers and local school boards. While Congress promises the American people that expansions of federal control over local schools will create an educational utopia, the fact is that the federal education bureaucracy has only increased the difficulties of educating the next generation and diverted resources away from the classroom. For example, while the federal government provides less than 10% of education funding, many school districts find that more than 50% of their paperwork is generated by federal mandates and the hoops local school officials must jump through in order to get Washington to return a ridiculously small portion of taxpayer money to local public schools. Congress PRAISING PARENTS AND TEACHERS DURING TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS WEEK March 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 16:5 * The “Family Education Freedom Act” fulfills the American people’s goal of greater control over their children’s education by simply allowing parents to keep more of their hard-earned money to spend on education, rather than forcing them to send it to Washington to support education programs reflective of the values and priorities of Congress and the federal bureaucracy. Congress PRAISING PARENTS AND TEACHERS DURING TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS WEEK March 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 16:8 * Since America’s teachers are underpaid because they are overtaxed, the best way to raise teacher take-home pay is to reduce their taxes. Raising teachers’ take-home pay via a $1,000 tax credit lets teachers know the American people and the Congress respect their work and encourages high-quality people to enter, and remain in, the teaching profession. Congress NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2000 March 22, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 17:1 * Mr. Speaker, while nuclear power has conferred a considerable benefit upon power users in this country, today, we confront the symptoms of a federal government run Constitutionally amok which requires our serious attention. As a Congress, we are faced with the decision of whether to further ignore the federal government’s constitutional limits and ultimately confront additional future symptoms of such action or acknowledge the necessary consequences of such an extra-Constitutional activity and act to correct the initial “enumerated powers doctrine” transgression. Congress CONGRATULATING THE PEOPLE OF TAIWAN FOR SUCCESSFUL CONCLUSION OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND REAFFIRMING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD TAIWAN AND PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA March 28, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 18:1 * Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today with H. Con. Res. 292 Congress bestows well-deserved congratulations upon the people of Taiwan for the successful conclusion of presidential elections on March 18, 2000, and for their continuing efforts to develop and sustain a free republic that respects individual rights and embraces free markets. President Lee Teng-hui of Taiwan should also be praised for his significant contributions to freedom in Taiwan. Congress CONGRATULATING THE PEOPLE OF TAIWAN FOR SUCCESSFUL CONCLUSION OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND REAFFIRMING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD TAIWAN AND PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA March 28, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 18:5 * Each year the people of the United States write a check to subsidize China, one of the most brutal, anti-American regimes in the world. It has been in vogue of late for everyone in Washington, it seems, to eagerly denounce the egregious abuses of the Chinese people at the hands of the communist dictators. Yet no one in our federal government has been willing to take China on in any meaningful way. Very few people realize that China is one of the biggest beneficiaries of American subsidization. Thanks to the largesse of this Congress, China enjoys the flow of U.S. taxpayers cash into Beijing’s coffers. Yet, today we are asked to pledge support for Taiwan when we could best demonstrate support for Taiwan by terminating subsidies to that country’s enemies. Congress 2000 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT March 29, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 21:10 So I think that, unfortunately, this could end up in a real mess. Maybe then we would have enough sense to leave. But we, in the Congress, ought to have enough sense not to go down there. This money can be better spent on national defense. We should be concerned about national security. Congress 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). Congress Amendment No. 5 Offered By Mr. Paul 30 March 2000    2000 Ron Paul 22:7 Last year, when we were dealing with Kosovo and our initial involvement in there, we had several votes on the floor dealing with the sentiment of the Congress. For the most part, the sentiment was strongly opposed to our military troops being placed in Kosovo. Congress Amendment No. 5 Offered By Mr. Paul 30 March 2000    2000 Ron Paul 22:14 This is a good time for the Members of the Congress to decide whether or not they would like to vote clearly and say to the American people, “I do not endorse the concept that we should have an open-ended commitment to the world, to be the policemen of the world.” This is what this amendment says. Quite frankly, the large majority of the American people are strongly supportive of this position. Congress Amendment No. 5 Offered By Mr. Paul 30 March 2000    2000 Ron Paul 22:16 That is not correct. Under the Constitution, the words “foreign policy” do not exist. All the obligations fall on the Congress, especially with the power of the purse. The President is the Commander in Chief. But he should never send troops around the world without permission, which all Presidents continuously have done in the last 50 years. This amendment addresses that subject. Congress AWARDING GOLD MEDAL TO FORMER PRESIDENT AND MRS. RONALD REAGAN IN RECOGNITION OF SERVICE TO NATION April 3, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 25:3 * Because of my continuing and uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, I would maintain my resolve and commitment to the Constitution — a Constitution, which only last year, each Member of Congress, swore to uphold. In each of these instances, I offered to do a little more than uphold my constitutional oath. Congress PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION BAN ACT OF 2000 April 5, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 26:4 The best solution, of course, is not now available to us. That would be a Supreme Court that would refuse to deal with the issues of violence, recognizing that for all such acts the Constitution defers to the States. It is constitutionally permitted to limit Federal courts jurisdiction in particular issues. Congress should do precisely that with regard to abortion. It would be a big help in returning this issue to the States. Congress WHAT IS FREE TRADE? May 2, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 29:26 There is a little bit more to the trade issue than just the benefits of free trade, true free trade, and the disadvantages of managed trade, because we are dealing now when we have a vote on the normal trade status with China, as well as getting out of the World Trade Organization, we are dealing with the issue of sovereignty. The Constitution is very clear. Article I, section 8, gives the Congress the responsibility of dealing with international trade. It does not delegate it to the President, it does not delegate it to a judge, it does not delegate it to an international management organization like the World Trade Organization. Congress WHAT IS FREE TRADE? May 2, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 29:27 International trade management is to be and trade law is to be dealt with by the U.S. Congress, and yet too often the Congress has been quite willing to renege on that responsibility through fast-track legislation and deliver this authority to our President, as well as delivering through agreements, laws being passed and treaties, delivering this authority to international bodies such as the UN-IMF-World Trade Organizations, where they make decisions that affect us and our national sovereignty. Congress WHAT IS FREE TRADE? May 2, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 29:30 Fortunately, in 1994 there was a provision put in the bill that said that any member could bring up a privileged resolution that gives us a chance at least to say is this a good idea to be in the World Trade Organization, or is it not? Now, my guess is that we do not have the majority of the U.S. Congress that thinks it is a bad idea. But I am wondering about the majority of the American people, and I am wondering about the number of groups now that are growing wary of the membership in the World Trade Organization, when you look at what happened in Seattle, as well as demonstrations here in D.C. So there is a growing number of people from various aspects of the political spectrum who are now saying, what does this membership mean to us? Is it good or is it bad? A lot of them are coming down on the side of saying it is bad. Congress WHAT IS FREE TRADE? May 2, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 29:33 We are currently under review and the World Trade Organization has ruled against the United States because we have given a tax break to our overseas company, and they have ruled against us and said that this tax break is a tax subsidy, language which annoys me to no end. They have given us until October 1 to get rid of that tax break for our corporations, so they are telling us, the U.S. Congress, what we have to do with tax law. Congress WHAT IS FREE TRADE? May 2, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 29:35 Our agreement says very clearly that any ruling by the WTO, the Congress is obligated to change the law. This is the interpretation and this is what we signed. This is a serious challenge, and we should not accept so easily this idea that we will just go one step further. Congress WHAT IS FREE TRADE? May 2, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 29:36 This has not just happened 5 years ago, there has been a gradual erosion of the concept of national sovereignty. It occurred certainly after World War II with the introduction of the United Nations, and now, under current conditions, we do not even ask the Congress to declare war, yet we still fight a lot of wars. We send troops all over the world and we are involved in combat all the time, and our presidents tell us they get the authority from a UN resolution. So we have gradually lost the concept of national sovereignty. Congress WHAT IS FREE TRADE? May 2, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 29:40 Now, the whole idea that treaties could be passed and undermine the ability of our Congress to pass legislation or undermine our Constitution, this was thought about and talked about by the founders of this country. They were rather clear on the idea that a treaty, although the treaty can become the law of the land, a treaty could never be an acceptable law of the land if it amended or changed the Constitution. That would be ridiculous, and they made that very clear. Congress WHAT IS FREE TRADE? May 2, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 29:42 So that is very important. We cannot just sit back and accept the idea that the World Trade Organization, we have entered into it, it was not a treaty, it was an agreement, but we have entered into it, and the agreement says we have to do what they tell us, even if it contradicts the whole notion that it is the Congress’ and people’s responsibility to pass their own laws with regard to the environment, with regard to labor and with regard to tax law. Congress TEXAS HOME SCHOOL APPRECIATION WEEK May 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 32:1 * Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, as this is Texas Home School Appreciation week, I am pleased to take this opportunity to salute those Texas parents who have chosen to educate their children at home. While serving in Congress, I have had the opportunity to get to know many of the home schooling parents in my district. I am very impressed by the job these parents are doing in providing their children with a quality education. I have also found that home schooling parents are among the most committed activists in the cause of advancing individual liberty, constitutional government, and traditional values. I am sure my colleagues on the Education Committee would agree that the support of home schoolers was crucial in defeating the scheme to implement a national student test. Congress TEXAS HOME SCHOOL APPRECIATION WEEK May 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 32:7 * Mr. Speaker, the best way to improve education is to return control over education resources to the people who best know their children’s unique needs: those children’s parents. Congress should empower all parents, whether they choose to home school or send their child to a public or private school, with the means to control their child’s education. That is why I believe the most important education bill introduced in this Congress is the Family Education Freedom Act. Congress IDEA FULL FUNDING ACT OF 2000 May 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 33:3 * On May 10, 1994, Dr. Mary Wagner testified before the Education Committee that disabled children who are not placed in a mainstream classroom graduate from high school at a much higher rate than disabled children who are mainstreamed. Dr. Wagner quite properly accused Congress of sacrificing children to ideology. Congress IDEA FULL FUNDING ACT OF 2000 May 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 33:4 * Increasing IDEA spending also provides incentives to over-identify children as learning disabled, thus unfairly stigmatizing many children and, in a vicious cycle, leading to more demands for increased federal spending on IDEA. Instead of increasing spending on a federal program that may actually damage the children it claims to help, Congress should return control over education to those who best know the child’s needs: parents. In order to restore parental control to education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935), which provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit to pay for K-12 education expenses. My tax credit would be of greatest benefit to parents of children with learning disabilities because it would allow them to devote more of their resources to ensure their children get an education that meets the child’s unique needs. Congress SENSE OF THE HOUSE IN SUPPORT OF AMERICA’S TEACHERS May 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 34:1 * Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support the resolution of the gentlewoman from Texas expressing Congress’ appreciation for the valuable work of America’s teachers. I would also like to take this opportunity to urge my colleagues to support two pieces of legislation I have introduced to get the government off the backs, and out of the pockets, of America’s teachers. The first piece of legislation, H.R. 1706, prohibits the expenditure of federal funds for national teacher testing or certification. A national teacher test would force all teachers to be trained in accordance with federal standards, thus dramatically increasing the Department of Education’s control over the teaching profession. Language banning federal funds for national teacher testing and national teacher certification has been included in both the House and Senate versions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Congress SENSE OF THE HOUSE IN SUPPORT OF AMERICA’S TEACHERS May 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 34:2 * I have also introduced the Teacher Tax Cut Act (H.R. 937) which provides every teacher in America with a $1,000 tax credit. The Teacher Tax Cut Act thus increases teachers’ salaries without raising federal expenditures. It lets America’s teachers know that the American people and the Congress respect their work. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, by raising teacher take-home pay, the Teacher Tax Cut Act encourages high-quality people to enter, and remain in, the teaching profession. Congress SENSE OF THE HOUSE IN SUPPORT OF AMERICA’S TEACHERS May 9, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 34:3 * Mr. Speaker, these two bills send a strong signal to America’s teachers that we in Congress are determined to encourage good people to enter and remain in the teaching profession and that we want teachers to be treated as professionals, not as Education Department functionaries. In conclusion, I urge my colleagues to vote for this resolution recognizing the hard work of America’s teachers. I also urge they continue to stand up for those who have dedicated their lives to educating America’s children by cosponsoring my legislation to prohibit the use of federal funds for national teacher testing and to give America’s teachers a $1,000 tax credit. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Misuse of the Social Security Number May 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 35:2 The Congress that created the Social Security system in no way intended to create a national identifier. In fact, Congress never directly authorized the creation of the Social Security number — they simply authorized the creation of an “appropriate record keeping and identification scheme.” The Social Security number was actually the creation of the Internal Revenue Service! The Social Security Number did not become a popular identifier until the 1960s. In response to concerns about the use of the Social Security number, Congress passed the Privacy Act of 1974, because “The Congress finds the opportunities for an individual to secure employment, insurance and credit and his right to due process and other legal protections are endangered by the misuse of certain information systems.” Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Misuse of the Social Security Number May 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 35:3 The Privacy Act of 1974 states that “It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny any individual any right, benefit or privilege provided by law because of such individual’s refusal to disclose his Social Security number.” This is a good and necessary step toward protecting individual liberty. Unfortunately, the language of the Privacy Act allows Congress to require the use of the Social Security number at will. In fact, just two years after the passage of the Privacy Act, Congress explicitly allowed state governments to use the Social Security number as an identifier for tax collection, motor vehicle registration and drivers’ license identification. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Misuse of the Social Security Number May 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 35:4 Since the passage of the Privacy Act, Congress has been all too eager to expand the use of the Social Security number as a uniform identifier. For example, in 1996, Congress required employers to report the Social Security number of employees as part of the “new hires” database, while in 1998, 210 members of Congress voted to allow states to force citizens to produce a Social Security number before they could exercise their right to vote. Mr. Chairman, my legislation, the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220) forbids Federal or State governments from using the Social Security number for purposes not directly related to administering the Social Security system. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Misuse of the Social Security Number May 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 35:5 Since I introduced this legislation on the first day of the 106th Congress, my office has received countless calls, letter, faxes, and e-mails from Americans around the country who are tired of having to divulge their national ID number in order to get a job, open bank account, or go fishing. The strong public outrage over the federal banking regulators’ “know your customer” scheme, as well as the attempt to turn state drivers’ licenses into a national ID card, and the Clinton Administration’s so-called “medical privacy” proposals all reveal the extent to which the American people oppose the “surveillance state.” These Americans believe that since Congress created this problem, Congress must fix it. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Misuse of the Social Security Number May 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 35:6 Certain well-meaning members of Congress are focusing on the use of the Social Security number by private businesses. However, this ignores the fact that the private sector was only following the lead of the federal government in using the Social Security number as an ID. In many cases, the use of the Social Security number by private business is directly mandated by the government, for example, banks use Social Security numbers as an identifier for their customers because the federal government required them to use the Social Security number for tax reporting purposes. Once the federal government stops using the Social Security number as an identifier, the majority of private businesses, whose livelihood depends on pleasing consumers, will respond to their customers demands and stop using the Social Security number and other standard identifiers Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Misuse of the Social Security Number May 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 35:7 I hope that we in Congress would not once again allow a problem Congress created to become an excuse for disregarding the constitutional limitations of federal police powers or imposing new mandates on businesses in the name of “protecting privacy.” Federal mandates on private businesses may harm consumers by preventing business from offering improved services such as the ability to bring new products that consumers would be interested in immediately to the consumers’ attention. These mandates will also further interfere with matters that should be resolved by private contracts. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Misuse of the Social Security Number May 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 35:9 Finally, I would remind my colleagues that no private organization has the power to abuse personal liberty on as massive a scale as the federal government. After all, consumers have the right to refuse to do business with any private entity that asks for a Social Security number, whereas citizens cannot lawfully refuse to deal with government agencies. Furthermore, most of the major invasions of privacy, from the abuse of IRS files to the case of the Medicare clerk who sold the names of Medicare patients to an HMO, to the abuse of the FBI by administrations of both parties have occurred by government agents. Therefore Congress should focus on the threat to liberty caused by the federal government’s use of uniform identifiers. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Misuse of the Social Security Number May 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 35:10 In conclusion, I once again thank the Subcommittee for holding this hearing on the uses and abuses on the Social Security number. I hope that this hearing is the first step toward Congressional action designed to stop the use of the Social Security number as a national ID number. Congress Manipulating Interest Rates May 15, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 36:1 * The national debt is rising at an annual rate of a $100 billion per year while the federal government obligation to future generations is rising even faster. Yet, little concern is shown in Congress as our budgets grow and new programs are added on to old. Ordinary political deception has been replaced with the dangerous notion of invincibleness as members claim credit for imaginary budgetary surpluses. The percent of our income that government now takes continues to rise, while personal liberty is steadily compromised with each new budget. But the political euphoria associated with the “New Era” economy will soon come to an end. Congress Manipulating Interest Rates May 15, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 36:12 * Fine-tuning the economy, through monetary manipulation is a dangerous game to play. We are now completing nearly a decade of rapid monetary growth and evidence is now appearing indicating that we will soon start to pay for our profligate ways. The financial bubble that the Fed manufactured over the past decade or two will burst and the illusion of our great wealth will end. In time, also the illusion of “surpluses for as far as the eye can see” will end. Then the Congress will be forced to take much more seriously the budgetary problems that it pretends do not exist. Congress The Dollar And Our Current Account Deficit May 16, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 37:12 * The nervousness in the stock and bond markets, and especially in the NASDAQ, indicates that the Congress may soon be facing an entirely different set of financial numbers regarding spending, revenues, interest costs on our national debt and the value of the US dollar. Price inflation of the conventional type will surely return, even if the economy slows. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220) May 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 38:5 Since the creation of the Social Security number in 1935, there have been almost 40 congressionally-authorized uses of the Social Security number as an identification number for non-Social Security programs. Many of these uses, such as the requirement that employers report the Social Security number of new employees to the “new hires data base,” have been enacted in the past few years. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220) May 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 38:6 Such Congressional actions do not reflect the intent of the Congress that created the Social Security system as that Congress in no way intended to create a national identifier. In fact, Congress never directly authorized the creation of the Social Security number — they simply authorized the creation of an “appropriate record keeping and identification scheme.” The Social Security number was actually the creation of the Internal Revenue Service! Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220) May 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 38:7 The Social Security number did not become a popular identifier until the 1960s. In response to concerns about the use of the Social Security number, Congress passed the Privacy Act of 1974, because, as stated within the act itself, “The Congress finds the opportunities for an individual to secure employment, insurance and credit and his right to due process and other legal protections are endangered by the misuse of certain information systems.” Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220) May 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 38:8 The Privacy Act of 1974 states that “It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny any individual any right, benefit or privilege provided by law because of such individual’s refusal to disclose his Social Security number.” This is a good and necessary step toward protecting individual liberty. Unfortunately, the language of the Privacy Act allows Congress to require the use of the Social Security number at will. In fact, just two years after the passage of the Privacy Act, Congress explicitly allowed state governments to use the Social Security number as an identifier for tax collection, motor vehicle registration and drivers’ license identification. When one considers the trend toward the use of the Social Security number as an identifier, the need for HR 220 becomes clear. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220) May 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 38:12 In addition to forbidding the federal government from creating national identifiers, this legislation forbids the federal government from blackmailing states into adopting uniform standard identifiers by withholding federal funds. One of the most onerous practices of Congress is the use of federal funds illegitimately taken from the American people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220) May 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 38:13 Certain members of Congress are focusing on the use of the Social Security number and other identifiers by private businesses. However, this ignores the fact that the private sector was only following the lead of the federal government in using the Social Security number as an ID. In many cases, the use of the Social Security number by private business is directly mandated by the government, for example, banks use Social Security numbers as an identifier for their customers because the federal government required them to use the Social Security number for tax reporting purposes. Once the federal government stops using the Social Security number as an identifier, the majority of private businesses, whose livelihood depends on pleasing consumers, will respond to their customers demands and stop using the Social Security number and other standard identifiers in dealing with them. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220) May 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 38:14 I hope that we in Congress would not once again allow a problem Congress created to become an excuse for disregarding the constitutional limitations of federal police powers or imposing new mandates on businesses in the name of “protecting privacy.” Federal mandates on private businesses may harm consumers by preventing business from offering improved services such as the ability to bring new products that consumers would be interested in immediately to the consumers’ attention. These mandates will also further interfere with matters that should be resolved by private contracts. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220) May 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 38:18 The main reason Congress should take action to stop the use of standard identifiers is because the federal government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress Permanent Normal Trade Relations May 24, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 40:1 * Mr. Speaker, yesterday morning the legislation which would have implemented ‘permanent normal trade relations’ with the People’s Republic of China was three pages in length. Today, it is 66 pages in length. Close examination of this bill ‘gone bad’ is demonstrative of how this Congress misdefines ‘free trade’ and how, like most everything else is in Washington, this ‘free trade’ bill is a misnomer of significant proportions. Congress Permanent Normal Trade Relations May 24, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 40:2 * For the past several years I have favored normal trade relations with the People’s Republic of China. Because of certain misconceptions, I believe it is useful to begin with some detail as to what ‘normal trade relations’ status is and what it is not. Previous ‘normal trade relations’ votes meant only that U.S. tariffs imposed on Chinese goods will be no different than tariffs imposed on other countries for similar products — period. NTR status did not mean more U.S. taxpayers dollars sent to China. It did not signify more international family planning dollars sent overseas. NTR status does not mean automatic access to the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, OPIC, or any member of other ‘foreign aid’ vehicles by which the U.S. Congress sends foreign aid to a large number of countries. Rather, NTR status was the lowering of a United States citizen’s taxes paid on voluntary exchanges entered into by citizens who happen to reside in different countries. Congress Medical Privacy Amendment June 13, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 41:6 Many people object to this invasion of privacy. They do not place full trust in the U.S. Congress and in the U.S. Government to protect our privacy. Many say that this would not be an invasion of privacy and there would be some strict rules and regulations about how this medical information would be used, but that is not enough reassurance. Congress TRIBUTE TO THE ROUND TOP, TEXAS, INDEPENDENCE DAY PARADE June 14, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 43:1 * Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the citizens of Round Top, Texas. The bark of the old cannon on the town square in Round Top, Texas, on July 4, 2000, will announce the city’s famous Independence Day Parade. Each year, the small town of Round Top, deep in the heart of Fayette County in Texas’ Congressional District 14, swells to accommodate a crowd of 8,000 Fourth of July visitors that come to celebrate our nation’s freedom. Congress U.S. Membership In The Wprld Trade Organization June 19, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 44:3 It said by those who disagree with this so often in the media that those of us who disagree with the World Trade Organization that we are paranoid, we worry too much, and that there is no loss of sovereignty in this procedure. But quite frankly, there is strong evidence to present to show that not only do we lose sovereignty as we deliver this power to the World Trade Organization, that it indeed is not a legal agreement. It does not conform with our Constitution; and, therefore, we as Members of Congress should exert this privilege that we have every 5 years to think about the World Trade Organization, whether it is in our best interests and whether it is technically a good agreement. Congress U.S. Membership In The Wprld Trade Organization June 19, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 44:4 The World Trade Organization came into existence, and we joined it, in a lame duck session in 1994. It was hurried up in 1994 because of the concern that the new Members of Congress, who would have much more reflected the sentiments of the people, would oppose our membership in the WTO. So it went through in 1994; but in that bill, there was an agreement that a privileged resolution could come up to offer us this opportunity. Congress U.S. Membership In The Wprld Trade Organization June 19, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 44:5 Mr. Speaker, let me just point out the importance of whether or not this actually attacks our sovereignty. The CRS has done a study on the WTO, and they make a statement in this regard. This comes from a report from the Congressional Research Service on 8-25-99. It is very explicit. It says, as a member of the WTO, the United States does commit to act in accordance with the rules of the multilateral body. It is legally obligated to ensure national laws do not conflict with WTO rules. That is about as clear as one can get. Congress U.S. Membership In The Wprld Trade Organization June 19, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 44:7 Interestingly enough, in the past, if we dealt with trade matters, they came to the U.S. Congress to change the law; they came to elected representatives to deal with this, and that is the way it should be under the Constitution. Today, though, the effort has to be directed through our world trade representative, our international trade representative, who then goes to bat for our business people at the WTO. So is it any surprise that, for instance, the company of Chiquita Banana, who has these trade wars going on in the trade fights, wants somebody in the administration to fight their battle, and just by coincidence, they have donated $1.5 million in their effort to get influence? Congress U.S. Membership In The Wprld Trade Organization June 19, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 44:9 The membership in the WTO actually is illegal, illegal any way we look at it. If we are delivering to the WTO the authority to regulate trade, we are violating the Constitution, because it is very clear that only Congress can do this. We cannot give that authority away. We cannot give it to the President, and we cannot give it to an international body that is going to manage trade in the WTO. This is not legal, it is not constitutional, and it is not in our best interests. It stirs up the interest to do things politically, and unelected bureaucrats make the decision, not elected officials. It was never intended to be that way, and yet we did this 5 years ago. We have become accustomed to it, and I think it is very important, it is not paranoia that makes some of us bring this up on the floor. Congress WITHDRAWING APPROVAL OF UNITED STATES FROM AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION June 21, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 45:1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress withdraws its approval, provided under section 101(a) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, of the WTO Agreement as defined in section 2(9) of that Act. Congress WITHDRAWING APPROVAL OF UNITED STATES FROM AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION June 21, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 45:5 So there is something very unfair about the system. It is an unconstitutional approach to managing trade. We cannot transfer the power to manage trade from the Congress to anyone. The Constitution is explicit. ‘Congress shall have the power to regulate foreign commerce.’ We cannot transfer that authority. Transferring that authority to the WTO is like the President transferring his authority as Commander in Chief to the Speaker of the House. Congress WITHDRAWING APPROVAL OF UNITED STATES FROM AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION June 21, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 45:12 Mr. Speaker, let me remind those who would like to reform the WTO that we are helpless, Congress cannot do that. We need a unanimous consent vote from the WTO members. So that is not going to happen. Even the committee describes what we are talking about as a system of fair trade administered by the WTO. Fair trade, fine, we are all for fair trade, but who decides the WTO? That is not fair to the American citizens. Congress WITHDRAWING APPROVAL OF UNITED STATES FROM AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION June 21, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 45:13 This is not an issue of trade. This is an issue of who gets to manage and decide whether it is fair trade or not. It is the issue of power, whether it is by the environmental bureaucrats or by the U.S. Congress. The one thing under this arrangement, the little farmer has very little say. He cannot get into the WTO and make a complaint. The great meat packers of the country may well. Congress WITHDRAWING APPROVAL OF UNITED STATES FROM AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION June 21, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 45:17 Let me say that reforms are not permissible. The Congress cannot reform the WTO. Only they can reform themselves. But they work in secret, and they have to have a unanimous vote. Our vote is equal to the country of Sudan. So do not expect it to ever be reformed. The only way we can voice our objection is with this resolution. And there will never be another chance to talk about the WTO for 5 more years. Congress WITHDRAWING APPROVAL OF UNITED STATES FROM AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION June 21, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 45:18 Let me state that the Congress is required to state a constitutional justification for any legislation. The Committee on Ways and Means amazingly used article I, section 8 to justify their position on this bill. And let me state their constitutional justification. It says, ‘The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises.’ But the Constitution says the Congress. But what we are doing is allowing the WTO to dictate to us. Congress WITHDRAWING APPROVAL OF UNITED STATES FROM AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION June 21, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 45:21 Thomas Jefferson, I am sure, would be aghast at this WTO trade agreement. It is out of the hands of the Congress. It is put into the hands of unelected bureaucrats at the WTO. I would venture to guess even the Hamiltonians would be a bit upset with what we do with trade today. I am pro-trade. I have voted consistently to trade with other nations, with lowering tariffs. But I do not support managed trade by international bureaucrats. I do not support subsidized trade. Huge corporations in this country like the WTO because they have political clout with it. They like it because they have an edge on their competitors. They can tie their competitors up in court. And they can beat them at it because not everybody has access. One has to be a monied interest to have influence at the World Trade Organization. Congress WITHDRAWING APPROVAL OF UNITED STATES FROM AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION June 21, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 45:23 We cannot control the WTO. None of us here in the Congress has anything to say. You have to have a unanimous vote with WTO to change policy. Our vote is equal to all the 134 other countries; and, therefore, we have very little to say here in the U.S. Congress. Congress World Trade Organization 21 June 2000    2000 Ron Paul 46:8 To the issue of whether or not we are obligated to follow the WTO rules, Congressional Research Service on August 25, 1999, did a study on the WTO. Their interpretation is this: Congress World Trade Organization 21 June 2000    2000 Ron Paul 46:12 Indeed, this is a treaty that we are obligated to follow. It is an illegal treaty because it was never ratified by the Senate. Even if it had been, it is not legal because you cannot transfer authority to an outside body. It is the U.S. Congress that has the authority to regulate foreign commerce. Nobody else. We will change our tax law and obey the WTO. And just recently, the European Union has complained to us because we do not tax sales on the Internet, and they are going to the WTO to demand that we change that law; and if they win, we will have to change our law. The other side of the argument being, We don’t have to do it. We don’t have to do it if we don’t want to. But then we are not a good member as we promised to be. Then what does the WTO do? They punish us with punitive sanctions, with tariffs. It is a managed trade war operated by the WTO and done in secrecy, without us having any say about it because it is out of our hands. It is a political event now. You have to have access to the U.S. Trade Representative for your case to be heard. This allows the big money, the big corporations to be heard and the little guy gets ignored. Congress World Trade Organization 21 June 2000    2000 Ron Paul 48:2 Mr. Speaker, let me remind those who would like to reform the WTO that we are helpless, Congress cannot do that. We need a unanimous consent vote from the WTO members. So that is not going to happen. Even the committee describes what we are talking about as a system of fair trade administered by the WTO. Fair trade, fine, we are all for fair trade, but who decides the WTO? That is not fair to the American citizens. Congress World Trade Organization 21 June 2000    2000 Ron Paul 49:2 Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the gentleman from Texas. This is not an issue of trade. This is an issue of who gets to manage and decide whether it is fair trade or not. It is the issue of power, whether it is by the environmental bureaucrats or by the U.S. Congress. The one thing under this arrangement, the little farmer has very little say. He cannot get into the WTO and make a complaint. The great meat packers of the country may well. Congress World Trade Organization 21 June 2000    2000 Ron Paul 53:2 Let me say to the gentleman that reforms are not permissible. The Congress cannot reform the WTO. Only they can reform themselves. But they work in secret, and they have to have a unanimous vote. Our vote is equal to the country of Sudan. So do not expect it to ever be reformed. The only way we can voice our objection is with this resolution. And there will never be another chance to talk about the WTO for 5 more years. Congress World Trade Organization 21 June 2000    2000 Ron Paul 53:3 Let me state that the Congress is required to state a constitutional justification for any legislation. The Committee on Ways and Means amazingly used article I, section 8 to justify their position on this bill. And let me state their constitutional justification. It says, “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises.” But the Constitution says the Congress. But what we are doing is allowing the WTO to dictate to us. Congress World Trade Organization 21 June 2000    2000 Ron Paul 55:3 Thomas Jefferson, I am sure, would be aghast at this WTO trade agreement. It is out of the hands of the Congress. It is put into the hands of unelected bureaucrats at the WTO. I would venture to guess even the Hamiltonians would be a bit upset with what we do with trade today. I am pro-trade. I have voted consistently to trade with other nations, with lowering tariffs. But I do not support managed trade by international bureaucrats. I do not support subsidized trade. Huge corporations in this country like the WTO because they have political clout with it. They like it because they have an edge on their competitors. They can tie their competitors up in court. And they can beat them at it because not everybody has access. One has to be a monied interest to have influence at the World Trade Organization. Congress World Trade Organization 21 June 2000    2000 Ron Paul 55:5 We cannot control the WTO. None of us here in the Congress has anything to say. You have to have a unanimous vote with WTO to change policy. Our vote is equal to all the 134 other countries; and, therefore, we have very little to say here in the U.S. Congress. Congress Hostettler Amendment to Commerce, Justice, State, Judiciary Appropriations Act June 26, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 59:5 A serious act of misconduct on the administration occurred when the Smith & Wesson agreement was settled. The executive branch acted as the legislative branch when they bypassed Congress through 22 pages of litigation. The egregious agreement will require all authorized Smith & Wesson dealers to limit handgun sales to one handgun every 14 days regardless of make, require all authorized Smith & Wesson dealers to require customers to pass a certified test before completing a sale of any firearm, mandate that the BATF participate on an oversight commission created by the settlement agreement, and does not allow unaccompanied minors into areas where firearms are present. Congress Hostettler Amendment to Commerce, Justice, State, Judiciary Appropriations Act June 26, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 59:9 * Let us not forget past calamities against U.S. citizens from over zealous federal agents in trying to enforce unconstitutional gun laws. Again, too much power is being given to these unconstitutional agencies and even worse, it is being done without the consent of Congress. Members of the House, you must remember the oath that you swore to uphold and not relinquish your authority any longer. By what authority does the administration set up this new commission, what check will be placed on this agency in making their new regulations that will affect all Americans without giving them a chance to vote or have a say in these changes. Why should we hand over our authority to another branch of the government and then let it take more freedoms away from our citizens? Congress Quality Health-Care Coalition Act of 2000 June 29, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 61:1 * Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to take this opportunity to lend my support to H.R. 1304, the Quality Health Care Coalition Act, which takes a first step towards restoring a true free-market in health care by restoring the rights of freedom of contract and association to health care professionals. Over the past few years, we have had much debate in Congress about the difficulties medical professionals and patients are having with Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs). HMOs are devices used by insurance industries to ration health care. While it is politically popular for members of Congress to bash the HMOs and the insurance industry, the growth of the HMOs are rooted in past government interventions in the health care market though the tax code, the Employment Retirement Security Act (ERSIA), and the federal anti-trust laws. These interventions took control of the health care dollar away from individual patients and providers, thus making it inevitable that something like the HMOs would emerge as a means to control costs. Congress Quality Health-Care Coalition Act of 2000 June 29, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 61:6 * By restoring the freedom of medical professionals to voluntarily come together to negotiate as a group with HMOs and insurance companies, this bill removes a government-imposed barrier to a true free market in health care. I am quite pleased that this bill does not infringe on the rights of health care professionals by forcing them to join a bargaining organization against their will. Contrary to the claims of some of its opponents, H.R. 1304 in no way extends the scourge of federally-mandated compulsory unionism to the health care professions. While Congress should protect the right of all Americans to join organizations for the purpose of bargaining collectively, Congress also has a moral responsibility to ensure that no worker is forced by law to join or financially support such an organization. Congress Quality Health-Care Coalition Act of 2000 June 29, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 61:7 * Mr. Chairman, it is my hope that Congress will follow up on its action today by empowering patients to control their health care by providing all Americans with access to Medical Saving Accounts (MSAs) and large tax credits for their health care expenses. Putting individuals back in charge of their own health care decisions will enable patients to work with providers to ensure they receive the best possible health care at the lowest possible price. If providers and patients have the ability to form the contractual arrangements that they found most beneficial to them, the HMO monster would wither on the vine without the imposition of new federal regulations on the insurance industry. Congress THE FAMILY HEALTH TAX CUT ACT 29 June 2000    2000 Ron Paul 62:3 * As an OB-GYN who has had the privilege of delivering more than four thousand babies, I know how important it is that parents have the resources to provide adequate health care for their children. The inability of many working Americans to provide health care for their children is rooted in one of the great inequities of the tax code: Congress’ failure to allow individuals the same ability to deduct health care costs that it grants to businesses. As a direct result of Congress’ refusal to provide individuals with health care related tax credits, parents whose employers do not provide health insurance have to struggle to provide health care for their children. Many of these parents work in low-income jobs; oftentimes their only recourse to health care is the local emergency room. Congress THE FAMILY HEALTH TAX CUT ACT 29 June 2000    2000 Ron Paul 62:7 * Mr. Speaker, this Congress has a moral responsibility to provide low-income parents struggling to care for a sick child tax relief in order to help them better meet their child’s medical expenses. I would ask any of my colleagues who would say that we cannot enact the Family Tax Cut Act because it would cause the government to lose too much revenue, who is more deserving of this money, Congress or the working-class parents of a sick child? Congress Sense Of Congress Regarding Importance And Value Of Education In United States History July 10, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 63:1 * Madam Speaker, I rise to address two shortcomings of S. Con. Res. 129. I am certainly in agreement with the sentiments behind this resolution. The promotion of knowledge about, and understanding of, American history are among the most important activities those who wish to preserve American liberty can undertake. In fact, I would venture to say that with my work with various educational organizations, I have done as much, if not more, than any other member of Congress to promote the study of American history. Congress Sense Of Congress Regarding Importance And Value Of Education In United States History July 10, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 63:5 * Madam Speaker, the confusion over whether America is a democracy, where citizens’ rights may be violated if the consent of 51 percent of the people may be obtained, or a republic, where the federal government is forbidden to take any actions violating a people’s fundamental rights, is behind many of the flawed debates in this Congress. A constitutionally literate Congress that understands the proper function of a legislature in a constitutional republic would never even debate whether or not to abridge the right of self-defense, instruct parents how to raise and educate their children, send troops to intervene in distant foreign quarrels that do not involve the security of the country, or even deny entire classes of citizens the fundamental right to life. Congress Sense Of Congress Regarding Importance And Value Of Education In United States History July 10, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 63:6 * Secondly, it is not the proper role of the United States Congress to dictate educational tenets to states and local governments. After all, the United States Constitution does not give the federal government any power to dictate, or even suggest, curriculum. Instead the power to determine what is taught in schools is reserved to states, local communities, and, above all, parents. Congress Sense Of Congress Regarding Importance And Value Of Education In United States History July 10, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 63:7 * In conclusion, by mistaking this country’s founding as being based on mass democracy rather than on republican principles, and by ignoring the constitutionally limited role of the federal government, this resolution promotes misunderstanding about the type of government necessary to protect liberty. Such constitutional illiteracy may be more dangerous than historical ignorance, since the belief that America was founded to be a democracy legitimizes the idea that Congress may violate people’s fundamental rights at will. I, therefore, encourage my colleagues to embrace America’s true heritage: a constitutional republic with strict limitations on the power of the central government. Congress INTERNET GAMBLING PROHIBITION ACT OF 2000 July 19, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 66:4 Several States have already addressed the issue, and Congress should recognize States’ rights. The definition of ‘gambling’ in the bill appears narrow but could be ‘reinterpreted’ to include online auctions or even day trading (a different sort of gambling). Those individuals who seek out such thrills will likely soon find a good substitute which will justify the next round of federal Internet regulation. Congress Social Security Tax Relief Act 27 July 2000    2000 Ron Paul 67:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of the Social Security Tax Relief Act (H.R. 4865). By repealing the 1993 tax increase on Social Security benefits, Congress will take a good first step toward eliminating one of the most unfair taxes imposed on seniors: the tax on Social Security benefits. Congress Social Security Tax Relief Act 27 July 2000    2000 Ron Paul 67:2 Eliminating the 1993 tax on Social Security benefits has long been one of my goals in Congress. In fact, I introduced legislation to repeal this tax increase in 1997, and I am pleased to see Congress acting on this issue. I would remind my colleagues that the justification for increasing this tax in 1993 was to reduce the budget deficit. Now, President Clinton, who first proposed the tax increase, and most members of Congress say the deficit is gone. So, by the President’s own reasoning, there is no need to keep this tax hike in place. Congress Social Security Tax Relief Act 27 July 2000    2000 Ron Paul 67:3 Because Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another incidence of “double taxation.” Furthermore, “taxing” benefits paid by the government is merely an accounting trick, a “shell game” which allows members of Congress to reduce benefits by subterfuge. This allows Congress to continue using the Social Security trust fund as a means of financing other government programs and mask the true size of the federal deficit. Congress Social Security Tax Relief Act 27 July 2000    2000 Ron Paul 67:5 Congress should also act on my Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which ensures that all money in the Social Security Trust Fund is spent solely on Social Security. When the government takes money for the Social Security Trust Fund, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress Social Security Benefits Tax Relief Act Of 2000 27 July 2000    2000 Ron Paul 68:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of the Social Security Tax Relief Act (H.R. 4865). By repealing the 1993 tax increase on Social Security benefits, Congress will take a good first step toward eliminating one of the most unfair taxes imposed on seniors: the tax on Social Security benefits. Congress Social Security Benefits Tax Relief Act Of 2000 27 July 2000    2000 Ron Paul 68:2 Eliminating the 1993 tax on Social Security benefits has long been one of my goals in Congress. In fact, I introduced legislation to repeal this tax increase in 1997, and I am pleased to see Congress acting on this issue. I would remind my colleagues that the justification for increasing this tax in 1993 was to reduce the budget deficit. Now, President Clinton, who first proposed the tax increase, and most members of Congress say the deficit is gone. So, by the President’s own reasoning, there is no need to keep this tax hike in place. Congress Social Security Benefits Tax Relief Act Of 2000 27 July 2000    2000 Ron Paul 68:3 Because Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another incidence of “double taxation.” Furthermore, “taxing” benefits paid by the government is merely an accounting trick, a “shell game” which allows members of Congress to reduce benefits by subterfuge. This allows Congress to continue using the Social Security trust fund as a means of financing other government programs and mask the true size of the federal deficit. Congress Social Security Benefits Tax Relief Act Of 2000 27 July 2000    2000 Ron Paul 68:5 Congress should also act on my Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which ensures that all money in the Social Security Trust Fund is spent solely on Social Security. When the government takes money for the Social Security Trust Fund, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress Child Support Distribution Act Of 2000 September 7, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 71:5 * I would also remind my colleagues that the federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in the collection of child support, much less invade the privacy of every citizen in order to ferret out a few wrongdoers. Constitutionally, there are only three federal crimes: treason, counterfeiting, and piracy on the high seas. For Congress to authorize federal involvement in any other law enforcement issue is a violation on the limits on Congressional power contained in Article 1, section 8 and the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution. No less an authority than Chief Justice William Renhquist has stated that Congress is creating too many federal laws and infringing on the proper police powers of the states. Congress Child Support Distribution Act Of 2000 September 7, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 71:6 * In a free society, constitutional limits on government power and the liberty of citizens must never be sacrificed to increase the efficiency of any government program, no matter how noble the program’s goal. Again I ask my colleagues to keep in mind that the dangerous road toward the loss of liberty begins when members of Congress put other goals ahead of our oath to preserve the Constitution and protect the liberty of our constituents. Congress Child Support Distribution Act Of 2000 September 7, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 71:9 * Instead of furthering federal involvement in the family, Congress should stop pumping the narcotic of welfare into America’s communities by defunding federal bureaucracies and returning responsibility for providing assistance to those institutions best able to provide help without fostering an ethic of irresponsibility and dependancy: private charities and churches. Congress SOCIAL SECURITY TAX RELIEF ACT 7 September 2000    2000 Ron Paul 72:1 * Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of the Social Security Tax Relief Act (H.R. 4865). By repealing the 1993 tax increase on Social Security benefits, Congress will take a good first step toward eliminating one of the most unfair taxes imposed on seniors: the tax on Social Security benefits. Congress SOCIAL SECURITY TAX RELIEF ACT 7 September 2000    2000 Ron Paul 72:2 * Eliminating the 1993 tax on Social Security benefits has long been one of my goals in Congress. In fact, I introduced legislation to repeal this tax increase in 1997, and I am pleased to see Congress acting on this issue. I would remind my colleagues that the justification for increasing this tax in 1993 was to reduce the budget deficit. Now, President Clinton, who first proposed the tax increase, and most members of Congress say the deficit is gone. So, by the President’s own reasoning, there is no need to keep this tax hike in place. Congress SOCIAL SECURITY TAX RELIEF ACT 7 September 2000    2000 Ron Paul 72:3 * Because Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another incidence of ‘double taxation.’ Furthermore, ‘taxing’ benefits paid by the government is merely an accounting trick, a ‘shell game’ which allows members of Congress to reduce benefits by subterfuge. This allows Congress to continue using the Social Security trust fund as a means of financing other government programs and mask the true size of the federal deficit. Congress SOCIAL SECURITY TAX RELIEF ACT 7 September 2000    2000 Ron Paul 72:5 * Congress should also act on my Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which ensures that all money in the Social Security Trust Fund is spent solely on Social Security. When the government takes money for the Social Security Trust Fund, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress FSC Repeal And Extra-Territorial Income Exclusion Act Of 2000 September 12, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 73:4 * We are now witnessing trade war protectionism being administered by the World (Government) Trade Organization — the WTO. For two years now we have been involved in an ongoing trade war with Europe and this is just one more step in that fight. With this legislation the U.S. Congress capitulates to the demands of the WTO. The actual reason for this legislation is to answer back to the retaliation of the Europeans for having had a ruling against them in favor of the United States on meat and banana products. The WTO obviously spends more time managing trade wars than it does promoting free trade. This type of legislation demonstrates clearly the WTO is in charge of our trade policy. Congress FSC Repeal And Extra-Territorial Income Exclusion Act Of 2000 September 12, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 73:18 * Congress has also been anxious to block the Voice Stream Communications planned purchase by Deutch Telekom, a German government-owned phone monopoly. We have not yet heard the last of this international trade fight. Congress FSC Repeal And Extra-Territorial Income Exclusion Act Of 2000 September 12, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 73:22 * The one thing for certain is this process is not free trade; this is international managed trade by an international governmental body. The odds of coming up with fair trade or free trade under WTO are zero. Unfortunately, even in the language most commonly used in the Congress in promoting ‘free trade’ it usually involves not only international government managed trade but subsidies as well, such as those obtained through the Import/Export Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and various other methods such as the Foreign Aid and our military budget. Congress Scouting For All Act September 12, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 74:3 * Nevertheless, this Congress has decided to bring to the floor a bill attempting to penalize this private group of citizens for exercising their first amendment ‘freedom of association’ rights. This is very close to denying the very right itself. To the extent the Boy Scouts should be penalized for their exercise of free association (or exclusion in this case), that penalty should only manifest itself through other private citizens exercising their freedom not to associate with individuals or groups whose associations (or lack therof) they find offensive. Congress Scouting For All Act September 12, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 74:4 * As to the ‘federal charter’, where do we find authority for the federal government to charter organizations it deems ‘honorable’? To the extent the ‘charter’ is an honorary title awarded by Congress to organizations which is then ultimately used to threaten exercise of the right to freedom of association, I suggest we repeal not only the Boy Scout’s charter but all federal charters such that they won’t be used as tools of federal meddling. Congress Scouting For All Act September 12, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 74:5 * While I hesitate to further propagate this system of federal charters by which the federal government manipulates private groups, I despise more so this congressional attempt to penalize the Boy Scouts for merely exercising their constitutional rights — or as syndicated columnist Charley Reese recently put it in the Orlando Sentinel: Congress Literacy Involves Families Together Act September 12, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 75:1 * Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why Congress should reject the Literacy Involves Families Together (LIFT) Act (House Resolution 3222), which aims to increase ‘family literacy’ by directing money from the American taxpayer to Washington and funneling a small percentage of it back to the states and localities to spend on education programs that meet the specifications of DC-based bureaucrats. While all support the goal of promoting adult literacy, especially among parents with young children, Congress should not endorse supporting the unconstitutional and ineffective means included in this bill. If Congress were serious about meaningful education reform, we would not even be debating bills like H.R. 3222. Rather, we would be discussing the best way to return control over the education dollar to the people so they can develop the education programs that best suit their needs. Congress Literacy Involves Families Together Act September 12, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 75:3 * In contrast to the drafters of the LIFT bill, I do not trust the Congress to develop an education program that can match the needs of every community in the United States. Instead, I trust the American people to provide the type of education system that best suits their needs, and the needs of their fellow citizens, provided Congress gives them back control over the education dollar. Congress Literacy Involves Families Together Act September 12, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 75:5 * Reinforcing that the scariest words in the English language are ‘I’m from the federal government and I am here to help you,’ the American education system has deteriorated in the years since Congress disregarded the constitutional limitations on centralizing education in order to ‘improve the schools.’ One could argue that if the federally-controlled schools did a better job of educating children to read, perhaps there would not be a great demand for ‘adult literacy programs!’ Congress SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS TAX RELIEF ACT OF 2000 September 14, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 76:1 * Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of the Social Security Tax Relief Act (H.R. 4865). By repealing the 1993 tax increase on Social Security benefits, Congress will take a good first step toward eliminating one of the most unfair taxes imposed on seniors: the tax on Social Security benefits. Congress SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS TAX RELIEF ACT OF 2000 September 14, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 76:2 * Eliminating the 1993 tax on Social Security benefits has long been one of my goals in Congress. In fact, I introduced legislation to repeal this tax increase in 1997, and I am pleased to see Congress acting on this issue. I would remind my colleagues that the justification for increasing this tax in 1993 was to reduce the budget deficit. Now, President Clinton, who first proposed the tax increase, and most members of Congress say the deficit is gone. So, by the President’s own reasoning, there is no need to keep this tax hike in place. Congress SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS TAX RELIEF ACT OF 2000 September 14, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 76:3 * Because Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another incidence of ‘double taxation.’ Furthermore, ‘taxing’ benefits paid by the government is merely an accounting trick, a ‘shell game’ which allows members of Congress to reduce benefits by subterfuge. This allows Congress to continue using the Social Security trust fund as a means of financing other government programs and mask the true size of the federal deficit. Congress SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS TAX RELIEF ACT OF 2000 September 14, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 76:5 * Congress should also act on my Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which ensures that all money in the Social Security Trust Fund is spent solely on Social Security. When the government takes money for the Social Security Trust Fund, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE UNITED NATIONS September 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 77:1 Mr. Speaker, over a half a century has transpired since the United States of America became a member of the United Nations. Purporting to act pursuant to the treaty powers of the Constitution, the President of the United States signed, and the United States Senate ratified, the charter of the United Nations. Yet, the debate in government circles over the United Nations’ charter scarcely has touched on the question of the constitutional power of the United States to enter such an agreement. Instead, the only questions addressed concerned the respective roles that the President and Congress would assume upon the implementation of that charter. Congress AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE UNITED NATIONS September 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 77:2 On the one hand, some proposed that once the charter of the United States was ratified, the President of the United States would act independently of Congress pursuant to his executive prerogatives to conduct the foreign affairs of the Nation. Others insisted, however, that the Congress played a major role of defining foreign policy, especially because that policy implicated the power to declare war, a subject reserved strictly to Congress by Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. Congress AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE UNITED NATIONS September 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 77:3 At first, it appeared that Congress would take control of America’s participation in the United Nations. But in the enactment of the United Nations’ participation act on December 20, 1945, Congress laid down several rules by which America’s participation would be governed. Among those rules was the requirement that before the President of the United States could deploy United States Armed Forces in service of the United Nations, he was required to submit to Congress for its specific approval the numbers and types of Armed Forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of the facilities and assistance including rights of passage to be made available to the United Nations Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security. Congress AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE UNITED NATIONS September 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 77:4 Since the passage of the United Nations Participation Act, however, congressional control of presidential foreign policy initiatives, in cooperation with the United Nations, has been more theoretical than real. Presidents from Truman to the current President have again and again presented Congress with already-begun military actions, thus forcing Congress’s hand to support United States troops or risk the accusation of having put the Nation’s servicemen and service women in unnecessary danger. Instead of seeking congressional approval of the use of the United States Armed Forces in service of the United Nations, presidents from Truman to Clinton have used the United Nations Security Council as a substitute for congressional authorization of the deployment of United States Armed Forces in that service. Congress AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE UNITED NATIONS September 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 77:5 This transfer of power from Congress to the United Nations has not, however, been limited to the power to make war. Increasingly, Presidents are using the U.N. not only to implement foreign policy in pursuit of international peace, but also domestic policy in pursuit of international, environmental, economic, education, social welfare and human rights policy, both in derogation of the legislative prerogatives of Congress and of the 50 State legislatures, and further in derogation of the rights of the American people to constitute their own civil order. Congress AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE UNITED NATIONS September 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 77:8 Although such a wholesale transfer of United States sovereignty to the United Nations as envisioned by Secretary General Annan has not yet come to pass, it will, unless Congress takes action. Congress AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE UNITED NATIONS September 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 77:10 To date, Congress has attempted to curb the abuse of power of the United Nations by urging the United Nations to reform itself, threatening the nonpayment of assessments and dues allegedly owed by the United States and thereby cutting off the United Nations’ major source of funds. America’s problems with the United Nations will not, however, be solved by such reform measures. The threat posed by the United Nations to the sovereignty of the United States and independence is not that the United Nations is currently plagued by a bloated and irresponsible international bureaucracy. Rather, the threat arises from the United Nation’s Charter which — from the beginning — was a threat to sovereignty protections in the U.S. Constitution. The American people have not, however, approved of the Charter of the United Nations which, by its nature, cannot be the supreme law of the land for it was never ‘made under the Authority of the U.S.,’ as required by Article VI. Congress AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE UNITED NATIONS September 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 77:11 H.R. 1146 — The American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 1999 is my solution to the continued abuses of the United Nations. The U.S. Congress can remedy its earlier unconstitutional action of embracing the Charter of the United Nations by enacting H.R. 1146. The U.S. Congress, by passing H.R. 1146, and the U.S. president, by signing H.R. 1146, will heed the wise counsel of our first president, George Washington, when he advised his countrymen to ‘steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world,’ lest the nation’s security and liberties be compromised by endless and overriding international commitments. An excerpt from Herbert W. Titus’ Constitutional Analysis of the United Nations Congress AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE UNITED NATIONS September 18, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 77:26 As a direct consequence of this original power of the people to constitute a new government, the Congress under the new constitution was authorized to admit new states to join the original 13 states without submitting the admission of each state to the 13 original states. In like manner, the Charter of the United Nations, forged in the name of the ‘peoples’ of those nations, established a new international government with independent powers to admit to membership whichever nations the United Nations governing authorities chose without submitting such admissions to each individual member nation for ratification. See Charter of the United Nations, Article 4, Section 2. No treaty could legitimately confer upon the United Nations General Assembly such powers and remain within the legal and political definition of a treaty. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE ESSENTIAL RURAL HOSPITAL PRESERVATION ACT September 20, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 78:8 * Considering that the BBA of 1997 has resulted in Medicare savings of over $50 billion more than projected by Congress surely it is not to much to ask that Congress ensure Medicare patients in rural areas are not denied access to quality health care services because of the unintended consequences of the Balanced Budget Amendment. I therefore call on my colleagues to stand up for rural hospitals by cosponsoring the Essential Rural Hospital Preservation Act. Congress CHILDHOOD CANCER AWARENESS MONTH September 21, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 79:2 * The bill will be particularly helpful to those parents whose employers cannot afford to provide their employees’ health insurance. Often-times those employees work in low-income jobs and thus must struggle to provide adequate health care for their children. This burden is magnified when the child needs special care to cope with cancer or a physical disability. Yet, thanks to Congress’ refusal to grant individuals the same tax breaks for health-care expenses it grants businesses, these hard-working parents receive little or no tax relief to help them cope with the tremendous expenses of caring for a child requiring for a child requiring long-term or specialized care. Congress CHILDHOOD CANCER AWARENESS MONTH September 21, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 79:5 * Mr. Speaker, it is tough enough for working families to cope with a child with a serious illness without having to sacrifice resources that should be used for the care of that child to the federal government. It is hard to think of a more compassionate action this Congress can take than to reduce taxes on America’s parents in order to allow them to help provide quality health care to their children. I therefore call on my colleagues to join me in helping working parents provide health care to their children by cosponsoring H.R. 4799, the Family Health Tax Cut Act. Congress TWENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT September 25, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 80:3 * On May 10, 1994, Dr. Mary Wagner testified before the Education Committee that disabled children who are not placed in a mainstream classroom graduate from high school at a much higher rate than disabled children who are mainstreamed. Dr. Wagner quite properly accused Congress of sacrificing children to ideology. Congress TWENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT September 25, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 80:4 * IDEA also provides school personal with incentives to over-identify children as learning disabled, thus unfairly stigmatizing many children and, in a vicious cycle, leading to more demands for increased federal spending on IDEA also IDEA encourages the use of the dangerous drug Retalin for the purpose of getting education subsidies. Instead of celebrating and increasing spending on a federal program that may actually damage the children it claims to help, Congress should return control over education to those who best know the child’s needs: parents. In order to restore parental control to education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (HR 935), which provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit to pay for K-12 education expenses. My tax credit would be of greatest benefit to parents of children with learning disabilities because it would allow them to devote more of their resources to ensure their children get an education that meets the child’s unique needs. Congress Congratulating Home Educators And Home Schooled Students September 26, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 81:1 * Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support H. Res. 578, which celebrates the accomplishments of parents across the nation who have chosen to educate their children at home by designating the first week of October as ‘National Home Schooling Week.’ While serving in Congress, I have had the opportunity to get to know many of the home-schooling parents in my district. I am very impressed by the job these parents are doing in providing their children with a quality education. I have also found that home schooling parents are among the most committed activists in the cause of advancing individual liberty, constitutional government, and traditional values. I am sure my colleagues on the Education Committee would agree that the support of home schoolers was crucial in defeating the scheme to implement a national student test. Congress Congratulating Home Educators And Home Schooled Students September 26, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 81:7 * Mr. Speaker, the best way to improve education is to return control over education resources to the people who best know their children’s unique needs: those children’s parents. Congress should empower all parents, whether they choose to home school or send their child to a public or private school, with the means to control their child’s education. That is why I believe the most important education bill introduced in this Congress is the Family Education Freedom Act. Congress CONGRESS IGNORES ITS CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REGARDING MONETARY POLICY October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 84:1 Mr. Speaker, at a frantic pace we anxiously rush to close down this Congress with excessive legislation while totally ignoring the all-important issue of monetary policy. Congress CONGRESS IGNORES ITS CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REGARDING MONETARY POLICY October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 84:2 Congress has certainly reneged on its responsibility in this area. We continue to grant authority to a central bank that designs monetary policy in complete secrecy, inflating the currency at will, thus stealing value from the already existing currency through a dilution effect. Congress CONGRESS IGNORES ITS CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REGARDING MONETARY POLICY October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 84:5 And what do we do here in the Congress? We continue to ignore our constitutional responsibility to maintain a sound dollar. Our monetary policy of the last 10 years has produced the largest financial bubble in all of history, with the good times paid for by borrowing and an illusion of wealth created in a speculative stock market. Our current account deficit, now running over $400 billion per year, and our $1.5 trillion foreign debt, has been instrumental in financing our extravagance. Be assured, the piper will be paid. The markets are clearly reflecting the excesses of the 1990s. Congress CONGRESS IGNORES ITS CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REGARDING MONETARY POLICY October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 84:7 The Federal Reserve, which maintains a monopoly control over the money supply, credit and interest rates, is indeed the culprit and should be held accountable. But the real responsibility falls on the Congress, for it is Congress’ neglect that permits the central bank to debase the dollar at will. Congress CONGRESS IGNORES ITS CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY REGARDING MONETARY POLICY October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 84:8 Destroying the value of a currency is immoral and remains unconstitutional. It should be illegal. And only a responsible Congress can accomplish that. Congress END-OF-SESSION ISSUES October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 85:1 Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan and the gentleman from Colorado for allowing me the opportunity to express my thoughts on the education reform debate that is sure to consume much of our time in the remaining days of the 106th Congress. For all the sound and fury generated by the argument over education, the truth is that the differences between the congressional leadership and the administration are not significant; both wish to strengthen the unconstitutional system of centralized education. I trust I need not go into the flaws with President Clinton’s command-and-control approach to education. However, this Congress has failed to present a true, constitutional alternative to President Clinton’s proposal to further nationalize education. Congress END-OF-SESSION ISSUES October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 85:7 Of course, I applaud all efforts which move in the right direction such as the Education Savings Accounts legislation (H.R. 7). President Clinton’s college tax credits are also good first steps in the right direction. However, Congress must act boldly — we can ill afford to waste another year without a revolutionary change in our policy. I believe my bill sparks this revolution and I am disappointed that the leadership of this Congress chose to ignore this fundamental reform and instead focused on reauthorizing great society programs and promoting the pseudo-federalism of block grants. Congress END-OF-SESSION ISSUES October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 85:8 One area where this Congress has so far been successful in fighting for a constitutional education policy was in resisting President Clinton’s drive for national testing. I do wish to express my support for the provisions banning the development of national testing contained in the Education Appropriations bill, and thank Mr. Goodling for his leadership in this struggle. Congress END-OF-SESSION ISSUES October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 85:13 Furthermore, the federal government’s power to treat state governments as their administrative subordinates stems from an abuse of Congress’ taxing-and-spending power. Submitting to federal control is the only way state and local officials can recapture any part of the monies of the federal government has illegitimately taken from a state’s citizens. Of course, this is also the only way state officials can tax citizens of other states to support their education programs. It is the rare official who can afford not to bow to federal dictates in exchange for federal funding! Congress END-OF-SESSION ISSUES October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 85:15 Since federal spending is the root of federal control, by increasing federal spending this Congress is laying the groundwork for future Congresses to fasten more and more mandates on the states. Because state and even local officials, not federal bureaucrats, will be carrying out these mandates, this system could complete the transformation of the state governments into mere agents of the federal government. Congress END-OF-SESSION ISSUES October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 85:16 While it is true that lower levels of intervention are not as bad as micro-management at the federal level, Congress’ constitutional and moral responsibility is not to make the federal education bureaucracy ‘less bad.’ Rather, we must act now to put parents back in charge of education and thus make American education once again the envy of the world. Congress END-OF-SESSION ISSUES October 11, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 85:17 Hopefully the next Congress will be more reverent toward their duty to the U.S. Constitution and America’s children. The price of Congress’s failure to return to the Constitution in the area of education will be paid by the next generation of American children. In short, we cannot afford to continue on the policy read we have been going down. The cost of inaction to our future generations is simply too great. Congress SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER CONFIDENTIALITY ACT OF 1999 17 October 2000    2000 Ron Paul 87:5 * Unscrupulous people have found ways to exploit this system and steal another’s identity — the ubiquity of the Social Security number paved the way for these very predictable abuses and crimes. Congress must undo the tremendous injury done to the people’s privacy and security by the federal government’s various mandates which transformed the Social Security number into a universal identifier. Congress THREATS TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM October 19, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 88:1 * Mr. Speaker, I recently had the pleasure of hearing remarks made by our former House colleague, Bob Bauman of Maryland, at a meeting of the Eris Society in Colorado. Since his talk centered on banking, financial and related privacy issues pending before the Congress, I want to share his view with the House as an informed statement of the threats to financial freedom posed by the Clinton administration’s policies. Congress THREATS TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM October 19, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 88:11 Now, it’s quite obvious that financial activities in which a person engages when wealth is moved offshore for asset protection, for broader investment potential, for any number of legitimate reasons, for possible tax savings, any of these moves, are innocent in themselves. Former Secretary of the US Treasury, Robert Rubin, admitted in congressional testimony last year, it is the intention behind these innocent financial moves that government agents want to police for possible criminal investigation and prosecution. Congress PALMETTO BEND CONVEYANCE ACT October 24, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 89:1 * Mr. Speaker, Lake Texana (The Palmetto Bend Project), is located in my congressional district near Edna in the Texas Gulf Coast area about midway between Corpus Christi and Houston. Lake Texana supplies roughly 75,000 acre/feet per year of municipal and industrial water to a large multicounty area of Texas. The Lake Texana water is directly responsible for creating over 3,000 jobs in the cities of Edna and Victoria, Texas and water sales from the project make it financially self-sufficient. Congress OLDER AMERICANS ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2000 October 24, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 90:3 * Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, by involving itself in these areas, the federal government has politicized the offering of these services as well as assured inefficiencies in their delivery — inefficiencies that would not be present if the federal government respected its constitutional limits and allowed states, local communities and private citizens to provide these vital services to seniors. For example, one of the most contentious areas of this bill is the funding that goes to private organization to provide employment services. Many of these organizations are involved in partisan politics, and, because money is fungible, the federal grants to these organizations make taxpayers de facto underwriters of their political activities. As Thomas Jefferson said: ‘To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is both sinful and tyrannical.’ This ‘sinful and tyrannical’ action is inevitable whenever Congress exceeds its constitutional limitations and abuses the taxing power by forcing citizens to support the charitable activities of congressionally-favored organizations. One reason for this is that federal funding encourages these organizations to become involved in lobbying in order to gain more federal support. These organizations may even form alliances with other advocacy groups in order to build greater support for their cause. Congress OLDER AMERICANS ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2000 October 24, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 90:4 * When social services are nationalized, there is inevitably waste and inefficiency in the distribution of the services. This is because when the government administers social services the lion’s share of those services are provided to those with the most effective lobby or those whose Congressional representative is able to exercise the most clout at appropriations time. While I applaud the efforts of certain of my colleagues on the Education and Workforce Committee to direct resources to where they are truly needed, particularly Mr. Barrett’s efforts to bring more resources to rural areas, the politicization of social services will inevitably result in some areas receiving inadequate funding to meet their demand for those services. I have little doubt that if these programs were restored to the private sector those areas with the greatest concentration of needy seniors would receive priority over those areas with the most powerful lobby. Congress OLDER AMERICANS ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2000 October 24, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 90:6 * Mr. Speaker, several years ago, when people still recognized their moral duty to voluntarily help their fellow humans rather than expect the government to coerce their fellow citizens to provide assistance through the welfare state, my parents were involved in a local Meals-on-Wheels program run by their church. I remember how upset they were when their local program was forced to conform to federal standards or close its program because Congress had decided to take control of delivering hot food to the elderly. It is time that this Congress return to the wisdom of the drafters of the Constitution and return responsibility for providing services to the nation’s seniors to states, communities, churches, and other private organizations who can provide those services much more effectively and efficiently than the federal government. Congress NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION ACT October 25, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 91:1 * Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject the National Science Act (H.R. 4271), which violates the limits on congressional power found in Article 1, section 8 and the 10th amendment to the Constitution by using tax monies unjustly taken from the American people to promote the educational objectives favored by a few federal politicians and bureaucrats. As an OB-GYN, I certainly recognize the importance of increasing the quality of science education as well as undertaking efforts to interest children in the sciences. However, while I share the goals of the drafters of this legislation, I recognize that Congress has no constitutional authority to single out any one academic discipline as deserving special emphasis. Instead, the decision about which subjects to emphasize should be made by local officials, educators and parents. Congress NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION ACT October 25, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 91:3 * I also object to the provision of this bill providing special assistance to science teachers for training and professional development as well as grants for so-called ‘Master Teachers.’ Of course, I recognize that, like other citizens, teachers are underpaid because they are overtaxed. This is why I have introduced the Teacher Tax Cut Act (H.R. 937) which provides all teachers with a $1,000 tax credit. H.R. 937 effectively raises teacher salaries by lowering their taxes. In contrast H.R. 4271 raises the salaries of certain congressionally-favored educators by effectively cutting the pay of engineers, doctors, truck drivers, waiters, and even their fellow educators. Mr. Speaker, I cannot find any constitutional nor moral justification for Congress to redistribute money to any favorite class of professionals. Congress CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2615, CERTIFIED DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2000 October 26, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 92:3 * Accordingly, I strongly endorse many of the provisions in this bill. I fully support the increased IRA and pension plan deduction amounts, which will benefit virtually all Americans. Tax-deductible and tax-deferred savings incentives represent the very best kind of tax reforms this Congress can make. Not only do Americans pay less in taxes with an increased deduction, they also have an increased incentive to accumulate retirement savings. Congress CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2615, CERTIFIED DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2000 October 26, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 92:4 * Another worthwhile portion of this bill addresses the needs of rural hospitals, which were unfairly singled out for excessive reductions in Medicare reimbursements by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. While Congress deserves a share of the blame, most of the problems experienced by rural health care providers are the result of flawed implementation of the Act by the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA). This administration has decimated rural health care in order to artificially prolong the life of the Medicare trust fund, while avoiding reforms that would give seniors more control over their health care decisions. The administration should not play political games with Medicare trust funds at the expense of rural hospitals. By doing so, it has violated the promise of quality health care made to senior taxpayers in rural areas. Congress CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2615, CERTIFIED DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2000 October 26, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 92:9 * The small business tax relief in this bill is more than outweighed by the provisions raising the federally-mandated minimum wage. While I certainly understand the motivation to help lower wage workers, the reality is that a minimum wage hike hurts lower income Americans the most. When an employer cannot afford to pay a higher wage, the employer has no choice but to hire less workers. As a result, young people with fewer skills and less experience find it harder to obtain an entry-level job. Raising the minimum wage actually reduces opportunities and living standards for the very people the administration claims will benefit from this legislation! It’s time to stop fooling ourselves about the basic laws of economics, and realize that Congress cannot legislate a higher standard of living. Congress should not allow itself to believe that the package of small business tax cuts will fully compensate businesses and their employees for the damage inflicted by a minimum wage hike. Congress is not omnipotent; we cannot pretend to strike a perfect balance between tax cuts and wage mandates so that no American businesses or workers are harmed. It may make my colleagues feel good to raise the minimum wage, but the real life consequences of this bill will be felt by those who can least afford diminished job opportunities. Congress CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2615, CERTIFIED DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2000 October 26, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 92:10 * We also make a mistake when we rush to change our domestic tax laws to comply with the ruling of an international body. Nobody in Congress or the administration wants to talk about it, but this is the first time in the history of our nation that we have changed our laws because an international body told us to do so. We are not considering this legislation because American citizens or corporations lobbied for it. We are considering it solely because of the demands of the WTO appellate panel, which agreed with EU complaints about our corporate income tax laws. We created the Foreign Sales Corporation rules back in the 1980s, but now the EU has decided our exempting a small portion of foreign source income from corporate taxes represents a ‘subsidy.’ We have plenty of federal subsidies in this country, but the FSC tax treatment assuredly is not one of them. FSCs do not receive a subsidy — no tax dollars are collected from taxpayers and given to FSCs. The FSC rules simply permit the parent corporation to pay less taxes on its foreign income. Most EU countries don’t tax their corporations on foreign income at all! So the EU complaint that the FSC represents a subsidy is ridiculous. Congress CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2615, CERTIFIED DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2000 October 26, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 92:11 * This measure clearly demonstrates how our membership in the WTO undermines our national sovereignty. I have warned this body that the WTO does not promote true free trade, but rather enforces politically influenced ‘managed trade.’ I warned this body that our agreement to abide by WTO rulings would force us to change our domestic laws. I warned this body that our participation in the WTO was unconstitutional. Yet Members scoffed at this idea. Members of the Ways and Means committee said it was ‘unthinkable’ that the U.S. Congress would change our nation’s laws because of an order by the WTO. We were told that we had to join or else we would lose the international ‘trade wars.’ Today we see our sovereignty clearly undermined, and at the same time we stand on the brink of a retaliatory trade war by the EU. So the WTO has given us the worst of all worlds. Congress CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2615, CERTIFIED DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2000 October 26, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 92:12 * We should not change our tax laws at the behest of any body other than the U.S. Congress. If we want to help American businesses, we should simply stop taxing foreign source income. Today’s FSC measure will not appease the EU; they already have indicated that the House version of this bill is unsatisfactory to them. Worst of all, this measure gives the President further unconstitutional executive order powers to make changes when demanded by the WTO in the future. Never mind that the legislative power is supposed to reside solely with Congress. We simply cede our legislative authority to the WTO when we pass this measure, and it’s shameful that it likely will go unnoticed by the American people. We ought to tell them exactly what we are doing to national sovereignty when we pass this last-minute mixed bag of tax measures. Congress ECONOMIC PROBLEMS AHEAD November 13, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 93:3 * Mises, the great 20th century economist, predicted decades before the fall of the Soviet system that socialism was unworkable and would collapse upon itself. Although he did not live to see it, he would not have been surprised to witness the events of 1989 with the collapse of the entire Communist-Soviet system. Likewise, the interventionist-welfare system endorsed by the West, including the United States, is unworkable. Even without the current problems in the Presidential election, signs of an impasse within our system were evident. Inevitably, a system that decides almost everything through pure democracy will sharply alienate two groups: the producers, and the recipients of the goods distributed by the popularly elected congresses. Our system is not only unfairly designed to take care of those who do not work, it also rewards the powerful and influential who can gain control of the government apparatus. Control over government contracts, the military industrial complex and the use of our military to protect financial interests overseas is worth great sums of money to the special interests in power. Congress ECONOMIC PROBLEMS AHEAD November 13, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 93:7 * Government statistics continue to tell us that price inflation is not a problem, and when an inflation statistic comes out it does not like, it drops out food and energy and claims the number is totally benign. Ask any housewife, and they will tell you that the cost of living is going up steadily and much more rapidly than the government will admit. We in the Congress should be prepared for lower revenues in the future since the revenues received in the last couple of years were artificially created by a stock market that had skyrocketed due to the credit expansion by the Federal Reserve. These capital gains tax revenues will soon disappear. The savings rates of the American people are now negative. Without savings, true capital investment cannot be maintained. Creation of credit out of thin air by the Fed was the original problem, so it surely can’t be the solution. Congress ECONOMIC PROBLEMS AHEAD November 13, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 93:8 * Even in the midst of our great imaginary budgetary surpluses, there has been no effort to cut. Once the economy tends to slow and more problems are apparent, expenditures are going to soar not only because of future problems but because of the new programs recently initiated. A huge financial bubble has been created by the GSEs, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The $33 billion of shareholder equities in these two organizations has been leveraged into $1.07 trillion worth of assets- a bubble waiting to be pricked. The Congress has reacted to all these events irresponsibly by increasing spending, increasing tax revenues, doing nothing to reduce regulations, and being totally apathetic toward the dollar and monetary policy. We in the Congress have a moral and constitutional obligation to protect the value of the dollar and to understand why it is so important to the economy that a central bank not be given the unbelievable power of inflating a currency at will and pretending that it knows how to find tune an economy through this counterfeit system of money. Congress ECONOMIC PROBLEMS AHEAD November 13, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 93:10 * What must we do? We should develop more sensible priorities. We must restore confidence in freedom and recognize how free markets can solve our problems . We must have more respect for the Rule of Law and demand that Congress, the Courts, and the President live within the Rule of Law and stop arbitrarily flaunting the Constitution. If the Constitution is to be changed, it should be changed slowly and deliberately as is permitted, but never by fiat. We must eventually reconsider the notion of the original constitutional Republic as designed by our Founders. The monolithic centralized state was not the design nor is it supported by the Constitution. We were meant to have loose knit individual states, with the states themselves managing their own affairs. Congress FSC Repeal and Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act of 2000 14 November 2000    2000 Ron Paul 94:4 We are now witnessing trade war protectionism being administered by the World (Government) Trade Organization—the WTO. For two years now we have been involved in an ongoing trade war with Europe and this is just one more step in that fight. With this legislation the U.S. Congress capitulates to the demands of the WTO. The actual reason for this legislation is to answer back to the retaliation of the Europeans for having had a ruling against them in favor of the United States on meat and banana products. The WTO obviously spends more time managing trade wars than it does promoting free trade. This type of legislation demonstrates clearly the WTO is in charge of our trade policy. Congress FSC Repeal and Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act of 2000 14 November 2000    2000 Ron Paul 94:16 Congress has also been anxious to block the Voice Stream Communications planned purchase by Deutsche Telekom, a German government-owned phone monopoly. We have not yet heard the last of this international trade fight. Congress FSC Repeal and Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act of 2000 14 November 2000    2000 Ron Paul 94:19 The one group of Americans that seem to get little attention are those importers whose businesses depend on imports and thus get hit by huge tariffs. When 100 to 200 percent tariffs are placed on an imported product, this virtually puts these corporations out of business. The one thing for certain is this process is not free trade; this is international managed trade by an international governmental body. The odds of coming up with fair trade or free trade under WTO are zero. Unfortunately, even in the language most commonly used in the Congress in promoting “free trade” it usually involves not only international government managed trade but subsidies as well, such as those obtained through the Import/Export Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and various other methods such as the Foreign Aid and our military budget. Congress James Madison Commemoration Commission Act 4 December 2000    2000 Ron Paul 96:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the James Madison Commemoration Commission Act secure in the belief that were James Madison on the floor today, he would share my opposition to this bill. Congress has no constitutional authority to use taxpayer funds to promote the life and thought of any individual. Congressional actions exceeding the limitations on congressional power contained in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution undermine the very principles of limited government to which James Madison devoted his life. In fact, few have been as eloquent in pointing out how liberty is threatened when Congress exceeds its enumerated powers: Congress James Madison Commemoration Commission Act 4 December 2000    2000 Ron Paul 96:2 If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.—Letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792 (Madison, 1865, I, page 546) Congress James Madison Commemoration Commission Act 4 December 2000    2000 Ron Paul 96:4 However, the continuing growth of the federal government and Congress’ refusal to abide by its constitutional limits suggest that the people most in need of familiarization with the thought of James Madison are those who would support this bill. Congress James Madison Commemoration Commission Act 4 December 2000    2000 Ron Paul 96:5 Mr. Speaker, S. 3137 exceeds the constitutional limits on Congressional power, and thus violates the principles of limited government upon which our constitutional system was based. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to pay appropriate tribute to James Madison by rejecting this unconstitutional bill. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:1 * Mr. Speaker, more and more people now are talking about an oncoming recession. I tend to agree. I think we are moving into a recession, and for good reasons. But already the question that comes up so often among politicians is, who will get blamed? Will the current President be blamed for the recession or will the next President be blamed? Will the current Congress be blamed for the recession or the next Congress? Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:7 * The problem I see is that Congress for too long has conceded too much of their authority over control of the monetary system to the Federal Reserve system, which acts in secrecy. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:8 * It is something that is directly stated in the Constitution that the Congress shall have the responsibility over the money supply, not a Federal Reserve system. Quite frankly, the Federal Reserve system is not even authorized by the Constitution. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:11 * The reason we should be concerned about this more so than we are is the fact that, when we are in a recession, revenues go crashing down. The inflation that occurred over these past 10 years, which was artificially created, giant revenues from capital gains from this artificially high stock market. Well that is all being reversed now, so revenues are going to go down now, and we will have to deal with this in the next Congress. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:13 * What I think is going to happen is that once the recession sets in and there is a need for additional spending and there will be no longer a concern at all about the deficit; and that is when the Congress will spend, the Federal Reserve will inflate. And it may temporarily help, but in the long-run it does not do the trick. It is not the way we gain economic prosperity out of a printing press. We just cannot allow a Federal Reserve to believe it creates capital by creating credit out of thin air. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:17 * Congress should be prepared for some surprises in the not-to-distance future. A slumping economy or definite recession will obviously lower revenues. This will reverse the illusion of the grand surpluses that everyone has been anxious to spend. Instead of expenditures being held under control, expect them to rise rapidly. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:18 * Many are starting to talk now about a legislative stalemate with no clear majority in the House or Senate and the Presidency being uncertain. This concern about a stalemate is overblown. Not that the problem isn’t serious, but I am certain that under the conditions that we are about to experience, the Congress and the President will be all too willing to deal with the deteriorating conditions with increased spending and with a concerted bi-partisan effort to pressure the Federal Reserve to further inflate the currency in pursuing the fiction that the Federal Reserve can prevent a “hard landing” by merely increasing the money supply in an effort to dictate short-term Fed funds rates. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:19 * Although this will not be the impasse that many anticipate, the actual capitulation by both parties to deal with the oncoming economic slowdown will actually be more harmful than gridlock because Congress will undoubtedly do more harm than good to the economy. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:28 * Congress definitely should be concerned about these matters. Budgetary planning will get more difficult as the revenues spiral downward and spending does the opposite. Interest on the national debt will continue and will rise as interest rates rise. The weak dollar, lower stock markets and inflation can affect every fixed income citizen, especially the Social Security beneficiaries. We can expect the World Trade Organization=s managed trade war will actually get much worse under these conditions. Military conflict is not out of the question under the precarious conditions that are developing. Oil supplies are obviously not secure, as we have already seen the run up of prices to dangerously high levels. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:29 * The question is what should one expect the Federal Reserve Board to eventually do? We can expect it to continue to inflate as they have always chosen with every crisis. There’s no evidence that Alan Greenspan would choose to do anything else regardless of his expression of concern about inflation and the value of the dollar. Greenspan still believes he can control the pain and produce a weakened economy that will not get out of control. But there’s no way that he can guarantee that the United States might not slip into a prolonged lethargy, similar to what Japan is now experiencing. We can be certain that Congress will accommodate with whatever seems to be necessary by bailing out a weakened financial sector. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:31 * We must someday recognize that neither Congress nor the Fed is supposed to “run” the economy. Yet we still live with the belief that the Administration, our Presidents, our Congress and the Federal Reserve should run the economy. This is a dangerous concepts and always leads to the painful corrections to so-called the good times for which everyone is anxious to take credit. Congress ECONOMIC UPDATE December 4, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 97:32 * Congress does have responsibility for maintaining a sound dollar and a free market and not much else. Unfortunately this responsibility that is clearly stated in the Constitution is ignored. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 3, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 1:2 * Mr. Speaker, Congress has a moral responsibility to address this problem as it was Congress which transformed the Social Security number into a national identifier. Thanks to Congress, today no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get a drivers’ license without presenting their Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license! Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 3, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 1:3 * One of the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the congressionally-authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim them as dependents. Forcing parents to register their children with the state is more like something out of the nightmares of George Orwell than the dreams of a free republic which inspired this nation’s founders. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 3, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 1:4 * Congressionally-mandated use of the Social Security number as an identifier facilitates the horrendous crime of identity theft. Thanks to the Congressionally-mandated use of the Social Security number as an uniform identifier, an unscrupulous person may simply obtain someone’s Social Security number in order to access that person’s bank accounts, credit cards, and other financial assets. Many Americans have lost their life savings and had their credit destroyed as a result of identity theft — yet the federal government continues to encourage such crimes by mandating use of the Social Security number as a uniform ID! Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 3, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 1:6 * In addition to forbidding the federal government from creating national identifiers, this legislation forbids the federal government from blackmailing states into adopting uniform standard identifiers by withholding federal funds. One of the most onerous practices of Congress is the use of federal funds illegitimately taken from the American people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 3, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 1:9 * Other members of Congress will claim that the federal government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that in a constitutional republic the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the job of government officials a little bit easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 3, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 1:10 * Mr. Speaker, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure citizens’ rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the only effective privacy protection is to forbid the federal government from mandating national identifiers. Legislative “privacy protections” are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for several reasons. First, it is simply common sense that repealing those federal laws that promote identity theft is more effective in protecting the public than expanding the power of the federal police force. Federal punishment of identity thieves provides cold comfort to those who have suffered financial losses and the destruction of their good reputation as a result of identity theft. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 3, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 1:14 * The primary reason why any action short of the repeal of laws authorizing privacy violations is insufficient is because the federal government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with chains of the Constitution.” Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 3, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 1:15 * Mr. Speaker, those members who are unpersuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Identity Theft Prevention Act should consider the overwhelming opposition of the American people toward national identifiers. The overwhelming public opposition to the various “Know-Your-Customer” schemes, the attempt to turn drivers’ licenses into National ID cards, the Clinton Administration’s Medical Privacy proposal, as well as the numerous complaints over the ever-growing uses of the Social Security number show that American people want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Congress risks provoking a voter backlash if we fail to halt the growth of the surveillance state. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT TAX CUT ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 31, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 2:2 * I need not remind my colleagues that education is one of, if not the, top priority of the American people. After all, many members of Congress have proposed education reforms and a great deal of time is spent debating these proposals. However, most of these proposals either expand federal control over education or engage in the pseudo-federalism of block grants. Many proposals that claim to increase local control over education actually extend federal power by holding schools “accountable” to federal bureaucrats and politicians. Of course, schools should be held accountable for their results, but under the United States Constitution, they should be held accountable to parents and school boards not to federal officials. Therefore, I propose we move in a different direction and embrace true federalism by returning control over the education dollar to the American people. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT TAX CUT ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 31, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 2:5 * Children in some communities may benefit most from the opportunity to attend private, parochial, or other religious schools. One of the most encouraging trends in education has been the establishment of private scholarship programs. These scholarship funds use voluntary contributions to open the doors of quality private schools to low-income children. By providing a tax credit for donations to these programs, Congress can widen the educational opportunities and increase the quality of education for all children. Furthermore, privately-funded scholarships raise none of the concerns of state entanglement raised by publicly-funded vouchers. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE FAMILY EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 31, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 3:4 * Loss of control is a key reason why so many of America’s parents express dissatisfaction with the educational system. According to a study by The Polling Company, over 70% of all Americans support education tax credits! This is just one of numerous studies and public opinion polls showing that Americans want Congress to get the federal bureaucracy out of the schoolroom and give parents more control over their children’s education. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE FAMILY EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 31, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 3:5 * Today, Congress can fulfill the wishes of the American people for greater control over their children’s education by simply allowing parents to keep more of their hard-earned money to spend on education rather than force them to send it to Washington to support education programs reflective only of the values and priorities of Congress and the federal bureaucracy. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE FAMILY EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT — HON. RON PAUL Wednesday, January 31, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 3:9 * Clearly, enactment of the Family Education Freedom Act is the best thing this Congress could do to improve public education. furthermore, a greater reliance on parental expenditures rather than government tax dollars will help make the public schools into true community schools that reflect the wishes of parents and the interests of the students. Congress Introduction Of The Teacher Tax Cut Act 31 January 2001    2001 Ron Paul 4:3 * Since America’s teachers are underpaid because they are overtaxed, the best way to raise teacher take-home pay is to reduce their taxes. Simply by raising teacher’s take-home pay via a $1,000 tax credit we can accomplish a number of important things. First, we show a true commitment to education. We also let America’s teachers know that the American people and the Congress respect their work. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, by raising teacher take-home pay, the Teacher Tax Cut Act encourages highly-qualified professionals to enter, and remain in, the teaching profession. Congress Honoring The Success Of Catholic Schools 6 February 2001    2001 Ron Paul 6:4 Therefore, even though Congress intends to honor the ways Catholic schools help fulfill a secular goal, the fact is Congress cannot honor Catholic schools without endorsing efforts to promulgate the Catholic faith. By singling out one sect over another, Congress is playing favors among religions. While this does not compare to the type of religious persecution experienced by many of the founders of this country, it is still an example of the type of federal favoritism among religions that the first amendment forbids. Congress Honoring The Success Of Catholic Schools 6 February 2001    2001 Ron Paul 6:5 What is the superintendent of a Baptist private school or a Pentecostal home schooler going to think when reading this resolution? That Congress does not think they provide children with an excellent education or that Congress does not deem their religious goals worthy of federal endorsement? In a free republic, the legislature should not be in the business of favoring one religion over another. I would also like to point out the irony of considering government favoritism of religion in the context of praising the Catholic schools, when early in this century Catholic schools where singled out for government-sanctioned discrimination because they were upholding the teachings of the Catholic Church. Congress Honoring The Success Of Catholic Schools 6 February 2001    2001 Ron Paul 6:6 Allowing Congress to single out certain religions for honors not only insults those citizens whose faith is not recognized by Congress, it also threatens the religious liberty of those honored by Congress. This is because when the federal government begins evaluating religious institutions, some religious institutions may be tempted to modify certain of their teachings in order to curry favor with political leaders. I will concede that religious institutions may not water down their faith in order to secure passage of “Sense of Congress resolutions,” however, the belief that it is proper to judge religious institutions by how effectively they fulfill secular objectives is at the root of the proposals to entangle the federal government with state-approved religions by providing taxpayer dollars to religious organizations in order to preform various social services. Providing taxpayer money to churches creates the very real risk that a church may, for example, feel the need to downplay its teaching against abortion or euthanasia in order to maintain favor with a future pro-abortion administration and thus not lose its federal funding. Congress Honoring The Success Of Catholic Schools 6 February 2001    2001 Ron Paul 6:7 Of course, the idea that politicians should bestow favors on religions based on how well they fulfill the aims of the politicians is one that should be insulting to all believers no matter their faith. After all, despite what a few of my colleagues seem to think, Mr. Speaker, we in Congress are neither omnipotent nor divine. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:2 The main question before the new Congress and the Administration is: Are we to have gridlock or cooperation? Today we refer to cooperation as bipartisanship . Some argue that bipartisanship is absolutely necessary for the American democracy to survive. The media never mention a concern for the survival of the Republic. But there are those who argue that left-wing interventionism should give no ground to right-wing interventionism-that too much is at stake. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:3 The media are demanding the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress immediately yield to those insisting on higher taxes and more federal government intervention for the sake of national unity , because our government is neatly split between two concise philosophic views. But if one looks closely, one is more likely to find only a variation of a single system of authoritarianism, in contrast to the rarely mentioned constitutional, non-authoritarian approach to government. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:5 The feared gridlock anticipated for the 107th Congress will differ little from the other legislative battles in recent previous congresses. Yes, there will be heated arguments regarding the size of budgets, local vs. federal control, and private vs. government solutions. But a serious debate over the precise role for government is unlikely to occur. I do not expect any serious challenge to the 20th Century consensus of both major parties-that the federal government has a significant responsibility to deal with education, health care, retirement programs, or managing the distribution of the welfare state benefits. Both parties are in general agreement on monetary management, environmental protection, safety and risks both natural and man-made. Both participate in telling others around the world how they must adopt a democratic process similar to ours, as we police our worldwide financial interests. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:7 The cliche Third Way has been used to define the so-called compromise between the conventional wisdom of the conservative and liberal firebrands. This nice-sounding compromise refers not only to the noisy rhetoric we hear in the US Congress but also in Britain, Germany, and other nations as well. The question, though, remains: Is there really anything new being offered? The demand for bipartisanship is nothing more than a continuation of the Third-Way movement of the last several decades. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:11 In the last session of the Congress, the Majority Party, with bipartisan agreement, increased the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations by 26% over the previous year, nine times the rate of inflation. The Education Department alone received $44 billion, nearly double Clinton’s first educational budget of 1993. The Labor, HHS, and Education appropriation was $34 billion more than the Republican budget had authorized. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:12 Already the spirit of bipartisanship has prompted the new president to request another $10 billion, along with many more mandates on public schools. This is a far cry from the clear constitutional mandate that neither the Congress nor the federal courts have any authority to be involved in public education. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:14 How true bipartisanship works in Washington is best illustrated by the way a number of former Members of Congress make a living after leaving office. They find it quite convenient to associate with other former Members of the opposing party and start a lobbying firm. What might have appeared to be contentious differences when in office are easily put aside to lobby their respected party Members. Essentially no philosophic difference of importance exists-it’s only a matter of degree and favors sought, since both parties must be won over. The differences they might have had while they were voting Members of Congress existed only for the purpose of appealing to their different constituencies, not serious differences of opinion as to what the role of government ought to be. This is the reality of bipartisanship. Sadly our system handsomely rewards those who lobby well and in a bipartisan fashion. Congressional service too often is a training ground or a farm system for the ultimate government service: lobbying Congress for the benefit of powerful and wealthy special interests. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:15 It should be clearly evident, however, that all the campaign finance reforms and lobbying controls conceivable will not help the situation. Limiting the right to petition Congress or restricting people’s right to spend their own money will always fail and is not morally acceptable and misses the point. As long as government has so much to offer, public officials will be tempted to accept the generous offers of support from special interests. Those who can benefit have too much at stake not to be in the business of influencing government. Eliminating the power of government to pass out favors is the only real solution. Short of that, the only other reasonable solution must come by Members’ refusal to be influenced by the pressure that special-interest money can exert. This requires moral restraint by our leaders. Since this has not happened, special-interest favoritism has continued to grow. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:24 As we move into the next Congress, some worry that gridlock will make it impossible to get needed legislation passed. This seems highly unlikely. If big government supporters found ways to enlarge the government in the past, the current evenly split Congress will hardly impede this trend and may even accelerate it. With a recession on the horizon, both sides will be more eager than ever to cooperate on expanding federal spending to stimulate the economy , whether the fictitious budget surplus shrinks or not. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:26 If we are truly taking a more dangerous course, the biggest question is: How long will it be before a major political-economic crisis engulfs our land? That, of course, is not known, and certainly not necessary if we as a people and especially the Congress understand the nature of the crisis and do something to prevent the crisis from undermining our liberties. We should, instead, encourage prosperity by avoiding any international conflict that threatens our safety or wastefully consumes our needed resources. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:27 Congressional leaders have a responsibility to work together for the good of the country. But working together to promote a giant interventionist state dangerous to us all is far different from working together to preserve constitutionally protected liberties. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:46 There’s good reason to believe the Congress and the American people ought to be concerned and start preparing for a slump that could play havoc with our federal budget and the value of the American dollar. Certainly the Congress has a profound responsibility in this area. If we ignore the problems, or continue to endorse the economic myths of past generations, our prosperity will be threatened. But our liberties could be lost, as well, if expanding the government’s role in the economy is pursued as the only solution to the crisis. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:56 No one should be surprised when recessions hit or bewildered as to their cause or danger. The greater surprise should be the endurance of an economy fine-tuned by a manipulative central bank and a compulsively interventionist Congress. But the full payment for all past economic sins may now be required. Let’s hope we can keep the pain and suffering to a minimum. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:74 We must reassess the responsibility Congress has in maintaining a sound monetary system. In the 19th Century, the constitutionality of a central bank was questioned and challenged. Not until 1913 were the advocates of a strong federalist system able to foist a powerful central bank on us, while destroying the gold standard. This banking system, which now serves as the financial arm of Congress, has chosen to pursue massive welfare spending and a foreign policy that has caused us to be at war for much of the 20th Century. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:86 Over the past 50 years, Congress has allowed our presidents to usurp the prerogatives the Constitution explicitly gave only to the Congress. The term foreign policy is never mentioned in the Constitution and it was never intended to be monopolized by the president. Going to war was to be strictly a legislative function, not an Executive one. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:91 We already accept the WTO and its international trade court. Trade wars are fought with this court’s supervision, and we are only too ready to rewrite our tax laws as the WTO dictates. The only portion of the major tax bill at the end of the last Congress to be rushed through for the President’s signature was the Foreign Sales Corporation changes dictated to us by the WTO. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:95 It’s the responsibility of Congress to curtail this trend by reestablishing the principles of the US Constitution and our national sovereignty. It’s time for the United States to give up its membership in all these international organizations. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:107 Selling weapons to both factions of almost all the major conflicts of the past 50 years reveals that our involvement is more about selling weapons than spreading the message of freedom. That message can never be delivered through force to others over their objection. Only a policy of peace, friendship, trade, and our setting a good example can inspire others to look to what once was the American tradition of liberty and justice for all. Entangling alliances won’t do it. It’s time for Congress and the American people to wake up. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:115 The most dramatic change in 20th Century social attitudes was the acceptance of abortion. This resulted from a change in personal morality that then led to legalization nationally through the courts and only occurred by perverting our constitutional system of government. The federal courts should never have been involved, but the Congress compounded the problem by using taxpayer funds to perform abortions both here and overseas. Confrontation between the pro-life and the pro-abortion forces is far from over. If government were used only to preserve life, rather than act as an accomplice in the taking of life, this conflict would not be nearly so rancorous. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:118 We can expect the pro-life and pro-abortion and euthanasia groups to become more vocal and confrontational in time, as long as government is used to commit acts that a large number of people find abhorrent. Partial-birth abortion dramatizes the issue at hand and clearly demonstrates how close we are to legalizing infanticide. This problem should be dealt with by the states and without the federal courts or US Congress involvement. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:123 Mandatory drug sentencing laws have done a great deal of harm by limiting the discretion that judges could use in sentencing victims in the drug war. Congress should repeal or change these laws, just as we found it beneficial to modify seizure and forfeiture laws two years ago. Congress 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. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:138 Welfarism and government interventionism are failed systems and always lead to ever-more intrusive government. The issue of privacy is paramount. Most Americans and Members of Congress recognize the need to protect everyone’s privacy. But the loss of privacy is merely the symptom of an authoritarian government. Effort can and should be made, even under today’s circumstances, to impede the government’s invasion of privacy. Congress CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:143 The time to correct these mistakes is prior to the bad times, before tempers flair. Congress needs to consider a new economic and foreign policy. Congress POTENTIAL FOR WAR February 08, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 10:12 Over the past 50 years, Congress has allowed our Presidents to usurp the prerogatives the Constitution explicitly gave only to the Congress. The term “foreign policy” is never mentioned in the Constitution, and it was never intended to be monopolized by the President. Going to war was to be strictly a legislative function, not an executive one. Operating foreign policy by executive orders and invoking unratified treaties is a slap in the face to the rule of law and our republican form of government. But that is the way it is currently being done. Congress POTENTIAL FOR WAR February 08, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 10:19 The only portion of the major tax bill at the end of the last Congress to be rushed through for the President’s signature was the foreign sales corporation changes dictated to us by the WTO. Congress POTENTIAL FOR WAR February 08, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 10:23 It is the responsibility of Congress to curtail this trend by reestablishing the principles of the U.S. Constitution and our national sovereignty. It is time for the United States to give up its membership in all these international organizations. Congress POTENTIAL FOR WAR February 08, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 10:39 Selling weapons to both factions of almost all the major conflicts of the past 50 years reveals that our involvement is more about selling weapons than spreading the message of freedom. That message can never be delivered through force to others over their objection. Only a policy of peace, friendship, trade, and our setting a good example can inspire others to look to what once was the American tradition of liberty and justice for all. Entangling alliances will not do it. It is time for Congress and the American people to wake up. Congress POTENTIAL FOR WAR February 08, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 10:50 The Federal costs should never have been involved, but the Congress compounded the problem by using taxpayers’ funds to perform abortions both here and overseas. Confrontation between the pro-life and pro-abortion forces is far from over. If governments were used only to preserve life rather than act as an accomplice in the taking of life, this conflict would not nearly be so rancorous. Congress POTENTIAL FOR WAR February 08, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 10:53 We can expect the pro-life and pro-abortion and euthanasia groups to become more vocal and confrontational in time as long as Government is used to commit acts that a large number of people find abhorrent. Partial-birth abortion dramatize the issue at hand and clearly demonstrates how close we are to legalizing infanticide. This problem should be dealt with by the States and without the Federal courts or the U.S. Congress involvement. Congress POTENTIAL FOR WAR February 08, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 10:61 Mandatory drug sentencing have done a great deal of harm by limiting the discretion that judges could use in sentencing victims in this drug war. Congress should repeal or change these laws just as we found it beneficial to modify seizure and for forfeiture laws 2 years ago. The drug laws, I am sure, were never meant to be discriminatory. Yet they are. Congress 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. Congress POTENTIAL FOR WAR February 08, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 10:85 The issue of privacy is paramount. Most Americans and Members of Congress recognize the need to protect everyone’s privacy. But the loss of privacy is merely the symptom of an authoritarian government. Congress POTENTIAL FOR WAR February 08, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 10:90 The time to correct these mistakes is prior to the bad times, before tempers flare. Congress needs to consider a new economic and foreign policy. Congress IDENTITY THEFT — HON. RON PAUL Tuesday, February 13, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 11:2 * Mr. Whalen properly identifies the Social Security number and its use as a universal identifier as the root cause of identity theft. Unfortunately, thanks to Congress, today no American can get a job, open a bank account, or even go fishing without showing their Social Security number. Following the lead of the federal government, many private industries now use the Social Security number as an identifier. After all, if a bank needs to see their customers’ Social Security number to comply with IRS regulations, why shouldn’t the bank use the Social Security number as a general customer identifier? Congress IDENTITY THEFT — HON. RON PAUL Tuesday, February 13, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 11:26 Eliminating the use of Social Security numbers as identifiers by law seems like a logical solution. Texas Rep. Ron Paul has introduced legislation to prohibit the commercial use of Social Security numbers as identifiers, but Congress needs to more thoroughly examine the issue. Congress IDENTITY THEFT — HON. RON PAUL Tuesday, February 13, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 11:27 Even if Social Security did not exist, the financial system would invent another system of universal identification. Congress should place the blame where it belongs, on the lenders and credit bureaus. It should require credit bureaus to obtain written affirmation from consumers prior to accepting a change in the name, address or other details on a credit history. Lenders should be held liable for reporting false information to credit bureaus, especially in cases where false reports lead to acts of financial fraud. Congress IDENTITY THEFT — HON. RON PAUL Tuesday, February 13, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 11:28 Additionally, Congress needs to afford consumers greater protection from asset seizures based solely on Social Security numbers. Congress The Economy February 13, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 13:6 Instead of blind faith in the Federal Reserve to run the economy, we should become more aware of Congress’s responsibility for maintaining a sound dollar and removing the monopoly power of our central bank to create money and credit out of thin air and fix short term interest rates—which is the real cause of all our economic downturns. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:2 * Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I highly recommend the attached article, “Blame Congress for HMOs” by Twila Brase, a registered nurse and President of the Citizens’ Council on Health Care, to my colleagues. Ms. Brase demolishes the myth that Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs), whose power to deny Americans the health care of their choice has been the subject of much concern, are the result of an unregulated free-market. Instead, Ms. Brase reveals how HMOs were fostered on the American people by the federal government for the express purpose of rationing care. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:3 * The story behind the creation of the HMOs is a classic illustration of how the unintended consequences of government policies provide a justification for further expansions of government power. During the early seventies, Congress embraced HMOs in order to address concerns about rapidly escalating health care costs. However, it was Congress which had caused health care costs to spiral by removing control over the health care dollar from consumers and thus eliminating any incentive for consumers to pay attention to costs when selecting health care. Because the consumer had the incentive to control health care cost stripped away, and because politicians where unwilling to either give up power by giving individuals control over their health care or take responsibility for rationing care, a third way to control costs had to be created. Thus, the Nixon Administration, working with advocates of nationalized medicine, crafted legislation providing federal subsidies to HMOs, preempting state laws forbidding physicians to sign contracts to deny care to their patients, and mandating that health plans offer an HMO option in addition to traditional fee-for-service coverage. Federal subsidies, preemption of state law, and mandates on private business hardly sounds like the workings of the free market. Instead, HMOs are the result of the same Nixon-era corporatist, Big Government mindset that produced wage-and-price controls. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:4 * Mr. Speaker, in reading this article, I am sure many of my colleagues will think it ironic that many of the supporters of Nixon’s plan to foist HMOs on the American public are today promoting the so-called “patients’ rights” legislation which attempts to deal with the problem of the HMOs by imposing new federal mandates on the private sector. However, this is not really surprising because both the legislation creating HMOs and the Patients’ Bill of Rights reflect the belief that individuals are incapable of providing for their own health care needs in the free market, and therefore government must control health care. The only real difference between our system of medicine and the Canadian “single payer” system is that in America, Congress contracted out the job of rationing health care resources to the HMOs. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:7 * In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I hope all my colleagues will read this article and take its lesson to heart. Government-managed care, whether of the socialist or corporatist variety, is doomed to failure. Congress must instead restore a true free-market in health care if we are serious about creating conditions under which individuals can receive quality care free of unnecessary interference from third-parties and central planners. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:8 [From the Ideas On Liberty, Feb. 2001] BLAME CONGRESS FOR HMOS (By Twila Brase) Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:9 Only 27 years ago, congressional Republicans and Democrats agreed that American patients should gently but firmly be forced into managed care. That patients do not know this fact is evidenced by public outrage directed at health maintenance organizations (HMOs) instead of Congress. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:10 Although members of Congress have managed to keep the public in the dark by joining in the clamor against HMOs, legislative history puts the responsibility and blame squarely in their collective lap. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:12 Offering “free care” led to predictable results. Because Congress placed no restrictions on benefits and removed all sense of cost-consciousness, health-care use and medical costs skyrocketed. Congressional testimony reveals that between 1969 and 1971, physician fees increased 7 percent and hospital charges jumped 13 percent, while the Consumer Price Index rose only 5.3 percent. The nation’s health-care bill, which was only $39 billion in 1965, increased to $75 billion in 1971. Patients had found the fount of unlimited care, and doctors and hospitals had discovered a pot of gold. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:13 This stampede to the doctor’s office, through the U.S. Treasury, sent Congress into a panic. It had unlocked the health-care appetite of millions, and the results were disastrous. While fiscal prudence demanded a hasty retreat, Congress opted instead for deception. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:14 Limited by a noninterference promise attached to Medicare law — enacted in response to concerns that government health care would permit rationing — Congress and federal officials had to be creative. Although Medicare officials could not deny services outright, they could shift financial risk to doctors and hospitals, thereby influencing decision-making at the bedside. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:15 Beginning in 1971, Congress began to restrict reimbursements. They authorized the economic stabilization program to limit price increases; the Relative Value Resource Based System (RVRBS) to cut physician payments; Diagnostic-Related Groups (DRGs) to limit hospitals payments; and most recently, the Prospective Payment System (PPS) to offer fixed prepayments to hospitals, nursing homes, and home health agencies for anticipated services regardless of costs incurred. In effect, Congress initiated managed care. NATIONAL HEALTH-CARE AGENDA ADVANCES Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:19 In 1972, President Richard M. Nixon heralded his desire for the HMO in a speech to Congress: “the Health Maintenance Organization concept is such a central feature of my National Health Strategy.” The administration had already authorized, without specific legislative authority, $26 million for 110 HMO projects. That same year, the U.S. Senate passed a $5.2 billion bill permitting the establishment of HMOs “to improve the nation’s health-care delivery system by encouraging prepaid comprehensive health-care programs.” Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:20 But what the House of Representatives refused to concur, it was left to the 93rd Congress to pass the HMO Act in 1973. Just before a voice vote passed the bill in the House, Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:25 Congress’s plan to save its members’ political skins and national agendas relied on employer-sponsored coverage and taxpayer subsidies to HMOs. The planners’ long-range goal was to place Medicare and Medicaid recipients into managed care where HMO managers, instead of Congress, could ration care and the government’s financial liability Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:27 Using the HMO Act of 1973, Congress eliminated three major barriers to HMO growth, as clarified by U.S. Representative Claude Pepper of Florida: “First, HMO’s are expensive to start; second, restrictive State laws often make the operation of HMO’s illegal; and, third, HMO’s cannot compete effectively in employer health benefit plans with existing private insurance programs. The third factor occurs because HMO premiums are often greater than those for an insurance plan.” Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:28 To bring the privately insured into HMOs, Congress forced employers with 25 or more employees to offer HMOs as an option — a law that remained in effect until 1995. Congress then provided a total of $373 million in federal subsidies to fund planning and startup expenses, and to lower the cost of HMO premiums. This allowed HMOs to undercut the premium prices of their insurance competitors and gain significant market share. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:31 Once HMOs were filled with the privately insured, Congress moved to add the publicly subsidized. Medicaid Section 1115 waivers allowed states to herd Medicaid recipients into HMOs, and Medicare+Choice was offered to the elderly. By June 1998, over 53 percent of Medicaid recipients were enrolled in managed-care plans, according to HRSA. In addition, about 15 percent of the 39 million Medicare recipients were in HMOs in 2000. HMOS SERVE PUBLIC-HEALTH AGENDA Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:36 Truth be told, HMOs allowed politicians to promise access to comprehensive health-care services without actually delivering them. Because treatment decisions could not be linked directly to Congress, HMOs provided the perfect cover for its plans to contain costs nationwide through health-care rationing. Now that citizens are angry with managed (rationed) care, the responsible parties in Congress, Senator Kennedy in particular, return with legislation ostensibly to protect patients from the HMOs they instituted. Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:37 At worst, such offers are an obfuscation designed to entrench federal control over health care through the HMOs. At best they are deceptive placation. Congress has no desire to eliminate managed care, and federal regulation of HMOs and other managed-care corporations will not protect patients from rationing. Even the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged in its June 12, 2000, Pegram Congress Blame Congress for HMOs February 27, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 15:39 What could be so bad about that? A lot, it seems. Public officials worry privately that patients with power may not choose managed-care plans, eventually destabilizing the HMOs Congress is so dependent on for cost containment and national health-care initiatives. Witness congressional constraints on individually owned, tax-free medical savings accounts and the reluctance to break up employer-sponsored coverage by providing federal tax breaks to individuals. Unless citizens wise up to Congress’s unabashed but unadvertised support for managed care, it appears unlikely that real patient power will rise readily to the top of its agenda. Congress Questions for Secretary of State Colin Powell before the House Committee on International Relations March 8, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 17:3 2 . Since World War II, each of our Presidents have engaged in wars — both big and small, from Korea to the continued bombing of Iraq — without an explicit declaration of war from Congress. Yet, the Constitution clearly vests the decision to go to war (as opposed to its execution by the commander-in chief, once declared), with the Congress. If, however, the “war decision” is allowed to come from Presidential directives or UN resolutions, of what value to the American people is the Constitutional constraint upon a President who would otherwise wage war without Congressional approval? Do you believe the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional? If so, why? If not, why not? Congress Questions for Secretary of State Colin Powell before the House Committee on International Relations March 8, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 17:6 5. Is not the continued bombing of Iraq an act of war? Where does the administration get its authority to pursue this war? Is this policy not in violation of our Constitution that says only Congress can declare war? There is not even a UN resolution calling for the US-British imposed no-fly zone over Iraq. Our allies have almost all deserted us on our policy toward Iraq. Is it not time to talk to the Iraqis? We talked to the Soviets at the height of the Cold War, surely we can do the same with Iraq today. We trade with and subsidize China and we talk to the Iranians, surely we can trade with Iraq . . . ? Congress Questions for Secretary of State Colin Powell before the House Committee on International Relations March 8, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 17:8 7. How would you, the U.S. government, and the American people respond if a foreign power subsidized subversive groups whose goal it was to overthrow our government as we are doing with the Iraqi National Congress? Congress The Beginning of the End of Fiat Money March 13, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 18:1 The golden new Era of the 1990s has been welcomed and praised by many observers. But I’m afraid a different type of new era is arriving-a dangerous one- heralding the end of 30 years of fiat money. If so, it’s a serious matter that deserves close attention by Congress. Congress The Beginning of the End of Fiat Money March 13, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 18:20 However, hope springs eternal, so no effort will soon be made to restore sound money. A giant worldwide slump will merely prompt massive monetary inflation and deficit financing. The Congress and the American people should anticipate this will happen even though it should not. Congress The Medical Privacy Protection Resolution March 15, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 19:1 * Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Medical Privacy Protection Resolution, which uses the Congressional Review Act to repeal the so-called Medical Privacy regulation. Many things in Washington are misnamed, however, this regulation may be the most blatant case of false advertising I have come across in all my years in Congress. Rather than protect an individual right to medical privacy, these regulations empower government officials to determine how much medical privacy an individual “needs.” This “one-size-fits-all” approach ignores the fact that different people may prefer different levels of privacy. Certain individuals may be willing to exchange a great deal of their personal medical information in order to obtain certain benefits, such as lower-priced care or having information targeted to their medical needs sent to them in a timely manner. Others may forgo those benefits in order to limit the number of people who have access to their medical history. Federal bureaucrats cannot possibly know, much less meet, the optimal level of privacy for each individual. In contrast, the free market allows individuals to obtain the level of privacy protection they desire. Congress The Medical Privacy Protection Resolution March 15, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 19:9 * The collection and storage of personal medical information “authorized” by these regulations may also revive an effort to establish a “unique health identifier” for all Americans. The same legislation which authorized these privacy rules also authorized the creation of a “unique health care identifier” for every American. However, Congress, in response to a massive public outcry, has included a moratorium on funds for developing such an identifier in HHS budgets for the last three fiscal years. Congress The Medical Privacy Protection Resolution March 15, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 19:10 * By now it should be clear to every member of Congress that the American people do not want their health information recorded on a database, and they do not wish to be assigned a unique health identifier. According to a survey by the respected Gallup Company, 91 percent of Americans oppose assigning Americans a “unique health care identifier” while 92 percent of the people oppose allowing government agencies the unrestrained power to view private medical records and 88 percent of Americans oppose placing private health care information in a national database. Mr. Speaker, Congress must heed the wishes of the American people and repeal these HHS regulations before they go into effect and become a backdoor means of numbering each American and recording their information in a massive health care database. Congress Congressman Paul’s Statement on Dietary Supplement Regulation and Research March 20, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 21:1 Joint Statement from Congressman Ron Paul and Peter DeFazio (D-OR) submitted to the House Committee on Government Reform: “Six Years After the Enactment of DSHEA: The Status of National and International Dietary Supplement Regulation and Research” Congress Congressman Paul’s Statement on Dietary Supplement Regulation and Research March 20, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 21:3 Over the past decade the American people have made it clear that they do not want the federal government to interfere with their access to dietary supplements. In 1994, Congress responded to the American people’s desire for greater access to the truth about the benefits of dietary supplements by passing the Dietary Supplements and Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), which liberalized the rules regarding the regulation of dietary supplements. Congressional offices received a record number of comments in favor of DSHEA. Congress Congressman Paul’s Statement on Dietary Supplement Regulation and Research March 20, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 21:4 Despite DSHEA, officials of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continued to attempt to enforce regulations aimed at keeping the American public in the dark about the benefits of dietary supplements. However, in the case of Pearson v. Shalala, 154 F.3d 650 (DC Cir. 1999), reh’g denied en banc, 172 F.3d 72 (DC Cir. 1999) , the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit Court reaffirmed consumers’ first amendment right to learn about how using dietary supplements can improve their health without unnecessary interference from the FDA. The FDA has been forced to revise its regulations in order to comply with Pearson. However, members of Congress have had to intervene with the FDA on several occasions to ensure that they followed the court’s order. Clearly Congress must continue to monitor the FDA’s action in this area. Congress Congressman Paul’s Statement on Dietary Supplement Regulation and Research March 20, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 21:6 Codex is the vehicle through which the World Trade Organization (WTO) is working to “harmonize” (e.g. conform) food and safety regulations of WTO member countries. Codex is currently creating a guideline on the proper regulations for dietary supplements with the participation of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). We are concerned that the end result of this process will force the United States to adopt the same strict regulations of dietary supplements common in European countries such as Germany, where consumers’ cannot even examine a bottle of dietary supplements without a pharmacists permission. By participating in this process, the FDA is ignoring the will of Congress as expressed in DSHEA and in the FDA Modernization Act of 1997, which expressly forbid the FDA from participating in the harmonization process, as well as the will of the American people. Congress Congressman Paul’s Statement on Dietary Supplement Regulation and Research March 20, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 21:7 While Codex has no direct authority to force Americans to adopt stringent regulations of dietary supplements, we are concerned that the United States may be forced to adopt Codex standards as a result of the United States’ status as a member of the WTO. According to an August 199 report of the Congressional Research Service, “As a member of the WTO, the United States does commit to act in accordance with the rules of the multilateral body. It [the US] is legally obligated to ensure national laws do not conflict with WTO rules.” Thus, Congress may have a legal obligation to again change American laws and regulations to conform with WTO rules! Congress Congressman Paul’s Statement on Dietary Supplement Regulation and Research March 20, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 21:8 If Congress were to refuse to “harmonize” US laws according to strict Codex/WTO guidelines, a WTO “dispute resolution panel” could find that the United States is engaging in unfair trade because of our failure to “harmonize” our regulations with the rest of the world. In any such trade dispute, the scales are tipped in favor of countries using the Codex standards because of WTO rules presuming that a nation who has adopted Codex has not erected an unfair trade barrier. Therefore, in a dispute with a country that has adopted the Codex standards it is highly probable that America would lose and be subject to heavy sanctions unless Congress harmonized our laws with the other WTO countries. Harmonization may be beneficial for the large corporations and international bureaucrats that control the WTO but it would be a disaster for American consumers of dietary supplements! Congress Congressman Paul’s Statement on Dietary Supplement Regulation and Research March 20, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 21:9 In conclusion, we once again thank Chairman Burton for holding this hearing and for all his efforts to protect the freedom of American dietary supplement customers and for the opportunity to express our concerns regarding the threat to American consumers posed by the WTO and the Codex Alimentarius process. We also express our hope that Congress will act to protect the freedom of American consumers from overregulation of dietary supplements whether imposed by the FDA or through the back door by an international organization such as the WTO. Congress Manipulation Of Interest Rates Cause Economic Problems 20 March 2001    2001 Ron Paul 22:5 We have a responsibility here in the Congress to deal with this. We have a responsibility to maintain the integrity of the money. Yet we up that responsibility to a secretive body that works on its own, deliberating and deciding how much money supply we should have. Congress Free Trade April 24, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 24:2 * Professor Lemieux seems to grasp quite well what few in Congress have come to understand — that is, “The primary rationale for free trade is not that exporters should gain larger markets, but that consumers should have more choice — even if the former is a consequence of the latter.” Mr. Lemieux went on to point out that the leaders of the 34 participating states in the recent Quebec summit “are much keener on managed trade than on free trade and more interested in income redistribution and regulation than in the rooting out of trade restrictions.” Congress A New China Policy April 25, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 25:9 It is clear that war can only be declared by a Congress currently in office. Declaring war cannot be circumvented by a treaty or agreement committing us to war at some future date. If a previous treaty can commit future generations to war, the House of Representatives, the body closest to the people, would never have a say in the most important issue of declaring war. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE AGRICULTURE EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT — HON. RON PAUL April 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 27:1 * Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Agriculture Education Freedom Act. This bill addresses a great injustice being perpetrated by the Federal Government on those youngsters who participate in programs such as 4-H or the Future Farmers of America. Under current tax law, children are forced to pay federal income tax when they sell livestock they have raised as part of an agricultural education program. Think about this for a moment. These kids are trying to better themselves, earn some money, save some money and what does Congress do? We pick on these kids by taxing them. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE AGRICULTURE EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT — HON. RON PAUL April 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 27:2 * It is truly amazing that with all the hand-wringing in Congress over the alleged need to further restrict liberty and grow the size of government “for the children” we would continue to tax young people who are trying to lead responsible lives and prepare for the future. Even if the serious social problems today’s youth face could be solved by new federal bureaucracies and programs, it is still unfair to pick on those kids who are trying to do the right thing. Congress Repeal of the Selective Service Act April 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 28:2 * Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am today introducing legislation to repeal the Selective Service Act and related parts of the US Code. Also, I am placing the attached article from the Taipei Times in today’s CONGRESSIONAL RECORD . I fear that this source is not widely read among many in this body or our nation, so I am hopeful this action will serve to bring this letter to a much wider audience. The person who writes this letter is a law student in Taiwan. His arguments against conscription are similar to those offered by people in the United States who oppose the draft. The student argues that conscription is a violation of civil liberties, a costly and ineffective system that harms society and the economy as well as the rights of the individual conscripted, and a system that harms national defense rather than helping it. While we do not currently have conscription in the US we do have draft registration and each argument against the draft is equally applicable to our current selective service system and the registration requirement. I urge my colleagues to seriously consider the arguments against conscription raised in this article and cosponsor my legislation to repeal the Selective Service Act. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 April 2001    2001 Ron Paul 29:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, while it is the independent duty of each branch of the Federal Government to act Constitutionally, Congress will likely continue to ignore not only its Constitutional limits but earlier criticisms from Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as well. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 April 2001    2001 Ron Paul 29:3 Of course, it is much easier to ride the current wave of federalizing every human misdeed in the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a Constitutional oath which prescribes a procedural structure by which the nation is protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism. Who, after all, wants to be amongst those members of Congress who are portrayed as soft on violent crimes initiated against the unborn? Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 April 2001    2001 Ron Paul 29:4 Nevertheless, our Federal Government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers. Article one, section eight, enumerates the legislative areas for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every other issue, the Federal Government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the State governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The tenth amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our Nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 April 2001    2001 Ron Paul 29:5 However, Congress does more damage than just expanding the class to whom Federal murder and assault statutes apply — it further entrenches and seemingly concurs with the Roe v. Wade decision (the Court’s intrusion into rights of States and their previous attempts to protect by criminal statute the unborn’s right not to be aggressed against). By specifically exempting from prosecution both abortionists and the mothers of the unborn (as is the case with this legislation), Congress appears to say that protection of the unborn child is not only a Federal matter but conditioned upon motive. In fact, the Judiciary Committee in marking up the bill, took an odd legal turn by making the assault on the unborn a strict liability offense insofar as the bill does not even require knowledge on the part of the aggressor that the unborn child exists. Murder statutes and common law murder require intent to kill (which implies knowledge) on the part of the aggressor. Here, however, we have the odd legal philosophy that an abortionist with full knowledge of his terminal act is not subject to prosecution while an aggressor acting without knowledge of the child’s existence is subject to nearly the full penalty of the law. (With respect to only the fetus, the bill exempts the murderer from the death sentence — yet another diminution of the unborn’s personhood status and clearly a violation of the equal protection clause.) It is becoming more and more difficult for congress and the courts to pass the smell test as government simultaneously treats the unborn as a person in some instances and as a non-person in others. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 April 2001    2001 Ron Paul 29:6 In his first formal complaint to Congress on behalf of the federal Judiciary, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist said “the trend to federalize crimes that have traditionally been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our Federal system.” Rehnquist further criticized Congress for yielding to the political pressure to “appear responsive to every highly publicized societal ill or sensational crime.” Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 April 2001    2001 Ron Paul 29:8 Occasionally the argument is put forth that States may be less effective than a centralized Federal Government in dealing with those who leave one State jurisdiction for another. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of State sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit clause allow States to exact judgments from those who violate their State laws. The Constitution even allows the Federal Government to legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow States to enforce their substantive laws without the Federal Government imposing its substantive edicts on the States. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one State to another. While not self-enacting, in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. There is, of course, a cost imposed upon States in working with one another rather than relying on a national, unified police force. At the same time, there is a greater cost to centralization of police power. Congress AMERICA NOT GETTING FAIR SHAKE FROM UNITED NATIONS — May 10, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 31:6 Essentially since World War II, we have gone to war under U.N. resolutions. No longer does the President come to the Congress and ask for a declaration of war. U.N. resolutions are passed, and we send our troops throughout the world fighting and being engaged in war. That is not the way it is supposed to be. The Constitution is very clear on when we should be involved in war. Congress H.R. 1646 10 May 2001    2001 Ron Paul 32:4 I do think there are some serious things that we must consider. One is the issue of national sovereignty. To support H.R. 1646, one has to vote to give up some of our national sovereignty to the United Nations. There is $844 million for peacekeeping missions. We know now that we live in an age when we go to war not by declaration of the U.S. Congress but we go to war under U.N. resolutions. When we vote for this bill, and if this bill is supported, that concept of giving up our sovereignty and going to war under U.N. resolutions is supported. Congress International Criminal Court 10 May 2001    2001 Ron Paul 33:7 Today’s amendment, rather than be silent as is currently the case with the bill, supposes that ratification would subject U.S. citizens to the ICC but the Supreme Court stated in Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416, 433 (1920), Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), and DeGeofrey v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258, 267 (1890) that the United States Government may not enter into a treaty that contravenes prohibitory words in the United States Constitution because the treaty power does not authorize what the Constitution forbids. Approval of the International Criminal Court Treaty is in fundamental conflict with the constitutional oaths of the President and Senators, because the United States Constitution clearly provides that “[a]ll legislative powers shall be vested in a Congress of the United States,” and vested powers cannot be transferred. Congress Protecting Privacy and Preventing Misuse of Social Security Numbers May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 37:2 The responsibility for the misuse of the Social Security number and the corresponding vulnerability of the American people to identity crimes lies squarely with the Congress. Since the creation of the Social Security number, Congress has authorized over 40 uses of the Social Security number. Thanks to Congress, today no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get a drivers’ license without presenting their Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license! Congress Protecting Privacy and Preventing Misuse of Social Security Numbers May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 37:3 Because it was Congress which transformed the Social Security number into a national identifier, Congress has a moral responsibility to address this problem. In order to protect the American people from government-mandated uniform identifiers which facilitate identity crimes, I have introduced the Identity Theft Prevention Act (HR 220). The major provision of the Identity Theft Prevention Act halts the practice of using the Social Security number as an identifier by requiring the Social Security Administration to issue all Americans new Social Security numbers within five years after the enactment of the bill. These new numbers will be the sole legal property of the recipient and the Social Security Administration shall be forbidden to divulge the numbers for any purposes not related to the Social Security program. Social Security numbers issued before implementation of this bill shall no longer be considered valid federal identifiers. Of course, the Social Security Administration shall be able to use an individual’s original Social Security number to ensure efficient transition of the Social Security system. Congress Protecting Privacy and Preventing Misuse of Social Security Numbers May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 37:5 In addition to forbidding the federal government from creating national identifiers, this legislation forbids the federal government from blackmailing states into adopting uniform standard identifiers by withholding federal funds. One of the most onerous practices of Congress is the use of federal funds illegitimately taken from the American people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates. Congress Protecting Privacy and Preventing Misuse of Social Security Numbers May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 37:7 Other members of Congress will claim that the federal government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that in a constitutional republic the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the job of government officials a little bit easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient. Congress Protecting Privacy and Preventing Misuse of Social Security Numbers May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 37:8 Mr. Chairman, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure citizens’ rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the only effective privacy protection is to forbid the federal government from mandating national identifiers. Legislative “privacy protections” are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for several reasons. First, it is simply common sense that repealing those federal laws that promote identity theft is a more effective in protecting the public than expanding the power of the federal police force. Federal punishment of identity thieves provides old comfort to those who have suffered financial losses and the destruction of their good reputation as a result of identity theft. Congress Protecting Privacy and Preventing Misuse of Social Security Numbers May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 37:10 The primary reason why any action short of the repeal of laws authorizing privacy violation is insufficient is because the federal government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress Protecting Privacy and Preventing Misuse of Social Security Numbers May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 37:11 Mr. Chairman, those members who are unpersuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Identity Theft Prevention Act should consider the overwhelming opposition of the American people toward national identifiers. The overwhelming public opposition to the various “Know-Your-Customer” schemes, the attempt to turn drivers’ licenses into National ID cards, HHS’s misnamed “medical privacy” proposal, as well as the numerous complaints over the ever-growing uses of the Social Security number show that American people want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Congress risks provoking a voter backlash if we fail to halt the growth of the surveillance state. Congress Protecting Privacy and Preventing Misuse of Social Security Numbers May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 37:12 In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I once again thank you and the other members of the subcommittee for holding a hearing on this important issue. I hope this hearing would lead to serious Congressional action to end to the federal government’s unconstitutional use of national identifiers which facilitate identity theft by passing Hr 220, the Identify Theft Prevention Act. Congress Statement on the Congressional Education Plan May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 38:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, thirty-six years ago Congress blatantly disregarded all constitutional limitations on its power over K-12 education by passing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). This act of massive federal involvement in education was sold to the American people with promises that federal bureaucrats had it within their power to usher in a golden age of education. Yet, instead of the promised nirvana, federal control over education contributed to a decline in education quality. Congress has periodically responded to the American people’s concerns over education by embracing education “reforms,” which it promises are the silver bullet to fixing American schools. “Trust us,” proponents of new federal edcation programs say, we have learned from the mistakes of the past and all we need are a few billion more dollars and some new federal programs and we will produce the educational utopia in which “all children are above average.” Of course, those reforms only result in increasing the education bureaucracy, reducing parental control, increasing federal expenditures, continuing decline in education and an inevitable round of new “reforms.” Congress Statement on the Congressional Education Plan May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 38:2 Congress is now considering whether to continue this cycle by passing the national five-year plan contained in H.R. 1, the so-called “No Child Left Behind Act.” A better title for this bill is “No Bureaucrat Left Behind” because, even though it’s proponents claim H.R. 1 restores power over education to states and local communities, this bill represents a massive increase in federal control over education. H.R. 1 contains the word “ensure” 150 times, “require” 477 times, “shall” 1,537 and “shall not” 123 times. These words are usually used to signify federal orders to states and localities. Only in a town where a decrease in the rate of spending increases is considered a cut could a bill laden with federal mandates be considered an increase in local control! Congress Statement on the Congressional Education Plan May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 38:4 Some will claim that this does not violate states’ control because states are free to not accept federal funds. However, every member here knows that it is the rare state administrator who will decline federal funds to avoid compliance with federal mandates. It is time Congress stopped trying to circumvent the constitutional limitations on its authority by using the people’s own money to bribe them into complying with unconstitutional federal dictates. Congress Statement on the Congressional Education Plan May 22, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 38:6 teachers of having to prepare for two different tests. Furthermore, states will feel pressure from employers, colleges, and perhaps even future Congresses to conform their standards with other national tests “for the children’s sake.” After all, what state superintendent wants his state’s top students denied admission to the top colleges, or the best jobs, or even student loans, because their state’s test is considered inferior to the “assessments” used by the other 49 states? Congress Sudan Peace Act 13 June 2001    2001 Ron Paul 40:7 Mr. Chairman, with HR 2052, the Sudan Peace Act, we embark upon another episode of interventionism, in continuing our illegitimate and ill-advised mission to “police” the world. It seemingly matters little to this body that it proceeds neither with any constitutional authority nor with the blessings of such historical figures such as Jefferson who, in his first inaugural address, argued for “Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none.” Unfortunately, this is not the only bit of history which seemingly is lost on this Congress. Congress Sudan Peace Act 13 June 2001    2001 Ron Paul 40:8 Apparently, it is also lost on this Congress that the Constitution was a grant of limited power to the federal government from the citizens or, in other words, the Constitution was not designed to allow the government to restrain the people, but to allow the people to restrain the government. Of course, the customary lip service is given to the Constitution insofar as the committee report for this bill follows the rule of citing Constitutional authority and cites Art. I, Section 8, which is where one might look to find a specific enumerated power. However, the report cites only clause 18 which begs some further citation. While Clause 18 contains the “necessary and proper” clause, it limits Congress to enacting laws “necessary and proper” to some more specifically (i.e. foregoing) enumerated power. Naturally, no such “foregoing” authority is cited by the advocates of this bill. Congress Sudan Peace Act 13 June 2001    2001 Ron Paul 40:10 The legislative “tools” to be used to “facilitate” this aforementioned “comprehensive solution” are as frightening as the nation-building tactics. For example, “It is the sense of the Congress that . . . the United Nations should be used as a tool to facilitate peace and recovery in Sudan.” Congress Sudan Peace Act 13 June 2001    2001 Ron Paul 40:12 The bill does not stop there, however, in intervening in the civil war in Sudan. It appears that this Congress has found a new mission for the Securities and Exchange Commission who are now tasked with investigating “the nature and extent of . . . commercial activity in Sudan” as it relates to “any violations of religious freedom and human rights in Sudan.” It seems we have finally found a way to spend those excessive fees the SEC has been collecting from mutual fund investors despite the fact we cannot seem to bring to the floor a bill to actually reduce those fees which have been collected in multiples above what is necessary to fund this agencies’ previous (and again unconstitutional) mission. Congress Conscription Policies 13 June 2001    2001 Ron Paul 42:4 TURNING EIGHTEEN IN AMERICA: THOUGHTS ON CONSCRIPTION (By Michael R. Allen) In March of 1967, Senator Mark Hatfield (R–Oregon) proposed legislation that would abolish the practice of military conscription, or the drafting of men who are between 18 and 35 years old. Despite its initial failure, it has been reintroduced in nearly every Congress that has met since then, and has been voted upon as an amendment at least once. Congress Faith Based Initiatives June 13, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 43:3 * If religious organizations receive taxpayer monies, they will have an incentive to make obedience to the dictates of federal bureaucrats their number-one priority. Religious entities may even change the religious character of their programs in order to avoid displeasing their new federal paymaster. This will occur in large part because people who currently voluntarily support religious organizations will assume they “gave at the (tax) office” and thus will reduce their level of private giving. Thus, religious charities will become increasingly dependent on federal funds for support. Since “he who pays the piper calls the tune” federal bureaucrats and Congress will then control the content of “faith-based” programs. Congress Faith Based Initiatives June 13, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 43:5 * Miss Parker points out that the founding fathers recognized the danger that church-state entanglement poses to religious liberty, which is why the First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the free exercise of religion and forbids the federal government from establishing a national church. As Miss Parker points out, the most effective and constitutional means for Congress to help those in poverty is to cut taxes on the American people so that they may devote more of their resources to effective, locally-controlled, charitable programs. Congress INTRODUCTION OF FOODS ARE NOT DRUGS ACT — HON. RON PAUL June 21, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 46:5 * The FDA is so fanatical about censoring truthful information regarding dietary supplements it even defies federal courts! For example, in the case of Pearson v. Shalala, 154 F.3d 650 (DC Cir. 1999), rehg denied en banc, 172 F.3d 72 (DC Cir. 1999), the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit Court ruled that the FDA violated consumers’ first amendment rights by denying certain health claims. However, the FDA has dragged its feet for over two years in complying with the Pearson decision while wasting taxpayer money on frivolous appeals. It is clear that even after Pearson the FDA will continue to deny legitimate health claims and force dietary supplement manufacturers to waste money on litigation unless Congress acts to rein in this rogue agency. Congress INTRODUCTION OF FOODS ARE NOT DRUGS ACT — HON. RON PAUL June 21, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 46:6 * Allowing American consumers access to information about the benefits of foods and dietary supplements will help America’s consumers improve their health. However, this bill is about more than physical health, it is about freedom. The first amendment forbids Congress from abridging freedom of all speech, including commercial speech. Congress “Postal Service Has Its Eye On You” 27 June 2001    2001 Ron Paul 47:17 It also was the Bank Secrecy Act that opened the door for the “Know Your Customer” rules on banks, to which congressional leaders objected as a threat to privacy. Lawrence Lindsey, now head of the Bush administration’s National Economic Council, frequently has pointed out that more than 100,000 reports are collected on innocent bank customers for every one conviction of money laundering. “That ratio of 99,999-to-1 is something we normally would not tolerate as a reasonable balance between privacy and the collection of guilty verdicts,” Lindsey wrote in a chapter of the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s book The Future of Financial Privacy, published last year. Congress INTRODUCTION OF EDUCATION BILLS -- HON. RON PAUL June 28, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 49:3 * My other bill, the “Professional Educators Tax Relief Act” provides a thousand dollar per year tax credit to all professional educators, including librarians, counselors, and others involved in implementing or formulating the curriculum. This bill helps equalize the pay gap between educators and other professionals, thus ensuring that quality people will continue to seek out careers in education. Good teaching is the key to a good education, so it is important that Congress raise the salaries of educators by cutting their taxes. Congress Re-Importation of Pharmaceuticals 11 July 2001    2001 Ron Paul 50:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Vermont. As I am sure I need not remind my colleagues, many Americans are concerned about the high prices of prescription drugs. The high prices of prescription drugs particularly effect low-income senior citizens since many seniors have a greater than-average need for prescription drugs. One of the reasons prescription drug prices are high is because of government policies which give a few powerful companies a monopoly position in the prescription drug market. One of the most egregious of those policies are those restricting the importation of quality pharmaceuticals. If members of Congress are serious about lowering prescription drug prices they should support this amendment. Congress REIMPORTATION OF FDA-APPROVED PHARMACEUTICALS -- HON. RON PAUL July 17, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 51:2 * I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I supported these amendments. As my colleagues are aware, many Americans are concerned about the high cost of prescription drugs. These high prices particularly affect low-income senior citizens because many seniors have a greater than average need for prescription drugs and lower than average income. One of the reasons prescription drug prices are high is government policies which give a few powerful companies a monopoly position in the prescription drug market, such as those restricting the importation of quality pharmaceuticals. Therefore, all members of Congress who are serious about lowering prescription drug prices should have supported these amendments. Congress Flag Burning Amendment 17 July 2001    2001 Ron Paul 53:10 The first amendment, we must remember, is not there to protect noncontroversial speech. It is to do exactly the opposite. So, therefore, if you are looking for controversy protection it is found in the first amendment. But let me just look at the words of the amendment. Congress, more power to the Congress. Congress will get power, not the States. That is the opposite of everything we believe in or at least profess to believe in on this side of the aisle. Congress Flag Burning Amendment 17 July 2001    2001 Ron Paul 53:16 Since then Congress has twice tried to overturn more than 213 years of history and legal tradition by making flag desecration a federal crime. Just as surely as the Court was wrong in its disregard for the Tenth Amendment by improperly assigning the restrictions of the First Amendment to the states, so are attempts to federally restrict the odious (and very rare) practice of Americans desecrating the flag. Congress Flag Burning Amendment 17 July 2001    2001 Ron Paul 53:17 After all, the First Amendment clearly states that it is Congress that may “make no laws” and is prohibited from “abridging” the freedom of speech and expression. While some may not like it, under our Constitution state governments are free to restrict speech, expression, the press and even religious activities. The states are restrained, in our federal system, by their own constitutions and electorate. Congress Flag Burning Amendment 17 July 2001    2001 Ron Paul 53:20 Our nation would be far better served that if instead of loyalty to an object — what Mr. Kruel calls the “golden calf” — we had more Members of Congress who were loyal to the Constitution and principles of liberty. If more people demonstrated a strong conviction to the Tenth Amendment, rather than creating even more federal powers, this issue would be far better handled. Congress STATEMENT FOR WE THE PEOPLE PRESS CONFERENCE July 17, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 54:1 My office has received hundreds of phone calls, faxes, emails, and letters supporting Mr. Schulz and Mr. Croteau. I think they are sincere in their beliefs, even though I strongly disagree with their hunger strike. I believe we can work with the IRS, the administration, and Congress to get answers to their questions, and I know that Congressman Bartlett and I are willing to assist them in their efforts. However, it is imperative that these gentleman end their fast immediately. No cause is served by their needless suffering. Congress STATEMENT FOR WE THE PEOPLE PRESS CONFERENCE July 17, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 54:3 The attention generated by Mr Schulz and his organization shows that many Americans are fed up with the tax system. It’s an outrage that most tax professionals, much less typical taxpayers, cannot understand the incredibly complex tax code. It’s an outrage that so many have had their lives destroyed by the IRS. One thing is clear: The Founding Fathers never intended a nation where citizens pay nearly half of everything they earn to government. Congress needs to address the tax mess legislatively, by drastically simplifying and drastically reducing taxes. My own legislation would repeal the 16th Amendment and put an end to individual income taxes. Congress Banning U.S. Contributions To United Nations 18 July 2001    2001 Ron Paul 57:10 It is out of control. It is out of our hands. We have lost control of our destiny when it comes to military operations. We now go to war under U.N. resolutions, rather than this Congress declaring war and fighting wars to win. Congress Statement on the Community Solutions Act of 2001 July 19, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 60:2 Providing federal funds to religious organizations gives the organizations an incentive to make obedience to federal bureaucrats their number-one priority. Religious entities may even change the religious character of their programs in order to please their new federal paymaster. Faith-based organizations may find federal funding diminishes their private support as people who currently voluntarily support religious organizations assume they “gave at the (tax) office” and will thus reduce their levels of private giving. Thus, religious organizations will become increasingly dependent on federal funds for support. Since “he who pays the piper calls the tune” federal bureaucrats and Congress will then control the content of “faith-based” programs. Congress Statement on the Community Solutions Act of 2001 July 19, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 60:4 H.R. 7 also imposes new paperwork and audit requirements on religious organizations, thus diverting resources away from fulfilling the charitable mission. Supporters of HR 7 point out that any organization that finds the conditions imposed by the federal government too onerous does not have to accept federal grants. It is true no charity has to accept federal grants. It is true no charity has to accept federal funds, but a significant number will accept federal funds in exchange for federal restrictions on their programs, especially since the restrictions will appear “reasonable” during the program’s first few years. Of course, history shows that Congress and the federal bureaucracy cannot resist imposing new mandates on recipients of federal money. For example, since the passage of the Higher Education Act the federal government has gradually assumed control over almost every aspect of campus life. Congress Statement on the Community Solutions Act of 2001 July 19, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 60:11 The primary issue both sides of this debate are avoiding is the constitutionality of the welfare state. Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government given the power to level excessive taxes on one group of citizens for the benefit of another group of citizens. Many of the founders would have been horrified to see modern politicians define compassion as giving away other people’s money stolen through confiscatory taxation. After all, the words of the famous essay by former Congressman Davy Crockett, that money is “Not Yours to Give.” Congress Statement on the Community Solutions Act of 2001 July 19, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 60:12 Instead of expanding the unconstitutional welfare state, Congress should focus on returning control over welfare to the American people. As Marvin Olaksy, the “godfather of compassionate conservatism,” and others have amply documented, before they were crowded out by federal programs, private charities did an exemplary job at providing necessary assistance to those in need. These charities not only met the material needs of those in poverty but helped break many of the bad habits, such as alcoholism, taught them “marketable” skills or otherwise engaged them in productive activity, and helped them move up the economic ladder. Congress Statement on the Community Solutions Act of 2001 July 19, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 60:13 Therefore, it is clear that instead of expanding the unconstitutional welfare state, Congress should return control over charitable giving to the American people by reducing the tax burden. This is why I strongly support the tax cut provisions of H.R. 7, and would enthusiastically support them if they were brought before the House as a stand alone bill. I also proposed a substitute amendment which would have given every taxpayer in America a $5,000 tax credit for contributions to social services organizations which serve lower-income people. Allowing people to use more of their own money promotes effective charity by ensuring that charities remain true to their core mission. After all, individual donors will likely limit their support to those groups with a proven track record of helping the poor, whereas government agencies may support organizations more effective at complying with federal regulations or acquiring political influence than actually serving the needy. Congress Export-Import Bank 24 July 2001    2001 Ron Paul 61:5 Free trade means there are low tariffs, but we do not subsidize any special interests. To me it is rather amazing, the paragraph that we are dealing with is called Subsidy Authorization. There is no pretension anymore. We just advertise, this as a subsidies. When did we get into the business of subsidies? A long time ago, unfortunately. I do not think that the Congress should be in the business of subsidies. Congress Export-Import Bank 24 July 2001    2001 Ron Paul 61:11 Those who do not like China should vote for this because there is a suggestion that the Export-Import Bank serves the interest of China. So to me it should be an easy vote. The only problem with this amendment is that it is so small. It does not really address the big subject on whether or not the Congress should be in this business. Obviously they should not be. Where do you find the authorization to give subsidy appropriations in the Constitution? It is not there. Congress Export-Import Bank Amendment 24 July 2001    2001 Ron Paul 62:2 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, my amendment strikes the paragraph on page 2, line 21 entitled “subsidy appropriation.” I do not believe this Congress should be in the business of subsidizing anyone. We should be protecting the American taxpayer, and we should be protecting the individual liberty of all American citizens, not dealing in subsidies. Congress Export-Import Bank Amendment 24 July 2001    2001 Ron Paul 62:10 If we oppose corporate welfare and think we ought to address it on principle and decide whether or not the Congress and the U.S. Government and the taxpayers should be in this type of business, we have to vote for my amendment to get us out of this business. This does not serve the interests of the general welfare of the people. This is antagonistic toward the general welfare of the people. It costs the taxpayers money, it puts the risk on the taxpayer, it serves the interests of the powerful special interests. Why else would they come with their lobbying funds? Why else would they come with their huge donations to the political action committees, unless it is a darn good deal for them? Congress THE PATIENT PRIVACY ACT -- HON. RON PAUL July 24, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 65:3 * When the scheme to assign every American a unique medical identifier became public knowledge in 1998, their was a tremendous outcry from the public. Congress responded to the public outrage by including language forbidding the expenditure of funds to implement or develop a medical identifier in the federal budget for the past three fiscal years. Last year my amendment prohibiting the use of funds to develop or implement a medical ID unanimously passed the House of Representatives. Congress THE PATIENT PRIVACY ACT -- HON. RON PAUL July 24, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 65:4 * It should be clear to every member of Congress that the American public does not want a uniform medical identifier. Therefore, rather than continuing to extend the prohibition on funding for another year, Congress should simply repeal the authorization of the national medical ID this year. Congress THE PATIENT PRIVACY ACT -- HON. RON PAUL July 24, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 65:9 * The second, and most important reason, legislation “protecting” the unique health identifier is insufficient is that the federal government lacks any constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal health identifier, or force citizens to divulge their personal health information to the government, regardless of any attached “privacy protections.” Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty as it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate arbitrator of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for congress and the American people to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the constitution.” Congress LIFT THE UNITED STATES EMBARGO ON CUBA — HON. RON PAUL July 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 66:2 * Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, encouraged in part by a recent resolution passed by the Texas State Legislature, I rise again this Congress to introduce my bill to lift the United States Embargo on Cuba. Congress LIFT THE UNITED STATES EMBARGO ON CUBA — HON. RON PAUL July 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 66:4 * “We have a lot of rice and agricultural products, as well as high-tech products, that would be much cheaper for Cuba to purchase from Texas. All that could come through the ports of Houston and Corpus Christi.” I wholeheartedly support this resolution, and I have introduced similar federal legislation in past years to lift all trade, travel, and telecommunications restrictions with Cuba. I only wish Congress understood the simple wisdom expressed in Austin, so that we could end the harmful and ineffective trade sanctions that serve no national purpose. Congress LIFT THE UNITED STATES EMBARGO ON CUBA — HON. RON PAUL July 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 66:6 * Second, sanctions simply hurt American industries, particularly agriculture. Every market we close to our nation’s farmers is a market exploited by foreign farmers. China, Russia, the middle east, North Korea, and Cuba all represent huge markets for our farm products, yet many in Congress favor current or proposed trade restrictions that prevent our farmers from selling to the billions of people in these ares. The department of Agriculture estimates that Iraq alone represents a $1 billion market for American farm goods. Given our status as one of the world’s largest agricultural producers, why would we ever choose to restrict our exports? The only beneficiaries of our sanctions policies are our foreign competitors. Congress LIFT THE UNITED STATES EMBARGO ON CUBA — HON. RON PAUL July 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 66:7 * Still, support for sanctions continues in Congress. The House International Relations committee last week considered legislation that will extend existing economic sanctions against Iran and Libya for another 5 years. While I certainly oppose this legislation, I did agree with the Congress LIFT THE UNITED STATES EMBARGO ON CUBA — HON. RON PAUL July 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 66:8 * I certainly understand the emotional feelings many Americans have toward nations such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Cuba. Yet we must not let our emotions overwhelm our judgment in foreign policy matters, because ultimately human lives are at stake. For example, 10 years of trade sanctions against Iraq, not to mention aggressive air patrols and even bombings, have not ended Saddam Hussein’s rule. If anything, the political situation has worsened, while the threat to Kuwait remains. The sanctions have, however, created suffering due to critical shortages of food and medicine among the mostly poor inhabitants of Iraq. So while the economic benefits of trade are an important argument against sanctions, we must also consider the humanitarian argument. Our sanctions policies undermine America’s position as a humane nation, bolstering the common criticism that we are a bully with no respect for people outside our borders. Economic common sense, self-interested foreign policy goals, and humanitarian ideals all point to the same conclusion: Congress should work to end economic sanctions against all nations immediately. Congress LIFT THE UNITED STATES EMBARGO ON CUBA — HON. RON PAUL July 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 66:10 * I submit for inclusion in the record, a copy of the Sense of Congress Resolution passed in Austin in late June. Congress A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE ON THE LIFE OF FREDERIC BASTIAT -- HON. RON PAUL July 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 67:4 * Bastiat understood well what few in Congress have come to grasp--that it is absurd to favor producers over consumers and sellers over buyers. This is because producers and sellers benefit from scarcity and high prices while consumers benefit from abundance and low prices. As a consequence, when government policies favor producers, the citizens of the United States are faced with scarcity and unnecessarily high prices. In essence, the economic pie is made smaller for all. Congress A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE ON THE LIFE OF FREDERIC BASTIAT -- HON. RON PAUL July 26, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 67:5 * As members of Congress we should note, as Bastiat did, that because we have limited resources and unlimited wants, it is unwise to create inefficiencies for the purpose of creating or protecting jobs. As Mr. McTeer writes, “Progress comes from reducing the work needed to produce, not increasing it.” Congress Stem Cell Research and Human Cloning July 31, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 68:9 The notion that one person, i.e., the President, by issuing a Presidential order can instantly stop or start major research is frightening. Likewise, the U.S. Congress is no more likely to do the right thing than the President by rushing to pass a new federal law. Congress Stem Cell Research and Human Cloning July 31, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 68:23 What can be done? The first step Congress should take is to stop all funding of research for cloning and other controversial issues. Obviously all research in a free society should be done privately, thus preventing this type of problem. If this policy were to be followed, instead of less funding being available for research, there would actually be more. Congress Stem Cell Research and Human Cloning July 31, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 68:24 Second, the President should issue no Executive Order because under the Constitution he does not have the authority either to promote or stop any particular research nor does the Congress. And third, there should be no sacrifice of life. Local law officials are responsible for protecting life or should not participate in its destruction. Congress LEGISLATION WHICH ENHANCES SENIOR CITIZENS’ HEALTH CARE -- HON. RON PAUL Thursday, August 2, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 70:6 * Mr. Speaker, the most important reason to enact this legislation is seniors should not be treated like children and told what health care services they can and cannot have by the federal government. We in Congress have a duty to preserve and protect the Medicare trust fund and keep the promise to America’s seniors and working Americans, whose taxes finance Medicare, that they will have quality health care in their golden years. However, we also have a duty to make sure that seniors can get the health care that suits their needs, instead of being forced into a cookie cutter program designed by Washington-DC-based bureaucrats! Medicare MSAs are a good first step toward allowing seniors the freedom to control their own health care. Congress TRUTH IN EMPLOYMENT ACT -- HON. RON PAUL Thursday, August 2, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 71:3 * Thanks to unconstitutional interference in the nation’s labor markets by Congress, small businesses targeted by union salts often must acquiesce to union bosses’ demands that they force their workers to accept union “representation” and pay union dues. If an employer challenges a salt, the salt may file (and win) an unfair labor practice charge against the employer! Congress PRESCRIPTION DRUG AFFORDABILITY ACT -- HON. RON PAUL Thursday, August 2, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 72:4 * The first provision of my legislation provides seniors a tax credit equal to 80 percent of their prescription drug costs. As many of my colleagues have pointed out, our nation’s seniors are struggling to afford the prescription drugs they need in order to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle. Yet, the federal government continues to impose taxes on Social Security benefits. Meanwhile, Congress continually raids the Social Security trust fund to finance unconstitutional programs! It is long past time for Congress to choose between helping seniors afford medicine or using the Social Security trust fund as a slush fund for big government and pork-barrel spending. Congress PRESCRIPTION DRUG AFFORDABILITY ACT -- HON. RON PAUL Thursday, August 2, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 72:7 * I need not remind my colleagues that many senior citizens and other Americans impacted by the high costs of prescription medicine have demanded Congress reduce the barriers which prevent American consumers from purchasing imported pharmaceuticals. Just a few weeks ago, Congress responded to these demands by overwhelmingly passing legislation liberalizing the rules governing the importation of pharmaceuticals. While this provision took a good first step toward allowing free trade in pharmaceuticals, and I hope it remains in the final bill, the American people will not be satisfied until all unnecessary regulations on importing pharmaceuticals are removed. Congress Patients’ Bill Of Rights 2 August 2001    2001 Ron Paul 74:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I oppose all versions of the Patients’ Bill of Rights. Once again Congress is staging a phony debate over which form of statism to embrace, instead of asking the fundamental question over whether Congress should be interfering in this area at all, much less examine how previous interferences in the health care market created the problems which these proposals claim to address. Congress Patients’ Bill Of Rights 2 August 2001    2001 Ron Paul 74:4 The fundamental economic principle is that true competition assures that the consumer gets the best deal at the best price possible by putting pressure on the providers. This principle applies equally to health care as it does to other goods and services. However, over the past fifty years, Congress has systematically destroyed the market in health care. HMOs themselves are the result of conscious government policy aimed at correcting distortions in the health care market caused by Congress. The story behind the creation of the HMOs is a classic illustration of how the unintended consequences of government policies provide a justification for further expansions of government power. During the early seventies, Congress embraced HMOs in order to address concerns about rapidly escalating health care costs. Congress Patients’ Bill Of Rights 2 August 2001    2001 Ron Paul 74:5 However, it was previous Congressional action which caused health care costs to spiral by removing control over the health care dollar from consumers and thus eliminating any incentive for consumers to pay attention to prices when selecting health care. Because the consumer had the incentive to monitor health care prices stripped away and because politicians were unwilling to either give up power by giving individuals control over their health care or take responsibility for rationing care, a third way to control costs had to be created. Thus, the Nixon Administration, working with advocates of nationalized medicine, crafted legislation providing federal subsidies to HMOs and preempting state laws forbidding physicians to sign contracts to deny care to their patients. This legislation also mandated that health plans offer an HMO option in addition to traditional fee-for-service coverage. Federal subsidies, preemption of state law, and mandates on private business hardly sound like the workings of the free market. Instead, HMOs are the result of the same Nixon-era corporatist, big government mindset that produced wage-and-price controls. Congress Patients’ Bill Of Rights 2 August 2001    2001 Ron Paul 74:6 I am sure many of my colleagues will think it ironic that many of the supporters of Nixon’s plan to foist HMOs on the American public are today among the biggest supporters of the “patients’ rights” legislation. However, this is not really surprising because both the legislation creating HMOs and the Patients’ Bill of Rights reflect the belief that individuals are incapable of providing for their own health care needs and therefore government must control health care. The only real difference between our system of medicine and the Canadian “single payer” system is that in America, Congress contracted out the job of rationing health care resources to the HMOs. Congress Patients’ Bill Of Rights 2 August 2001    2001 Ron Paul 74:8 We all should become suspicious when it is declared we need a new Bill of Rights, such as a Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights, or now a Patients’ Bill of Rights. Why do more Members not ask why the original Bill of Rights is not adequate in protecting all rights and enabling the market to provide all services? In fact, if Congress respected the Constitution we would not even be debating this bill, and we would have never passed any of the special-interest legislation that created and empowered the HMOs in the first place! Congress Patients’ Bill Of Rights 2 August 2001    2001 Ron Paul 74:11 Many members of Congress have convinced themselves that they can support a “watered-down” Patients’ Bill of Rights which will allow them to appease the supporters of nationalized medicine without creating the negative consequences of the unmodified Patients’ Bill of Rights, while even some supporters of the most extreme versions of this legislation say they will oppose any further steps to increase the power of government over health care. These well-intentioned members ignore the economic fact that partial government involvement is not possible. It inevitably leads to total government control. A vote for any version of a Patients’ Bill of Rights is a 100 percent endorsement of the principle of government management of the health care system. Congress Patients’ Bill Of Rights 2 August 2001    2001 Ron Paul 74:17 Congress should also remove all federallyimposed roadblocks to making pharmaceuticals available to physicians and patients. Government regulations are a major reason why many Americans find it difficult to afford prescription medicines. It is time to end the days when Americans suffer because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prevented them from getting access to medicines that where available and affordable in other parts of the world! Congress Patients’ Bill Of Rights 2 August 2001    2001 Ron Paul 74:18 While none of the proposed “Patients’ Bill of Rights” addresses the root cause of the problems in our nation’s health care system, the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kentucky does expend individual control over health care by making Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs) available to everyone. This is the most important thing Congress can do to get market forces operating immediately and improve health care. When MSAs make patient motivation to save and shop a major force to reduce cost, physicians would once again negotiate fees downward with patients — unlike today where the reimbursement is never too high and hospital and MD bills are always at the maximum levels allowed. MSAs would help satisfy the American’s people’s desire to control their own health care and provide incentives for consumers to take more responsibility for their care. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:1 Congress has a constitutional responsibility to maintain the value of the dollar by making only gold and silver legal tender and not to “emit bills of credit.” Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:5 The people of the United States, including the US Congress, are far too complacent about the seriousness of the current economic crisis. They remain oblivious to the significance of the US dollar’s fiat status. Discussions about the dollar are usually limited to the question of whether the dollar is now too strong or too weak. When money is defined as a precise weight of a precious metal, this type of discussion doesn’t exist. The only thing that matters under that circumstance is whether an honest government will maintain convertibility. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:9 The monetary inflation of the 1900s produced welcomed profits of $145 billion for the NASDAQ companies over the five years between 1996 and 2000. Astoundingly this entire amount was lost in the past year. This doesn’t even address the trillions of dollars of paper losses in stock values from its peak in early 2000. Congress has expressed concern about the staggering stock-market losses but fails to see the connection between the bubble economy and the monetary inflation generated by the Federal Reserve. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:10 Instead, Congress chooses to blame the analysts for misleading investors . The analysts may not be entirely blameless , but their role in creating the bubble is minimal compared to the misleading information that the Federal Reserve has provided, with artificially low interest rates and a financial market made flush with generous new credit at every sign of a correction over the past ten years. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:12 Talk of sound money and balanced budgets is just that. When the economy sinks, the rhetoric for sound policy and a strong dollar may continue but all actions by the Congress and the Fed will be directed toward re-inflation and a congressional spending policy oblivious to all the promises regarding a balanced budget and the preservation of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:28 In addition, the Federal Reserve treats GSE securities with special consideration. Ever since the fall of 1999, the Fed has monetized GSE securities, just as if they were US Treasury bills. This message has not been lost by foreign central banks, which took their cue from the Fed and now hold more than $130 billion of United States GSE securities. The Fed holds only $20 billion worth, but the implication is clear. Not only will the Treasury loan to the GSEs if necessary, since the line of credit is already in place, but, if necessary, Congress will surely accommodate with appropriations as well, just as it did during the Savings and Loan crisis. But the Fed has indicated to the world that the GSEs are equivalent to US Treasury bills, and foreign central banks have enthusiastically accommodated, sometimes by purchasing more than $10 billion of these securities in one week alone. They are merely recycling the dollars we so generously print and spend overseas. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:30 Refinancing especially helped the consumers to continue spending even in a slowing economy. It isn’t surprising for high credit-card debt to be frequently rolled into second mortgages, since interest on mortgage debt has the additional advantage of being tax-deductible. When financial conditions warrant it, leaving financial instruments (such as paper assets), and looking for hard assets (such as houses), is commonplace and is not a new phenomenon. Instead of the newly inflated money being directed toward the stock market, it now finds its way into the rapidly expanding real-estate bubble. This, too, will burst as all bubbles do. The Fed, the Congress, or even foreign investors can’t prevent the collapse of this bubble, any more than the incestuous Japanese banks were able to keep the Japanese “miracle” of the 1980s going forever. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:35 Congress is starting to realize that the budget forecast based on an overly optimistic growth rate of 3% is way off target, and even the pseudo-surpluses are soon to be eliminated. Remember the national debt never went down with the “surpluses.” The national debt is currently rising at more than $120 billion at an annualized rate and is destined to get worse. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:37 The deception regarding price increases is supposed to reassure us and may do so for a while. The Fed never admits it, and the Congress disregards it out of ignorance, but the serious harm done by artificially low interest rates--leading to mal-investment, overcapacity, excessive debt and speculation causes the distortions that always guarantee the next recession. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:38 Serious problems lie ahead. If the Fed continues with the same monetary policy of perpetual inflation, and the Congress responds with more spending and regulations, real solutions will be indefinitely delayed. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:39 The current problems, hopefully, will cause us as a nation and, in particular, Congress to reassess the policies that have allowed the imbalances to develop over the last thirty years. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:40 Someday, stable money based on the gold standard must be reconsidered. Stable money is a constitutional responsibility of Congress. The Federal Reserve Board’s goal of stable prices, economic growth and low interest rates, through centralized economic planning by manipulating money and credit, is a concoction of 20 th Century Keynesian economics. These efforts are not authorized by the Constitution, and are economically detrimental. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:44 If, heaven forbid, the economy sinks as low and for as long as many free market economists believe, what policy changes must we consider? Certainly the number one change ought to be to reject the ideas that created the crisis. But rejecting old ways that Congress and the people are addicted to is not easy. Many people believe that government programs are free. The clamor for low interest rates, (more monetary inflation) by virtually all public officials and prominent business and banking leaders is endless. And, the expectation for government to do something for every economic malady-even if ill-advised government policy has created the problem-drives this seductive system of centralized planning that ultimately undermines prosperity. A realization that we cannot continue our old ways may well be upon us, and, the inflating, taxing, regulating, and centralized planning programs of the last thirty years must come to an end. Congress The US Dollar and the World Economy September 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 75:48 There are no other options if we hope to remain a free and prosperous nation. Economic and monetary meddling undermines the principles of a free society. A free society and sound money maximize production and minimize poverty. The responsibility of Congress is clear: avoid the meddling so engrained in our system and assume the responsibility, all but forgotten, to maintain a free society while making the dollar once again as good as gold. Congress Defense Production Act 10 September 2001    2001 Ron Paul 76:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, when the Defense Production Act was enacted in 1950, considerable damage was done. Some of the worst damage occurred as a result of wage and price controls and the improper delegation of economic powers to the President (much of which economic power even Congress itself didn’t have). Congress Statement on the New York City and Washington, DC Terrorist Attacks September 12, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 78:5 In our grief, we must remember our responsibilities. The Congress’ foremost obligation in a constitutional republic is to preserve freedom and provide for national security. Yesterday our efforts to protect our homeland came up short. Our policies that led to that shortcoming must be reevaluated and changed if found to be deficient. Congress Statement on the New York City and Washington, DC Terrorist Attacks September 12, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 78:6 When we retaliate for this horror we have suffered, we must be certain that only the guilty be punished. More killing of innocent civilians will only serve to flame the fires of war and further jeopardize our security. Congress should consider its constitutional authority to grant letters of marque and reprisal to meet our responsibility. Congress Statement on the New York City and Washington, DC Terrorist Attacks September 12, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 78:9 We must all pray for peace and ask for God’s guidance for our President, our congressional leaders, and all America- and for the wisdom and determination required to resolve this devastating crisis. Congress Statement on the Congressional Authorization of the Use of Force September 14, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 79:3 The best tool the framers of the Constitution provided under these circumstances was the power of Congress to grant letters of marque and reprisals, in order to narrow the retaliation to only the guilty parties. The complexity of the issue, the vagueness of the enemy, and the political pressure to respond immediately limits our choices. The proposed resolution is the only option we’re offered and doing nothing is unthinkable. Congress Statement on the Congressional Authorization of the Use of Force September 14, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 79:10 We are placing tremendous trust in our president to pursue our enemies as our commander-in-chief but Congress must remain vigilant as to not allow our civil liberties here at home to be eroded. The temptation will be great to sacrifice our freedoms for what may seem to be more security. We must resist this temptation. Congress Foreign Interventionism September 25, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 80:4 Mr. Speaker, I returned to Congress 5 years ago out of deep concern about our foreign policy of international interventionism, and a monetary and fiscal policy I believed would lead to a financial and dollar crisis. Over the past 5 years I have frequently expressed my views on these issues and why I believed our policies should be changed. Congress Foreign Interventionism September 25, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 80:7 It is obviously no easy task to destroy an almost invisible, ubiquitous enemy spread throughout the world, without expanding the war or infringing on our liberties here at home. But above all else, that is our mandate and our key constitutional responsibility- protecting liberty and providing for national security. My strong belief is that in the past, efforts in the US Congress to do much more than this, have diverted our attention and hence led to our neglect of these responsibilities. Congress Foreign Interventionism September 25, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 80:32 The founders and authors of our Constitution provided an answer for the difficult tasks that we now face. When a precise declaration of war was impossible due to the vagueness of our enemy, the Congress was expected to take it upon themselves to direct the reprisal against an enemy not recognized as a government. In the early days the concern was piracy on the high seas. Piracy was one of only three federal crimes named in the original Constitution. Congress Foreign Interventionism September 25, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 80:33 Today, we have a new type of deadly piracy, in the high sky over our country. The solution the founders came up with under these circumstances was for Congress to grant letters of marque and reprisal. This puts the responsibility in the hands of Congress to direct the President to perform a task with permission to use and reward private sources to carry out the task, such as the elimination of Osama bin Laden and his key supporters. This allows narrow targeting of the enemy. This effort would not preclude the president’s other efforts to resolve the crisis, but if successful would preclude a foolish invasion of a remote country with a forbidding terrain like Afghanistan- a country that no foreign power has ever conquered throughout all of history. Congress Foreign Interventionism September 25, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 80:50 The efforts of a small minority in Congress to avoid this confrontation by voting for the foreign policy of George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and all the 19 th century presidents went unheeded. The unwise policy of supporting so many militants who later became our armed enemies makes little sense whether it’s bin Laden or Saddam Hussein. A policy designed to protect America is wise and frugal and hopefully it will once again be considered. George Washington, as we all know, advised strongly, as he departed his presidency, that we should avoid all entangling alliances with foreign nations. Congress Intelligence Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2002 5 October 2001    2001 Ron Paul 81:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, HR 2883, the Intelligence Authorization Act, is brought before us today under a process which denies members of Congress our constitutional right as elected officials to be informed on crucial aspects of the programs we are asked to authorize. Information about this bill is limited to dollars amounts and personnel ceilings for the individual intelligence programs and even that information is restricted to viewing in a classified annex available to members during regular business hours for “security reasons.” Congress Intelligence Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2002 5 October 2001    2001 Ron Paul 81:2 Given the many questions the American people have about the performance of the intelligence agencies prior to September 11, and the many concerns as to whether the intelligence agencies can effectively respond to the challenges of international terrorism, I believe that the American people would be well served by a full debate on the ways the intelligence community plans to respond to these challenges. I also believe the American people would be well-served if members of Congress could debate the prudence of activities authorized under this bill, such as using taxpayer monies for drug interdiction, is an efficient use of intelligence resources or if those resources could be better used to counter other, more significant threats. Perhaps the money targeted for drug interdiction and whether it should be directed to anti-terrorism efforts. However, Mr. Speaker, such a debate cannot occur when members are denied crucial facts regarding the programs authorized in this bill or, at a minimum, are not free to debate in an open forum. Therefore, Congress is denied a crucial opportunity to consider how we might improve America’s intelligence programs. Congress Intelligence Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2002 5 October 2001    2001 Ron Paul 81:3 We are told that information about this bill must be limited to a select few for “security reasons.” However, there are other ways to handle legitimate security concerns than by limiting the information to those members who happen to sit on the Intelligence Committee. If any member were to reveal information that may compromise the security of the United States, I certainly would support efforts to punish that member for violating his office and the trust of his country. I believe that if Congress and the Executive Branch exercised sufficient political will to make it known that any member who dared reveal damaging information would suffer full punishment of the law, there would not be a serious risk of a member leaking classified information. Congress Intelligence Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2002 5 October 2001    2001 Ron Paul 81:4 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, it is inexcusable for members to be denied crucial facts regarding the intelligence program authorized by this bill, especially at a time when the nation’s attention is focused on security issues. Therefore, I hope my colleagues will reject HR 2883 and all other intelligence authorization or funding bills until every member of Congress is allowed to fully perform their constitutional role of overseeing these agencies and participating in the debate on this vital aspect of America’s national security policy. Congress Counter-Terrorism and Homeland Security October 9, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 82:11 But here at home it is surely a prime responsibility of all members of Congress to remain vigilant and not, out of fear and panic, sacrifice the rights of Americans in our effort to maximize security. Congress AIR PIRACY REPRISAL AND CAPTURE ACT OF 2001 -- HON. RON PAUL October 10, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 84:1 * Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Air Piracy Reprisal and Capture Act of 2001 and the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. The Air Piracy Reprisal and Capture Act of 2001 updates the federal definition of “piracy” to include acts committed in the skies. The September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001 provides Congressional authorization for the President to issue letters of marque and reprisal to appropriate parties to seize the person and property of Osama bin Laden and any other individual responsible for the terrorist attacks of September 11. Authority to grant letters of marque and reprisal are provided for in the Constitution as a means of allowing Congress to deal with aggressive actions where a formal declaration of war against a foreign power is problematic, Originally intended to deal with piracy, letters of marque and reprisal represent an appropriate response to the piracy of the twentieth century: hijacking terrorism. Congress AIR PIRACY REPRISAL AND CAPTURE ACT OF 2001 -- HON. RON PAUL October 10, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 84:2 * All of America stood horrified at the brutal attacks of September 11 and all of us stand united in our determination to exact just retribution on the perpetrators of this evil deed. This is why I supported giving the President broad authority to use military power to respond to these attacks. When Congress authorized the use of force to respond to the attacks of September 11 we recognized these attacks were not merely criminal acts but an “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security.” Congress AIR PIRACY REPRISAL AND CAPTURE ACT OF 2001 -- HON. RON PAUL October 10, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 84:3 * Congress must use every means available to fight the terrorists behind this attack if we are to fulfill our constitutional obligations to provide for the common defense of our sovereign nation. Issuance of letters of marque and reprisal are a valuable tool in the struggle to exact just retribution on the perpetrators of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In fact, they may be among the most effective response available to Congress. Congress AIR PIRACY REPRISAL AND CAPTURE ACT OF 2001 -- HON. RON PAUL October 10, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 84:4 * Since the bombing there has been much discussion of how to respond to warlike acts carried out by private parties. The drafters of the Constitution also had to wrestle with the problem of how to respond to sporadic attacks on American soil and citizens organized by groups not formally affiliated with a government. In order to deal with this situation, the Constitution authorized Congress to issue letters of marque and reprisal. In the early days of the Republic, marque and reprisal were usually used against pirates who, while they may have enjoyed the protection and partnership of governments, where not official representatives of a government. Congress AIR PIRACY REPRISAL AND CAPTURE ACT OF 2001 -- HON. RON PAUL October 10, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 84:7 * Specifically, my legislation authorizes the President to issue letters of marque and reprisal to all appropriate parties to capture Osama bin Laden and other members of al Qaeda or any other persons involved in the September 11 terrorist attacks. The President is also authorized to use part of the $40 billion appropriated by this Congress to respond to the attack, to establish a bounty for the capture of Osama bin Laden. My legislation singles out Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda because the information available to Congress and the American people indicates bin Laden and his organization were responsible for this action. By vesting authority in the President to issue the letters, my legislation ensures that letters of marque and reprisal can be coordinated with the administration’s overall strategy to bring the perpetrators of this outrageous act to justice. Congress Statement on Counter-Terrorism Proposals and Civil Liberties October 12, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 87:2 There is also much the federal government can do under current existing law to fight terrorism. The combined annual budgets of the FBI, the CIA and various other security programs amount to over $30 billion. Perhaps Congress should consider redirecting some of the money spent by intelligence agencies on matters of lower priority to counter-terrorism efforts. Since the tragic attacks, our officials have located and arrested hundreds of suspects, frozen millions of dollars of assets, and received authority to launch a military attack against the ring leaders in Afghanistan. It seems the war against terrorism has so far been carried our satisfactorily under current law. Congress Statement on HR 3004 October 17, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 88:4 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this package of unconstitutional expansions of the financial police state, most of which will prove ultimately ineffective in the war against terrorism. Instead, I hope Congress will work to fashion a measure aimed at giving the government a greater ability to locate and seize the assets of terrorists while respecting the constitutional rights of American citizens. Congress Statement on International Relations committee hearing featuring Secretary of State Colin Powell October 17, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 89:3 Because I am concerned about winning this war at the least possible cost in American life and treasure, I have introduced legislation to authorize the president to issue letters of marque and reprisal. This legislation would give the president a powerful tool to root out Osama bin Laden and his supporters. The legislation would allow the United States to narrow the retaliation to only the guilty parties, thus providing a political as well as military victory. It would also address the increasingly complex problem of asymmetrical warfare using a solution that had been employed successfully in the past against a similar threat. I am disappointed to see that this legislation has not been considered by Congress, and that the Administration has not yet expressed its support for this bill. Congress Statement on International Relations committee hearing featuring Secretary of State Colin Powell October 17, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 89:4 I am also concerned about the emerging nation-building component of our activities in Afghanistan. If, as it appears, our military action in Afghanistan is to benefit the Northern Alliance opposition group, what assurances do we have that this group will not be every bit as unpopular as the Taliban, as press reporting suggests? Not long ago, it was the Taliban itself that was the recipient of U.S. military and financial support. Who is to say that Afghanistan might not benefit from a government managed by several tribal factions with a weak central government and little outside interference either by the U. S. or the UN? Some have suggested that a western-financed pipeline through Afghanistan can only take place with a strong and “stable” government in place- and that it is up to the U.S. government to ensure the success of what is in fact a private financial venture. Whatever the case, my colleagues in Congress and those in the administration openly talk of a years-long post-war UN presence in Afghanistan to “build institutions.” Congress A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS -- October 25, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 90:15 Countless groups are now descending on Washington with their hands out. As usual with any disaster, this disaster is being parlayed into an “opportunity,” as one former Member of the Congress phrased it. The economic crisis that started a long time before 9-11 has contributed to the number of those now demanding Federal handouts. Congress A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS -- October 25, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 90:16 But there is one business that we need not fear will go into a slump: The Washington lobbying industry. Last year, it spent $1.6 billion lobbying Congress. This year, it will spend much more. The bigger the disaster, the greater the number of vultures who descend on Washington. When I see this happening, it breaks my heart, because liberty and America suffers, and it is all done in the name of justice, equality and security. Congress A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS -- October 25, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 90:21 It is certainly disappointing that our congressional leaders and administration have not considered using letters of marque and reprisal as an additional tool to root out those who participated in the 9-11 attacks. The difficulty in finding bin Laden and his supporters make marque and reprisal quite an appropriate option in this effort. Congress Statement on Funding for the Export- Import Bank October 31, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 91:9 In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, Eximbank distorts the market by allowing government bureaucrats to make economic decisions in place of individual consumers. Eximbank also violates basic principles of morality, by forcing working Americans to subsidize the trade of wealthy companies that could easily afford to subsidize their own trade, as well as subsidizing brutal governments like Red China and the Sudan. Eximbank also violates the limitations on congressional power to take the property of individual citizens and use them to benefit powerful special interests. It is for these reasons that I urge my colleagues to reject HR 2871, the Export-Import Bank Reauthorization Act. Congress Expansion of NATO is a Bad Idea November 7, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 95:3 I, too, was a friend of Jerry Solomon. We came into the Congress together in 1978. One thing for sure that Jerry understood very clearly was the care that we must give to expanding our influence as well as sacrificing our sovereignty, because he was strongly opposed to the United Nations. Congress Statement on Preventing Identity Theft by Terrorists and Criminals November 8, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 96:2 I would also like to thank the Chairwoman for leading the effort to ensure the Social Security Administration is making full use of the “Death Master File” in order to help reduce the incidence of identity theft. It is long-past time we recognized the ways in which Congress’ transformation of the Social Security number into a de facto uniform identifier facilitates identity crimes. Since the creation of the Social Security number, Congress has authorized over 40 uses of the Social Security number as an identifier. Thanks to Congress, today no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get a drivers’ license without presenting their Social Security number. Federal law even requires Americans to produce a Social Security number to get a fishing license! Congress Statement on Preventing Identity Theft by Terrorists and Criminals November 8, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 96:3 Because of the congressionally-mandated abuse of the Social Security number, all an unscrupulous person needs to do is obtain someone’s Social Security number in order to access that person’s bank accounts, credit cards, and other financial assets. As supportive as I am of efforts to ensure that the Social Security Administration minimizes the risk of identity theft, the only way to ensure the federal government is not inadvertently assisting identity criminals is to stop using the Social Security number as a uniform ID. I have introduced legislation to address the American people’s concerns regarding the transformation of the Social Security number into a national ID, the Identity Theft Prevention Act (HR 220). The major provision of the Identity Theft Prevention Act halts the practice of using the Social Security number as an identifier by requiring the Social Security Administration to issue all Americans new Social Security numbers within five years after the enactment of the bill. These new numbers will be the sole legal property of the recipient, and the Social Security Administration shall be forbidden to divulge the numbers for any purposes not related to the Social Security program. Social Security numbers issued before implementation of this bill shall no longer be considered valid federal identifiers. Of course, the Social Security Administration shall be able to use an individual’s original Social Security number to ensure efficient transition of the Social Security system. Congress Statement on Preventing Identity Theft by Terrorists and Criminals November 8, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 96:4 Madam Chairwoman, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure citizens’ rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, legislative “privacy protections” are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for several reasons. First, it is simply common sense that repealing those federal laws that promote identity theft is more effective in protecting the public than expanding the power of the federal police force. Federal punishment of identity thieves provides cold comfort to those who have suffered financial losses and the destruction of their good reputation as a result of identity theft. Congress Statement on Preventing Identity Theft by Terrorists and Criminals November 8, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 96:6 My colleagues should remember that the federal government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress Statement on Preventing Identity Theft by Terrorists and Criminals November 8, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 96:7 In conclusion, Madam Chairwoman, I once again thank you and the other members of the subcommittee for holding a hearing on this important issue, and for your efforts to take steps to protect the American people from government-facilitated identity theft. However, I would ask my colleagues to remember that efforts to protect the American people from identity crimes will not be effective until Congress addresses the root cause of the problem: the transformation of the Social Security number into a national identifier. Congress Statement for the Government Reform Committee Hearing on National ID Card Proposals November 16, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 97:2 However, Congress should reject proposals which provide only the illusion of security, while in reality simply eroding constitutional government and individual liberty. Perhaps the most onerous example of a proposal that creates the illusion of security (yet really promotes servitude) is the plan to force all Americans to carry a national ID card. A uniform national system of identification would allow the federal government to inappropriately monitor the movements and transactions of every citizen. History shows that when government gains the power to monitor the actions of the people, it inevitably uses that power in harmful ways. Congress Statement for the Government Reform Committee Hearing on National ID Card Proposals November 16, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 97:4 Furthermore, the federal government has no constitutional authority to require law-abiding Americans to present any form of identification before engaging in private transactions (e.g. getting a job, opening a bank account, or seeking medical assistance). As we consider how best to enhance the federal government’s ability to ensure the safety of the people, it is more important then ever that Congress remain mindful of the constitutional limitations on its power. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:1 Mr. Speaker: We have been told on numerous occasions to expect a long and protracted war. This is not necessary if one can identify the target – the enemy – and then stay focused on that target. It’s impossible to keep one’s eye on a target and hit it if one does not precisely understand it and identify it. In pursuing any military undertaking, it’s the responsibility of Congress to know exactly why it appropriates the funding. Today, unlike any time in our history, the enemy and its location remain vague and pervasive. In the undeclared wars of Vietnam and Korea, the enemy was known and clearly defined, even though our policies were confused and contradictory. Today our policies relating to the growth of terrorism are also confused and contradictory; however, the precise enemy and its location are not known by anyone. Until the enemy is defined and understood, it cannot be accurately targeted or vanquished. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:9 Former FBI Deputy Director John O’Neill resigned in July over duplicitous dealings with the Taliban and our oil interests. O’Neill then took a job as head of the World Trade Center security and ironically was killed in the 9-11 attack. The charges made by these authors in their recent publication deserve close scrutiny and congressional oversight investigation- and not just for the historical record. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:36 As we continue our bombing of Afghanistan, plans are made to install a new government sympathetic to the West and under UN control. The persuasive argument as always is money. We were able to gain Pakistan’s support, although it continually wavers, in this manner. Appropriations are already being prepared in the Congress to rebuild all that we destroy in Afghanistan, and then some- even before the bombing has stopped. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:38 It seems that Washington never learns. Our foolish foreign interventions continually get us into more trouble than we have bargained for- and the spending is endless. I am not optimistic that this Congress will anytime soon come to its senses. I am afraid that we will never treat the taxpayers with respect. National bankruptcy is a more likely scenario than Congress adopting a frugal and wise spending policy. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:44 As members of Congress, we have a profound responsibility to mete out justice, provide security for our nation, and protect the liberties of all the people, without senselessly expanding the war at the urging of narrow political and economic special interests. The price is too high, and the danger too great. We must not lose our focus on the real target and inadvertently create new enemies for ourselves. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:45 We have not done any better keeping our eye on the terrorist target on the home front than we have overseas. Not only has Congress come up short in picking the right target, it has directed all its energies in the wrong direction. The target of our efforts has sadly been the liberties all Americans enjoy. With all the new power we have given to the administration, none has truly improved the chances of catching the terrorists who were responsible for the 9-11 attacks. All Americans will soon feel the consequences of this new legislation. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:47 Granting bailouts is not new for Congress, but current conditions have prompted many takers to line up for handouts. There has always been a large constituency for expanding federal power for whatever reason, and these groups have been energized. The military-industrial complex is out in full force and is optimistic. Union power is pleased with recent events and has not missed the opportunity to increase membership rolls. Federal policing powers, already in a bull market, received a super shot in the arm. The IRS, which detests financial privacy, gloats, while all the big spenders in Washington applaud the tools made available to crack down on tax dodgers. The drug warriors and anti-gun zealots love the new powers that now can be used to watch the every move of our citizens. “Extremists” who talk of the Constitution, promote right-to-life, form citizen militias, or participate in non-mainstream religious practices now can be monitored much more effectively by those who find their views offensive. Laws recently passed by the Congress apply to all Americans- not just terrorists. But we should remember that if the terrorists are known and identified, existing laws would have been quite adequate to deal with them. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:49 The laws recently passed in Congress in response to the terrorist attacks can be compared to the effort by anti-gun fanatics, who jump at every chance to undermine the Second Amendment. When crimes are committed with the use of guns, it’s argued that we must remove guns from society, or at least register them and make it difficult to buy them. The counter argument made by Second Amendment supporters correctly explains that this would only undermine the freedom of law-abiding citizens and do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or to reduce crime. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:50 Now we hear a similar argument that a certain amount of privacy and personal liberty of law-abiding citizens must be sacrificed in order to root out possible terrorists. This will result only in liberties being lost, and will not serve to preempt any terrorist act. The criminals, just as they know how to get guns even when they are illegal, will still be able to circumvent anti-terrorist laws. To believe otherwise is to endorse a Faustian bargain, but that is what I believe the Congress has done. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:54 The administration has severely curtailed briefings regarding the military operation in Afghanistan for congressional leaders, ignoring a long-time tradition in this country. One person or one branch of government should never control military operations. Our system of government has always required a shared-power arrangement. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:55 The Anti-Terrorism Bill did little to restrain the growth of big government. In the name of patriotism, the Congress did some very unpatriotic things. Instead of concentrating on the persons or groups that committed the attacks on 9-11, our efforts, unfortunately, have undermined the liberties of all Americans. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:56 “Know Your Customer” type banking regulations, resisted by most Americans for years, have now been put in place in an expanded fashion. Not only will the regulations affect banks, thrifts and credit unions, but also all businesses will be required to file suspicious transaction reports if cash is used with the total of the transaction reaching $10,000. Retail stores will be required to spy on all their customers and send reports to the U.S. government. Financial services consultants are convinced that this new regulation will affect literally millions of law-abiding American citizens. The odds that this additional paperwork will catch a terrorist are remote. The sad part is that the regulations have been sought after by federal law-enforcement agencies for years. The 9-11 attacks have served as an opportunity to get them by the Congress and the American people. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:58 It’s easy for elected officials in Washington to tell the American people that the government will do whatever it takes to defeat terrorism. Such assurances inevitably are followed by proposals either to restrict the constitutional liberties of the American people or to spend vast sums of money from the federal treasury. The history of the 20th Century shows that the Congress violates our Constitution most often during times of crisis. Accordingly, most of our worst unconstitutional agencies and programs began during the two World Wars and the Depression. Ironically, the Constitution itself was conceived in a time of great crisis. The founders intended its provision to place severe restrictions on the federal government, even in times of great distress. America must guard against current calls for government to sacrifice the Constitution in the name of law enforcement. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:59 The“anti-terrorism” legislation recently passed by Congress demonstrates how well-meaning politicians make shortsighted mistakes in a rush to respond to a crisis. Most of its provisions were never carefully studied by Congress, nor was sufficient time taken to debate the bill despite its importance. No testimony was heard from privacy experts or from others fields outside of law enforcement. Normal congressional committee and hearing processes were suspended. In fact, the final version of the bill was not even made available to Members before the vote! The American public should not tolerate these political games, especially when our precious freedoms are at stake. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:63 In his speech to the joint session of Congress following the September 11th attacks, President Bush reminded all of us that the United States outlasted and defeated Soviet totalitarianism in the last century. The numerous internal problems in the former Soviet Union- its centralized economic planning and lack of free markets, its repression of human liberty and its excessive militarization- all led to its inevitable collapse. We must be vigilant to resist the rush toward ever-increasing state control of our society, so that our own government does not become a greater threat to our freedoms than any foreign terrorist. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:66 The argument that FDR did it and therefore it must be OK is a rather weak justification. Roosevelt was hardly one that went by the rule book- the Constitution. But the situation then was quite different from today. There was a declared war by Congress against a precise enemy, the Germans, who sent eight saboteurs into our country. Convictions were unanimous, not 2/3 of the panel, and appeals were permitted. That’s not what’s being offered today. Furthermore, the previous military tribunals expired when the war ended. Since this war will go on indefinitely, so too will the courts. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:72 The ongoing debate regarding the use of torture in rounding up the criminals involved in the 9-11 attacks is too casual. This can hardly represent progress in the cause of liberty and justice. Once government becomes more secretive, it is more likely this tool will be abused. Hopefully the Congress will not endorse or turn a blind eye to this barbaric proposal. For every proposal made to circumvent the justice system, it’s intended that we visualize that these infractions of the law and the Constitution will apply only to terrorists and never involve innocent U.S. citizens. This is impossible, because someone has to determine exactly who to bring before the tribunal, and that involves all of us. That is too much arbitrary power for anyone to be given in a representative government and is more characteristic of a totalitarian government. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:74 Congress has a profound responsibility in all of this and should never concede this power to a President or an Attorney General. Congressional oversight powers must be used to their fullest to curtail this unconstitutional assumption of power. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:79 The proponents of the draft call it “mandatory service.” Slavery, too, was mandatory, but few believed it was a service. They claim that every 18-year old owes at least two years of his life to his country. Let’s hope the American people don’t fall for this “need to serve” argument. The Congress should refuse to even consider such a proposal. Better yet, what we need to do is abolish the Selective Service altogether. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:80 However, if we get to the point of returning to the draft, I have a proposal. Every news commentator, every Hollywood star, every newspaper editorialist, and every Member of Congress under the age of 65 who has never served in the military and who demands that the draft be reinstated, should be drafted first — the 18-year olds last. Since the Pentagon says they don’t need draftees, these new recruits can be the first to march to the orders of the general in charge of homeland security. For those less robust individuals, they can do the hospital and cooking chores for the rest of the newly formed domestic army. After all, someone middle aged owes a lot more to his country than an 18-year old. Congress The War On Terrorism November 29, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 98:82 I see good reason for American citizens to be concerned- not only about another terrorist attack, but for their own personal freedoms as the Congress deals with the crisis. Personal freedom is the element of the human condition that has made America great and unique and something we all cherish. Even those who are more willing to sacrifice a little freedom for security do it with the firm conviction that they are acting in the best interest of freedom and justice. However, good intentions can never suffice for sound judgment in the defense of liberty. Congress Statement on Terrorism Reinsurance Legislation November 30, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 99:1 Mr. Speaker, no one doubts that the government has a role to play in compensating American citizens who are victimized by terrorist attacks. However, Congress should not lose sight of fundamental economic and constitutional principles when considering how best to provide the victims of terrorist attacks just compensation. I am afraid that HR 3210, the Terrorism Risk Protection Act, violates several of those principles and therefore passage of this bill is not in the best interests of the American people. Congress Statement on Terrorism Reinsurance Legislation November 30, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 99:3 The drafters of HR 3210 claim that this creates a temporary government program. However, Mr. Speaker, what happens in three years if industry lobbyists come to Capitol Hill to explain that there is still a need for this program because of the continuing threat of terrorist attacks? Does anyone seriously believe that Congress will refuse to reauthorize this “temporary” insurance program or provide some other form of taxpayer help to the insurance industry? I would like to remind my colleagues that the federal budget is full of expenditures for long-lasting programs that were originally intended to be temporary. Congress Statement on Terrorism Reinsurance Legislation November 30, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 99:6 Instead of forcing taxpayers to subsidize the costs of terrorism insurance, Congress should consider creating a tax credit or deduction for premiums paid for terrorism insurance, as well as a deduction for claims and other costs borne by the insurance industry connected with offering terrorism insurance. A tax credit approach reduces government’s control over the insurance market. Furthermore, since a tax credit approach encourages people to devote more of their own resources to terrorism insurance, the moral hazard problems associated with federally-funded insurance are avoided. Congress Let Privateers Troll For Bin Laden 4 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 100:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I recommend my colleagues read the attached article “Let Privateers Troll for Bin Laden” by Larry Sechrest, a research fellow at the Independent Institute in Oakland, California, and a professor of economics at Sul Ross State University. Professor Sechrest documents the role privateers played in the war against pirates who plagued America in the early days of the Republic. These privateers often operated with letters of marque and reprisal granted by the United States Congress. Congress Let Privateers Troll For Bin Laden 4 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 100:5 Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld recently acknowledged the role that private parties, when provided sufficient incentives by government, can play in bringing terrorists to justice. Now is the time for Congress to ensure President Bush can take advantage of every effective and constitutional means of fighting the war on terrorism. This is why I have introduced the Air Piracy Reprisal and Capture Act of 2001 (HR 3074) and the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001 (HR 3076). The Air Piracy Reprisal and Capture Act of 2001 updates the federal definition of “piracy” to include acts committed in the skies. The September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001 provides Congressional authorization for the President to issue letters of marque and reprisal to appropriate parties to seize the person and property of Osama bin Laden and any other individuals responsible for the terrorist attacks of September 11. I encourage my colleagues to read Professor Sechrest’s article on the effectiveness of privateers, and to help ensure President Bush can take advantage of every available tool to capture and punish terrorists by cosponsoring my Air Piracy Reprisal and Capture Act and the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act. Congress Let Privateers Troll For Bin Laden 4 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 100:10 During the War of 1812, 526 American vessels were commissioned as privateers. This was not piracy, because the privateers were licensed by their own governments and the ships were bonded to ensure that their captains followed the accepted laws of the sea, including the humane treatment of those who were taken prisoner. Congress granted privateers “letters of marque and reprisal,” under the authority of Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. Congress Ongoing Violence in Israel and Palestine December 5, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 102:19 Mr. Speaker, I agree with our Secretary of State. The Secretary also said that we need to move beyond seeing the two sides there as “just enemies.” I agree with that too. But I don’t think this piece of legislation moves us any closer to that important goal. While it rightly condemns the senseless acts of violence against the innocent, it unfortunately goes much further than that--and that is where I regrettably must part company with this bill. Rather than stopping at condemning terrorism, this bill makes specific demands in Israel and the Palestinian areas regarding internal policy and specifically the apprehension and treatment of suspected terrorists. I don’t think that is our job here in Congress. Congress Ongoing Violence in Israel and Palestine December 5, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 102:20 Further, it recommends that the President suspend all relations with Yasir Arafat and the Palestinian Authority if they do not abide by the demands of this piece of legislation. I don’t think this is a very helpful approach to the problem. Ceasing relations with one side in the conflict is, in effect, picking sides in the conflict. I don’t think that has been our policy, nor is it in our best interest, be it in the Middle East, Central Asia, or anywhere else. The people of the United States contribute a substantial amount of money to both Israel and to the Palestinian people. We have made it clear in our policy and with our financial assistance that we are not taking sides in the conflict, but rather seeking a lasting peace in the region. Even with the recent, terrible attack. I don’t think this is the time for Congress to attempt to subvert our government’s policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Congress Statement Opposing Unconstitutional “Trade Promotion Authority” December 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 103:2 Our founders understood the folly of trade agreements between nations; that is why they expressly granted the authority to regulate trade to Congress alone, separating it from the treaty-making power given to the President and Senate. This legislation clearly represents an unconstitutional delegation of congressional authority to the President. Simply put, the Constitution does not permit international trade agreements. Neither Congress nor the President can set trade policies in concert with foreign governments or international bodies. Congress Statement Opposing Unconstitutional “Trade Promotion Authority” December 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 103:4 Congress can promote true free trade without violating the Constitution. We can lift the trade embargo against Cuba, end Jackson-Vanik restrictions on Kazakhstan, and repeal sanctions on Iran. These markets should be opened to American exporters, especially farmers. We can reduce our tariffs unilaterally- taxing American consumers hardly punishes foreign governments. We can unilaterally end the subsidies that international agreements purportedly seek to reduce. We can simply repeal protectionist barriers to trade, so-called NTB’s, that stifle economic growth. Congress Statement Opposing Unconstitutional “Trade Promotion Authority” December 6, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 103:5 Mr. Speaker, we are not promoting free trade today, but we are undermining our sovereignty and the constitutional separation of powers. We are avoiding the responsibilities with which our constituents have entrusted us. Remember, congressional authority we give up today will not be restored when less popular Presidents take office in the future. I strongly urge all of my colleagues to vote NO on TPA. Congress Too Many Federal Cops 6 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 104:4 In the past, interim procedural steps, such as the military tribunals Franklin Roosevelt established during World War II to try saboteurs, have been promptly terminated when the conflict ended. Because of its likely permanence, the expansion and institutionalization of national police power poses a greater threat to individual liberties. Congress should count to 10 before creating any additional police forces or a Cabinet-level Office of Homeland Security. Congress Too Many Federal Cops 6 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 104:5 Pre-Sept. 11, the FBI stood at about 27,000 in personnel; Drug Enforcement Administration at 10,000; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms at 4,000; Secret Service at 6,000; Border Patrol at 10,000; Customs Service at 12,000; and Immigration and Naturalization Service at 34,000. At the request of the White House, Congress is moving to beef up these forces and expand the number of armed air marshals from a handful to more than a thousand. Despite the president’s objection, Congress recently created another security force of 28,000 baggage screeners under the guidance of the attorney general. Congress Too Many Federal Cops 6 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 104:6 In 1878 Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act to prohibit the military from performing civilian police functions. Over Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger’s opposition, President Ronald Reagan declared drug trafficking a threat to national security as the rationale for committing the military to the war on drugs. (Weinberger argued that “reliance on military forces to accomplish civilian tasks is detrimental to . . . the democratic process.”) Reagan’s action gives George Bush a precedent for committing the military and National Guard to civilian police duty at airports and borders. Congress Too Many Federal Cops 6 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 104:7 Given the president’s candor about the likelihood that the war on terrorism will last many years, the administration and a compliant Congress are in clear and present danger of establishing a national police force and — under either the attorney general, director of homeland security or an agency combining the CIA and State and Defense intelligence (or some combination of the above) — a de facto ministry of the interior. Congress Too Many Federal Cops 6 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 104:12 It’s time for the executive and Congress to take a hard look at the police personnel amassing at the federal level and the extent to which we are concentrating them under any one individual short of the president. Congress should turn its most skeptical laser on the concept of an Office of Homeland Security and on any requests to institutionalize its director beyond the status of a special assistant to the president. We have survived for more than 200 years without a ministry of the interior or national police force, and we can effectively battle terrorism without creating one now. Congress Introduction of the ”Human Cloning Prevention Act of 2001“ December 13, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 105:2 Some believe the current prohibition on the use of federal funds for cloning and cloning research is sufficient protection for those taxpayers who object to cloning. However, this argument is flawed for two reasons. First, the current ban is not permanent- and thus could be changed at will by a future Congress or administration. Second, because money is fungible, current law does not necessarily prevent federal funds from subsidizing cloning. After all, whenever a company that engages in cloning research receives federal dollars for any project, the company obviously then has more dollars available to use for cloning. Therefore, any federal funding for companies that engage in human cloning forces taxpayers to subsidize those activities. Thus, the only way to ensure that no American is forced to pay for cloning research is to eliminate all federal funding of such companies or organizations. Congress H.R. 3054 16 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 106:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3054. At the same time, I rise in great respect for the courage and compassion shown by those who gave their lives attempting to rescue their fellow citizens in the aftermath of the World Trade Center attacks. I also rise in admiration and gratitude to the passengers of Flight 93 who knowingly sacrificed their lives to prevent another terrorist attack. However, I do not believe that an unconstitutional authorization for Congressional Gold Medals is in the true spirit of these American heros. After all, this legislation purports to honor personal sacrifices and acts of heroism by forcing others to pay for these gold medals. Congress H.R. 3054 16 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 106:3 Instead of abusing the taxing and spending power, I urge my colleagues to undertake to raise the money for these medals among ourselves. I would gladly donate to a Congressional Gold Medal fund whose proceeds would be used to purchase and award gold medals to those selected by Congress for this honor. Congress should also reduce the federal tax burdened on the families of those who lost their lives helping their fellow citizens on September 11. Mr. Speaker, reducing the tax burden on these Americans would be a real sacrifice for many in Washington since any reduction in taxes represents a loss of real and potential power for the federal government. Congress H.R. 3054 16 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 106:5 Because of my continuing and uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, I must remain consistent in my defense of a limited government whose powers are explicitly delimited under the enumerated powers of the Constitution — a Constitution which each Member of Congress swore to uphold. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I must oppose this legislation and respectfully suggest that perhaps we should begin a debate among us on more appropriate processes by which we spend other people’s money. Honorary medals and commemorative coins, under the current process, come from other people’s money. It is, of course, easier to be generous with other people’s money, but using our own funds to finance these gold medal is true to the sprit of the heros of September 11. Congress Saddam Hussein 19 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 107:3 One of the reasons why I take an approach on foreign policy where we are less involved overseas is mainly because I feel that the number one obligation for us in Congress and for the people of this country is to preserve liberty and defend it from outside threats. The authors of this resolution, I am sure, have the same goals, but, over the years, I think those goals have been undermined. We as a Nation are now probably weaker rather than stronger and we are more threatened because of what we do overseas. Congress Opposing Resolution For War With Iraq 19 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 110:8 But there is one gentleman who has been in Iraq many times under the U.N., as a U.N. inspector, Scott Ritter. He has been there 30 times. Probably even the best junketeer in Congress I will bet has not been over there 30 times, but he has been there 30 times inspecting. Congress Opposing Resolution For War With Iraq 19 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 110:13 Quite frankly, I think there is a better diplomatic way to handle things. I think it is a shame that our Secretary of State has not been given more authority to have his way on this issue, rather than being overruled by those and encouraged by many Members here in the Congress who want to prepare for war against Iraq, because of this fantastic success in Afghanistan, a country, probably the poorest country in the world that did not even have an airplane; and now, because of this tremendous success, we are ready to take on the next country. Congress 19 December 2001    2001 Ron Paul 111:8 Absent Iraqi involvement in the attack on the United States, I can only wonder why so many in Congress seek to divert resources away from our efforts to bring those who did attack us to justice. That hardly seems a prudent move. Many will argue that it doesn’t matter whether Iraq had a role in the attack on us, Iraq is a threat to the United States and therefore must be dealt with. Some on this committee have made this very argument. Mr. Speaker, most of us here have never been to Iraq, however those who have, like former UN chief Arms Inspector Scott Ritter — who lead some 30 inspection missions to Iraq — come to different conclusions on the country. Asked in November on Fox News Channel by John Kasich sitting in for Bill O’Reilly about how much of a threat Saddam Hussein poses to the United States, former Chief Inspector Ritter said, “In terms of military threat, absolutely nothing . . . Diplomatically, politically, Saddam’s a little bit of a threat. In terms of real national security threat to the United States, no, none.” Mr. Speaker, shouldn’t we even stop for a moment to consider what some of these experts are saying before we move further down the road toward military confrontation? Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:3 The one thing I agree with him entirely on is that the problem exists. There is no doubt there is a huge influence of money here in Washington, and even in my prepared statement I mention how corporations influence our foreign policy and that something ought to be done about it; but campaign finance reform goes in exactly the wrong direction. It just means more regulations, more controls, telling the American people how they can spend their money and how they can lobby Congress and how they can campaign. That is not the problem. Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:4 The problem is that we have Members of Congress that yield to the temptation and influence of money. If we had enough Members around here that did not yield to the temptation, we would not have to have campaign finance reform, we would not have to regulate money, we would not have to undermine the first amendment, and we would not have to undermine the Constitution in that effort. Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:12 What we have done so far since last September is not very reassuring. What we do here in the Congress in the coming months may well determine the survival of our Republic. Fear and insecurity must not drive our policy. Sacrificing personal liberty should never be an option. Involving ourselves in every complex conflict around the globe hardly enhances our national security. Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:13 The special interests that were already lined up at the public trough should not be permitted to use the ongoing crisis as an opportunity to demand even more benefits. Let us all remember why the U.S. Congress was established, what our responsibilities are, and what our oath of office means. Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:19 Sadly, the Congress went in the opposite direction in providing safety on commercial flights. Pilots are not carrying guns, and security has been socialized in spite of the fact that security procedures authorized by the FAA prior to 9–11 were not compromised. The problem did not come from failure to follow the FAA rules. The problem resulted from precisely following FAA rules. No wonder so many Americans were wisely assuming they better be ready to protect themselves when necessary. Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:25 As time progresses, the full impact of homeland security and the unintended consequences of our growing overseas commitments will become apparent, and a large majority of our Americans will appropriately ask why did the Congress do it. Unless we precisely understand the proper role of government in a free society, our problems will not be solved without sacrificing liberty. Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:36 Fortunately, due to the many probable repercussions, a swift attack on Iraq now seems unlikely. Our surrogate army, organized by the Iraqi National Congress, is now known to be a charade, prompting our administration to correctly stop all funding of this organization. The thought of relying on the Kurds to help remove Hussein defies logic, as the U.S.-funded Turkish army continues its war on the Kurds. There is just no coalition in the Persian Gulf to take on Iraq and, fortunately, our Secretary of State knows it. Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:50 If the jingoism of the Wall Street Journal prevails and the warmongers in the Congress and the administration carry the day, we can assume with certainty that these efforts being made will precipitate an uncontrollable breakout of hostilities in the region that could lead to World War III. How a major publication can actually print an article that openly supports such aggression as a serious proposal is difficult to comprehend. Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:52 Something, anything, regardless of its effectiveness, had to be done, since the American people expected it and Congress and the administration willed it. An effort to get the terrorists and their supporters is obviously in order and, hopefully, that has been achieved. But a never-ending commitment to end all terrorism throughout the world, whether it is related to September 11 or not, is neither a legitimate nor a wise policy. H.J. Res. 64 gives the President authority to pursue only those guilty of the attack on us, not every terrorist in the entire world. Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:63 This is good advice. The framers also understood that the important powers for dealing with other countries and the issue of war were to be placed in the hands of Congress. This principle has essentially been forgotten. Congress The Case For Defending America 24 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 1:64 The executive branch now has much more power than does the Congress. Congress continues to allows its authority to be transferred to the executive branch as well as to the international agencies such as the U.N., NAFTA, IMF and the WTO. Through executive orders, our Presidents routinely use powers once jealously guarded and held by the Congress. Congress Resolution Violates Spirit Of Establishment Clause 29 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 2:4 Therefore, even though Congress intends to honor the ways Catholic schools help fulfill a secular goal, the fact is Congress cannot honor Catholic schools without endorsing efforts to promulgate the Catholic faith. By singling out one sect over another, Congress is playing favorites among religions. While this does not compare to the type of religious persecution experienced by many of the founders of this country, it is still an example of the type of federal favoritism among religions that the first amendment forbids. Congress Resolution Violates Spirit Of Establishment Clause 29 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 2:5 What is the superintendent of a Baptist private school or a Pentecostal home schooler going to think when reading this resolution? That Congress does not think they provide children with an excellent education or that Congress does not deem their religious goals worthy of federal endorsement? In a free republic the legislature should not be in the business of favoring one religion over another. I would also like to point out the irony of considering government favoritism of religion in the context of praising the Catholic schools, when early in this century Catholic schools were singled out for government-sanctioned discrimination because they were upholding the teachings of the Catholic Church. Congress Resolution Violates Spirit Of Establishment Clause 29 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 2:6 Allowing Congress to single out certain religions for honors not only insults those citizens whose faith is not recognized by Congress, it also threatens the religious liberty of those honored by Congress. This is because when the federal government begins evaluating religious institutions, some religious institutions may be tempted to modify certain of their teachings in order to curry favor with political leaders. I will concede that religious institutions may not water down their faith in order to secure passage of “Sense of Congress resolutions,” however, the belief that it is proper to judge religious institutions by how effectively they fulfill secular objectives is at the root of the proposals to entangle the federal government with state-approved religions by providing taxpayer dollars to religious organizations in order to perform various social services. Providing taxpayer money to churches creates the very real risk that a church may, for example, feel the need to downplay its teaching against abortion or euthanasia in order to maintain favor with a future pro-abortion administration and thus not lose its federal funding. Congress Resolution Violates Spirit Of Establishment Clause 29 January 2002    2002 Ron Paul 2:7 Of course, the idea that politicians should bestow favors on religions based on how well they fulfill the aims of the politicians is one that should be insulting to all believers no matter their faith. After all, despite what a few of my colleagues seem to think, Mr. Speaker, we in Congress are neither omnipotent nor divine. Congress Statement before the House Capital Markets Subcommittee Monday, February 4, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 3:2 I fear that many of my well-meaning colleagues are reacting to media reports portraying Enron as a reckless company whose problems stemmed from a lack of federal oversight. It is a mistake for Congress to view the Enron collapse as a justification for more government regulation. Publicly held corporations already comply with massive amounts of SEC regulations, including the filing of quarterly reports that disclose minute details of assets and liabilities. If these disclosure rules failed to protect Enron investors, will more red tape really solve anything? The real problem with SEC rules is that they give investors a false sense of security, a sense that the government is protecting them from dangerous investments. Congress Statement before the House Capital Markets Subcommittee Monday, February 4, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 3:4 The SEC, like all government agencies, is not immune from political influence or conflicts of interest. In fact, the new SEC chief used to represent the very accounting companies now under SEC scrutiny. If anything, the Enron failure should teach us to place less trust in the SEC. Yet many in Congress and the media characterize Enron’s bankruptcy as an example of unbridled capitalism gone wrong. Few in Congress seem to understand how the Federal Reserve system artificially inflates stock prices and causes financial bubbles. Yet what other explanation can there be when a company goes from a market value of more than $75 billion to virtually nothing in just a few months? The obvious truth is that Enron was never really worth anything near $75 billion, but the media focuses only on the possibility of deceptive practices by management, ignoring the primary cause of stock overvaluation: Fed expansion of money and credit. Congress Statement before the House Capital Markets Subcommittee Monday, February 4, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 3:6 Therefore, if Congress wishes to avoid future bankruptcies like Enron, the best thing it can do is repeal existing regulations which give investors a false sense of security and reform the country’s monetary policy to end the Fed-generated boom-and-bust cycle. Congress should also repeal those programs which provide taxpayer subsidies to large, politically-powerful corporations such as Enron. Congress Statement before the House Capital Markets Subcommittee Monday, February 4, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 3:7 Enron provides a perfect example of the dangers of corporate subsidies. The company was (and is) one of the biggest beneficiaries of Export-Import Bank subsidies. The Ex-Im bank, a program that Congress continues to fund with tax dollars taken from hard-working Americans, essentially makes risky loans to foreign governments and businesses for projects involving American companies. The Bank, which purports to help developing nations, really acts as a naked subsidy for certain politically-favored American corporations- especially corporations like Enron that lobbied hard and gave huge amounts of cash to both political parties. Its reward was more that $600 million in cash via six different Ex-Im financed projects. Congress Statement on the Argentine crisis February 6 2002    2002 Ron Paul 4:5 According to our colleague, Congressman Jim Saxton, Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, this “Continued lending over many years sustained and subsidized a bankrupt Argentine economic policy, whose collapse is now all the more serious. The IMF’s generous subsidized bailouts lead to moral hazard problems, and enable shaky governments to pressure the IMF for even more funding or risk disaster.” Congress Statement on the Argentine crisis February 6 2002    2002 Ron Paul 4:11 Mr. Chairman, the damage inflicted by the IMF on Argentina is immense and inexcusable. This is yet further proof that the IMF was a bad idea from the very beginning- economically, constitutionally, and morally. However, perhaps some good can come out of this debacle if it causes Congress to at last rethink America’s foolish participation in the IMF. This is why I will soon be introducing legislation to withdraw America from the IMF. I hope my colleagues will join me in working to protect the American taxpayer from underwriting the destruction of countries like Argentina, by working with me to end America’s support for the IMF. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:1 Mr. Speaker: Dealing with the slumping economy will prove every bit as challenging to Congress as fighting terrorism. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:12 The Fed can’t control these rates, and they can’t control where the new credit they create goes. This means that resorting to, or trusting in, the Fed to bail out the economy and accommodate congressional spending is foolhardy and dangerous. This policy has led to a record default for U.S. corporate bonds. Worldwide, $110 billion of bonds were defaulted on last year. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:15 There are other policies that will assist in a recovery that the Congress could implement. All taxes ought to be lowered, government spending should be reduced, controls on labor costs should be removed, and onerous regulations should be reduced or eliminated. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:16 We should not expect any of this to happen unless the people and the Congress decide that free-market capitalism and sound money are preferable to a welfare state and fiat money. Whether this downturn is the one that will force that major decision upon us is not known, but eventually we will have to make it. Welfarism and our expanding growing foreign commitments, financed seductively through credit creation by the Fed, are not viable options. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:17 Transferring wealth to achieve a modicum of economic equality and assuming the role of world policeman, while ignoring economic laws regarding money and credit, must lead to economic distortions and a lower standard of living for most citizens. In the process, dependency on the government develops and Congress attempts to solve all the problems with a much more visible hand than Adam Smith recommended. The police efforts overseas and the effort to solve the social and economic problems here at home cannot be carried out without undermining the freedoms that we all profess to care about. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:18 Sadly lacking in the Congress is a conviction that free markets- that is truly free markets- and sound money can provide the highest standard of living for the greatest number of people. Instead, we operate with a system that compromises free markets and causes economic injury to a growing number of people, while rewarding special interests and steadily undermining the principles of liberty. Unfortunately, the policy of monetary inflation is most harmful to the poor and the middle class, especially in the early stages. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:19 Since rejecting the current system and endorsing economic freedom diminishes the power and influence of politicians, it’s difficult to get political support for such a program. The necessary changes will only come when the American people wake up to the reality and insist that the Congress pursues only those goals permitted under the Constitution. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:25 This is a well-known problem and prompts some serious-minded and well-intentioned Members to want to legislate campaign finance reforms. But the reforms proposed would actually make the whole mess worse. They would regulate access to the members of Congress, and dictate how private money is spent in campaigns. This merely curtails liberty, while ignoring the real problem- a government that ignores the Constitution naturally passes out largesse. Even under today’s conditions, where money talks in Washington, if enough members would refuse either to accept or be influenced by the special interests, government favors would no longer be up for sale. Since politicians are far from perfect, the solution is having a government of limited size acting strictly within the framework of the Constitution. No matter how strictly campaign finance laws are written, they will do only harm if the rule of law is not restored and if Congress refuses to stop being manipulated by the special interests. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:49 The Social Security system depends on the value of the dollar and on future taxation. The Fed can create unlimited amounts of money that Congress needs, and Congress can raise taxes as it wants. But this policy guarantees that the dollar cannot maintain its purchasing power and that there won’t be enough young people to tax in the future. Increasing benefits under these circumstances can only be done at the expense of the dollar. Catching up with the current system of money and transfer payments is equivalent to a person on a treadmill who expects to get to the next town. It tragically doesn’t work. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:50 The economic loss is bad enough, but whether it’s fighting the war on terrorism, acting as the world’s policeman, or solving the problems of vanishing wealth, the real insult will come from the freedoms we lose. These freedoms, vital to production and wealth formation, are necessary and represent what the American dream is all about. They are what made us the richest nation in all of history, but this we will lose if Congress is not careful with what it does in the coming months. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:52 There is, however, no unanimity as to the cause of the attacks, who is responsible, and what exactly has to be done. The President has been given congressional authority to use force “against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.” A large majority of Americans are quite satisfied that his efforts have been carried out with due diligence. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:56 2. Another danger is that the administration may take it upon itself to broadly and incorrectly interpret House Joint Resolution 64- the resolution granting authority to the President to use force to retaliate against only “those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.” Congress did not authorize force against all terrorist attacks throughout the world if the individuals involved were not directly involved in the 9-11 attacks. It would be incorrect and dangerous to use this authority to suppress uprisings throughout the world. This authority cannot be used to initiate an all-out attack on Iraq or any other nation we might find displeasing but that did not participate in the 9-11 attacks. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:62 8. A danger exists that the United States is becoming a police state. Just a few decades ago, this would have been unimaginable. As originally designed, in the American republic, police powers were the prerogative of the states and the military was not to be involved. Unfortunately today, most Americans welcome the use of military troops to police our public places, especially the airports. Even before 9-11, more than 80,000 armed federal bureaucrats patrolled the countryside, checking for violations of federal laws and regulations. That number since 9-11 has increased by nearly 50%- and it will not soon shrink. A military takeover of homeland security looks certain. Can freedom and prosperity survive if the police state continues to expand? I doubt it. It never has before in all of history, and this is a threat the Congress should not ignore. Congress Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:63 9. There is a danger that personal privacy will be a thing of the past. Even before 9-11, there were attacks on the privacy of all Americans- for good reasons, or so it was argued. The attacks included plans for national ID cards, a national medical data bank, and “Know Your Customer” type banking regulations. The need for enforcement powers for the DEA and the IRS routinely prompted laws that violated the Fourth amendment. The current crisis has emboldened those who already were anxious to impose restrictions on the American people. With drug and tax laws, and now with anti-terrorist legislation sailing through Congress, true privacy enjoyed by a free people is fast becoming something that we will only read about in our textbooks. Reversing this trend will not be easy. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, the Enron bankruptcy and the subsequent revelations regarding Enron’s political influence have once again brought campaign finance to the forefront of the congressional agenda. Ironically, many of the strongest proponents of campaign finance reform are among those who receive the largest donations from special interests seeking state favors. In fact, some legislators who where involved in the government-created savings and loan scandal of the late eighties and early nineties today pose as born again advocates of “good government” via campaign finance reform! Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:4 The damage this bill does to the First amendment is certainly a sufficient reason to oppose it. However, as Professor Titus demonstrates in his analysis of the bill, the most important reason to oppose this bill is that the Constitution does not grant Congress the power to regulate campaigns. In fact, article II expressly authorizes the regulation of elections, so the omission of campaigns is glaring. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:5 This legislation thus represents an attempt by Congress to fix a problem created by excessive government intervention in the economy with another infringement on the people’s constitutional liberties. The real problem is not that government lacks power to control campaign financing, but that the federal government has excessive power over our economy and lives. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:8 There is a tremendous incentive for every special interest group to influence government. Every individual, bank, or corporation that does business with government invests plenty in influencing government. Lobbyists spend over a hundred million dollars per month trying to influence Congress. Taxpayer dollars are endlessly spent by bureaucrats in their effort to convince Congress to protect their own empires. Government has tremendous influence over the economy and financial markets through interest rate controls, contracts, regulations, loans, and grants. Corporations and others are “forced” to participate in the process out of greed as well as self-defense- since that’s the way the system works. Equalizing competition and balancing power- such as between labor and business- is a common practice. As long as this system remains in place, the incentive to buy influence will continue. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:10 It’s naive to believe stricter rules will make a difference. If members of Congress resisted the temptation to support unconstitutional legislation to benefit special interests, this whole discussion would be unnecessary. Because members do yield to the pressure, the reformers believe that more rules regulating political speech will solve the problem. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:11 The reformers argue that it’s only the fault of those trying to influence government and not the fault of the members of Congress who yield to the pressure, or the system that generates the abuse. This allows members to avoid assuming responsibility for their own acts, and instead places the blame on those who exert pressure on Congress through the political process- which is a basic right bestowed on all Americans. The reformer’s argument is “Stop us before we succumb to the special interest groups.” Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:18 1. Introduction 2. Congress Has No Constitutional Authority to Pass Any Campaign-Finance Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:22 I. Introduction To date, the legislative debate over campaign-finance reform has focused upon the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech, as interpreted and applied by the courts. The constitutional issues, however, are not limited to the First Amendment, neither are they resolved by citation to Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976) nor by the latest Supreme Court opinion, including the one handed down on June 25, 2001 in FEC v . Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee . To the contrary, pursuant to their oaths of office, members of Congress have an independent duty to determine the constitutionality of legislation before them and to decide, before ever reaching the First Amendment, whether they have been vested by the Constitution with any authority, at all, to regulate federal election campaigns. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:24 Hamilton’s warning has proved prophetic in the case of campaign-finance reform. As the debate swirls around the impact of such reform measures on the freedom of speech and association, the question whether Congress has the constitutional authority to regulate federal election campaigns is being ignored. Yet, that question would have been hotly debated and quickly answered in America’s founding era in light of the constitutional text carefully circumscribing Congress’s authority in relation to federal elections. (See Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 and Article II, Section 1, Clause 4; Federalist No. 60 and Federalist No. 68, I Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution , Sections 814-826 and II Story’s Commentaries , Sections 1453-75, 5th ed. 1891.) Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:25 Additionally, the issue of constitutional authority would have been examined, in the first instance, by Congress and the president without their being bound by previous court opinions. It had already been well established that each representative, each senator, and the president and his cabinet had a constitutional duty, independent of the judiciary, to determine the constitutionality of legislation before them. As President Andrew Jackson observed, in his 1832 veto message rejecting a bill extending the charter of the Bank of the United States: Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:26 It is maintained by the advocates of the bank that its constitutionality in all its features ought to be considered as settled by precedent and by the decision of the Supreme Court. To this conclusion I cannot assent. Mere precedent is a dangerous source of authority...[and] the opinion of the Supreme Court...ought not to control the coordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others. It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill...presented to them for passage...as it is of the supreme judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:27 It is in light of these principles, then, that the issue of constitutional authority to enact any campaign-finance reform bill is addressed in sections II and III below, before reaching the First Amendment issues raised by particular campaign-finance measures in sections IV and V. Furthermore, those issues are examined in light of the constitutional duty of Congress to decide for itself whether it has the constitutional authority to enact campaign-finance reform legislation and whether any such legislation violates the First Amendment, regardless of the opinion of the United States Supreme Court in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976) and its progeny, including the high court’s most recent pronouncement on June 25, 2001. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:28 II.Congress Has No Constitutional Authority to Pass Any Campaign-Finance Reform Legislation According to Article I, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, Congress is a legislature of enumerated powers, having only those “powers herein granted.” As a legislature of enumerated powers, Congress may enact laws only for constitutionally authorized purposes. ( McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S., 4 Wheat. 316, 1819) (“Let the end be legitimate, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end which are not prohibited, are constitutional.”) The stated purpose of all campaign-finance reform legislation, like the Federal Election Campaign Act that it amends, is to “reform the financing of campaigns for election to Federal office,” thereby preventing the “corruption and the appearance of corruption” in government and “equaliz[ing] the relative ability of all citizens to affect the outcomes of elections.” ( Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 25-26, 1976) Congress has been granted no such power. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:29 The threshold question concerning any campaign-finance reform bill is whether the Constitution has conferred upon Congress any authority to regulate federal election campaigns . Such authority is not found among any enumerated power conferred upon Congress. Therefore, Congress may not justify any campaign-finance reform measure on the grounds that its purpose is to reform the financing of campaigns for federal office. Thus, campaign-finance reform laws may be constitutionally justified only if enacted as a means to achieve some other purpose that is constitutionally authorized. ( McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S., 4 Wheat. 316, 1819) Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:30 The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended in 1974, presumed that the Constitution authorized Congress to regulate federal election campaigns for the purposes of “the prevention of corruption and the appearance of corruption” in government and of the equalization of “the relative ability of all citizens to affect the outcome of elections.” ( Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 25-26, 1976) According to the proponents of campaign-finance reform, both then and now, Congress has power to regulate federal election campaigns because it has the general power “to regulate federal elections....” ( Id., 424 U.S. at 13-14) A careful examination of the Constitution, as it is written, uncovers no such broad power, but only a carefully circumscribed one. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:31 As for congressional elections, Article I, Section 4 limits Congress to the making of regulations prescribing the “times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives.” As for the election of the president and vice president Article II, Section 1 limits Congress only to “determin[ing] the time of choosing the [presidential] electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.” (Emphasis added.) As for the place and manner of the selection of the presidential electors, and hence the president and vice president of the United States, the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution determines the place and, according to Article II, Section 1, the state legislatures choose the manner by which the electors are chosen. ( Bush v. Gore , 531 U.S. --, 148 L.Ed.2d 388, 2000) Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:32 Given these express restrictions upon congressional power over federal elections, it was not until the 1930s that Congress, with court approval, began to assume broad powers over federal elections, including the regulation of campaigns for the office of the president. ( Burroughs v. United States, 290 U.S. 534, 1934) At the time of America’s founding, and extending for a period of nearly 135 years, such was not the case. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:33 As for congressional elections, Alexander Hamilton observed, in Federalist No. 60, that congressional authority was “expressly restricted to the regulation of the times, the places , the manner of elections,” and did not, for example, extend to the qualifications of voters. Likewise, Joseph Story noted that congressional authority over federal elections was explicitly confined to regulations concerning the mechanics and integrity of the election process itself, and did not extend to the integrity of government generally or the relative power of voters. ( I Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution , Section 826, 5th ed., 1891) Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:34 As for presidential elections, Hamilton noted that the detailed plan set forth in the original constitution was deliberately designed to ensure that the president would not be elected according to rules promulgated by Congress, lest the president be too dependent upon that body. ( Federalist No. 68 ) Likewise, Justice Story asserted that both the original Constitution and the Twelfth Amendment immunized the “mode of election of the President and Vice-President” from congressional regulation, limiting congressional authority only to setting the “time” of the election. ( II Story’s Commentaries , Sections 1453-75, 5th ed., 1891) Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:35 In 1892, a unanimous Supreme Court rehearsed the history and text governing the election of the president and vice president, concluding that the manner of selection of presidential electors was “placed absolutely and wholly with the legislatures of the several states” and that this “power and jurisdiction of the State” was “so framed that congressional and Federal influence might be excluded.” ( McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 34-36, 1892) (See also Bush v. Gore , supra.) Because the Constitution grants to Congress no authority to regulate the “manner” of the election of the president and vice president, it follows that Congress has no authority over presidential and vice presidential election campaigns. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:36 As for congressional regulation of the campaigns of candidates for the United States House of Representatives and United States Senate, four justices of the United States Supreme Court, in 1921, struck down a federal law limiting contributions and expenditures in congressional elections, observing: Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:37 We find no support in reason or authority for the argument that because the offices were created by the Constitution, Congress has some indefinite, undefined power over elections for Senators and Representatives not derived from [Article I] Section 4. ( Newberry v. United States , 256 U.S. 232, 249, 1921) Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:38 From this constitutional premise, these justices ruled that the “authority to regulate the manner of holding... [elections] gives no right to control” things that are “prerequisites to elections or [that] may affect their outcomes - voters, education, means of transportation, health, public discussion , immigration, private animosities, even the face and figure of the candidate....” ( Id., 256 U.S. at 257 [emphasis added]) Therefore, they concluded that Congress had authority only to regulate congressional elections to protect voters from fraud { Ex parte Siebold, 100 U.S. 371, 382-88 (1880)}, from intimidation { Ex Parte Yarbrough, 110 U.S. 660-62 (1884)} and from other acts designed to protect the integrity of the election process, as such. ( Newberry v. United States, supra, 256 U.S. at 255) Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:39 This was the original understanding, as set forth in the constitutional text and as stated by Hamilton and Story. Congressional regulation of political campaigns, beginning in the 1930’s, disregards the founding principle of limited federal authority. Instead, such regulation is based upon the assumption that Congress is a legislature of plenary power, rather than enumerated powers as stated in Article I, Section 1. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:40 (See Burroughs v. United States, supra, 290 U.S. at 545.) Such precedents as these should be rejected, lest Congress overstep the limited authority granted to it by the sovereign people of the United States. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:41 III. Campaign-Finance Reform Violates Separation of Powers and Federalism Under the Constitution, Congress has no role in the manner by which the president and vice president are selected. In order to ensure the independence of the president from Congress, the electors of the president and vice president are state officers, governed exclusively by the Constitution and by state law. (See Bush v. Gore , supra.) All current campaign-finance measures, such as the Federal Campaign Act of 1971, as amended in 1974, subvert these separation of powers and federalism principles by imposing a national uniform rule governing the conduct of election campaigns for president and vice-president. They also undermine the federalism principle underpinning the limited role of Congress in the governance of elections of representatives and senators. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:42 According to Article II, Section 1, the state legislatures, not Congress, determine the “manner” of the election of presidential electors who, in turn, are governed by the Twelfth Amendment as to the “manner” of the election of the president and vice president of the United States. The only constitutionally prescribed role for the Senate in that election process is to serve as an objective observer of the final count of votes cast by the presidential electors. The House also is limited to the role of an objective observer, unless on final count of the electors’ votes, no person achieves a majority of votes for president. Then, and only then, may the House intervene in the manner of electing a president, casting one vote per state until a candidate achieves a majority. As for the vice president, both houses of Congress are limited to serving as objective observers of the final tally of votes, except that the Senate plays the same role as the House if no candidate for vice president receives a majority. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:43 This detailed scheme limiting the role of Congress in the manner of electing the president and the vice president of the United States was deliberately chosen by America’s founders to insulate the federal executive branch from the legislative branch in order to ensure independence of the former from the latter. As Alexander Hamilton put it in Federalist No. 68, the Constitution entrusts the selection of the president and vice president not to “any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose....” The electoral college was designed, therefore, as a buffer between the people and Congress to guard against the risk of corruption of the presidency by congressional participation in the election process. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:44 Thus, the electoral college system was designed to prevent corruption and the appearance of corruption of the offices of the president and the vice president. That system was set up in such a way as to deny to Congress any authority over the manner of selecting those two officers, leaving the selection process to be exclusively and absolutely determined by the legislatures of the several states. This delegation to the several state legislatures necessarily precludes Congress from imposing any uniform rule governing the election of the president and the vice president. (See McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 1892.) By continuing the regulation of presidential election campaigns as provided for in the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended in 1974, and by adding new regulations that extend to candidates for the presidency and vice presidency, all current campaign-finance reform measures subvert the constitutionally prescribed decentralized manner by which the president and vice president of the United States are selected. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:45 By design and effect, such measures perpetuate the current regulations governing the selection of presidential and vice presidential electors who are, according to the Constitution, state officers, and not federal ones. ( In re Green, 134 U.S. 377, 1890) (“Although the electors are appointed and act under and pursuant to the Constitution of the United States, they are no more officers or agents of the United States than are... the people of the States when acting as electors of representatives in Congress.”); Ray v. Blair, 343 U.S. 214, 224-25 (1952) (“The presidential electors exercise a federal function in balloting for President and Vice-President but they are not federal officers or agents any more than the state elector who votes for congressmen.”) Thus, all current campaign-finance reform bills violate the principles of separation of powers and federalism protecting the independence of the federal executive branch. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:46 Additionally, campaign-finance regulations applied to the election of members of Congress also intrude upon the power of their electors who, like presidential electors, are state officers. According to Article I, Section 2 and the Seventeenth Amendment, the qualifications of the electors of United States representatives and senators are set by state law, not by federal law. ( In re Green, supra, 134 U.S. 379; Ray v. Blair, supra, 343 U.S. at 224-25) The Constitution did not grant to Congress any power to determine the eligibility of their electors, and thus insulated those electors from having their power reduced, or otherwise affected, by their representatives in Congress. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:47 Although no current campaign-finance reform bill sets the qualifications of electors for Congress, each one does, like its predecessors, impose a uniform system of campaign rules designed to govern the power to be exercised by citizens at the voting booth. Some of the measures, like the McCain-Feingold bill passed in the Senate and Shays-Meehan bill pending before the House, extend that uniform system, exercising power over the state, district and local committees of political parties as well as the national committees of those parties. While such laws do not change state laws governing voter eligibility, as such, they do change the power exercised by those eligible voters. Indeed, one of the stated purposes of campaign reform legislation is to “equalize” the power of citizens “to affect the outcome of elections.” ( Buckley v. Valeo, supra, 424 U.S. at 25-26) Such a purpose, however, is illegitimate. It imposes a national uniform standard limiting the power of voters to the detriment of a constitutionally prescribed system of state diversity. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:48 In his Commentaries on the Constitution , Justice Story observed that the framers deliberately chose not to impose a standard of “equality” among the voters of the several states, but rather to accommodate a “mixed system, embracing and representing and combining distinct interests, classes and opinions.” ( I Story , Commentaries on the Constitution Sections 583-84, 5th ed., 1891) More recently, in a column published in the September 5, 1999, issue of The Washington Post, columnist George Will reminded his fellow Americans that the Constitution does not authorize one federal election, but many. All current campaign-finance reform measures disregard this decentralized federal structure governing elections to Congress and to the presidency and, for that reason, are unconstitutional. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:49 IV. Campaign-Finance Reform Abridges the Freedom of Speech and the Press At the heart of campaign-finance reform legislation, is the desire of Congress to eliminate even the “appearance of corruption” to the end that the people have confidence in the current system of representative government. ( Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 27, 1976) At the heart of the guarantee of the freedom of speech is the prohibition against any law designed to protect the reputation of the government to the end that the people have confidence in their current governors. As seditious libel laws protecting the reputation of the government unconstitutionally abridge the freedom of speech so also do campaign-finance reform laws. Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:55 Twice in America’s history, the sovereignty of the people came under direct attack from Congress. Both times the attack came in the form of laws prohibiting “seditious libel” (writing or speaking in such a way as to bring the government into ridicule or disrepute), and thereby threatening the current system of government and its leaders. Finally, in 1964, the United States Supreme Court put an end to seditious libel, ruling that the freedom of speech guarantees a nation in which “debate on the public issues should be uninhibited, robust and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.” ( New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 270, 1964) Congress So-Called “Campaign Finance Reform” is Unconstitutional February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 7:62 Since Watergate, Congress has been scrambling to “purify” the political process in order to restore public confidence in the federal government. Campaign-finance reform has been one of the centerpieces of this purification effort. Two central goals have dominated this reform effort: (1) to limit the amounts that any one person or entity may contribute to an election campaign; (2) to force disclosure of the identity of those contributors. Both of these aims violate the First Amendment right of the people to assemble. Congress Introduction of the Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 8:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act. This simple bill takes a step toward restoring Congress’ constitutional authority over U.S. monetary policy by requiring congressional approval before the President or the Treasury secretary buys or sells gold. Congress Introduction of the Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 8:7 Mr. Speaker, while I certainly share GATA’s concerns over the effects of federal dealings in the gold market, my bill in no way interferes with the ability of the federal government to buy or sell gold. It simply requires that before the executive branch engages in such transactions, Congress has the chance to review it, debate it, and approve it. Congress Introduction of the Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act February 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 8:8 Given the tremendous effects on the American economy from federal dealings in the gold market, it certainly is reasonable that the people’s representatives have a role in approving these transactions, especially since Congress has a neglected but vital constitutional role in overseeing monetary policy. Therefore, I urge all my colleagues to stand up for sound economics, open government, and Congress’ constitutional role in monetary policy by cosponsoring the Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act. Congress Before We Bomb Iraq... February 26, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 9:15 Congress never complains about its lost prerogative to be the sole declarer of war. Astoundingly, Congress is only too eager to give war power to our presidents through the back door, by the use of some fuzzy resolution that the president can use as his justification. And once the hostilities begin, the money always follows, because Congress fears criticism for not “supporting the troops.” But putting soldiers in harm’s way without proper authority, and unnecessarily, can hardly be the way to “support the troops.” Congress Before We Bomb Iraq... February 26, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 9:16 Let it be clearly understood- there is no authority to wage war against Iraq without Congress passing a Declaration of War. HJ RES 65, passed in the aftermath of 9/11, does not even suggest that this authority exists. A UN Resolution authorizing an invasion of Iraq, even if it were to come, cannot replace the legal process for the United States going to war as precisely defined in the Constitution. We must remember that a covert war is no more justifiable, and is even more reprehensible. Congress Before We Bomb Iraq... February 26, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 9:18 We must understand that the American people become less secure when we risk a major conflict driven by commercial interests and not constitutionally authorized by Congress. Victory under these circumstances is always elusive, and unintended consequences are inevitable. Congress Statement on Ending US Membership in the IMF February 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 10:3 According to Congressman Jim Saxton, Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, this “Continued lending over many years sustained and subsidized a bankrupt Argentine economic policy, whose collapse is now all the more serious. The IMF’s generous subsidized bailouts lead to moral hazard problems, and enable shaky governments to pressure the IMF for even more funding or risk disaster.” Congress Statement on Ending US Membership in the IMF February 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 10:8 In all my years in Congress, I have never been approached by a taxpayer asking that he or she be forced to provide more subsidies to Wall Street executives and foreign dictators. The only constituency for the IMF is the huge multinational banks and corporations. Big banks used IMF funds- taxpayer funds- to bail themselves out from billions in losses after the Asian financial crisis. Big corporations obtain lucrative contracts for a wide variety of construction projects funded with IMF loans. It’s a familiar game in Washington, with corporate welfare disguised as compassion for the poor. Congress Health Information Independence Act of 2002 February 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 11:5 In 1994, Congress responded to the American people’s desire for greater access to information about the benefits of dietary supplements by passing the Dietary Supplements and Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), which liberalized rules regarding the regulation of dietary supplements. Congressional offices received a record number of comments in favor of DSHEA. Congress Health Information Independence Act of 2002 February 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 11:7 In the more than two years since the Pearson decision, members of Congress have had to continually intervene with the FDA to ensure it followed the court order. The FDA continues to deny consumers access to truthful health information. Clearly, the FDA is determined to continue to (as the Pearson court pointed out) act as though liberalizing regulations regarding health claims is the equivalent of “asking consumers to buy something while hypnotized and therefore they are bound to be misled.” Therefore, if Congress is serious about respecting the First Amendment rights of the people, we must remove FDA authority to censor non-misleading health claims, and those claims which can be rendered non-misleading by the simple device of adopting a disclaimer, by passing my Health Information Independence Act. Congress Statement on the Financial Services committee’s “Views and Estimates for Fiscal Year 2003” February 28, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 12:5 Rather than embracing an agenda of expanded statism, I hope my colleagues will work to reduce government interference in the market that only benefits the politically powerful. For example, the committee could take a major step toward ending corporate welfare by holding hearings and a mark-up on my legislation to withdrawal the United States from the Bretton Woods Agreement and end taxpayer support for the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The Financial Services committee can also take a step toward restoring Congress’ constitutional role in monetary policy by acting on my Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act (HR 3732), which requires Congressional approval before the federal government buys or sells gold. Congress Federal Penalties For Child Sexual Abuse 14 March 2002    2002 Ron Paul 16:3 As I stated before, it certainly is a legitimate exercise of government power to impose a lifetime sentence on those guilty of multiple sex crimes against children. However, I would ask my colleagues to consider the wisdom of Congress’ increased reliance on mandatory minimums. Over the past several years we have seen a number of cases with people sentenced to life, or other harsh sentences, that appear to offend basic principles of justice. Even judges in many of these cases admit that the sentences imposed are in no way just, but the judiciary’s hands are tied by the statutorily imposed mandatory minimums. Congress Federal Penalties For Child Sexual Abuse 14 March 2002    2002 Ron Paul 16:4 In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, while I believe this is a worthy piece of legislation, I hope someday we will debate whether expanding Federal crimes (along with the use of congressionally mandated mandatory minimum sentences) is consistent with constitutional government and fundamental principles of justice. Congress Export-Import Reauthorization Act 19 March 2002    2002 Ron Paul 17:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, reauthorizing taxpayer support for the Export-Import Reauthorization Act for every 1 day, much less for a month violates basic economic, constitutional, and moral principles. Therefore, Congress should reject S. 2019. Congress Export-Import Reauthorization Act 19 March 2002    2002 Ron Paul 17:10 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, Eximbank distorts the market by allowing government bureaucrats to make economic decisions in place of individual consumers. Eximbank also violates basic principles of morality, by forcing working Americans to subsidize the trade of wealthy companies that could easily afford to subsidize their own trade, as well as subsidizing brutal governments like Red China and the Sudan. Eximbank also violates the limitations on congressional power to take the property of individual citizens and use them to benefit powerful special interests. It is for these reasons that I urge my colleagues to reject S. 2019. Congress Statement against Meddling in Domestic Ukrainian Politics Wednesday, March 20, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 18:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose H. Res. 339, a bill by the United States Congress which seeks to tell a sovereign nation how to hold its own elections. It seems the height of arrogance for us to sit here and lecture the people and government of Ukraine on what they should do and should not do in their own election process. One would have thought after our own election debacle in November 2000, that we would have learned how counterproductive and hypocritical it is to lecture other democratic countries on their electoral processes. How would members of this body- or any American- react if countries like Ukraine demanded that our elections here in the United States conform to their criteria? So I think we can guess how Ukrainians feel about this piece of legislation. Congress Statement against Meddling in Domestic Ukrainian Politics Wednesday, March 20, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 18:6 Mr. Speaker, we are legislators in the United States Congress. We are not in Ukraine. We have no right to interfere in the internal affairs of that country and no business telling them how to conduct their elections. A far better policy toward Ukraine would be to eliminate any U.S.-government imposed barrier to free trade between Americans and Ukrainians. Congress Do Not Initiate War On Iraq March 20, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 19:2 Number one, Congress has not given the President the legal authority to wage war against Iraq as directed by the Constitution, nor does he have U.N. authority to do so. Even if he did, it would not satisfy the rule of law laid down by the Framers of the Constitution. Congress Statement Opposing Military Conscription March 20, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 20:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation expressing the sense of Congress that the United States government should not revive military conscription. Supporters of conscription have taken advantage of the events of September 11 to renew efforts to reinstate the military draft. However, reviving the draft may actually weaken America’s military. Furthermore, a military draft violates the very principles of individual liberty this country was founded upon. It is no exaggeration to state that military conscription is better suited for a totalitarian government, such as the recently dethroned Taliban regime, than a free society. Congress Statement Opposing Military Conscription March 20, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 20:5 Instead of reinstating a military draft, Congress should make military service attractive by finally living up to its responsibility to provide good benefits and pay to members of the armed forces and our nation’s veterans. It is an outrage that American military personnel and veterans are given a lower priority in the federal budget than spending to benefit politically powerful special interests. Until this is changed, we will never have a military which reflects our nation’s highest ideals. Congress Statement Opposing Military Conscription March 20, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 20:10 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to stand up for the long-term military interests of the United States, individual liberty, and values of the Declaration of Independence by cosponsoring my sense of Congress resolution opposing reinstatement of the military draft. Congress American Servicemember And Civilian Protection Act Of 2002 April 11, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 22:2 This bill expresses the sense of the Congress that President Bush should formally rescind the signature approving the International Criminal Court made on behalf of the United States, and should take necessary steps to prevent the establishment of that Court. It also prohibits funds made available by the United States Government from being used for the establishment or operation of the Court. Congress H.R. 476 17 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 23:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, in the name of a truly laudable cause (preventing abortion and protecting parental rights), today the Congress could potentially move our nation one step closer to a national police state by further expanding the list of federal crimes and usurping power from the states to adequately address the issue of parental rights and family law. Of course, it is much easier to ride the current wave of criminally federalizing all human malfeasance in the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a Constitutional oath which prescribes a procedural structure by which the nation is protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism carried out by a centralized government. Who, after all, wants to be amongst those members of Congress who are portrayed as trampling parental rights or supporting the transportation of minor females across state lines for ignoble purposes. Congress H.R. 476 17 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 23:3 Our federal government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers, Article one, Section eight, enumerates the legislative area for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every other issues, the federal government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the state governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The tenth amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Congress H.R. 476 17 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 23:4 Nevertheless, rather than abide by our constitutional limits, Congress today will likely pass H.R. 476. H.R. 476 amends title 18, Untied States Code, to prohibit taking minors across State line to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions. Should parents be involved in decisions regarding the health of their children? Absolutely. Should the law respect parents rights to not have their children taken across state lines for contemptible purposes? Absolutely. Can a state pass an enforceable statute to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions? Absolutely. But when asked if there exists constitutional authority for the federal criminalizing of just such an action the answer is absolutely not. Congress H.R. 476 17 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 23:6 We have been reminded by both Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese that more federal crimes, while they make politicians feel good, are neither constitutionally sound nor prudent. Rehnquist has stated that “The trend to federalize crimes that traditionally have been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our federal system.” Meese stated that Congress’ tendency in recent decades to make federal crimes out of offenses that have historically been state matters has dangerous implications both for the fair administration of justice and for the principle that states are something more than mere administrative districts of a nation governed mainly from Washington. Congress H.R. 476 17 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 23:7 The argument which springs from the criticism of a federalized criminal code and a federal police force is that states may be less effective than a centralized federal government in dealing with those who leave one state jurisdiction for another. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of state sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit clause allow states to exact judgments from those who violate their state laws. The Constitution even allows the federal government to legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow states to enforce their substantive laws without the federal government imposing its substantive edicts on the states. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one state to another. While not self-enacting, in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. There is, of course, a cost imposed upon states in working with one another rather than relying on a national, unified police force. At the same time, there is a greater cost to state autonomy and individual liberty from centralization of police power. Congress Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility, And Transparency Act of 2002 (CARTA) 24 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 24:2 So ingrained is the idea that new Federal regulations will prevent future Enrons, that today’s debate will largely be between CARTA’s supporters and those who believe this bill does not provide enough Federal regulation and control. I would like to suggest that before Congress imposes new regulations on the accounting profession, perhaps we should consider whether the problems the regulations are designed to address were at least in part caused by prior government interventions into the market. Perhaps Congress could even consider the almost heretical idea that reducing Federal control of the markets is in the public’s best interest. Congress should also consider whether the new regulations will have costs which might outweigh any (marginal) gains. Finally, Mr. Speaker, Congress should contemplate whether we actually have any constitutional authorization to impose these new regulations, instead of simply stretching the Commerce Clause to justify the program de jour. Congress Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility, And Transparency Act of 2002 (CARTA) 24 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 24:4 When Congress establishes a regulatory state it creates an opportunity for corruption. Unless CARTA eliminates original sin, it will not eliminate fraud. In fact, by creating a new bureaucracy and further politicizing the accounting profession, CARTA may create new opportunities for the unscrupulous to manipulate the system to their advantage. Congress Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility, And Transparency Act of 2002 (CARTA) 24 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 24:11 If left alone by Congress, the market is perfectly capable of disciplining businesses who engage in unsound practices. After all, before the government intervened, Arthur Andersen and Enron had already begun to pay a stiff penalty, a penalty delivered by individual investors acting through the market. This shows that not only can the market deliver punishment, but it can also deliver this punishment swifter and more efficiently than the government. We cannot know what efficient means of disciplining companies would emerge from a market process but we can know they would be better at meeting the needs of investors than a top-down regulatory approach. Congress Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility, And Transparency Act of 2002 (CARTA) 24 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 24:12 Of course, while the supporters of increased regulation claim Enron as a failure of “ravenous capitalism,” the truth is Enron was a phenomenon of the mixed economy, rather than the operations of the free market. Enron provides a perfect example of the dangers of corporate subsidies. The company was (and is) one of the biggest beneficiaries of Export- Import (Ex-Im) Bank and Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) subsidies. These programs make risky loans to foreign governments and businesses for projects involving American companies. While they purport to help developing nations, Ex-Im and OPIC are in truth nothing more than naked subsidies for certain politically-favored American corporations, particularly corporations like Enron that lobby hard and give huge amounts of cash to both political parties. Rather than finding ways to exploit the Enron mess to expand Federal power, perhaps Congress should stop aiding corporations like Enron that pick the taxpayer’s pockets through Ex-Im and OPIC. Congress Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility, And Transparency Act of 2002 (CARTA) 24 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 24:14 Congress should also examine the role the Federal Reserve played in the Enron situation. Few in Congress seem to understand how the Federal Reserve system artificially inflates stock prices and causes financial bubbles. Yet, what other explanation can there be when a company goes from a market value of more than $75 billion to virtually nothing in just a few months? The obvious truth is that Enron was never really worth anything near $75 billion, but the media focuses only on the possibility of deceptive practices by management, ignoring the primary cause of stock overvaluations: Fed expansion of money and credit. Congress Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility, And Transparency Act of 2002 (CARTA) 24 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 24:16 Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would remind my colleagues that Congress has no constitutional authority to regulate the financial markets or the accounting profession. Instead, responsibility for enforcing laws against fraud are under the jurisdiction of the state and local governments. This decentralized approach actually reduces the opportunity for the type of corruption referred to above — after all, it is easier to corrupt one Federal official than 50 State Officials. Congress Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility, And Transparency Act of 2002 (CARTA) 24 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 24:17 In conclusion, the legislation before us today expands Federal power over the accounting profession and the financial markets. By creating new opportunities for unscrupulous actors to maneuver through the regulatory labyrinth, increasing the costs of investing, and preempting the market’s ability to come up with creative ways to hold corporate officials accountable, this legislation harms the interests of individual workers and investors. Furthermore, this legislation exceeds the constitutional limits on Federal power, interfering in matters the 10th amendment reserves to state and local law enforcement. I therefore urge my colleagues to reject this bill. Instead, Congress should focus on ending corporate welfare programs which provide taxpayer dollars to large politically-connected companies, and ending the misguided regulatory and monetary policies that helped create the Enron debacle. Congress Predictions 24 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 25:20 The Congress and the President will shift radically toward expanding the size and scope of the Federal Government. This will satisfy both the liberals and the conservatives. Congress Honoring Calhoun High School 29 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 26:2 The “We the People” program was begun in 1987, with the goal of enhancing students’ understanding of the institutions of American constitutional democracy, while guiding them to discover modern day applications of the Constitution and the Bill if Rights. It is a time consuming study requiring many hours of preparation, both in and out of the classroom. Each participant takes a multiple-choice test, and prepares for a simulated Congressional hearing in which students “testify” before a panel of judges. Congress Honoring Calhoun High School 29 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 26:5 I am proud to have these students in the 14th Congressional District of Texas. I am proud of the commitment to excellence and perseverance shown by each student. I am proud of the support shown by the parents and volunteers which helped them reach for their goal. Congress Honoring San Marcos High School 29 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 27:2 The “We the People” program was begun in 1987, with the goal of enhancing students’ understanding of the institutions of American constitutional democracy, while guiding them to discover modern day applications of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It is a time consuming study requiring many hours of preparation, both in and out of the classroom. Each participant takes a multiple-choice test, and prepared for a simulated Congressional hearing in which students “testify” before a panel of judges. Congress Honoring San Marcos High School 29 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 27:4 I am proud to have these students in the 14th Congressional District of Texas. I am proud of the commitment to excellence and perseverance shown by each student. I am proud of the support shown by the parents and volunteers which helped them reach their goal. Congress Statement Opposing Taxpayer Funding of Multinational Development Banks May 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 28:1 Mr. Speaker, Congress can perform a great service to the American taxpayer, as well as citizens in developing countries, by rejecting HR 2604, which reauthorizes two multilateral development banks, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the Asian Development Fund (AsDF). Congress Statement Opposing Taxpayer Funding of Multinational Development Banks May 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 28:2 Congress has no constitutional authority to take money from American taxpayers and send that money overseas for any reason . Furthermore, foreign aid undermines the recipient countries’ long-term economic progress by breeding a culture of dependency. Ironically, foreign aid also undermines long-term United States foreign policy goals by breeding resentment among recipients of the aid, which may manifest itself in a foreign policy hostile to the United States. Congress Statement Opposing Taxpayer Funding of Multinational Development Banks May 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 28:3 If Congress lacks authority to fund an international food aid program, then Congress certainly lacks authority to use taxpayer funds to promote economic development in foreign lands. Programs such as the AsDF are not only unconstitutional, but, by removing resources from the control of consumers and placing them under the control of bureaucrats and politically-powerful special interests, these programs actually retard economic development in the countries receiving this "aid!" This is because funds received from programs like the AsDF are all-too-often wasted on political boondoggles which benefit the political elites in the recipient countries, but are of little benefit to the individual citizens of those countries. Congress Statement Opposing Taxpayer Funding of Multinational Development Banks May 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 28:4 In conclusion, HR 2604 authorizes the continued taking of taxpayer funds for unconstitutional and economically destructive programs. I therefore urge my colleagues to reject this bill, return the money to the American taxpayers, and show the world that the United States Congress is embracing the greatest means of generating prosperity: the free market. Congress International Fund For Agricultural Development 1 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 29:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Congress can perform a great service to the American taxpayer, as well as citizens in developing countries, by rejecting HR 2604, which reauthorizes two multilateral development banks, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the Asian Development Fund (AsDF). Congress International Fund For Agricultural Development 1 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 29:2 Congress has no constitutional authority to take money from American taxpayers and send that money overseas for any reason. Furthermore, foreign aid undermines the recipient countries’ long-term economic progress by breeding a culture of dependency. Ironically, foreign aid also undermines long-term United States foreign policy goals by breeding resentment among recipients of the aid, which may manifest itself in a foreign policy hostile to the United States. Congress International Fund For Agricultural Development 1 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 29:3 If Congress lacks authority to fund an international food aid program, then Congress certainly lacks authority to use taxpayer funds to promote economic development in foreign lands. Programs such as the AsDF are not only unconstitutional, but, by removing resources from the control of consumers and placing them under the control of bureaucrats and politically-powerful special interests, these programs actually retard economic development in the countries receiving this “aid!” This is because funds received from programs like the AsDF are all-too-often wasted on political boondoggles which benefit the political elites in the recipient countries, but are of little benefit to the individual citizens of those countries. Congress International Fund For Agricultural Development 1 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 29:4 In conclusion, HR 2604 authorizes the continued taking of taxpayer funds for unconstitutional and economically destructive programs. I therefore urge my colleagues to reject this bill, return the money to the American taxpayers, and show the world that the United States Congress is embracing the greatest means of generating prosperity: the free market. Congress Statement Opposing Export-Import Bank Corporate Welfare May 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 31:1 Mr. Chairman, we are here today to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank, but it has nothing to do with a bank, do not mislead anybody. This has to do with an agency of the government that allocates credit to special interests and to the benefit of foreign entities. So it is not a bank in that sense. To me it is immoral in the fact that it takes from some who cannot defend themselves to give to the rich who get the benefits. And I just do not see that as being a very good function and a very good program for the U.S. Congress. Besides, I would like to see where somebody gives me the constitutional authority for doing what we do here and we have been doing, of course, for a long time. Congress Statement Opposing Export-Import Bank Corporate Welfare May 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 31:4 Now, it seems strange that we here in the Congress are willing to give the beneficiary China the most number of dollars. They qualify for nearly $6 billion worth of credits. And that just does not seem like the reasonable thing for us to do. So I strongly urge a no vote on this bill. Congress Statement Opposing Export-Import Bank Corporate Welfare May 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 31:5 Mr. Chairman, Congress should reject H.R. 2871, the Export-Import Reauthorization Act, for economic, constitutional, and moral reasons. The Export-Import Bank (Eximbank) takes money from American taxpayers to subsidize exports by American companies. Of course, it is not just any company that receives Eximbank support; the majority of Eximbank funding benefit large, politically powerful corporations. Congress Statement Opposing Export-Import Bank Corporate Welfare May 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 31:10 At a time when the Federal budget is going back into deficit and Congress is once again preparing to raid the Social Security and Medicare trust funds, does it really make sense to use taxpayer funds to benefit future Enrons, Fortune 500 companies, and communist China? Congress Statement Opposing Export-Import Bank Corporate Welfare May 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 31:15 In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, Eximbank distorts the market by allowing government bureaucrats to make economic decisions in place of individual consumers. Eximbank also violates basic principles of morality, by forcing working Americans to subsidize the trade of wealthy companies that could easily afford to subsidize their own trade, as well as subsidizing brutal governments like Red China and the Sudan. Eximbank also violates the limitations on congressional power to take the property of individual citizens and use it to benefit powerful special interests. It is for these reasons that I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 2871, the Export-Import Bank Reauthorization Act. Congress Statement in Support of a Balanced Approach to the Middle East Peace Process May 2, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 32:1 MR. PAUL: Mr. Speaker, this legislation could not have come at a worse time in the ongoing Middle East crisis. Just when we have seen some positive signs that the two sides may return to negotiations toward a peaceful settlement, Congress has jumped into the fray on one side of the conflict. I do not believe that this body wishes to de-rail the slight progress that seems to have come from the Administration’s more even-handed approach over the past several days. So why is it that we are here today ready to pass legislation that clearly and openly favors one side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Congress Statement in Support of a Balanced Approach to the Middle East Peace Process May 2, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 32:4 Perhaps this is why the Administration views this legislation as "not a very helpful approach" to the situation in the Middle East. In my view, it is bad enough that we are intervening at all in this conflict, but this legislation strips any lingering notion that the United States intends to be an honest broker. It states clearly that the leadership of one side - the Palestinians - is bad and supports terrorism just at a time when this Administration negotiates with both sides in an attempt to bring peace to the region. Talk about undermining the difficult efforts of the president and the State Department. What incentive does Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat or his organization have to return to the negotiating table if we as "honest broker" make it clear that in Congress’s eyes, the Palestinians are illegitimate terrorists? Must we become so involved in this far-off conflict that we are forced to choose between Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon? The United States Congress should not, Constitutionally, be in the business of choosing who gets to lead which foreign people. Congress Expressing Solidarity With Israel In Its Fight Against Terrorism 2 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 33:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, this legislation could not have come at a worse time in the ongoing Middle East crisis. Just when we have seen some positive signs that the two sides may return to negotiations toward a peaceful settlement, Congress has jumped into the fray on one side of the conflict. I do not believe that this body wishes to de-rail the slight progress that seems to have come from the Administration’s more even-handed approach over the past several days. So why is it that we are here today ready to pass legislation that clearly and openly favors one side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Congress Expressing Solidarity With Israel In Its Fight Against Terrorism 2 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 33:4 Perhaps this is why the Administration views this legislation as “not a very helpful approach” to the situation in the Middle East. In my view, it is bad enough that we are intervening at all in this conflict, but this legislation strips any lingering notion that the United States intends to be an honest broker. It states clearly that the leadership of one side — the Palestinians — is bad and supports terrorism just at a time when this Administration negotiates with both sides in an attempt to bring peace to the region. Talk about undermining the difficult efforts of the president and the State Department. What incentive does Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat or his organization have to return to the negotiating table if we as “honest broker” make it clear that in Congress’s eyes, the Palestinians are illegitimate terrorists? Must we become so involved in this far-off conflict that we are forced to choose between Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon? The United States Congress should not, Constitutionally, be in the business of choosing who gets to lead which foreign people. Congress Seeks More Balance Of Interests 2 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 34:4 This legislation is one-sided and, therefore, not very helpful. So here we are, as a Congress, in a desire to please certain people, moving quickly, even though it may affect what is going on in the State Department. And the State Department goes on to say that this one-sided legislation just comes when in the past 48 hours or so we have been making some progress. Congress Say No to Conscription May 9, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 35:2 Despite the threat posed to the very existence of the young republic by the invading British Empire, Congress ultimately rejected the proposal to institute a draft. If the new nation of America could defeat what was then the most powerful military empire in the world without a draft, there is no reason why we cannot address our current military needs with a voluntary military. Congress Say No to Conscription May 9, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 35:4 In order to reaffirm support for individual liberty and an effective military, I have introduced H. Con. Res. 368, which expresses the sense of Congress against reinstating a military draft. I urge my colleagues to read Daniel Webster’s explanation of why the draft is incompatible with liberty government and cosponsor H. Con. Res. 368. Congress Say No to Conscription May 9, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 35:5 ON CONSCRIPTION (By Daniel Webster) During America’s first great war, waged against Great Britain, the Madison Administration tried to introduce a conscription bill into Congress. This bill called forth one of Daniel Webster’s most eloquent efforts, in a powerful opposition to conscription. The speech was delivered in the House of Representatives on December 9, 1814; the following is a condensation: Congress Say No to Conscription May 9, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 35:6 This bill indeed is less undisguised in its object, and less direct in its means, than some of the measures proposed. It is an attempt to exercise the power of forcing the free men of this country into the ranks of an army, for the general purposes of war, under color of a military service. It is a distinct system, introduced for new purposes, and not connected with any power, which the Constitution has conferred on Congress. Congress Amendment 9 9 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 37:2 This amendment is not complex at all. It is a sense of Congress resolution as put in the bill. It says, “It is the sense of Congress that none of the funds appropriated pursuant to authorizations of appropriations in this Act should be used for any assistance to, or to cooperate with or to provide any support for the International Criminal Court.” Congress Amendment 9 9 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 37:11 I have introduced this amendment to the Defense Authorization Act, therefore, to support the president’s decision and to indicate that Congress is behind him in his rejection of this unconstitutional global court. it is imperative that we not award the International Criminal Court a single tax dollar to further its objective of undermining our sovereignty and our Constitutional protections. How could we do anything less: each of us in this body has taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States? Congress Amendment 9 9 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 37:12 I am also introducing today a Sense of the Congress bill to commend President Bush for his bold and brave decision to renounce the United States’ signature on the Statute of the International Court. We must support the president as he seeks to protect American servicemen and citizens from this court. I hope all of my colleagues here will co-sponsor and support this legislation, and please call my office for more details. Congress Statement on the introduction of H. Res. 416, Expressing the Sense of the Congress regarding the International Criminal Court May 9, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 39:1 We Want No Part of the ICC: Commending President Bush Mr. PAUL: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill Expressing the Sense of the Congress regarding the International Criminal Court. Congress Statement on the introduction of H. Res. 416, Expressing the Sense of the Congress regarding the International Criminal Court May 9, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 39:7 Therefore, this legislation makes it clear that Congress should take all steps necessary to grant appropriate authority to the president to defend the American people – servicemember and citizen alike -- from the threat of arrest, prosecution and conviction by the International Criminal Court. Congress Repudiating A Treaty Signature 9 May 2002    2002 Ron Paul 40:4 And it is the jurisdiction, it is the sovereignty, it is the civil liberties of the American soldier that we are dealing with. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. BARR) brought this up, and this is very true. These trials, they do not have juries. The judges are appointed in secret. They cannot face their accusers. And we are going to join an organization like that, endorse it, send money and say that our troops may become subject to this? To me, it is an extremely dangerous situation that we have here now, because we did not even ratify the treaty. We have repudiated the signature and they are still saying this is going to apply to our soldiers. We have a serious problem on our hands and we should at least do this very little thing here, because this is a sense of Congress resolution that we would not like to have the President spend any money on this, and this would support his position. Congress No Forced Dress Code for U.S. Soldiers Abroad May 14, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 41:2 I am voting for this bill because I believe, on the whole, that it is preferable to place concerns about our own citizens over those whose homeland is being defended by American troops. Young Americans join the all-volunteer military as an act of patriotism in hopes of defending their country and their constitution. We in Congress must honor that sacrifice. it is bad enough that our troops are sent around the world to defend foreign soil. Asking them to comply with foreign customs which violate basic American beliefs about freedom in order to appease the very governments our troops are defending adds insult to injury. I do not believe a single female member of the armed forces enlisted for the “privilege” of wearing an abaya while defending the House of Saud or that one single male member of the armed forces enlisted in order to force his female colleagues to wear an abaya. Congress Stop Perpetuating the Welfare State May 16, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 42:5 As Governor Ventura points out in reference to this proposal’s effects on Minnesota’s welfare-to-welfare work program, “We know what we are doing in Minnesota works. We have evidence. And our way of doing things has broad support in the state. Why should we be forced by the federal government to put our system at risk?” Why indeed, Mr. Speaker, should any state be forced to abandon its individual welfare programs because a group of self-appointed experts in Congress, the federal bureaucracy, and inside-the-beltway think tanks have decided there is only one correct way to transition people from welfare to work? Congress Stop Perpetuating the Welfare State May 16, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 42:8 H.R. 4737 further raises serious privacy concerns by expanding the use of the "New Hires Database" to allow states to use the database to verify unemployment claims. The New Hires Database contains the name and social security number of everyone lawfully employed in the United States. Increasing the states’ ability to identify fraudulent unemployment claims is a worthwhile public policy goal. However, every time Congress authorizes a new use for the New Hires Database it takes a step toward transforming it into a universal national database that can be used by government officials to monitor the lives of American citizens. Congress Stop Perpetuating the Welfare State May 16, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 42:11 Releasing the charitable impulses of the American people by freeing them from the excessive tax burden so they can devote more of their resources to charity, is a moral and constitutional means of helping the needy. By contrast, the federal welfare state is neither moral or constitutional. Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government given the power to level excessive taxes on one group of citizens for the benefit of another group of citizens. Many of the founders would have been horrified to see modern politicians define compassion as giving away other people’s money stolen through confiscatory taxation. In the words of the famous essay by former Congressman Davy Crockett, this money is “Not Yours to Give.” Congress Don’t Force Taxpayers to Fund Nation-Building in Afghanistan May 21, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 43:5 I imagine a lot of people here in the Congress might say no, but that might be the ultimate outcome. It is said that this bill may cut down on the drug trade. But the Taliban was stronger against drugs than the Northern Alliance. Drug production is up since we’ve been involved this past year in Afghanistan. Congress Don’t Force Taxpayers to Fund Nation-Building in Afghanistan May 21, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 43:7 Madam Chairman, perhaps the “Afghanistan Freedom Support Act” should more accurately be renamed the “Afghanistan Territorial Expansion Act,” because this legislation essentially treats that troubled nation like a new American territory. In fact, I wonder whether we give Guam, Puerto Rico, or other American territories anywhere near $1.2 billion every few years- so maybe we just should consider full statehood for Afghanistan. This new State of Afghanistan even comes complete with an American governor, which the bill charitably calls a “coordinator.” After all, we can’t just give away such a huge sum without installing an American overseer to ensure we approve of all aspects of the fledgling Afghan government. Madam Chairman, when we fill a nation’s empty treasury, when we fund and train its military, when we arm it with our weapons, when we try to impose foreign standards and values within it, indeed when we attempt to impose a government and civil society of our own making upon it, we are nation-building. There is no other term for it. Whether Congress wants to recognize it or not, this is neo-colonialism. Afghanistan will be unable to sustain itself economically for a very long time to come, and during that time American taxpayers will pay the bills. This sad reality was inevitable from the moment we decided to invade it and replace its government, rather than use covert forces to eliminate the individuals truly responsible for September 11th. Perhaps the saddest truth is that Bin Laden remains alive and free even as we begin to sweep up the rubble from our bombs. Congress Statement on New Internet Regulations and Expanded Federal Wiretap Powers May 21, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 44:1 Mr. Speaker, as a parent, grandparent, and OB-GYN who has delivered over three thousand babies, I certainly share the desire to protect children from pornography and other inappropriate material available on the internet. However, as a United States Congressman, I cannot support measures which exceed the limitations on constitutional power contained in Article one, Section 8 of the Constitution. The Constitution does not provide Congress with the authority to spend taxpayer funds to create new internet domains. Congress Statement on New Internet Regulations and Expanded Federal Wiretap Powers May 21, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 44:4 In addition to creating new internet domains, Congress is also expanding federal wiretapping powers. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues should also remember that the Constitution creates only three federal crimes, namely treason, piracy, and counterfeiting. Expansion of federal police power for crimes outside these well-defined areas thus violates the Constitution. In addition, expansion of federal wiretapping powers raises serious civil liberties concerns, as such powers easily can be abused by federal officials. Congress Statement on New Internet Regulations and Expanded Federal Wiretap Powers May 21, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 44:5 I therefore hope my colleagues will respect the constitutional limitations on federal power. Instead of usurping powers not granted the federal government, Congress should allow state and local law enforcement, schools, local communities, and most of all responsible parents to devise the best measures to protect children. Congress Stop Taxing Social Security Benefits! May 22, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 46:2 Since Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another example of double taxation. Furthermore, "taxing" benefits paid by the government is merely an accounting trick, a shell game which allows members of Congress to reduce benefits by subterfuge. This allows Congress to continue using the Social Security trust fund as a means of financing other government programs, and masks the true size of the federal deficit. Congress Stop Taxing Social Security Benefits! May 22, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 46:3 Instead of imposing ridiculous taxes on senior citizens, Congress should ensure the integrity of the Social Security trust fund by ending the practice of using trust fund monies for other programs. In order to accomplish this goal I introduced the Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which ensures that all money in the Social Security trust fund is spent solely on Social Security. At a time when Congress’ inability to control spending is once again threatening the Social Security trust fund, the need for this legislation has never been greater. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress Don’t Expand Federal Deposit Insurance May 22, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 47:3 In the event of a severe banking crisis, Congress likely will transfer funds from general revenues into the Deposit Insurance Fund, which could make all taxpayers liable for the mistakes of a few. Of course, such a bailout would require separate authorization from Congress, but can anyone imagine Congress saying "No" to banking lobbyists pleading for relief from the costs of bailing out their weaker competitors? Congress Don’t Expand Federal Deposit Insurance May 22, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 47:5 Immediately after a problem in the banking industry comes to light, the media and Congress inevitably will blame it on regulators who were "asleep at the switch." Yet, most politicians continue to believe the very regulators whose incompetence (or worse) either caused or contributed to the problem will somehow prevent future crises! Congress Don’t Expand Federal Deposit Insurance May 22, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 47:7 Finally, I would remind my colleagues that the federal deposit insurance program lacks constitutional authority. Congress’ only mandate in the area of money and banking is to maintain the value of the money. Unfortunately, Congress abdicated its responsibility over monetary policy with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, which allows the federal government to erode the value of the currency at the will of the central bank. Congress’ embrace of fiat money is directly responsible for the instability in the banking system that created the justification for deposit insurance. Congress Don’t Expand Federal Deposit Insurance May 22, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 47:8 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, HR 3717 imposes new taxes on financial institutions, forces sound institutions to pay for the mistakes of their reckless competitors, increases the chances of taxpayers being forced to bail out unsound financial institutions, reduces individual depositors’ incentives to take action to protect their deposits, and exceeds Congress’s constitutional authority. I therefore urge my colleagues to reject this bill. Instead of extending this federal program, Congress should work to prevent the crises which justify government programs like deposit insurance, by fulfilling our constitutional responsibility to pursue sound monetary policies. Congress Oppose the "Supplemental" Spending Bill May 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 50:2 Despite being sold as a national security bill, most of the spending in this bill bears little relationship to protecting the American people from terrorism. For example, this bill contains funding for the Securities and Exchange Commission, federal courts, and various welfare programs. In addition, this bill spends millions on unconstitutional foreign aid. Mr. Speaker, some may say that foreign aid promotes national security, but if that were true America would be the most beloved country on earth. After all, almost every country in the world has in some way benefited from Congress’ willingness to send the American people’s money oversees. Congress Oppose the "Supplemental" Spending Bill May 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 50:10 Finally, Mr. Speaker, I must object to this bill on the grounds that it enables further increases in government spending by providing a method to increases the debt ceiling. It is bad enough that Congress is increasing the debt limit, but this rule provides a procedure whereby the debt limit will be raised in conference, away from public scrutiny. It makes a mockery of open government to impose more government debt on hardworking Americans and future generations by subterfuge. Congress AN OPEN LETTER TO TREASURY SECRETARY O’NEILL AND FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN ALAN GREENSPAN May 31, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 51:2 (Congressman Ron Paul sent this letter to both the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Bank in April. Neither has responded) Congress Beware Dollar Weakness June 5, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 52:1 Mr. Speaker, I have for several years come to the House floor to express my concern for the value of the dollar. It has been, and is, my concern that we in the Congress have not met our responsibility in this regard. The constitutional mandate for Congress should only permit silver and gold to be used as legal tender and has been ignored for decades and has caused much economic pain for many innocent Americans. Instead of maintaining a sound dollar, Congress has by both default and deliberate action promoted a policy that systematically depreciates the dollar. The financial markets are keenly aware of the minute-by-minute fluctuations of all the fiat currencies and look to these swings in value for an investment advantage. This type of anticipation and speculation does not exist in a sound monetary system. Congress Beware Dollar Weakness June 5, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 52:2 But Congress should be interested in the dollar fluctuation not as an investment but because of our responsibility for maintaining a sound and stable currency, a requirement for sustained economic growth. Congress Beware Dollar Weakness June 5, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 52:7 That is what is starting to happen, and trust in the dollar is being lost. The value of the dollar this year is down 18 percent compared to gold. This drop in value should not be ignored by Congress. We should never have permitted this policy that was deliberately designed to undermine the value of the currency. Congress Beware Dollar Weakness June 5, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 52:11 Now it is back to reality. This is serious business, and the correction that must come to adjust for the Federal Reserve’s mischief of the past 30 years has only begun. Congress must soon consider significant changes in our monetary system. Congress Beware Dollar Weakness June 5, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 52:12 Congress must soon consider significant changes in our monetary system if we hope to preserve a system of sound growth and wealth preservation. Paper money managed by the Federal Reserve System cannot accomplish this. In fact, it does the opposite. Congress AFFORDABILITY OF CHILD HEALTH CARE June 11, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 54:3 As an OB-GYN who has had the privilege of delivering more than four thousand babies, I know how important it is that parents have the resources to provide adequate health care for their children. The inability of many working Americans to provide health care for their children is rooted in one of the great inequities of the tax code: Congress’ failure to allow individuals the same ability to deduct health care costs that it grants to businesses. As a direct result of Congress’ refusal to provide individuals with health care related tax credits, parents whose employers do not provide health insurance have to struggle to provide health care for their children. Many of these parents work in low-income jobs; oftentimes their only recourse to health care is the local emergency room. Congress AFFORDABILITY OF CHILD HEALTH CARE June 11, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 54:7 Mr. Speaker, this Congress has a moral responsibility to provide tax relief for low-income parents struggling to care for a sick child, in order to help them better meet their child’s medical expenses. Some may say that we cannot enact the Child Health Care Affordability Act because it would cause the government to lose revenue, but who is more deserving of this money, Congress or the working parents of a sick child? Congress RESTORING FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS SPEECH June 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 56:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation restoring First amendment protections of religion and religious speech. For fifty years, the personal religious freedom of this nation’s citizens has been infringed upon by courts that misread and distort the First amendment. The framers of the Constitution never in their worst nightmares imagined that the words, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech .....” would be used to ban children from praying in school, prohibit courthouses from displaying the Ten Commandments, or prevent citizens from praying before football games. The original meaning of the First amendment was clear on these two points: The federal government cannot enact laws establishing one religious denomination over another, and the federal government cannot forbid mention of religion, including the Ten Commandments and references to God. Congress RESTORING FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS SPEECH June 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 56:3 The Court completely disregards the original meaning and intent of the First amendment. It has interpreted the establishment clause to preclude prayer and other religious speech in a public place, thereby violating the free exercise clause of the very same First amendment. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Congress to correct this error, and to perform its duty to support and defend the Constitution. My legislation would restore First amendment protections of religion and speech by removing all religious freedom-related cases from federal district court jurisdiction, as well as from federal claims court jurisdiction. The federal government has no constitutional authority to reach its hands in the religious affairs of its citizens or of the several states. Congress Inspection or Invasion in Iraq? June 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 57:3 Mr. Ritter, who as former chief UN inspector in Iraq probably knows that country better than any of us here, made some excellent points in a recent meeting with Republican members of Congress. According to Mr. Ritter, no American-installed regime could survive in Iraq. Interestingly, Mr. Ritter noted that though his rule is no doubt despotic, Saddam Hussein has been harsher toward Islamic fundamentalism than any other Arab regime. He added that any U.S. invasion to remove Saddam from power would likely open the door to an anti-American fundamentalist Islamic regime in Iraq. That can hardly be viewed in a positive light here in the United States. Is a policy that replaces a bad regime with a worse regime the wisest course to follow? Congress Inspection or Invasion in Iraq? June 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 57:4 Much is made of Iraqi National Congress leader Ahmed Chalabi, as a potential post-invasion leader of Iraq. Mr. Ritter told me that in his many dealings with Chalabi, he found him to be completely unreliable and untrustworthy. He added that neither he nor the approximately 100 Iraqi generals that the US is courting have any credibility inside Iraq, and any attempt to place them in power would be rejected in the strongest manner by the Iraqi people. Hundreds, if not thousands, of American military personnel would be required to occupy Iraq indefinitely if any American-installed regime is to remain in power. Again, it appears we are creating a larger problem than we are attempting to solve. Congress Inspection or Invasion in Iraq? June 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 57:6 In the meeting last month, Scott Ritter reminded members of Congress that a nation cannot go to war based on assumptions and guesses, that a lack of knowledge is no basis on which to initiate military action. Mr. Ritter warned those present that remaining quiescent in the face of the administration’s seeming determination to exceed the authority granted to go after those who attacked us, will actually hurt the president and will hurt Congress. He concluded by stating that going in to Iraq without Congressionally-granted authority would be a “failure of American democracy.” Those pounding the war drums loudest for an invasion of Iraq should pause for a moment and ponder what Scott Ritter is saying. Thousands of lives are at stake. Congress Inspection or Invasion in Iraq? June 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 57:8 Congressional leaders from both parties have greeted these reports with enthusiasm. In their rush to be seen as embracing the president’s hard-line stance on Iraq, however, almost no one in Congress has questioned why a supposedly covert operation would be made public, thus undermining the very mission it was intended to accomplish. Congress Inspection or Invasion in Iraq? June 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 57:9 It is high time that Congress start questioning the hype and rhetoric emanating from the White House regarding Baghdad, because the leaked CIA plan is well timed to undermine the efforts underway in the United Nations to get weapons inspectors back to work in Iraq. In early July, the U.N. secretary-general will meet with Iraq’s foreign minister for a third round of talks on the return of the weapons monitors. A major sticking point is Iraqi concern over the use- or abuse- of such inspections by the U.S. for intelligence collection. Congress Inspection or Invasion in Iraq? June 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 57:18 Congress has seemed unwilling to challenge the Bush administration’s pursuit of war against Iraq. The one roadblock to an all- out U.S. assault would be weapons inspectors reporting on the facts inside Iraq. Yet without any meaningful discussion and debate by Congress concerning the nature of the threat posed by Baghdad, war seems all but inevitable. Congress Lifetime Consequences For Sex Offenders Act 25 June 2002    2002 Ron Paul 58:3 We have been reminded by both Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese that more federal crimes, while they make politicians feel good, are neither constitutionally sound nor prudent. Rehnquist has stated that “The trend to federalize crimes that traditionally have been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our federal system.” Meese stated that Congress’ tendency in recent decades to make federal crimes out of offenses that have historically been state matters has dangerous implications both for the fair administration of justice and for the principle that states are something more than mere administrative districts of a nation governed mainly from Washington. Congress Lifetime Consequences For Sex Offenders Act 25 June 2002    2002 Ron Paul 58:4 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while I am in fundamental agreement with the policies expressed in H.R. 4679, the Lifetime Consequences for Sex Offenders Act, I must remind my colleagues that this is an area over which Congress has no constitutional responsibility. I hope my colleagues will join me in restoring state and local government’s constitutional authority over criminal activities not related to treason, piracy, and counterfeiting. Congress Introduction of the Police Security Protection Act June 25, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 59:2 As recent events have reminded us, professional law enforcement officers put their lives on the line each and every day. Reducing the tax liability of law enforcement officers so they can afford armored vests is one of the best ways Congress can help these brave men and women. After all, an armored vest literally could make the difference between life or death for a police officer, I hope my colleagues will join me in helping our nation’s law enforcement officers by cosponsoring the Police Security Protection Act. Congress Introduction of the Public Safety Tax Cut Act: June 25, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 60:7 President George Bush has called on Americans to volunteer their time and energy to enhance public safety. Shouldn’t Congress do its part by reducing taxes that discourage public safety volunteerism? Shouldn’t Congress also show its appreciation to police officers and fire fighters by reducing their taxes? I believe the answer to both of these questions is a resounding "Yes," and therefore I am proud to introduce the Public Safety Tax Cut Act. I request that my fellow Members join in support of this key legislation. Congress Interstate And Foreign Travel For Sex With Children 25 June 2002    2002 Ron Paul 61:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, as appalling as it is that some would travel abroad to engage in activities that are rightly illegal in the United States, legislation of this sort poses many problems and offers little solution. First among these is the matter of national sovereignty. Those who travel abroad and break the law in their host country should be subject to prosecution in that country: it is the responsibility of the host country — not the U.S. Congress — to uphold its own laws. It is a highly unique proposal to suggest that committing a crime in a foreign country against a non-U.S. citizen is within the jurisdiction of the United States Government. Congress Child Obscenity And Pornography Prevention Act 25 June 2002    2002 Ron Paul 62:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, as a parent, grandparent and OB–GYN who has had the privilege of delivering over 4,000 babies, I share the revulsion of all decent people at child pornography. Those who would destroy the innocence of children by using them in sexuallyexplicit material deserve the harshest punishment. However, the Child Obscenity and Pornography Prevention Act (H.R. 4623) exceeds Congress’ constitutional power and does nothing to protect any child from being abused and exploited by pornographers. Instead, H.R. 4623 redirects law enforcement resources to investigations and prosecutions of “virtual” pornography which, by definition, do not involve the abuse or exploitation of children. Therefore, H.R. 4623 may reduce law enforcement’s ability to investigate and prosecute legitimate cases of child pornography. Congress Child Obscenity And Pornography Prevention Act 25 June 2002    2002 Ron Paul 62:2 H.R. 4623 furthers one of the most disturbing trends in modern politics, the federalization of crimes. We have been reminded by both Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese that more federal crimes, while they make politicians feel good, are neither constitutionally sound nor prudent. Rehnquist has stated that “The trend to federalize crimes that traditionally have been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our federal system.” Meese stated that Congress’ tendency in recent decades to make federal crimes out of offenses that have historically been state matters has dangerous implications both for the fair administration of justice and for the principle that states are something more than mere administrative districts of a nation governed mainly from Washington. Congress Child Obscenity And Pornography Prevention Act 25 June 2002    2002 Ron Paul 62:3 Legislation outlawing virtual pornography is, to say the least, of dubious constitutionality. The constitution grants the federal government jurisdiction over only three crimes: treason, counterfeiting, and piracy. It is hard to stretch the definition of treason, counterfeiting, or piracy to cover sending obscene or pornographic materials over the internet. Therefore, Congress should leave the issue of whether or not to regulate or outlaw virtual pornography to states and local governments. Congress H.R. 4954 27 June 2002    2002 Ron Paul 63:2 I am pleased that the drafters of H.R. 4954 incorporate regulatory relief legislation, which I have supported in the past, into the bill. This will help relieve some of the tremendous regulatory burden imposed on health care providers by the Federal Government. I am also pleased that H.R. 4954 contains several good provisions addressing the Congressionally-created crisis in rural health and attempting to ensure that physicians are fairly reimbursed by the Medicare system. Congress H.R. 4954 27 June 2002    2002 Ron Paul 63:5 I must express my disappointment that this legislation does nothing to reform the government policies responsible for the skyrocketing costs of prescription drugs. Congress should help all Americans by reforming federal patent laws and FDA policies which provide certain large pharmaceutical companies a government- granted monopoly over pharmaceutical products. Perhaps the most important thing Congress could do to reduce pharmaceutical policies is liberalize the regulations surrounding the reimportation of FDA-approved pharmaceuticals. Congress H.R. 4954 27 June 2002    2002 Ron Paul 63:11 Mr. Speaker, seniors should not be treated like children by the federal government and told what health care services they can and cannot have. We in Congress have a duty to preserve and protect the Medicare trust fund. We must keep the promise to American’s seniors and working Americans, whose taxes finance Medicare, that they will have quality health care in their golden years. However, we also have a duty to make sure that seniors can get the health care that suits their needs, instead of being forced into a cookie cutter program designed by Washington, DC — based bureaucrats! Medicare MSAs are a good first step toward allowing seniors the freedom to control their own health care. Congress H.R. 4954 27 June 2002    2002 Ron Paul 63:12 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, both H.R. 4954 and the alternative force seniors to cede control over what prescription medicines they may receive. The only difference between them is that H.R. 4954 gives federally funded HMO bureaucrats control over seniors prescription drugs, while the alternative gives government functionaries the power to tell seniors what prescription drug they can (and can’t) have. Congress can, and must, do better for our Nation’s seniors, by rejecting this command-andcontrol approach. Instead, Congress should give seniors the ability to use Medicare funds to pay for the prescription drugs of their choice by passing my legislation giving all seniors access to Medicare Medicaid Savings Accounts. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:1 Mr. Speaker: Most Americans believe we live in dangerous times, and I must agree. Today I want to talk about how I see those dangers and what Congress ought to do about them. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:23 Centralized control and regulations are required in a police state. Community and individual state regulations are not as threatening as the monolith of rules and regulations written by Congress and the federal bureaucracy. Law and order has been federalized in many ways and we are moving inexorably in that direction. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:29 All 18-year-old males must register to be ready for the next undeclared war. If they don’t, men with guns will appear and enforce this congressional mandate. "Involuntary servitude" was banned by the 13th Amendment, but courts don’t apply this prohibition to the servitude of draftees or those citizens required to follow the dictates of the IRS- especially the employers of the country, who serve as the federal government’s chief tax collectors and information gatherers. Fear is the tool used to intimidate most Americans to comply to the tax code by making examples of celebrities. Leona Helmsley and Willie Nelson know how this process works. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:44 It reminds me of the time I was soliciting political support from a voter and was boldly put down: "Ron," she said, "I wish you would lay off this freedom stuff; it’s all nonsense. We’re looking for a Representative who will know how to bring home the bacon and help our area, and you’re not that person." Believe me, I understand that argument; it’s just that I don’t agree that is what should be motivating us here in the Congress. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:46 The Congress would never agree that we are a police state. Most members, I’m sure, would argue otherwise. But we are all obligated to decide in which direction we are going. If we’re moving toward a system that enhances individual liberty and justice for all, my concerns about a police state should be reduced or totally ignored. Yet, if, by chance, we’re moving toward more authoritarian control than is good for us, and moving toward a major war of which we should have no part, we should not ignore the dangers. If current policies are permitting a serious challenge to our institutions that allow for our great abundance, we ignore them at great risk for future generations. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:58 So far the direction is clear: we are legislating bigger and more intrusive government here at home and are allowing our President to pursue much more military adventurism abroad. These pursuits are overwhelmingly supported by Members of Congress, the media, and the so-called intellectual community, and questioned only by a small number of civil libertarians and anti-imperial, anti-war advocates. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:87 The plans for a first strike supposedly against a potential foreign government should alarm all Americans. If we do not resist this power the President is assuming, our President, through executive order, can start a war anyplace, anytime, against anyone he chooses, for any reason, without congressional approval. This is a tragic usurpation of the war power by the executive branch from the legislative branch, with Congress being all too accommodating. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:89 The publicly announced plan to murder Saddam Hussein in the name of our national security draws nary a whimper from Congress. Support is overwhelming, without a thought as to its legality, morality, constitutionality, or its practicality. Murdering Saddam Hussein will surely generate many more fanatics ready to commit their lives to suicide terrorist attacks against us. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:93 We all can agree that aggression should be met with force and that providing national security is an ominous responsibility that falls on Congress’ shoulders. But avoiding useless and unjustifiable wars that threaten our whole system of government and security seems to be the more prudent thing to do. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:94 Since September 11th, Congress has responded with a massive barrage of legislation not seen since Roosevelt took over in 1933. Where Roosevelt dealt with trying to provide economic security, today’s legislation deals with personal security from any and all imaginable threats, at any cost- dollar or freedom-wise. These efforts include: Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:103 Guarantees to all insurance companies now are moving quickly through the Congress. Increasing the billions already flowing into foreign aid is now being planned as our interventions overseas continue to grow and expand. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:105 Even without evidence that any good has come from this massive expansion of government power, Congress is in the process of establishing a huge new bureaucracy, the Department of Homeland Security, hoping miraculously through centralization to make all these efforts productive and worthwhile. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:116 Mr. Speaker, what, then, is the answer to the question: "Is America a Police State?" My answer is: "Maybe not yet, but it is fast approaching." The seeds have been sown and many of our basic protections against tyranny have been and are constantly being undermined. The post-9/11 atmosphere here in Congress has provided ample excuse to concentrate on safety at the expense of liberty, failing to recognize that we cannot have one without the other. Congress Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 64:118 Some argue that we already live in a police state, and Congress doesn’t have the foggiest notion of what they’re dealing with. So forget it and use your energy for your own survival. Some advise that the momentum towards the monolithic state cannot be reversed. Possibly that’s true, but I’m optimistic that if we do the right thing and do not capitulate to popular fancy and the incessant war propaganda, the onslaught of statism can be reversed. Congress Has Capitalism Failed? July 9, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 66:9 Corruption and fraud in the accounting practices of many companies are coming to light. There are those who would have us believe this is an integral part of free-market capitalism. If we did have free-market capitalism, there would be no guarantees that some fraud wouldn’t occur. When it did, it would then be dealt with by local law-enforcement authority and not by the politicians in Congress, who had their chance to "prevent" such problems but chose instead to politicize the issue, while using the opportunity to promote more Keynesian useless regulations. Congress Has Capitalism Failed? July 9, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 66:13 First, Congress should be investigating the federal government’s fraud and deception in accounting, especially in reporting future obligations such as Social Security, and how the monetary system destroys wealth. Those problems are bigger than anything in the corporate world and are the responsibility of Congress. Besides, it’s the standard set by the government and the monetary system it operates that are major contributing causes to all that’s wrong on Wall Street today. Where fraud does exist, it’s a state rather than federal matter, and state authorities can enforce these laws without any help from Congress. Congress Has Capitalism Failed? July 9, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 66:16 So far the assessment made by the administration, Congress, and the Fed bodes badly for our economic future. All they offer is more of the same, which can’t possibly help. All it will do is drive us closer to national bankruptcy, a sharply lower dollar, and a lower standard of living for most Americans, as well as less freedom for everyone. Congress Has Capitalism Failed? July 9, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 66:22 Capitalism didn’t give us this crisis of confidence now existing in the corporate world. The lack of free markets and sound money did. Congress does have a role to play, but it’s not proactive. Congress’ job is to get out of the way. Congress H.R. 2896 10 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 67:7 In this case we are moving in the right direction because we are trying to remove some prohibitions that are limiting our Second Amendment rights. Our job here in the Congress should be to protect the Second Amendment, never to get in the way of the Second Amendment. This is why, although this amendment improves the bill and the bill is moving in that direction, I can support it, but we ought to do a lot more. Congress H.R. 2896 10 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 67:8 Another example of how private property could work was the recent example at LAX Airport. Private owners of an airline assumed responsibility for security at the gate. Many lives were probably saved with El Al guards, private guards with private weapons, that tragically are denied to American airlines. Because of an agreement between one foreign airline and the U.S. Department of Transportation, it has been given permission to protect their people better than we are allowed to protect ourselves. That to me just seems downright foolish, and I think we in the Congress should demand our rights of the Second Amendment and insist on the responsibility of property owners to protect their property and to protect our lives. Congress Commending Efforts Of John Keating, Joe Sapere, And Jerry Suggs 10 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 68:4 As a Physician and Congressman, I honor these gentlemen for their efforts and invite others to learn more about these activities on line at www.amputees-across-america.com. Congress Free Housing Market Enhancement Act July 16, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 70:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act. This legislation restores a free market in housing by repealing special privileges for housing-related government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). These entities are the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie), and the National Home Loan Bank Board (HLBB). According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received $13.6 billion worth of indirect federal subsidies in fiscal year 2000 alone. Congress Free Housing Market Enhancement Act July 16, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 70:8 Mr. Speaker, it is time for Congress to act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors misled by foolish government interference in the market. I therefore hope my colleagues will stand up for American taxpayers and investors by cosponsoring the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act. Congress Hard Questions for Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan July 17, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 71:2 "I have for quite a few years now expressed concern about the value of the dollar which I think we neglect here in the Congress, here in the committee and I do not think that the Federal Reserve has done a good job in protecting the value of the dollar. And it seems that maybe others are coming around to this viewpoint because I see that the head of the IMF this week, Mr. Koehler has expressed a concern and made a suggestion that all the central bankers of the world need to lay plans in the near future to possibly prop up the dollar. So others have this same concern. Congress Hard Questions for Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan July 17, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 71:5 Congressman Paul then added the he strongly believed this statement by Greenspan taken from a 1966 article that was included in an article he had written titled, "Gold & Economic Freedom" was true. Congressman Paul continued, Congress Hard Questions for Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan July 17, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 71:8 "But along this line, I have a bill that would say that our government, our Treasury could not deal in gold and could not be involved in the gold market unless the Congress knows about it. Now that to me seems like such a reasonable approach and reasonable request. But they say they don’t use it (gold) so we don’t need the bill. But if they are not trading in gold, what would be the harm in the Congress knowing about handling and dealing about this asset, gold?" Congress Before the House Ways and Means Committee July 23, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 72:2 I hope Congress understands the historical significance of this bill. Once again, as when we created the ETI ("extraterritorial") tax regime in 2000, we are acting at the behest on an international body. We are changing our domestic laws, and changing the way we tax domestic parent corporations on the activities of their subsidiaries operating wholly outside of the U.S., because an international body demands it. The WTO appellate panel has spoken, and their will trumps Congress. Yet we were assured in 1994 that our membership in the WTO would never diminish American sovereignty. Congress Before the House Ways and Means Committee July 23, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 72:4 Putting politics aside, however, the reality is that we must craft a bill that satisfies the WTO to avoid further trade sanctions. While reform of our overall tax system remains an issue for another day, it is vital that Congress begin to consider comprehensive overhaul of U.S. international tax rules. Congress Before the House Ways and Means Committee July 23, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 72:5 The FSC, created by Congress in 1984 under IRC sections 921-927, provides needed relief from the subpart F anti-deferral rules for the foreign subsidiaries of our domestic corporations. FSCs make it possible for U.S. corporations to better compete with companies incorporated in territorial-system nations — which is to say companies that generally pay no corporate tax at all on the foreign-source income of their subsidiaries. I urge the committee to reconsider repealing the FSC, an entity utilized by several corporations in my district that employ thousands of people, including Marathon Oil, Dow Chemical, and British Petroleum. Since competing legislation recently introduced in this committee seeks to encourage American manufacturing and exports, it is imperative that any manufacturing deduction (for "qualified production activities") include income derived from the production of finished energy products — refined gasoline, liquefied natural gas, etc. Congress Before the House Ways and Means Committee July 23, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 72:13 Taken all together, you find that a U.S.-based business operating internationally frequently pays a greater share of its income in foreign and U.S. tax than does a competing multinational company headquartered outside of the United States. Yet Congress wonders why corporate inversions are at an all-time high! Congress Treasury And General Government Appropriations Act, 2003 23 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 74:5 Mr. Chairman, finally and importantly, I strongly oppose sanctions for the simple reason that they hurt American industries, particularly agriculture. Every time we shut our own farmers out of foreign markets, they are exploited by foreign farmers. China, Russia, the Middle East, North Korea, and Cuba all represent huge potential for our farm products, yet many in Congress favor trade restrictions that prevent our farmers from selling to the billions of people in these areas. We are one of the world’s largest agricultural producers — why would we ever choose to restrict our exports? Why would we want to do harm to our domestic producers by pursuing a policy that does not work? The only beneficiaries of our sanctions policies are our foreign competitors; the ones punished are our own producers. It is time to end restrictions on Cuba travel and trade. Congress The Tragedy of Partial-Birth Abortion July 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 75:3 The best solution, of course, is not now available to us. That would be a Supreme Court that recognizes that for all criminal laws, the several states retain jurisdiction. Something that Congress can do is remove the issue from the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts, so that states can deal with the problems surrounding abortion, thus helping to reverse some of the impact of Roe v. Wade. Congress Statement on Expulsion of Congressman Jim Traficant July 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 76:1 Mr. Speaker, many of Congressman Traficant’s actions are impossible to defend. Mr. Traficant likely engaged in unethical behavior. I hope all my colleagues would join me in condemning any member who abused his office by requiring staff to pay kick-backs to him and/or do personal work as a condition of employment. I also condemn in the strongest terms possible using one’s office to obtain personal favors from constituents, the people we are sent here to represent. Such behavior should never be tolerated. Congress Statement on Expulsion of Congressman Jim Traficant July 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 76:3 Many Americans believe that Congress routinely engages in ethically questionable and unconstitutional actions, actions which are far more injurious to the liberty and prosperity of the American people than the actions of Mr. Traficant. Some question the ability of Congress to judge the moral behavior of one individual when, to use just one example, we manage to give ourselves a pay raise without taking a direct vote. Congress Statement on Expulsion of Congressman Jim Traficant July 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 76:7 Before voting to expel Mr. Traficant while his appeal is pending, my colleagues should consider the case of former Representative George Hansen. Like Mr. Traficant, Mr. Hansen was convicted in federal court, censured by Congress, and actually served time in federal prison. However, Mr. Hansen was acquitted on appeal- after his life, career, and reputation were destroyed. Congress Statement on Expulsion of Congressman Jim Traficant July 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 76:9 I also am troubled that Mr. Traficant will have only 30 minutes to plead his case before the full House. Spending only an hour to debate this resolution, as though expelling a member of Congress is no more important than honoring Paul Ecke’s contributions to the Poinsettia industry, does this Congress a disservice. Congress Commemorate A Unique And Magnificent Group Of Aviators 25 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 77:3 With the approach of WWII, aircraft manufacturers were producing aircraft faster than the Air Corps could fill with pilots. To qualify for Flight Training, a cadet was required to have two years of college. To fill this shortage of pilots, Congress enacted legislation in 1941 authorizing enlisted men to participate in aerial flight. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 5005, Homeland Security Act Of 2002 25 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 79:3 Instead of a carefully crafted product of meaningful deliberations, I fear we are once again about to pass a hastily drafted bill in order to appear that we are “doing something.” Over the past several months, Congress has passed a number of hastily crafted measures that do little, if anything, to enhance the security of the American people. Instead, these measures grow the size of the Federal Government, erode constitutional liberties, and endanger our economy by increasing the federal deficit and raiding the social security trust fund. The American people would be better served if we gave the question of how to enhance security from international terrorism the serious consideration it deserves rather than blindly expanding the Federal Government. Congress should also consider whether our hyper-interventionist foreign policy really benefits the American people. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 5005, Homeland Security Act Of 2002 25 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 79:7 I also introduced four amendments to the bill itself, including those that would prohibit a national identification card, that would prohibit the secretary of this new department from moving money to other agencies and departments without congressional oversight, that would deny student visas to nationals of Saudi Arabia, and that would deny student and diversity visas to nationals from terrorist-sponsoring countries. All of these amendments, which would have addressed some of the real issues of our security, were rejected. They were not even allowed onto the floor for a debate. This is yet more evidence of the failure of this process. Congress Department of Homeland Security 26 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 80:2 Mr. Speaker, as many commentators have pointed out, the creation of this new department represents the largest reorganization of federal agencies since the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947. Unfortunately, the process by which we are creating this new department bears little resemblance to the process by which the Defense Department was created. Congress began hearings on the proposed department of defense in 1945 — two years before President Truman signed legislation creating the new Department into law! Despite the lengthy deliberative process through which Congress created the new department, turf battles and logistical problems continued to bedeviled the military establishment, requiring several corrective pieces of legislation. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the Goldwater-Nicholas Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 (PL 99–433) was passed to deal with problems stemming from the 1947 law! The experience with the Department of Defense certainly suggests the importance of a more deliberative process in the creation of this new agency. Congress Department of Homeland Security 26 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 80:7 We have also received a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) cost estimate suggesting that it will cost no less than $3 billion just to implement this new department. That is $3 billion dollars that could be spent to capture those responsible for the attacks of September 11 or to provide tax-relief to the families of the victims of that attack. It is three billion dollars that could perhaps be better spent protecting against future attacks, or even simply to meet the fiscal needs of our government. Since those attacks this Congress has gone on a massive spending spree. Spending three billion additional dollars now, simply to rearrange offices and command structures, is not a wise move. In fact, Congress is actually jeopardizing the security of millions of Americans by raiding the social security trust fund to rearrange deck chairs and give big spenders yet another department on which to lavish porkbarrel spending. The way the costs of this department have skyrocketed before the Department is even open for business leads me to fear that this will become yet another justification for Congress to raid the social security trust fund in order to finance pork-barrel spending. This is especially true in light of the fact that so many questions remain regarding the ultimate effect of these structural changes. Moreover, this legislation will give the Executive Branch the authority to spend money appropriated by Congress in ways Congress has not authorized. This clearly erodes Constitutionally- mandated Congressional prerogatives relative to control of federal spending. Congress Department of Homeland Security 26 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 80:8 Recently the House passed a bill allowing for the arming of pilots. This was necessary because the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) simply ignored legislation we had passed previously. TSA is, of course, a key component of this new department. Do we really want to grant authority over appropriations to a Department containing an agency that has so brazenly ignored the will of Congress as recently as has the TSA? In fact, there has been a constant refusal of the bureaucracy to recognize that one of the best ways to enhance security is to legalize the second amendment and allow private property owners to defend their property. Instead, the security services are federalized. Congress Department of Homeland Security 26 July 2002    2002 Ron Paul 80:10 Mr. Speaker, government reorganizations, though generally seen as benign, can have a deleterious affect not just on the functioning of government but on our safety and liberty as well. The concentration and centralization of authority that may result from today’s efforts should give us all reason for pause. But the current process does not allow for pause. Indeed, it militates toward rushing decisions without regard to consequence. Furthermore, this particular reorganization, in an attempt to provide broad leeway for the new department, undermines our Congressional oversight function. Abrogating our Constitutionally-mandated responsibilities so hastily now also means that future administrations will find it much easier to abuse the powers of this new department to violate constitutional liberties. Congress Congress Sgould Think Twice Before Thrusting U.S. Into War September 4, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 81:1 Mr. Speaker; I rise to urge the Congress to think twice before thrusting this nation into a war without merit- one fraught with the danger of escalating into something no American will be pleased with. Congress Congress Sgould Think Twice Before Thrusting U.S. Into War September 4, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 81:5 Congress must consider the fact that those with military experience advocate a "go slow" policy, while those without military experience are the ones demanding this war. Congress Congress Sgould Think Twice Before Thrusting U.S. Into War September 4, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 81:9 We need this sentiment renewed in this Congress in order to avoid a needless war that offers us nothing but trouble. Congress must deal with this serious matter of whether or not we go to war. I believe it would be a mistake with the information that is available to us today. I do not see any reason whatsoever to take young men and young women and send them 6,000 miles to attack a country that has not committed any aggression against this country. Many American now share my belief that it would be a serious mistake. Congress Congress Sgould Think Twice Before Thrusting U.S. Into War September 4, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 81:12 There is a constitutional argument and a constitutional mistake that could be made. If we once again go to war, as we have done on so many occasions since World War II, without a clear declaration of war by Congress, we blatantly violate the Constitution. I fear we will once again go to war in a haphazard way, by executive order, or even by begging permission from the rotten, anti-American United Nations. This haphazard approach, combined with a lack of clearly defined goal for victory, makes it almost inevitable that true victory will not come. So we should look at this from a constitutional perspective. Congress should assume its responsibility, because war is declared by Congress, not by a President and not by a U.N. Congress Congress Sgould Think Twice Before Thrusting U.S. Into War September 4, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 81:13 This is a very important matter, and I am delighted to hear that there will be congressional hearings and discussion. I certainly believe we should have a balanced approach. We have already had some hearings in the other body, where we heard only one side of the issue. If we want to have real hearings, we should have a debate and hear evidence on both sides, rather than just hearing pro-war interests arguing for war. Congress Avoid War With Iraq 4 September 2002    2002 Ron Paul 82:3 We need this sentiment renewed in this Congress in order to avoid a needless war that offers us nothing but trouble. Congress must deal with this serious matter of whether or not we go to war. I believe it would be a mistake with the information that is available to us today. I do not see any reason whatsoever to take young men and young women and send them 6,000 miles off to a land to attack a country that has not committed any aggression against this country. I believe it would be a serious mistake for various reasons. Congress Avoid War With Iraq 4 September 2002    2002 Ron Paul 82:8 So we should look at this in a very constitutional fashion. We in the Congress should assume our responsibility because war is declared by Congress, not by a President and not by a U.N. Congress The Price Of War 5 September 2002    2002 Ron Paul 83:2 The question is, whatever happened to this principle and should it be restored? We find the 20th century was wracked with war; peace was turned asunder and our liberties steadily eroded. Foreign alliances and meddling in the internal affairs of other nations became commonplace. On many occasions, involvement in military action occurred through U.N. resolutions or a Presidential executive order, despite the fact that the war power was explicitly placed in the hands of the Congress. Congress The Price Of War 5 September 2002    2002 Ron Paul 83:36 The term foreign policy does not exist in the Constitution. All members of the Federal Government have sworn to uphold the Constitution and should do only those things that are clearly authorized. Careful reading of the Constitution reveals Congress has a lot more responsibility than does the President in dealing with foreign affairs. The President is the Commanderin- Chief, but cannot declare war or finance military action without explicit congressional approval. A good starting point would be for all of us in the Congress to assume the responsibility given us to make sure the executive branch does not usurp any authority explicitly given to the Congress. Congress Questions That Will Not Be Asked About Iraq September 10, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 85:15 14. Is it not true that the constitutional power to declare war is exclusively that of the Congress? Should presidents, contrary to the Constitution, allow Congress to concur only when pressured by public opinion? Are presidents permitted to rely on the UN for permission to go to war? Congress Questions That Will Not Be Asked About Iraq September 10, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 85:34 33. Is it not true that since World War II Congress has not declared war and- not coincidentally- we have not since then had a clear-cut victory? Congress Questions That Will Not Be Asked About Iraq September 10, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 85:36 35. Why don’t those who want war bring a formal declaration of war resolution to the floor of Congress? Congress Abolishing The Federal Reserve 10 September 2002    2002 Ron Paul 86:5 Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of the special interests and their own appetite for big government. Congress Abolishing The Federal Reserve 10 September 2002    2002 Ron Paul 86:6 Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the Federal Government to erode Americans’ living standard via an inflationary monetary policy. Congress Abolishing The Federal Reserve 10 September 2002    2002 Ron Paul 86:7 In fact, Congress’ constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our Nation’s founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true free-market economy. Congress A Political Mistake September 18, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 87:1 Mr. Speaker, I have for years advocated a moral and constitutional approach to our foreign policy. This has been done in the sincerest belief that a policy of peace, trade, and friendship with all nations is far superior in all respects to a policy of war, protectionism, and confrontation. But in the Congress I find, with regards to foreign affairs, no interest in following the precepts of the Constitution and the advice of our early Presidents. Congress A Political Mistake September 18, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 87:3 I have heard all the arguments on why we must immediately invade and occupy Iraq and have observed that there are only a few hardy souls left in the Congress who are trying to stop this needless, senseless, and dangerous war. They have adequately refuted every one of the excuses for this war of aggression; but, obviously, either no one listens, or the unspoken motives for this invasion silence those tempted to dissent. Congress A Political Mistake September 18, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 87:4 But the tragic and most irresponsible excuse for the war rhetoric is now emerging in the political discourse. We now hear rumblings that the vote is all about politics, the November elections, and the control of the U.S. Congress, that is, the main concern is political power. Can one imagine delaying the declaration of war against Japan after Pearl Harbor for political reasons? Or can one imagine forcing a vote on the issue of war before an election for political gain? Can anyone believe there are those who would foment war rhetoric for political gain at the expense of those who are called to fight and might even die if the war does not go as planned? Congress Rent-To-Own Contracts 18 september 2002    2002 Ron Paul 88:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1701, the Consumer Rental Purchase Agreement bill, rewriters every rent-to-own contract in the nation to conform to the dictates of federal politicians and bureaucrats. This bill thus represents another usurpation by Congress of powers reserved by the 9th and 10th amendments of the Constitution to the states and the people. Congress Rent-To-Own Contracts 18 september 2002    2002 Ron Paul 88:3 Proponents of H.R. 1701 admit the benefits of rent-to-own but fret that rent-to-own transactions are regulated by the states, not the federal government. Proponents of this legislation claim that state regulations are inadequate, thus making federal regulations necessary. My well-intentioned colleagues ignore the fact that Congress has no legitimate authority to judge whether or not state regulations are adequate. This is because the Constitution gives the federal government no authority to regulate this type of transaction. Thus, whether or not state regulations are adequate is simply not for Congress to judge. Congress Rent-To-Own Contracts 18 september 2002    2002 Ron Paul 88:5 In addition to exceeding Congress’s constitutional authority, H.R. 1701, like all federal regulatory schemes, could backfire and harm the very people it was intended to help. This is because any regulation inevitably raises the cost of doing business. These higher costs are passed along to the consumer in the form of either higher prices or fewer choices. The result of this is that marginal customers are priced out of the market. These consumers may prefer to sign contracts that do not meet federal standards as opposed to not having access to any rent-to-own contracts, but the Congress will deny them that option. According to the proponents of H.R. 1701, if people cannot obtain desired goods and services under terms satisfactory to the government, they are better off being denied those goods and services. Mr. Chairman, this type of “government knows best” legislation represents the worst type of paternalism and is totally inappropriate for a free society. Congress Rent-To-Own Contracts 18 september 2002    2002 Ron Paul 88:6 In conclusion, H.R. 1701 exceeds Congress’s constitutional authority by regulating areas constitutionally left to the states. It also raises the cost of forming rent-to-own contracts and thus will deny those contracts to consumers who desire them. I therefore urge my colleagues to reject this paternalistic and unconstitutional bill. Congress Can We Afford this War? September 24, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 89:16 A nation suffering from recession can ill afford a foreign policy that encourages unnecessary military action that will run up huge deficits. Congress ought to pause a moment, and carefully contemplate the consequences of the decisions we are about to make in the coming days. Congress Statement on Medical Malpractice Legislation September 26, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 90:1 Mr. Speaker, as an OB-GYN with over 30 years in private practice, I understand better than perhaps any other member of Congress the burden imposed on both medical practitioners and patients by excessive malpractice judgments and the corresponding explosion in malpractice insurance premiums. Malpractice insurance has skyrocketed to the point where doctors are unable to practice in some areas or see certain types of patients because they cannot afford the insurance premiums. This crisis has particularly hit my area of practice, leaving some pregnant woman unable to find a qualified obstetrician in their city. Therefore, I am pleased to see Congress address this problem. Congress Statement on Medical Malpractice Legislation September 26, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 90:3 Of course, I am not suggesting Congress place price controls on the insurance industry, Instead, Congress should reexamine those federal laws such as ERISA and the HMO Act of 1973, which have allowed insurers to achieve such a prominent role in the medical profession. As I will detail below, Congress should also take steps to encourage contractual means of resolving malpractice disputes. Such an approach may not be beneficial to the insurance companies or the trial lawyers, but will certainly benefit the patients and physicians which both sides in this debate claim to represent. Congress Statement on Medical Malpractice Legislation September 26, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 90:4 HR 4600 does contain some positive elements. For example, the language limiting joint and several liability to the percentage of damage someone actually caused, is a reform I have long championed. However, Mr. Speaker, HR 4600 exceeds Congress’ constitutional authority by preempting state law. Congressional dissatisfaction with the malpractice laws in some states provides no justification for Congress to impose uniform standards on all 50 states. The 10th amendment does not authorize federal action in areas otherwise reserved to the states simply because some members of Congress are unhappy with the way the states have handled the problem. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, by imposing uniform laws on the states, Congress is preventing the states from creating innovative solutions to the malpractice problems. Congress Statement on Medical Malpractice Legislation September 26, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 90:8 Rather than further expanding unconstitutional mandates and harming those with a legitimate claim to collect compensation, Congress should be looking for ways to encourage physicians and patients to resolve questions of liability via private, binding contracts. The root cause of the malpractice crisis (and all of the problems with the health care system) is the shift away from treating the doctor-patient relationship as a contractual one to viewing it as one governed by regulations imposed by insurance company functionaries, politicians, government bureaucrats, and trial lawyers. There is no reason why questions of the assessment of liability and compensation cannot be determined by a private contractual agreement between physicians and patients. Congress Statement on Medical Malpractice Legislation September 26, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 90:9 I am working on legislation to provide tax incentives to individuals who agree to purchase malpractice insurance, which will automatically provide coverage for any injuries sustained in treatment. This will insure that those harmed by spiraling medical errors receive timely and full compensation. My plan spares both patients and doctors the costs of a lengthy, drawn-out trial and respects Congress’ constitutional limitations. Congress Statement on Medical Malpractice Legislation September 26, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 90:10 Congress could also help physicians lower insurance rates by passing legislation that removes the antitrust restrictions preventing physicians from forming professional organizations for the purpose of negotiating contracts with insurance companies and HMOs. These laws give insurance companies and HMOs, who are often protected from excessive malpractice claims by ERISA, the ability to force doctors to sign contracts exposing them to excessive insurance premiums and limiting their exercise of professional judgment. The lack of a level playing field also enables insurance companies to raise premiums at will. In fact, it seems odd that malpractice premiums have skyrocketed at a time when insurance companies need to find other sources of revenue to compensate for their recent losses in the stock market. Congress Statement on Medical Malpractice Legislation September 26, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 90:11 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while I support the efforts of the sponsors of HR 4600 to address the crisis in health care caused by excessive malpractice litigation and insurance premiums, I cannot support this bill. HR 4600 exceeds Congress’ constitutional limitations and denies full compensation to those harmed by the unintentional effects of federal vaccine mandates. Instead of furthering unconstitutional authority, my colleagues should focus on addressing the root causes of the malpractice crisis by supporting efforts to restore the primacy of contract to the doctor-patient relationships. Congress “Say ‘No’ To UNESCO” Act 26 September 2002    2002 Ron Paul 91:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the “Say ‘No’ to UNESCO” act. This bill expresses the sense of the Congress that the United States should not rejoin the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Congress “Say ‘No’ To UNESCO” Act 26 September 2002    2002 Ron Paul 91:7 UNESCO has designated 47 U.N. Biosphere Reserves in the United States covering more than 70 million acres, without Congressional consultation. Congress “Say ‘No’ To UNESCO” Act 26 September 2002    2002 Ron Paul 91:8 UNESCO effectively bypasses Congressional authority to manage federal lands, by establishing management policies without Congressional consultation of approval. Congress Internet Gambling 1 October 2002    2002 Ron Paul 92:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 556 limits the ability of individual citizens to use bank instruments, including credit cards or checks, to finance Internet gambling. This legislation should be rejected by Congress since the federal government has no constitutional authority to ban or even discourage any form of gambling. Congress Introduction of the Television Consumer Freedom Act October 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 93:2 My office has received numerous calls from rural satellite and cable TV customers who are upset because their satellite or cable service providers have informed them that they will lose access to certain network television programs and/or cable networks. The reason my constituents cannot obtain their desired satellite and cable services is that the satellite and cable "marketplace" is fraught with government interventionism at every level. Cable companies have historically been granted franchises of monopoly privilege at the local level. Government has previously intervened to invalidate "exclusive dealings" contracts between private parties, namely cable service providers and program creators, and has most recently assumed the role of price setter. The Library of Congress has even been delegated the power to determine prices at which program suppliers must make their programs available to cable and satellite programming service providers. Congress Introduction of the Television Consumer Freedom Act October 1, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 93:3 It is, of course, within the constitutionally enumerated powers of Congress to "promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." However, operating a clearing-house for the subsequent transfer of such property rights in the name of setting a just price or "instilling competition" via "central planning" seems not to be an economically prudent nor justifiable action under this enumerated power. This process is one best reserved to the competitive marketplace. Congress Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War? October 3, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 94:1 The last time Congress declared war was on December 11, 1941, against Germany in response to its formal declaration of war against the United States. This was accomplished with wording that took less than one-third of a page, without any nitpicking arguments over precise language, yet it was a clear declaration of who the enemy was and what had to be done. And in three-and-a-half years, this was accomplished. A similar resolve came from the declaration of war against Japan three days earlier. Likewise, a clear-cut victory was achieved against Japan. Congress Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War? October 3, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 94:2 Many Americans have been forced into war since that time on numerous occasions, with no congressional declaration of war and with essentially no victories. Today’s world political condition is as chaotic as ever. We’re still in Korea and we’re still fighting the Persian Gulf War that started in 1990. Congress Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War? October 3, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 94:3 The process by which we’ve entered wars over the past 57 years, and the inconclusive results of each war since that time, are obviously related to Congress’ abdication of its responsibility regarding war, given to it by Article I Section 8 of the Constitution. Congress Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War? October 3, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 94:4 Congress has either ignored its responsibility entirely over these years, or transferred the war power to the executive branch by a near majority vote of its Members, without consideration of it by the states as an amendment required by the Constitution. Congress Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War? October 3, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 94:5 Congress is about to circumvent the Constitution and avoid the tough decision of whether war should be declared by transferring this monumental decision-making power regarding war to the President. Once again, the process is being abused. Odds are, since a clear-cut decision and commitment by the people through their representatives are not being made, the results will be as murky as before. We will be required to follow the confusing dictates of the UN, since that is where the ultimate authority to invade Iraq is coming from- rather than from the American people and the U.S. Constitution. Congress Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War? October 3, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 94:6 Controversial language is being hotly debated in an effort to satisfy political constituencies and for Congress to avoid responsibility of whether to go to war. So far the proposed resolution never mentions war, only empowering the President to use force at his will to bring about peace. Rather strange language indeed! Congress Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War? October 3, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 94:7 A declaration of war limits the presidential powers, narrows the focus, and implies a precise end point to the conflict. A declaration of war makes Congress assume the responsibilities directed by the Constitution for this very important decision, rather than assume that if the major decision is left to the President and a poor result occurs, it will be his fault, not that of Congress. Hiding behind the transfer of the war power to the executive through the War Powers Resolution of 1973 will hardly suffice. Congress Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War? October 3, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 94:8 However, the modern way we go to war is even more complex and deceptive. We must also write language that satisfies the UN and all our allies. Congress gladly transfers the legislative prerogatives to declare war to the President, and the legislative and the executive branch both acquiesce in transferring our sovereign rights to the UN, an un-elected international government. No wonder the language of the resolution grows in length and incorporates justification for starting this war by citing UN Resolutions. Congress Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War? October 3, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 94:10 What a difference from the days when a declaration of war was clean and precise and accomplished by a responsible Congress and an informed people! Congress Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War? October 3, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 94:15 An up or down vote on declaring war against Iraq would not pass the Congress, and the President has no intention of asking for it. This is unfortunate, because if the process were carried out in a constitutional fashion, the American people and the U.S. Congress would vote "No" on assuming responsibility for this war. Congress Statement Opposing the use of Military Force against Iraq October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 96:2 But I am very interested also in the process that we are pursuing. This is not a resolution to declare war. We know that. This is a resolution that does something much different. This resolution transfers the responsibility, the authority, and the power of the Congress to the President so he can declare war when and if he wants to. He has not even indicated that he wants to go to war or has to go to war; but he will make the full decision, not the Congress, not the people through the Congress of this country in that manner. Congress Statement Opposing the use of Military Force against Iraq October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 96:13 I must oppose this resolution, which regardless of what many have tried to claim will lead us into war with Iraq. This resolution is not a declaration of war, however, and that is an important point: this resolution transfers the Constitutionally-mandated Congressional authority to declare wars to the executive branch. This resolution tells the president that he alone has the authority to determine when, where, why, and how war will be declared. It merely asks the president to pay us a courtesy call a couple of days after the bombing starts to let us know what is going on. This is exactly what our Founding Fathers cautioned against when crafting our form of government: most had just left behind a monarchy where the power to declare war rested in one individual. It is this they most wished to avoid. Congress Statement Opposing the use of Military Force against Iraq October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 96:22 Reality: According to the latest edition of the State Department’s Patterns of Global Terrorism, Iraq sponsors several minor Palestinian groups, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). None of these carries out attacks against the United States. As a matter of fact, the MEK (an Iranian organization located in Iraq) has enjoyed broad Congressional support over the years. According to last year’s Patterns of Global Terrorism, Iraq has not been involved in terrorist activity against the West since 1993 – the alleged attempt against former President Bush. Congress Statement Opposing the use of Military Force against Iraq October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 96:25 Three years ago, during Iraq’s six-month occupation of Kuwait, there had been an outcry when a teen-age Kuwaiti girl testified eloquently and effectively before Congress about Iraqi atrocities involving newborn infants. The girl turned out to be the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to Washington, Sheikh Saud Nasir al-Sabah, and her account of Iraqi soldiers flinging babies out of incubators was challenged as exaggerated both by journalists and by human-rights groups. ( Sheikh Saud was subsequently named Minister of Information in Kuwait, and he was the government official in charge of briefing the international press on the alleged assassination attempt against George Bush .) In a second incident, in August of 1991, Kuwait provoked a special session of the United Nations Security Council by claiming that twelve Iraqi vessels, including a speedboat, had been involved in an attempt to assault Bubiyan Island, long-disputed territory that was then under Kuwaiti control. The Security Council eventually concluded that, while the Iraqis had been provocative, there had been no Iraqi military raid, and that the Kuwaiti government knew there hadn’t. What did take place was nothing more than a smuggler-versus-smuggler dispute over war booty in a nearby demilitarized zone that had emerged, after the Gulf War, as an illegal marketplace for alcohol, ammunition, and livestock. Congress Statement Opposing the use of Military Force against Iraq October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 96:31 In September 1988, however – a month after the war (between Iran and Iraq) had ended – the State Department abruptly, and in what many viewed as a sensational manner, condemned Iraq for allegedly using chemicals against its Kurdish population. The incident cannot be understood without some background of Iraq’s relations with the Kurds…throughout the war Iraq effectively faced two enemies – Iran and elements of its own Kurdish minority. Significant numbers of the Kurds had launched a revolt against Baghdad and in the process teamed up with Tehran. As soon as the war with Iran ended, Iraq announced its determination to crush the Kurdish insurrection. It sent Republican Guards to the Kurdish area, and in the course of the operation – according to the U.S. State Department – gas was used, with the result that numerous Kurdish civilians were killed. The Iraqi government denied that any such gassing had occurred. Nonetheless, Secretary of State Schultz stood by U.S. accusations, and the U.S. Congress, acting on its own, sought to impose economic sanctions on Baghdad as a violator of the Kurds’ human rights. Congress Statement Opposing the use of Military Force against Iraq October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 96:33 It appears that in seeking to punish Iraq, the Congress was influenced by another incident that occurred five months earlier in another Iraqi-Kurdish city, Halabjah. In March 1988, the Kurds at Halabjah were bombarded with chemical weapons, producing many deaths. Photographs of the Kurdish victims were widely disseminated in the international media. Iraq was blamed for the Halabjah attack, even though it was subsequently brought out that Iran too had used chemicals in this operation and it seemed likely that it was the Iranian bombardment that had actually killed the Kurds . Congress Statement Opposing the use of Military Force against Iraq October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 96:34 Thus, in our view, the Congress acted more on the basis of emotionalism than factual information , and without sufficient thought for the adverse diplomatic effects of its action. Congress The Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 97:2 The United States domestic shrimping industry is a vital social and economic force in many coastal communities across the United States, including several in my congressional district. A thriving shrimping industry benefits not only those who own and operate shrimp boats, but also food processors, hotels and restaurants, grocery stores, and all those who work in and service these industries. Shrimping also serves as a key source of safe domestic foods at a time when the nation is engaged in hostilities abroad. Congress The Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 97:4 Many members of Congress have let the National Marine Fisheries Service, which is the lead federal agency with responsibility to regulate the domestic shrimp industry, know of their displeasure with the unreasonable regulatory burden imposed upon the industry. In response, the agency recently held briefings with House and Senate staffers as well as industry representatives to discuss how the agency’s actions are harming shrimpers. Congress The Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 97:5 However, even after hearing first-hand testimony from industry representatives and representatives of communities whose economies rely on a thriving shrimping industry, the agency refuses to refrain from placing regulatory encumbrances upon the domestic shrimping industry. Therefore it is up to Congress to protect this industry from overzealous regulators. The Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act provides this protection by placing an indefinite moratorium on all future restrictive regulations on the shrimping industry. Congress The Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 97:9 In order to ensure that American shrimpers are not forced to subsidize their competitors, the Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act ends all Export-Import and OPIC subsidizes to the seven countries who imported more than 20 million pounds of shrimp in the first six months of 2002. The bill also reduces America’s contribution to the IMF by America’s pro rata share of any IMF aid provided to one of those seven countries. Mr. Speaker, it is time for Congress to rein in regulation-happy bureaucrats and stop subsidizing the domestic shrimping industries’ leading competitors. Otherwise, the government-manufactured depression in the price of shrimp will decimate the domestic shrimping industry and the communities whose economies depend on this industry. I, therefore, hope all my colleagues will stand up for shrimpers by cosponsoring the Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act. Congress Truth In Financing Act 8 October 2002    2002 Ron Paul 98:5 Providing federal funds to those who engage in illegal behavior undermines the rule of law and forces taxpayers to fund illegal behavior. If federal bureaucrats will not act to prevent taxpayer funds from going to organizations that violate the laws, then Congress has no choice but to give taxpayers the power to stop this outrage. I hope my colleagues will stand up for the rule of law and the American taxpayer by cosponsoring the Truth in Financing Act. Congress Child Abduction Prevention Act 16 October 2002    2002 Ron Paul 99:4 Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5422 also exceeds Congress’ constitutional authority by criminalizing travel with the intent of committing a crime. As appalling as it is that some would travel abroad to engage in activities that are rightly illegal in the United States, legislation of this sort poses many problems and offers few solutions. First among these problems is the matter of national sovereignty. Those who travel abroad and break the law in their host country should be subject to prosecution in that country: it is the responsibility of the host country — not the U.S. Congress — to uphold its own laws. It is a highly unique proposal to suggest that committing a crime in a foreign country against a non-U.S. citizen is within the jurisdiction of the United States Government. Congress Oppose The New Homeland Security Bureaucracy! November 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 101:1 Mr. Speaker, when the process of creating a Department of Homeland Security commenced, Congress was led to believe that the legislation would be a simple reorganization aimed at increasing efficiency, not an attempt to expand federal power. Fiscally conservative members of Congress were even told that the bill would be budget neutral! Yet, when the House of Representatives initially considered creating a Department of Homeland Security, the legislative vehicle almost overnight grew from 32 pages to 282 pages- and the cost had ballooned to at least $3 billion. Now we are prepared to vote on a nearly 500-page bill that increases federal expenditures and raises troubling civil liberties questions. Adding insult to injury, this bill was put together late last night and introduced only this morning. Worst of all, the text of the bill has not been made readily available to most members, meaning this Congress is prepared to create a massive new federal agency without even knowing the details. This is a dangerous and irresponsible practice. Congress Oppose The New Homeland Security Bureaucracy! November 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 101:2 The last time Congress attempted a similarly ambitious reorganization of the government was with the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947. However, the process by which we are creating this new department bears little resemblance to the process by which the Defense Department was created. Congress began hearings on the proposed Department of Defense in 1945 – two years before President Truman signed legislation creating the new Department into law! Despite the lengthy deliberative process through which Congress created that new department, turf battles and logistical problems continued to bedevil the military establishment, requiring several corrective pieces of legislation. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the Goldwater-Nicholas Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 was passed to deal with problems steaming from the 1947 law! The experience with the Department of Defense certainly suggests the importance of a more deliberative process in the creation of this new agency. Congress Oppose The New Homeland Security Bureaucracy! November 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 101:4 While this provision appears to be based on similar provisions granting broad mandatory vaccination and quarantine powers to governors from the controversial "Model Health Emergency Powers Act," this provision has not been considered by the House. Instead, this provision seems to have been snuck into the bill at the last minute. At the very least, Mr. Speaker, before Congress grants HHS such sweeping powers, we should have an open debate instead of burying the authorization in a couple of paragraphs tucked away in a 484 page bill! Congress Oppose The New Homeland Security Bureaucracy! November 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 101:6 Mr. Speaker, HR 5710 gives the federal government new powers and increases federal expenditures, completely contradicting what members were told about the bill. Furthermore, these new power grabs are being rushed through Congress without giving members the ability to debate, or even properly study, this proposal. I must oppose this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. Congress Unintended Consequences November 14, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 102:6 No local Iraqi or regional Arab support materializes. Instead of a spontaneous uprising as is hoped, the opposite occurs. The Iraqi citizens anxious to get rid of Hussein join in his defense, believing foreign occupation and control of their oil is far worse than living under the current dictator. Already we see that sanctions have done precisely that. Instead of blaming Saddam Hussein and his dictatorial regime for the suffering of the past decade, the Iraqi people blame the U.S.-led sanctions and the constant bombing by the U.S. and British. Hussein has increased his power and the people have suffered from the war against Iraq since 1991. There are a lot of reasons to believe this same reaction will occur with an escalation of our military attacks. Training dissidents like the Iraqi National Congress will prove no more reliable than the training and the military assistance we provided in the 70’s and the 80’s for Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein when they qualified as U.S. "allies." Congress “You Are A Suspect” 14 November 2002    2002 Ron Paul 103:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to read “You are a Suspect” by William Safire in today’s New York Times. Mr. Safire, who has been one of the media’s most consistent defenders of personal privacy, details the Defense Department’s plan to establish a system of “Total Information Awareness.” According to Mr. Safire, once this system is implemented, no American will be able to use the internet to fill a prescription, subscribe to a magazine, buy a book, send or receive e-mail, or visit a web site free from the prying eyes of government bureaucrats. Furthermore, individual internet transactions will be recorded in “a virtual centralized grand database.” Implementation of this project would shred the Fourth Amendment’s requirement that the government establish probable cause and obtain a search warrant before snooping into the private affairs of its citizens. I hope my colleagues read Mr. Safire’s article and support efforts to prevent the implementation of this program, including repealing any legislation weakening privacy protections that Congress may inadvertently have passed in the rush to complete legislative business this year. Congress “You Are A Suspect” 14 November 2002    2002 Ron Paul 103:6 A jury convicted Poindexter in 1990 on five felony counts of misleading Congress and making false statements, but an appeals court overturned the verdict because Congress had given him immunity for his testimony. He famously asserted, “The buck stops here,” arguing that the White House staff, and not the president, was responsible for fateful decisions that might prove embarrassing. Congress “You Are A Suspect” 14 November 2002    2002 Ron Paul 103:8 Even the hastily passed U.S.A. Patriot Act, which widened the scope of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and weakened 15 privacy laws, raised requirements for the government to report secret eavesdropping to Congress and the courts. But Poindexter’s assault on individual privacy rides roughshod over such oversight. Congress Important Questions Concerning the Administration’s Smallpox Vaccine Proposals December 19th, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 104:1 (This letter was sent by Congressman Ron Paul to Tommy Thompson, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, in response to announcements that the administration plans mandatory smallpox vaccines for approximately one million soldiers and frontline medical providers) Congress Introduction of the Social Security Preservation Act January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 1:2 The Social Security Preservation Act ensures that the government will keep its promises to America’s seniors that taxes collected for Social Security will be used for Social Security. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress Introduction of the Social Security Preservation Act January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 1:3 The return of massive federal deficits, and the accompanying pressure for massive new raids on the trust fund, make it more important than ever that Congress protect the trust fund from big spending, pork-barrel politics. I call upon all my colleagues, regardless of which proposal for long-term Social Security reform they support, to stand up for America’s seniors by cosponsoring the Social Security Preservation Act. Congress Say NO to UNESCO January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 2:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States should not rejoin the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Congress Say NO to UNESCO January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 2:7 UNESCO has designated 47 U.N. Biosphere Reserves in the United States covering more than 70 million acres, without Congressional consultation. Congress Say NO to UNESCO January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 2:8 UNESCO effectively bypasses Congressional authority to manage federal lands, by establishing management policies without Congressional consultation of approval. Congress Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act 7 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 3:2 The United States domestic shrimping industry is a vital social and economic force in many coastal communities across the United States, including several in my congressional district. A thriving shrimping industry benefits not only those who own and operate shrimp boats, but also food processors, hotels and restaurants, grocery stores, and all those who work in and service these industries. Shrimping also serves as a key source of safe domestic foods at a time when the nation is engaged in hostilities abroad. Congress Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act 7 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 3:4 Many members of Congress have let the National Marine Fisheries Service, which is the lead federal agency with responsibility to regulate the domestic shrimp industry, know of their displeasure with the unreasonable regulatory burden imposed upon the industry. In response, the agency held briefings with House and Senate staffers as well as industry representatives to discuss how the agency’s actions are harming shrimpers. Congress Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act 7 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 3:5 However, even after hearing first-hand testimony from industry representatives and representatives of communities whose economies rely on a thriving shrimping industry, the agency refuses to refrain from placing regulatory encumbrances upon the domestic shrimping industry. Therefore it is up to Congress to protect this industry from overzealous regulators. The Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act provides this protection by placing an indefinite moratorium on all future restrictive regulations on the shrimping industry. Congress Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act 7 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 3:10 Mr. Speaker, it is time for Congress to rein in regulation-happy bureaucrats and stop subsidizing the domestic shrimping industry’s leading competitors. Otherwise, the government- manufactured depression in the price of shrimp will decimate the domestic shrimping industry and the communities whose economies depend on this industry. I, therefore, hope all my colleagues will stand up for shrimpers by cosponsoring the Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act. Congress Stop Identity Theft – Make Social Security Numbers Confidential January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 4:2 Mr. Speaker, Congress has a moral responsibility to address this problem because it was Congress which transformed the Social Security number into a national identifier. Thanks to Congress, today no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get a driver’s license without presenting their Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license! Congress Stop Identity Theft – Make Social Security Numbers Confidential January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 4:3 One of the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the congressionally-authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim them as dependents. Forcing parents to register their children with the state is more like something out of the nightmares of George Orwell than the dreams of a free republic which inspired this nation’s founders. Congress Stop Identity Theft – Make Social Security Numbers Confidential January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 4:4 Congressionally-mandated use of the Social Security number as an identifier facilitates the horrendous crime of identity theft. Thanks to Congress, an unscrupulous person may simply obtain someone’s Social Security number in order to access that person’s bank accounts, credit cards, and other financial assets. Many Americans have lost their life savings and had their credit destroyed as a result of identity theft- yet the federal government continues to encourage such crimes by mandating use of the Social Security number as a uniform ID! Congress Stop Identity Theft – Make Social Security Numbers Confidential January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 4:6 In addition to forbidding the federal government from creating national identifiers, this legislation forbids the federal government from blackmailing states into adopting uniform standard identifiers by withholding federal funds. One of the most onerous practices of Congress is the use of federal funds illegitimately taken from the American people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates. Congress Stop Identity Theft – Make Social Security Numbers Confidential January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 4:7 Mr. Speaker, of all the invasions of privacy proposed in the past decade, perhaps the most onerous is the attempt to assign every American a “unique health identifier” — an identifier which could be used to create a national database containing the medical history of all Americans. As an OB/GYN with more than 30 years in private practice, I know the importance of preserving the sanctity of the physician-patient relationship. Oftentimes, effective treatment depends on a patient’s ability to place absolute trust in his or her doctor. What will happen to that trust when patients know that any and all information given to their doctor will be placed in a government accessible database? Some members of Congress may claim that the federal monitoring of all Americans will enhance security. However, the fact is that creating a surveillance state will divert valuable resources away from investigating legitimate security threats into spying on innocent Americans, thus reducing security. The American people would be better served if the government focused attention on ensuring our borders are closed to potential terrorists instead of coming up with new ways to violate the rights of American citizens. Congress Stop Identity Theft – Make Social Security Numbers Confidential January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 4:8 Other members of Congress will claim that the federal government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that in a constitutional republic, the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the job of government officials easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient. Congress Stop Identity Theft – Make Social Security Numbers Confidential January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 4:9 Mr. Speaker, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure that citizens’ rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the only effective privacy protection is to forbid the federal government from mandating national identifiers. Legislative “privacy protections” are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for several reasons: Congress Stop Identity Theft – Make Social Security Numbers Confidential January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 4:14 The primary reason why any action short of the repeal of laws authorizing privacy violations is insufficient is because the federal government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress Stop Identity Theft – Make Social Security Numbers Confidential January 7, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 4:15 Mr. Speaker, those members who are not persuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Identity Theft Prevention Act should consider the opposition of the American people toward national identifiers. The overwhelming public opposition to the various “Know-Your-Customer” schemes, the attempt to turn driver’s licenses into National ID cards, as well as the numerous complaints over the ever-growing uses of the Social Security number, show that American people want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Furthermore, according to a survey by the Gallup company, 91 percent of the American people oppose forcing Americans to obtain a universal health ID. Several other recent polls show most Americans remain skeptical that a national ID card would enhance their security or preserve their liberty. Congress Republic Versus Democracy 29 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 6:3 If Madison’s assessment was correct, it behooves those of us in Congress to take note and decide, indeed, whether the public has vantaged when it occurred and what to expect in the ways of turbulence, contention and violence, and above all else what can we and what will we do about it. Congress Republic Versus Democracy 29 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 6:13 But today, the American people accept drug prohibition, a policy equally damaging to liberty as was alcohol prohibition. A majority vote in Congress has been enough to impose this very expensive and failed program on the American people even without bothering to amend the Constitution. It has been met with only minimal but, fortunately, growing dissent. For the first 150 years of our history, when we were much closer to being a true Republic, there were no Federal laws dealing with the serious medical problem of addiction. Congress Republic Versus Democracy 29 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 6:24 Today, the concepts of rights and property ownership are completely arbitrary. Congress, the courts, Presidents and bureaucrats arbitrarily legislate on a daily basis, seeking only the endorsement of the majority. Although the Republic was designed to protect the minority against the dictates of the majority, today we find the reverse. The Republic is no longer recognizable. Congress Republic Versus Democracy 29 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 6:48 The turmoil and dangers of pure democracy are known. We should get prepared. But it will be the clarity with which we plan its replacement that determines the amount of pain and suffering endured during the transition to another system. Hopefully, the United States Congress and other government leaders will come to realize the seriousness of our current situation and replace the business-as-usual attitude, regardless of political demands and growing needs of a boisterous majority. Congress Republic Versus Democracy 29 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 6:63 Polling on the matter is followed closely and, unfortunately, is far more important than the rule of law. Do we hear the pundits talk of constitutional restraints on Congress and the administration? No. All we ever hear are the reassurances that the majority support the President; therefore, it must be all right. Congress Republic Versus Democracy 29 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 6:75 The reality is that we will not be able to inflate, tax, spend or borrow our way out of this mess that the Congress has delivered to the American people. Congress Republic Versus Democracy 29 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 6:94 Today, it is the opposite. The American people must get permission from the government for their every move, whether it is the use of their own property or spending their own money. Even the most serious decisions, such as going to war, are done while ignoring the Constitution and without a vote of the people’s representatives in the Congress. Members of the global government have more to say about when American troops are put in harm’s way than the U.S. Congress. The Constitution no longer restrains the government. The government restrains the people in all they do. This destroys individual creative energy, and the “mainspring of human progress” is lost. The consequences are less progress, less prosperity, and less personal fulfillment. Congress Republic Versus Democracy 29 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 6:103 The results, though, are frightening and will soon even become more so. Poverty has been made worse. The drug war is a bigger threat than drug use. Terrorism remains a threat, and foreign wars have become routine and decided upon without congressional approval. Congress End the Income Tax – Pass the Liberty Amendment January 28, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 7:2 The 16th Amendment gives the federal government a direct claim on the lives of American citizens by enabling Congress to levy a direct income tax on individuals. Until the passage of the 16th amendment, the Supreme Court had consistently held that Congress had no power to impose an income tax. Congress Reduce Taxes On Senior Citizens January 28, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 8:2 Since Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another example of double taxation. Furthermore, “taxing” benefits paid by the government is merely an accounting trick, a shell game which allows members of Congress to reduce benefits by subterfuge. This allows Congress to continue using the Social Security trust fund as a means of financing other government programs, and masks the true size of the federal deficit. Congress Reduce Taxes On Senior Citizens January 28, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 8:3 Instead of imposing ridiculous taxes on senior citizens, Congress should ensure the integrity of the Social Security trust fund by ending the practice of using trust fund moneys for other programs. In order to accomplish this goal I introduced the Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which ensures that all money in the Social Security trust fund is spent solely on Social Security. At a time when Congress’ inability to control spending is once again threatening the Social Security trust fund, the need for this legislation has never been greater. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress Social Security for American Citizens Only! January 29, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 11:8 It is long past time for Congress to stand up to the internationalist bureaucrats and start looking out for the American worker. I therefore call upon my colleagues to stop the use of the Social Security trust fund as yet another vehicle for foreign aid by cosponsoring the Social Security for American Citizens Only Act. Congress Expand Medicare MSA Program 5 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 12:5 Mr. Speaker, the most important reason to enact this legislation is seniors should not be treated like children and told what health care services they can and cannot have by the federal government. We in Congress have a duty to preserve and protect the Medicare trust fund and keep the promise to America’s seniors and working Americans, whose taxes finance Medicare, that they will have quality health care in their golden years. Congress The Family Education Freedom Act February 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 13:4 According to a study by The Polling Company, over 70% of all Americans support education tax credits! This is just one of numerous studies and public opinion polls showing that Americans want Congress to get the federal bureaucracy out of the schoolroom and give parents more control over their children’s education. Congress The Family Education Freedom Act February 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 13:5 Today, Congress can fulfill the wishes of the American people for greater control over their children’s education by simply allowing parents to keep more of their hard-earned money to spend on education rather than force them to send it to Washington to support education programs reflective only of the values and priorities of Congress and the federal bureaucracy. Congress The Family Education Freedom Act February 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 13:9 Clearly, enactment of the Family Education Freedom Act is the best thing this Congress could do to improve public education. Furthermore, a greater reliance on parental expenditures rather than government tax dollars will help make the public schools into true community schools that reflect the wishes of parents and the interests of the students. Congress Teacher Tax Cut Act February 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 14:2 Quality education is impossible without quality teaching. If we continue to undervalue educators, it will become harder to attract, and keep, good people in the education profession. While educators’ pay is primarily a local issue, Congress can, and should, help raise educators’ take home pay by reducing educators’ taxes. Congress Teacher Tax Cut Act February 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 14:4 The Teacher Tax Cut Act and the Professional Educators Tax Relief Act increase the salaries of teachers and other education professionals without raising federal expenditures. By raising the take-home pay of professional educators, these bills encourage highly qualified people to enter, and remain in, education. These bills also let America’s professional educators know that the American people and the Congress respect their work. Congress Education Improvement Tax Cut Act February 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 16:2 I need not remind my colleagues that education is one of the top priorities of the American people. After all, many members of Congress have proposed education reforms and a great deal of time is spent debating these proposals. However, most of these proposals either expand federal control over education or engage in the pseudo-federalism of block grants. Many proposals that claim to increase local control over education actually extend federal power by holding schools “accountable” to federal bureaucrats and politicians. Of course, schools should be held accountable for their results, but they should be held accountable to parents and school boards not to federal officials. Therefore, I propose we move in a different direction and embrace true federalism by returning control over the education dollar to the American people. Congress Education Improvement Tax Cut Act February 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 16:5 Children in some communities may benefit most from the opportunity to attend private, parochial, or other religious schools. One of the most encouraging trends in education has been the establishment of private scholarship programs. These scholarship funds use voluntary contributions to open the doors of quality private schools to low-income children. By providing a tax credit for donations to these programs, Congress can widen the educational opportunities and increase the quality of education for all children. Furthermore, privately-funded scholarships raise none of the concerns of state entanglement raised by publicly-funded vouchers. Congress Prescription Drug Affordability Act February 11, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 17:2 The first provision of my legislation provides seniors a tax credit equal to 80 percent of their prescription drug costs. As many of my colleagues have pointed out, our nation’s seniors are struggling to afford the prescription drugs they need in order to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle. Yet, the federal government continues to impose taxes on Social Security benefits. Meanwhile, Congress continually raids the Social Security trust fund to finance unconstitutional programs! It is long past time for Congress to choose between helping seniors afford medicine or using the Social Security trust fund as a slush fund for big government and pork-barrel spending. Congress Prescription Drug Affordability Act February 11, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 17:4 I need not remind my colleagues that many senior citizens and other Americans impacted by the high costs of prescription medicine have demanded Congress reduce the barriers which prevent American consumers from purchasing imported pharmaceuticals. Congress has responded to these demands by repeatedly passing legislation liberalizing the rules governing the importation of pharmaceuticals. However, implementation this provisions have been blocked by the federal bureaucracy. It is time Congress stood up for the American consumer and removed all unnecessary regulations on importing pharmaceuticals are removed. Congress Do-Not-Call Implementation Act 12 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 20:2 In addition to exceeding Congress’ constitutional authority, legislation to regulate telemarketing would allow the government to intrude further into our personal lives. Our country’s founders recognized the genius of severely limiting the role of government and reserving to the people extensive liberties, including the freedom to handle problems like this on the local level and through private institutions. The fact that the privately-run Direct Marketing Association is operating its own “do-not-call” list is evidence that consumers need not rely upon the national government to address the problems associated with telemarketers. Furthermore, many state public utility commissions have imposed regulations on telemarketers. Further regulation at the federal level will only result in a greater loss of liberty. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to take the constitutional course and oppose the Do-No- Call Implementation Act. Congress Support Medical Savings Accounts for Medicare February 13, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 21:6 Mr. Speaker, the most important reason to enact this legislation is seniors should not be treated like children and told what health care services they can and cannot have by the federal government. We in Congress have a duty to preserve and protect the Medicare trust fund and keep the promise to America’s seniors and working Americans, whose taxes finance Medicare, that they will have quality health care in their golden years. Congress Oppose the Federal Welfare State February 13, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 22:5 As former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura pointed out in reference to this proposal’s effects on Minnesota’s welfare-to-welfare work program, “We know what we are doing in Minnesota works. We have evidence. And our way of doing things has broad support in the state. Why should we be forced by the federal government to put our system at risk?” Why indeed, Mr. Speaker, should any state be forced to abandon its individual welfare programs because a group of self-appointed experts in Congress, the federal bureaucracy, and inside-the-beltway think tanks have decided there is only one correct way to transition people from welfare to work? Congress Oppose the Federal Welfare State February 13, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 22:8 H.R. 4 further raises serious privacy concerns by expanding the use of the “New Hires Database” to allow states to use the database to verify unemployment claims. The New Hires Database contains the name and social security number of everyone lawfully employed in the United States. Increasing the states’ ability to identify fraudulent unemployment claims is a worthwhile public policy goal. However, every time Congress authorizes a new use for the New Hires Database it takes a step toward transforming it into a universal national database that can be used by government officials to monitor the lives of American citizens. Congress Oppose the Federal Welfare State February 13, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 22:11 Releasing the charitable impulses of the American people by freeing them from the excessive tax burden so they can devote more of their resources to charity, is a moral and constitutional means of helping the needy. By contrast, the federal welfare state is neither moral nor constitutional. Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government given the power to level excessive taxes on one group of citizens for the benefit of another group of citizens. Many of the founders would have been horrified to see modern politicians define compassion as giving away other people’s money stolen through confiscatory taxation. In the words of the famous essay by former Congressman Davy Crockett, this money is “Not Yours to Give.” Congress Introducing United States Korea Normalization Resolution Of 2003 13 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 23:7 That is why I am introducing the United States-Korea Normalization Resolution, which expresses the sense of Congress that, 60 years after the Korean War, the U.S. security guarantee to South Korea should end, as should the stationing of American troops in South Korea. Congress Another United Nations War 25 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 24:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, President Bush, Sr., proudly spoke of “The New World Order,” a term used by those who promote one-world government under the United Nations. In going to war in 1991, he sought and received U.N. authority to push Iraqi forces out of Kuwait. He forcefully stated that this U.N. authority was adequate and that although a congressional resolution was acceptable, it was entirely unnecessary and he would proceed regardless. At that time, there was no discussion regarding a congressional declaration of war. The first Persian Gulf War, therefore, was clearly a U.N. political war fought within U.N. guidelines, not for U.S. security; and it was not fought through to victory. The bombings, sanctions, and harassment of the Iraqi people have never stopped. We are now about to resume the act of fighting. Although this is referred to as the Second Persian Gulf War, it is merely a continuation of a war started long ago and is likely to continue for a long time, even after Saddam Hussein is removed from power. Congress Another United Nations War 25 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 24:3 Our 58 years in Korea have seen 33,000 lives lost, 100,000 casualties and over $1 trillion in today’s dollars spent. Korea is the most outrageous example of our fighting a U.N. war without a declaration from the U.S. Congress. And where are we today? On the verge of a nuclear confrontation with a North Korean regime nearly out of control. And to compound the irony, the South Koreans are intervening in hopes of diminishing the tensions that exist between the United States and North Korea. Congress Another United Nations War 25 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 24:5 In this new battle with Iraq, our relationship with the United Nations and our allies is drawing a lot of attention. The administration now says it would be nice to have U.N. support, but it is not necessary. The President argues that a unilateralist approach is permissible with his understanding of national sovereignty, but no mention is made of the fact that the authority to go to war is not a U.N. prerogative and that such authority can only come from the U.S. Congress. Congress Another United Nations War 25 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 24:8 The Constitution makes it clear that if we must counter a threat to our security, that authority must come from the U.S. Congress. Congress Emancipation Proclamation 26 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 25:6 “That the executive will on the 1st day of January aforesaid, by proclamation, designate the States and parts of States, if any, in which the people thereof, respectively, shall then be in rebellion against the United States; and the fact that any State or the people thereof shall on that day be in good faith represented in the Congress of the United States by members chosen thereto at elections wherein a majority of the qualified voters of such States shall have participated shall, in the absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed conclusive evidence that such State and the people thereof are not then in rebellion against the United States.” Congress Stem Cell research 27 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 26:4 Today we have before us a bill that attempts to protect innocent human life from legislators wishing to exploit it. Though well intentioned, Congress does not have authority under the Constitution to create a federal law banning cloning and the accompanying destruction of human life. The separation and enumeration of powers reserves to the states and local governments the power to write and enforce laws that protect life. If this bill instead were introduced as a constitutional amendment banning the destruction and discarding of human embryos, it would both accomplish its purpose and, equally important, hold to the letter of the law. Congress Stem Cell research 27 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 26:5 In Congress we can either pass an unconstitutional ban on cloning, or we can abide by the law and not pass the ban, as bureaucrats continue to have control over human cloning and use of taxpayer funds to destroy human life. These bureaucrats seem to have no difficulty violating the consciences of those who recognize cloning experimentation for what it is. What is to be done? I fear the answer to this question, and its implications, will continue to haunt us in the months and years to come, whether or not this federal ban on human cloning passes. Mr. Speaker, when we last considered this issue I placed the following statement in the RECORD and wish to do so once again. Congress Stem Cell research 27 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 26:9 Since federal funding has already been used to promote much of the research that has inspired cloning technology, no one can be sure that voluntary funds would have been spent in the same manner. There are many shortcomings of cloning and I predict there are more to come. Private funds may well have flowed much more slowly into this research than when the government/taxpayer does the funding. The notion that one person, i.e., the President, by issuing a President order can instantly stop or start major research is frightening. Likewise, the U.S. Congress is no more likely to do the right thing than the President by rushing to pass a new federal law. Political wisdom in dealing with highly charged and emotional issues is not likely to be found. Congress Stem Cell research 27 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 26:16 What can be done? The first step Congress should take is to stop all funding of research for cloning and other controversial issues. Obviously all research in a free society should be done privately, thus preventing this type of problem. If this policy were to be followed, instead of less funding being available for research, there would actually be more. Congress Stem Cell research 27 February 2003    2003 Ron Paul 26:17 Second, the President should issue no Executive Order because under the Constitution he does not have the authority either to promote or stop any particular research nor does the Congress. And third, there should be no sacrifice of life. Local law officials are responsible for protecting life or should not participate in its destruction. We should continue the ethical debate and hope that the medical leaders would voluntarily do the self-policing that is required in a moral society. Local laws, under the Constitution, could be written and the reasonable ones could then set the standard for the rest of the nation. Congress The Financial Services Committee’s Terrible Blueprint for 2004 February 28, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 27:3 The committee shows complete disregard for the American taxpayer and the United Sates Constitution by embracing increases in foreign aid. Congress has neither constitutional nor moral authority to take money from the American people and send it overseas. Furthermore, foreign aid rarely improves the standard of living of the citizens of the “beneficiary” countries. Instead, the aid all too often enriches corrupt politicians and helps stave off pressure for real reform. Furthermore, certain proposals embraced by the committee smack of economic imperialism, suggesting that if a country’s economic and other policies please American politicians and bureaucrats, they will be rewarded with money stolen from American taxpayers. Congress The Financial Services Committee’s Terrible Blueprint for 2004 February 28, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 27:6 Rather than embracing an agenda of expanded statism, I hope my colleagues will work to reduce government interference in the market that only benefits the politically powerful. For example, the committee could take a major step toward ending corporate welfare by holding hearings and a mark-up on my legislation to withdraw the United States from the Bretton Woods Agreement and end taxpayer support for the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The Financial Services Committee can also take a step toward restoring Congress’ constitutional role in monetary policy by passing legislation requiring congressional approval before the federal government buys or sells gold. Congress The Financial Services Committee’s Terrible Blueprint for 2004 February 28, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 27:7 Perhaps the most disappointing omission from the committee’s views is the failure to address monetary policy. This is especially troubling given that many Americans have lost their jobs, while millions of others have seen severe declines in their net worth, because of the Federal Reserve’s continuing boom and bust monetary policy. It is long past time for Congress to examine seriously the need for reform of the system of fiat currency that is responsible for the cycle of booms and busts that plague the American economy. Until this committee addresses those issues, I am afraid the American economy may suffer more recessions or even depressions in the future. Congress The Myth of War Prosperity March 4, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 28:10 War should always be fought as the very, very last resort. It should never be done casually, but only when absolutely necessary. And when it is, I believe it should be fought to be won. It should be declared. It should not be fought under U.N. resolutions or for U.N. resolutions, but for the sovereignty and the safety and the security of this country. It is explicit in our Constitution that necessary wars be declared by the Congress. And that is something that concerns me a great deal because we have not declared war outright since 1945, and if you look carefully, we have not won very many since then. Congress Social Security Protection Act Of 2003 5 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 29:2 The effect of the Government Pension Offset is to punish people for teaching in public schools! However, current law provides widowed Texas public school teachers a means of collecting the full social security spousal benefits. Unfortunately, this bill removes that option from Texas teachers. Since I believe the Congress should repeal the Government Pension Offset by passing H.R. 524, which repeals both the Government Pension Offset and the Windfall Elimination Provision, another provision that denies public employees full social security benefits, I must oppose this bill. Congress Social Security Protection Act Of 2003 5 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 29:3 Instead of punishing public school teachers, Congress should be encouraging good people to enter the education profession by passing my Teacher Tax Cut Act (H.R. 613) which provides every teacher with a $1,000 tax credit, as well as my Professional Educators Tax Credit Act (H.R. 614), which provides a $1,000 tax credit to counselors, librarians, and all school personnel. Congress should also act to protect the integrity of the Social Security Trust Fund by passing my Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which ensures that Social Security monies are not spent on other programs. Congress should also pass my Social Security for American Citizens Only Act (H.R. 489), which ensures that noncitizens who have not worked the required number of quarters and illegal immigrants do not receive social security benefits. Congress American Servicemember And Civilian Protection Act Of 2003 6 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 30:9 Last year Congress passed the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act within the Defense Authorization bill. Commendable as that effort was, the fact of the matter is that because of the numerous loopholes and exemptions in that legislation, our servicemembers are still not protected from the probing arms of the International Criminal Court. American citizens have absolutely no protection under last year’s legislation. This is simply unacceptable. That is why I am introducing this legislation that makes the position of the United States clear: we will protect our servicemembers and citizens from this illegal court. Congress American Sovereignty Restoration Act Of 2003 6 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 31:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to reintroduce the American Sovereignty Restoration Act. I submitted this bill, which would end United States membership in the United Nations, in the 107th Congress and the 106th Congress and since then conditions have made its relevance and importance more evident now than ever. The United Nations assault on the sovereignty of the United States proceeds apace; it shows no signs of slowing. Mr. Speaker, since I last introduced this measure, the United Nations has convened its International Criminal Court, which claims jurisdiction even over citizens of countries that have not elected to join the court. This means that Americans — both civilians and members of our armed services — are subject to a court that even its supporters admit does not offer all the protections guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. Congress American Sovereignty Restoration Act Of 2003 6 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 31:6 The U.S. Congress, by passing H.R. 1146, and the U.S. president, by signing H.R. 1146, will heed the wise counsel of our first president, George Washington, when he advised his countrymen to “steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world,” lest the nation’s security and liberties be compromised by endless and overriding international commitments. I urge my colleagues to support this measure and I hope for its quick consideration. Congress American Sovereignty Restoration Act Of 2003 6 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 31:21 As a direct consequence of this original power of the people to constitute a new government, the Congress under the new constitution was authorized to admit new states to join the original 13 states without submitting the admission of each state to the 13 original states. In like manner, the Charter of the United Nations, forged in the name of the ‘peoples’ of those nations, established a new international government with independent powers to admit to membership whichever nations the United Nations governing authorities chose without submitting such admissions to each individual member nation for ratification. See Charter of the United Nations, Article 4, Section 2. No treaty could legitimately confer upon the United Nations General Assembly such powers and remain within the legal and political definition of a treaty. Congress Quality Health Care Coalition Act 12 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 32:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Quality Health Care Coalition Act, which takes a first step towards restoring a true free market in health care by restoring the rights of freedom of contract and association to health care professionals. Over the past few years, we have had much debate in Congress about the difficulties medical professionals and patients are having with Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs). HMOs are devices used by insurance industries to ration health care. While it is politically popular for members of Congress to bash the HMOs and the insurance industry, the growth of the HMOs are rooted in past government interventions in the health care market though the tax code, the Employment Retirement Security Act (ERSIA), and the federal anti-trust laws. These interventions took control of the health care dollar away from individual patients and providers, thus making it inevitable that something like the HMOs would emerge as a means to control costs. Congress Quality Health Care Coalition Act 12 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 32:6 By restoring the freedom of medical professionals to voluntarily come together to negotiate as a group with HMOs and insurance companies, this bill removes a government-imposed barrier to a true free market in health care. Of course, this bill does not infringe on the rights of health care professionals by forcing them to join a bargaining organization against their will. While Congress should protect the rights of all Americans to join organizations for the purpose of bargaining collectively, Congress also has a moral responsibility to ensure that no worker is forced by law to join or financially support such an organization. Congress Quality Health Care Coalition Act 12 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 32:7 Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that Congress will not only remove the restraints on medical professionals’ freedom of contract, but will also empower patients to control their health care by passing my Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act. The Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act puts individuals back in charge of their own health care by expanding access to Medical Savings Accounts and providing Americans with large tax credits and tax deductions for their health care expenses. Putting individuals back in charge of their own health care decisions will enable patients to work with providers to ensure they receive the best possible health care at the lowest possible price. If providers and patients have the ability to form the contractual arrangements that they find most beneficial to them, the HMO monster will wither on the vine without the imposition of new federal regulations on the insurance industry. Congress Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act (H.R. 1249) 13 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 34:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, as an OB–GYN with over 30 years in private practice, I understand better than perhaps any other member of Congress the burden imposed on both medical practitioners and patients by excessive malpractice judgments and the corresponding explosion in malpractice insurance premiums. Malpractice insurance has skyrocketed to the point where doctors are unable to practice in some areas or see certain types of patients because they cannot afford the insurance premiums. This crisis has particularly hit my area of practice, leaving some pregnant women unable to find a qualified obstetrician in their city. Therefore, I am pleased to see Congress address this problem. Congress Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act (H.R. 1249) 13 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 34:3 Of course, I am not suggesting Congress place price controls on the insurance industry. Instead, Congress should reexamine those federal laws such as ERISA and the HMO Act of 1973, which have allowed insurers to achieve such a prominent role in the medical profession. As I will detail below, Congress should also take steps to encourage contractual means of resolving malpractice disputes. Such an approach may not be beneficial to the insurance companies or the trial lawyers, buy will certainly benefit the patients and physicians, which both sides in this debate claim to represent. Congress Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act (H.R. 1249) 13 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 34:4 H.R. 5 does contain some positive elements. For example, the language limiting joint and several liabilities to the percentage of damage someone actually caused, is a reform I have long championed. However, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5 exceeds Congress’ constitutional authority by preempting state law. Congressional dissatisfaction with the malpractice laws in some states provides no justification for Congress to impose uniform standards on all 50 states. The 10th amendment does not authorize federal action in areas otherwise reserved to the states simply because some members of Congress are unhappy with the way the states have handled the problem. Ironically, H.R. 5 actually increases the risk of frivolous litigation in some states by lengthening the statue of limitations and changing the definition of comparative negligence! Congress Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act (H.R. 1249) 13 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 34:7 Rather than further expanding unconstitutional mandates and harming those with a legitimate claim to collect compensation, Congress should be looking for ways to encourage physicians and patients to resolve questions of liability via private, binding contracts. The root cause of the malpractice crisis (and all of the problems with the health care system) is the shift away from treating the doctor-patient relationship as a contractual one to viewing it as one governed by regulations imposed by insurance company functionaries, politicians, government bureaucrats, and trial lawyers. There is no reason why questions of the assessment of liability and compensation cannot be determined by a private contractual agreement between physicians and patients. Congress Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act (H.R. 1249) 13 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 34:8 I have introduced the Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act (H.R. 1249). H.R. 1249 provides tax incentives to individuals who agree to purchase malpractice insurance, which will automatically provide coverage for any injuries sustained in treatment. This will insure that those harmed by spiraling medical errors receive timely and full compensation. My plan spares both patients and doctors the costs of a lengthy, drawn-out trial and respects Congress’ constitutional limitations. Congress Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act (H.R. 1249) 13 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 34:9 Congress could also help physicians lower insurance rates by passing legislation, such as my Quality Health Care Coalition Act (H.R. 1247), that removes the antitrust restrictions preventing physicians from forming professional organizations for the purpose of negotiating contracts with insurance companies and HMOs. These laws give insurance companies and HMOs, who are often protected from excessive malpractice claims by ERISA, the ability to force doctors to sign contracts exposing them to excessive insurance premiums and limiting their exercise of professional judgment. The lack of a level playing field also enables insurance companies to raise premiums at will. In fact, it seems odd that malpractice premiums have skyrocketed at a time when insurance companies need to find other sources of revenue to compensate for their losses in the stock market. Congress Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act (H.R. 1249) 13 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 34:10 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while I support the efforts of the sponsors of H.R. 5 to address the crisis in health care caused by excessive malpractice litigation and insurance premiums, I cannot support this bill. H.R. 5 exceeds Congress’ constitutional limitations and denies full compensation to those harmed by the unintentional effects of federal vaccine mandates. Instead of furthering unconstitutional authority, my colleagues should focus on addressing the root causes of the malpractice crisis by supporting efforts to restore the primacy of contract to the doctor-patient relationships. Congress Crisis In Healthcare 13 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 35:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, America faces a crisis in health care. Health care costs continue to rise while physicians and patients struggle under the control of managed-care “gatekeepers.” Obviously, fundamental health care reform should be one of Congress’ top priorities. Congress Amber Alert Concerns 19 March 2003    2003 Ron Paul 36:4 Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1104 also exceeds Congress’ constitutional authority by criminalizing travel with the intent of committing a crime. As appalling as it is that some would travel abroad to engage in activities that are rightly illegal in the United States, legislation of this sort poses many problems and offers few solutions. First among these problems is the matter of national sovereignty. Those who travel abroad and break the law in their host country should be subject to prosecution in that country: it is the responsibility of the host country — not the U.S. Congress — to uphold its own laws. It is a highly unique proposal to suggest that committing a crime in a foreign country against a non-US citizen is within the jurisdiction of the United States Government. Congress Comprehensive Health Care Reform Without Socialized Medicine March 27, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 40:1 Mr. Speaker, America faces a crisis in health care. Health care costs continue to rise while physicians and patients struggle under the control of managed-care “gatekeepers.” Obviously, fundamental health care reform should be one of Congress’ top priorities. Congress No Federal Funding for Abortion! April 2, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 42:3 Finally, my Life-Protecting Judicial Limitation Act of 2003 provides that the inferior courts of the United States do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases. Congress must use the authority granted to it in Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution. The district courts of the United States, as well as the United States Court of Federal Claims, should not have the authority to hear these types of cases. Congress No Federal Funding for Abortion! April 2, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 42:4 Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that my colleagues will join me in support of these three bills. By following the Constitution and using the power granted to the Congress by this document, we can restore freedom of conscience and the sanctity of human life. Congress The First Amendment Protects Religious Speech April 2, 2003 Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation restoring First amendment protections of religion and religious speech. For fifty years, the personal religious freedom of this nation’s citizens has been infringed upon by courts that misread and distort the First amendment. The framers of the Constitution never in their worst nightmares imagined that the words, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech.......” would be used to ban children from praying in school, prohibit courthouses from displaying the Ten Commandments, or prevent citizens from praying before football games. The original meaning of the First amendment was clear on these two points: The federal government cannot enact laws establishing one religious denomination over another, and the federal government cannot forbid mention of religion, including the Ten Commandments and references to God.    2003 Ron Paul 43:2 The Court completely disregards the original meaning and intent of the First amendment. It has interpreted the establishment clause to preclude prayer and other religious speech in a public place, thereby violating the free exercise clause of the very same First amendment. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Congress to correct this error, and to perform its duty to support and defend the Constitution. My legislation would restore First amendment protections of religion and speech by removing all religious freedom-related cases from federal district court jurisdiction, as well as from federal claims court jurisdiction. The federal government has no constitutional authority to reach its hands in the religious affairs of its citizens or of the several states. Congress Social Security Protection Act 2 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 44:2 The effect of the Government Pension Offset is to punish people for teaching in public schools! However, current law provides widowed Texas public school teachers a means of collecting the full social security spousal benefits. Unfortunately, this bill removes that option from Texas teachers. Since I believe the Congress should repeal the Government Pension Offset by passing HR 524, which repeals both the Government Pension Offset and the Windfall Elimination Provision, another provision that denies public employees full social security benefits, I must oppose this bill. Congress Social Security Protection Act 2 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 44:3 Instead of punishing public school teachers, Congress should be encouraging good people to enter the education profession by passing my Teacher Tax Cut Act (HR 613) which provides every teacher with a $1,000 tax credit, as well as my Professional Educators Tax Credit act (HR 614), which provides a $1,000 tax credit to counselors, librarians, and all school personnel. Congress should also act to protect the integrity of the Social Security Trust Fund by passing my Social Security Preservation Act (HR 219), which ensures that Social Security monies are not spent on other programs. Congress should also pass my Social Security for American Citizens Only Act (HR 489), which ensures that non-citizens who have not worked the required number of quarters and illegal immigrants do not receive social security benefits. Congress Rice Farmers Fairness Act 2 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 45:5 America’s rice farmers are the most efficient, effective producers of rice in the world, despite the many hurdles erected by Washington. The Rice Farmer Fairness Act helps remove one of these hurdles and this makes America’s rice farmers even more efficient. In order to enhance our competitive position, we should also end our embargoes of other nations. Congress should eliminate the burdensome taxes and regulations imposed on America’s farmers. I hope my colleagues will join me in removing these federally imposed burdens on rice farmers by supporting free trade, low taxes and regulations, and cosponsoring my Rice Farmer Fairness Act. Congress War No Excuse For Frivolous Spending 3 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 46:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, at a time of war Congress has no more important duty than to make sure that our military force have all the resources they need. However, Congress also has a duty to not use the war as cover for unnecessary and unconstitutional spending. This is especially true when war coincides with a period of economic downturn and growing federal deficits. Unfortunately, Congress today is derelict in its duty to the United States taxpayer. Instead of simply ensuring that our military has the necessary resources to accomplish its mission in Iraq, a mission which may very well be over before this money reaches the Pentagon, Congress has loaded this bill up with unconstitutional wasteful foreign aid and corporate welfare spending. Congress War No Excuse For Frivolous Spending 3 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 46:3 Although generous to certain corporate interests, this bill actually contains less money than the administration requested for homeland security. One area of homeland security that Congress did not underfund is its own security; this bill provides the full amount requested to ensure the security of the Congress. Still, one could reasonably conclude from reading this bill that the security of Turkey, Pakistan, and Jordan are more important to Congress that the security of Houston, New York and other major American cities. Congress Second Amendment Restoration Act 9 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 47:2 It is long past time for Congress to recognize that not every problem requires a federal solution. This country’s founders recognized the genius of separating power amongst federal, state and local governments as a means to maximize individual liberty and make government most responsive to those persons who might most responsibly influence it. This separation of powers strictly limited the role of the federal governments in dealing with civil liability matters; instead, it reserved jurisdiction over matters of civil tort, such as gun related alleged-negligence suits, to the state legislatures from which their respective jurisdictions flow. Congress United States Embargo On Cuba 9 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 48:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise again in this Congress to introduce a bill to lift the harmful and counterproductive United States Embargo on Cuba. Congress United States Embargo On Cuba 9 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 48:3 “We have a lot of rice and agricultural products, as well as high-tech products, that would be much cheaper for Cuba to purchase from Texas. All that could come through the ports of Houston and Corpus Christi.” I wholeheartedly support this resolution, and I have introduced similar federal legislation in past years to lift all trade, travel, and telecommunications restrictions with Cuba. I only wish Congress understood the simple wisdom expressed in Austin, so that we could end the harmful and ineffective trade sanctions that serve no national purpose. Congress United States Embargo On Cuba 9 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 48:5 Second, sanctions simply hurt American industries, particularly agriculture. Every market we close to our nation’s farmers is a market exploited by foreign farmers. China, Russia, the middle east, North Korea, and Cuba all represent huge markets for our farm products, yet many in Congress favor current or proposed trade restrictions that prevent our farmers from selling to the billions of people in these countries. The Department of Agriculture estimates that Iraq alone represents a $1 billion market for American farm goods. Given our status as one of the world’s largest agricultural producers, why would we ever choose to restrict our exports? The only beneficiaries of our sanctions policies are our foreign competitors. Congress United States Embargo On Cuba 9 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 48:6 I certainly understand the emotional feelings many Americans have toward nations such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Cuba. Yet we must not let our emotions overwhelm our judgment in foreign policy matters, because ultimately human lives are at stake. Economic common sense, self-interested foreign policy goals, and humanitarian ideals all point to the same conclusion: Congress should work to end economic sanctions against all nations immediately. Congress Repeal the So-Called “Medical Privacy Rule” April 9, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 49:3 The dangers to liberty inherent in the “uniform health identifier” are magnified by the so-called “medical privacy” regulation. Many things in Washington are misnamed, however, this regulation may be the most blatant case of false advertising I have come across in all my years in Congress. Rather than protecting the individual’s right to medical privacy, these regulations empower government officials to determine how much medical privacy an individual “needs.” This one-size-fits-all approach ignores the fact that different people may prefer different levels of privacy. Some individuals may be willing to exchange a great deal of their personal medical information in order to obtain certain benefits, such as lower-priced care or having information targeted to their medical needs sent to them in a timely manner. Others may forgo those benefits in order to limit the number of people who have access to their medical history. Federal bureaucrats cannot possibly know, much less meet, the optimal level of privacy for each individual. In contrast, the free market allows individuals to obtain the level of privacy protection they desire. Congress Repeal the So-Called “Medical Privacy Rule” April 9, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 49:14 By now it should be clear to every member of Congress that the American people do not want their health information recorded on a database, and they do not wish to be assigned a unique health identifier. According to a survey by the respected Gallup Company, 91 percent of Americans oppose assigning Americans a unique health care identifier, while 92 percent of the people oppose allowing government agencies the unrestrained power to view private medical records and 88 percent of Americans oppose placing private health care information in a national database. Congress has acknowledge this public concern by including language forbidding the expenditure of funds to implement or develop a medical identifier in the federal budget for the past five fiscal years. Rather than continuing to extend the prohibition on funding for another year, Congress should finally obey the wishes of the American people by repealing the authorization of the individual medical ID this year as well as repealing these dangerous medical privacy rules. Congress Agriculture Education Freedom Act 10 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 50:2 Think about this for a moment. These kids are trying to better themselves, earn some money, save some money and what does Congress do? We pick on these kids by taxing them. It is truly amazing that with all the handwringing in Congress over the alleged need to further restrict liberty and grow the size of government “for the children” we would continue to tax young people who are trying to lead responsible lives and prepare for the future. Even if the serious social problems today’s youth face could be solved by new federal bureaucracies and programs, it is still unfair to pick on those kids who are trying to do the right thing. Congress America National Sovereignty vs. UN “International Law” – Time for Congress to Vote April 29, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 51:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge the leadership of this body to bring a very important vote to the House floor. I recently reintroduced HR 1146, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act, which would end our participation in the United Nations. Millions of Americans have begun to question why we continue to spend $300 million each year funding and housing an organization that is actively hostile to American interests. Surely Congress, which routinely spends 15 minutes renaming post offices, can spare 15 minutes to vote on this fundamental issue of American sovereignty. Congress Improving Educational Results For Children With Disabilities Act 30 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 52:2 At a time when Congress should be returning power and funds to the states, IDEA increases Federal control over education. Under this bill, expenditures on IDEA will total over $100 billion by the year 2011. After 2011, congressional appropriators are free to spend as much as they wish on this program. This flies in the face of many members’ public commitment to place limits on the scope of the Federal bureaucracy. Congress Improving Educational Results For Children With Disabilities Act 30 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 52:4 However, H.R. 1350 still imposes significant costs on state governments and localities. For example, this bill places new mandates on state and local schools to offer special services in areas with significant “overidentification” of disabled students. Mr. Chairman, the problem of overidentification is one created by the Federal mandates and federal spending of IDEA! So once again, Congress is using problems created by their prior mandates to justify imposing new mandates on the states! Congress Improving Educational Results For Children With Disabilities Act 30 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 52:8 On May 10, 1994, Dr. Mary Wagner testified before the Education Committee that disabled children who are not placed in mainstream classrooms graduate from high school at a much higher rate than disabled children who are mainstreamed. Dr. Wagner quite properly accused Congress of sacrificing children to ideology. Congress Improving Educational Results For Children With Disabilities Act 30 April 2003    2003 Ron Paul 52:10 Instead of placing more federal control on education, Congress should allow parents of disabled children the ability to obtain the type of education appropriate for that child’s unique needs by passing my Help and Opportunities for Parents of Exceptional Children (HOPE for Children) Act of 2003, H.R. 1575. This bill allows parents of children with a learning disability a tax cut of up to $3,000 for educational expenses. Parents could use this credit to pay for special services for their child, or to pay tuition at private school or even to home school their child. By allowing parents of special needs children to control the education dollar, the HOPE for Children Act allows parents to control their child’s education. Thus, this bill helps parents of special needs children provide their child an education tailored to the child’s unique needs. Congress Against $15 Billion To Fight AIDS In Africa 1 May 2003    2003 Ron Paul 53:4 But the point I wanted to bring up is the authority for doing programs like this. We have a rule in the House that we have to cite the constitutional authority, for the legislation we’re dealing with. The committee report cites the authority from a very important section of the Constitution, article I, section 8, because literally we, the Congress, get our marching orders from article I, section 8, which is the section of the Constitution relating to making all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution. Congress Against $15 Billion To Fight AIDS In Africa 1 May 2003    2003 Ron Paul 53:7 But most likely nobody is going to propose a change in the Constitution, the Constitution will not be changed, so the Congress chooses to ignore the Constitution when it feel like it; therefore, we have reduced the Constitution to something that has very little value anymore. Congress Voter Protection Act 1 May 2003    2003 Ron Paul 55:2 I want to make 4 points about this bill. First, it is constitutional. Article I, section 4, explicitly authorizes the U.S. Congress to, “At any time by law make or alter such regulations regarding the manner of holding elections.” This is the authority that was used for the Voter Rights Act of 1965. Congress The Wisdom Of Tax Cuts 6 May 2003    2003 Ron Paul 56:2 Some say tax cuts raise revenues by addressing economic activity, thus providing Congress with even more money to spend. Others say lowering taxes simply lowers revenues and increases deficits. Some say we must target tax cuts to the poor and the middle class so they will spend more money. Others say tax cuts should be targeted to the rich so they can invest and create jobs. We must accept that it is hard to give tax cuts to people who do not pay taxes. But we could, if we wanted, cut payroll taxes for lower-income workers. Congress The Wisdom Of Tax Cuts 6 May 2003    2003 Ron Paul 56:3 The truth is, government officials cannot know what consumers and investors will do if they get a tax cut. Plugging tax cut data into a computer and expecting an accurate projection of the economic outcome is about as reliable as asking Congress to project government surpluses. Two important points are purposely ignored: first, the money people earn is their own, and they have a moral right to keep as much of it as possible. It is not Congress’ money to spend. Government spending is the problem. Taking a big chunk of the people’s earnings out of the economy, whether through taxes or borrowing, is always harmful. Taxation is more honest and direct and the harm is less hidden. Borrowing, especially since the Federal Reserve creates credit out of thin air to loan to big spenders in Congress, is more deceitful. It hides the effects and delays the consequences. But over the long term, this method of financing is much more dangerous. Congress The Wisdom Of Tax Cuts 6 May 2003    2003 Ron Paul 56:4 The process by which the Fed monetizes debt and accommodates Congress contributes to, if not causes, most of our problems. This process of government financing generates the business cycle and thus increases unemployment. It destroys the value of the dollar and thus causes price inflation. It encourages deficits by reducing restraints on congressional spending. It encourages an increase in the current account deficit, the dollar being the reserve currency of the world, and causes huge foreign indebtedness. It reflects a philosophy of instant gratification that says, live for the pleasures of today and have future generations pay the bills. Congress The Wisdom Of Tax Cuts 6 May 2003    2003 Ron Paul 56:6 Remember, the real issue is total spending by government. Yet this issue is ignored or politicized by both sides of the aisle here in Congress. The political discussion about whether to cut taxes has avoided the real issue and instead has degenerated into charges of class and party warfare, with both sides lusting for power. Of course, the great issue for the ages, namely, what is the proper role for government in a constitutional republic, is totally ignored. Yet another question remains: Are the American people determined they still wish to have a constitutional Republic? Congress The Flag Burning Amendment June 3, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 57:9 The First Amendment has been brought up on several occasions, and I am sure it will be mentioned much more in general debate. This amendment does not directly violate the First Amendment, but what it does, it gives Congress the authority to write laws that will violate the First Amendment, and this is where the trouble is. Nothing but confusion and litigation can result. Congress The Flag Burning Amendment June 3, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 57:14 He suggested that we have amended the Constitution before when the courts have ruled a certain way. And he is absolutely right, we can do that and we have done that. But to use the 16th amendment as a beautiful example of how the Congress solves problems, I would expect the same kind of dilemma coming out of this amendment as we have out of the 16th amendment which, by the way, has been questioned by some historians as not being correctly ratified. Congress The Flag Burning Amendment June 3, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 57:16 The gentleman earlier had said that there are laws against slander so therefore we do violate the First amendment. Believe me, I have never read or heard about a legislative body or a judge who argued that you can lie and commit fraud under the First amendment. But the First amendment does say “Congress shall write no laws.” That is precise. So even the laws dealing with fraud and slander should be written by the States. This is not a justification for us to write an amendment that says Congress shall write laws restricting expression through the desecration of the flag. Congress The Flag Burning Amendment June 3, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 57:20 However, I cannot support an amendment to give Congress new power to prohibit flag burning. I served my country to protect our freedoms and to protect our Constitution. I believe very sincerely that today we are undermining to some degree that freedom that we have had all these many years. Congress The Flag Burning Amendment June 3, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 57:22 Let me emphasize how the First Amendment is written, “Congress shall make no law.” That was the spirit of our Nation at that time: “Congress shall make no laws.” Congress The Flag Burning Amendment June 3, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 57:23 Unfortunately, Congress has long since disregarded the original intent of the Founders and has written a lot of laws regulating private property and private conduct. But I would ask my colleagues to remember that every time we write a law to control private behavior, we imply that somebody has to arrive with a gun, because if you desecrate the flag, you have to punish that person. So how do you do that? You send an agent of the government, perhaps an employee of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Flags, to arrest him. This is in many ways patriotism with a gun – if your actions do not fit the official definition of a “patriot,” we will send somebody to arrest you. Congress The Flag Burning Amendment June 3, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 57:24 Fortunately, Congress has models of flag desecration laws. For example, Saddam Hussein made desecration of the Iraq flag a criminal offense punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Congress The Flag Burning Amendment June 3, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 57:31 Mr. Speaker, this is ultimately an attack on private property. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression depend on property. We do not have freedom of expression of our religion in other people’s churches; it is honored and respected because we respect the ownership of the property. The property conveys the right of free expression, as a newspaper would or a radio station. Once Congress limits property rights, for any cause, no matter how noble, it limits freedom. Congress The Partial Birth Abortion Ban June 4, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 58:3 The best solution, of course, is not now available to us. That would be a Supreme Court that recognizes that for all criminal laws, the several states retain jurisdiction. Something that Congress can do is remove the issue from the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts, so that states can deal with the problems surrounding abortion, thus helping to reverse some of the impact of Roe v. Wade. Congress H. Con. res. 177 4 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 61:2 I believe it is appropriate for Congress to recognize and commend this service to our country and I join with my colleagues to do so. I am concerned, however, that legislation like H. Con. Res. 177 seeks to use our support for the troops to advance a very political and controversial message. In addition to expressing sympathy and condolences to the families of those who have lost their lives in service to our country, for example, this legislation endorses the kind of open-ended occupation and nation-building that causes me great concern. It “recommits” the United States to “helping the people of Iraq and Afghanistan build free and vibrant democratic societies.” What this means is hundreds of thousands of American troops remaining in Iraq and Afghanistan for years to come, engaged in nation-building activities that the military is neither trained nor suited for. It also means tens and perhaps hundreds of billions of American tax dollars being shipped abroad at a time when our national debt is reaching unprecedented levels. Congress Continuity Of Government — Part 1 5 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 62:2 I certainly agree with the gentleman from Washington (Mr. BAIRD) that this is a very serious issue; and this is to me not just a casual appointment of a commission, but we are dealing with something that is, in a constitutional sense, rather profound because we are talking about amendments that are suggesting that our governors will appoint Members of Congress for the first time in our history. That should be done with a great deal of caution and clear understanding of what we are doing. Congress Continuity Of Government — Part 1 5 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 62:5 But I have another concern about the urgent need and the assumption that the world ends if we are not here for a few days. There are times when we are not here like in August and a few months we take off at Christmas. Of course, we can be recalled, but the world does not end because we’re not here. In a way this need for a constitutional amendment to appoint congressmen is assuming that life cannot go on without us writing laws. Congress Continuity Of Government — Part 1 5 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 62:6 I would suggest that maybe the urgency is not quite as much as one thinks. I want to quote Michael Barone who was trying to justify a constitutional amendment that allows governors to appoint moc in a time of crisis. He said, “think of all the emergency legislation that Congress passed in the weeks and months after September 11 authorizing expanded police powers. None of this could have happened”. But now as we look back at those emergency conditions, a lot of questions are being asked about the PATRIOT Act and the attack on our fourth amendment and civil liberties. I suggest there could be a slower approach no harm will come of it. Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Congress Establishin Joint Committee To Review House And Senate Matters Assuring Continuing Representation And Congressional Operations For The American People 5 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 64:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, while may seem reasonable to establish a Joint Committee on the Continuity of Congress, I wish to bring to my colleagues’ attention my concerns relative to certain proposals regarding continuity of government, which would fundamentally alter the structure of our government in a way detrimental to republican liberty. Congress Establishin Joint Committee To Review House And Senate Matters Assuring Continuing Representation And Congressional Operations For The American People 5 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 64:4 I would remind my colleagues that this country has faced the possibility of threats to the continuity of this body several times throughout our history, yet no one suggested removing the people’s right vote for members of Congress. For example, the British in the War of 1812 attacked the city of Washington, yet nobody suggested the states could not address the lack of a quorum in the House of Representatives though elections. During the Civil War, the neighboring state of Virginia, where today many Capitol Hill staffers and members reside, was actively involved in hostilities against the United States Government, yet Abraham Lincoln never suggested that non-elected persons serve in the House. Forty-two years ago, Americans wrestled with a hostile superpower that had placed nuclear weapons just 90 miles off the Florida coast, yet no one suggested we consider taking away the people’s right to elect their representatives in order to ensure “continuity of government!” Congress Establishin Joint Committee To Review House And Senate Matters Assuring Continuing Representation And Congressional Operations For The American People 5 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 64:6 Finally, Mr. Speaker, I wish to question the rush under which this bill is being brought to the floor. Until this morning, most members had no idea this bill would be considered today! The rules committee began its mark-up of the bill at 9:15 last night and by 9:31 the report was filed and the bill placed on the House Calendar. Then, after Congress had finished legislative business for the day and with only a handful of members on the floor, unanimous consent was obtained to consider this bill today. Congress Establishin Joint Committee To Review House And Senate Matters Assuring Continuing Representation And Congressional Operations For The American People 5 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 64:7 It is always disturbing when bills dealing with important subjects are rushed through the House before members have adequate time to consider all the implications of the measure. I hope this does not set a precedent for shutting members of Congress out of the debate on this important issue. Congress Establishin Joint Committee To Review House And Senate Matters Assuring Continuing Representation And Congressional Operations For The American People 5 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 64:8 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while there is no harm in considering ideas for continuity of Congress, I hope my colleagues will reject any proposal that takes away the people’s right to elect their representatives in this chamber. Congress Genetically Modified Agricultural Products 10 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 65:2 I oppose this bill because at its core it is government intervention — both in our own markets and in the affairs of foreign independent nations. Whether European governments decide to purchase American products should not be a matter for the U.S. Congress to decide. It is a matter for European governments and the citizens of European Union member countries. While it may be true that the European Union acts irrationally in blocking the import of genetically-modified products, the matter is one for European citizens to decide. Congress Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act 10 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 66:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2143 limits the ability of individual citizens to use bank instruments, including credit cards or checks, to finance Internet gambling. This legislation should be rejected by Congress since the Federal Government has no constitutional authority to ban or even discourage any form of gambling. Congress Does Tony Blair Deserve a Congressional Medal? June 25, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 68:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this legislation for a number of reasons. First, forcing the American people to pay tens of thousands of dollars to give a gold medal to a foreign leader is immoral and unconstitutional. I will continue in my uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution- a Constitution that each member of Congress swore to uphold. Congress Does Tony Blair Deserve a Congressional Medal? June 25, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 68:4 I find it particularly unfortunate that the Republican-controlled Congress would nominate Tony Blair to receive this award. His political party is socialist: Britain under Blair has a system of socialized medicine and government intervention in all aspects of the commercial and personal lives of its citizens. Socialism is an enemy of freedom and liberty - as the 20 th century taught us so well. It is the philosophical basis for a century of mass-murder and impoverishment. Congress Does Tony Blair Deserve a Congressional Medal? June 25, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 68:5 In May, a British television poll found that Prime Minister Blair is the most unpopular man in Great Britain. A brief look at his rule leaves little question why this is so. He has eroded Britain’s constitutional base- recently abolishing the ancient position of Lord Chancellor without any debate. He has overseen a huge expansion of government, with the creation of costly “assemblies” in Wales and Scotland. He also has overseen changes in Britain’s voting system that many believe open the door to widespread voting fraud. In short, he is no Margaret Thatcher and certainly no Winston Churchill. Yet today Congress is voting to give him its highest honor. Congress Does Tony Blair Deserve a Congressional Medal? June 25, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 68:6 Mr. Speaker, it is very easy to be generous with other people’s money. I believe the politicization of this medal, as we are seeing here today, really makes my own point on such matters: Congress should never spend tax money for appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution. When it does so, it charts a dangerous course away from the rule of law and away from liberty. I urge a “No” vote on this unfortunate bill. Congress H. Con. Res. 45 25 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 69:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker: I will reluctantly vote in favor of this legislation, partly because it is simply a sense of Congress resolution. But I am concerned about this bill and the others like it we face with regularity on the floor of Congress. We all condemn violence against innocents, whether it is motivated by hatred, prejudice, greed, jealousy, or whatever else. But that is not what this legislation is really about. It is about the Congress of the United States presuming to know — and to legislate on — the affairs of European countries. First, this is the United States Congress. We have no Constitutional authority to pass legislation affecting foreign countries. Second, when we get involved in matters such as this we usually get it wrong. H. Con. Res. 45 is an example of us getting it wrong on both fronts. Congress H. Con. Res. 45 25 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 69:3 Therefore, part of the problem in many European countries is the massive immigration from predominantly Muslim countries, where new residents bring their hatreds and prejudices with them. Those European politicians who recognize this growing problem — there are now 600,000 Jews in France and five million Muslims — are denounced as racist and worse. While I do not oppose immigration, it must be admitted that massive immigration from vastly different cultures brings a myriad of potential problems and conflicts. These are complicated issues for we in Congress to deal with here in the United States. Yes, prejudice and hatred are evil and must be opposed, but it is absurd for us to try to solve these problems in countries overseas. Congress Medicare Funds For Prescription Drugs 26 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 71:2 I am pleased that the drafters of H.R. 1 incorporate regulatory relief legislation, which have supported in the past, into the bill. This will help relieve some of the tremendous regulatory burden imposed on health care providers by the Federal Government. I am also pleased that H.R. 1 contains several good provisions addressing the congressionally-created crisis in rural health and attempts to ensure that physicians are fairly reimbursed by the Medicare system. Congress Medicare Funds For Prescription Drugs 26 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 71:8 This new spending comes on top of recent increases in spending for “homeland security,” foreign aid, federal education programs, and new welfare initiatives, such as those transforming churches into agents of the welfare state. In addition we have launched a seemingly endless program of global reconstruction to spread “democratic capitalism.” The need to limit spending is never seriously discussed: it is simply assumed that Congress can spend whatever it wants and rely on the Federal Reserve to bail us out of trouble. This is a prescription for disaster. Congress Medicare Funds For Prescription Drugs 26 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 71:10 Congress further exacerbates the fiscal problems created by this bill by failing to take any steps to reform the government policies responsible for the skyrocketing costs of prescription drugs. Congress should help all Americans by reforming federal patent laws and FDA policies, which provide certain large pharmaceutical companies a governmentgranted monopoly over pharmaceutical products. Perhaps the most important thing Congress can do to reduce pharmaceutical policies is liberalize the regulations surrounding the reimportation of FDA-Approved pharmaceuticals. Congress Medicare Funds For Prescription Drugs 26 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 71:12 Supporters of H.R. 1 claim that this bill does liberalize the rules governing the importation of prescription drugs. However, H.R. 1’s importation provision allows the Secretary of Health and Human Services to arbitrarily restrict the ability of American consumers to import prescription drugs — and HHS Secretary Thompson has already gone on record as determined to do all he can to block a free trade in pharmaceuticals! Thus, the importation language in H.R. 1 is a smokescreen designed to fool the gullible into thinking Congress is acting to create a free market in pharmaceuticals. Congress Medicare Funds For Prescription Drugs 26 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 71:18 Mr. Speaker, seniors should not be treated like children by the federal government and told what health care services they can and cannot have. We in Congress have a duty to preserve and protect the Medicare trust fund. We must keep the promise to America’s seniors and working Americans, whose taxes finance Medicare, that they will have quality health care in their golden years. However, we also have a duty to make sure that seniors can get the health care that suits their needs, instead of being forced into a cookie cutter program designed by Washington, DC-based bureaucrats! Medicare MSAs are a good first step toward allowing seniors the freedom to control their own health care. Congress Medicare Funds For Prescription Drugs 26 June 2003    2003 Ron Paul 71:20 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, both H.R. 1 and the alternative force seniors to cede control over which prescription medicines they may receive. The only difference between them is that H.R. 1 gives federally funded HMO bureaucrats control over seniors’ prescription drugs, whereas the alternative gives government functionaries the power to tell seniors which prescription drug they can (and can’t) have. Congress can, and must, do better for our Nation’s seniors, by rejecting this command- and-control approach. Instead, Congress should give seniors the ability to use Medicare funds to pay for the prescription drugs of their choice by passing my legislation that gives all seniors access to Medicare Medical Savings Accounts. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:1 The COGC Proposal The “Continuity of Government Commission” (COGC), spearheaded by the Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise Institute, recently issued proposals for the operation of Congress following a catastrophic terrorist attack. Specifically, COGC advocates a constitutional amendment calling for the appointment of individuals to the House of Representatives to fill the seats of dead or incapacitated members, a first in American history. An examination of the proposal reveals that it is both unnecessary and dangerous. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:3 One reading the COGC proposal cannot help but sense the familiar Washington conceit at work, a conceit that sees America as totally dependent on the workings of Capitol Hill. It is simply unthinkable to many in Washington that the American people might survive a period in which Congress did not pass any new laws. But the truth is that the federal state is not America. The American people have always been remarkably resilient in the face of emergencies, and individual states are far more equipped to deal with emergencies and fill congressional vacancies than COGC imagines. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:4 COGC is Unnecessary Every generation seems to labor under the delusion that it lives in the most dangerous and turbulent time in human history. COGC certainly proves this point. Its proposal provides doomsday scenarios designed to make us believe that the threat of modern terrorism poses a much greater risk to our government institutions than ever existed in the past. Yet is Congress really more vulnerable than it was at the height of the Cold War, when a single Soviet missile could have destroyed Washington? Surely Congress faced greater danger in 1814, when the British army actually invaded Washington, routed the city, and burned down the White House! Somehow the republic survived those much more perilous times without a constitutional amendment calling for the emergency appointment of Representatives. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:5 The scenarios offered by the commission, while theoretically possible, are highly unlikely to disable Congress. Remember, a majority of members assemble together in one place only rarely; even during votes most members are not on the floor together at the same time Inauguration ceremonies and State of the Union addresses often bring together a majority of members in the same place, but simple precautions could be taken to keep a sufficient number away from such events. Even a direct terrorist attack on the Pentagon failed to disrupt the operation of the Department of Defense. The COGC proposal exaggerates the likelihood that a terrorist strike on Washington would incapacitate the House of Representatives, and exaggeration is a bad reason to amend the Constitution. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:6 Existing Constitutional Provisions are Adequate It is important to understand that the Constitution already provides the framework for Congress to function after a catastrophic event. Article I section 2 grants the governors of the various states authority to hold special elections to fill vacancies in the House of Representatives. Article I section 4 gives Congress the authority to designate the time, manner, and place of such special elections if states should fail to act expeditiously following a national emergency. As Hamilton explains in Federalist 59, the “time, place, and manner” clause was specifically designed to address the kind of extraordinary circumstances imagined by COGC. Hamilton characterized authority over federal elections as shared between the states and Congress, with neither being able to control the process entirely. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:7 COGC posits that states could not hold special elections quickly enough after a terrorist act to guarantee the functioning of Congress. But even COGC reports that the average length of House vacancies, following the death of a member until the swearing in of a successor after a special election, is only 126 days. Certainly this period could be shortened given the urgency created by a terrorist attack. We should not amend the Constitution simply to avoid having a reduced congressional body for a month or two. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:8 In fact, Congress often goes months without passing significant legislation, and takes long breaks in August and December. If anything, legislation passed in the aftermath of a terrorist event is likely to be based on emotion, not reason. The terrible Patriot Act, passed only one month after September 11 th by a credulous Congress, is evidence of this. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:9 Also, advances in technology can be used to reduce the risk of a disruption in congressional continuity following an emergency. Members already carry Blackberry devices to maintain communications even if cut off from their offices. Similar technology can be used to allow remote electronic voting by members. Congress should focus on contingency plans that utilize technology, not a constitutional amendment. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:12 The problems with appointment of “representatives” are obvious. COGC calls for a general constitutional amendment that gives Congress wide power to make rules for filling vacancies “in the event that a substantial number of members are killed or incapacitated.” Such an amendment would be unavoidably vague, open to broad interpretation and abuse. In defining terms like “vacancy,” “substantial,” and “incapacitated,” Congress or the courts would be setting a dangerous precedent for a more elastic constitutional framework. Members of Congress simply cannot appoint their colleagues; the conflict of interest is glaring. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:13 Alternate proposals allowing state governors to appoint representatives from a list of successors nominated by members are no better. The House of Representatives represents the people, not the states. Single states often exhibit wide variations in political makeup even among voters of the same party. Appointment by governors, even though the successors represent the dead member’s party choice, could change the ideological composition of Congress contrary to the will of the people. Furthermore, voters choose an individual candidate, not a panel. They should not be required to consider the qualifications of a candidate’s potential successors. Congress The “Continuity of Government” Proposal – A Dangerous and Unnecessary Threat to Representative Rule June 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 72:17 Conclusion To quote Professor Charles Rice, a distinguished Professor Emeritus at Notre Dame Law School: “When it is not necessary to amend the Constitution, it is necessary not to amend the Constitution.” We must not allow the understandable fears and passions engendered by the events of September 11 th to compel a rushed and grievous injury to our system of government. The Constitution is our best ally in times of relative crisis; it is precisely during such times we should hold to it most dearly. Rather than amending the Constitution, Congress should be meeting to discuss how to preserve our existing institutions- including an elected House- in the event of a terrorist attack. The Constitution already provides us with the framework, while technology gives states the ability organize elections quickly. The COGC proposal not only makes a mountain out of a molehill, but also acutely threatens the delicate balance of federal power established in the Constitution. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:4 One thing is certain: conservatives who worked and voted for less government in the Reagan years and welcomed the takeover of the U.S. Congress and the presidency in the 1990s and early 2000s were deceived. Soon they will realize that the goal of limited government has been dashed and that their views no longer matter. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:6 When taxes are not raised to accommodate higher spending, the bills must be paid by either borrowing or “printing” new money. This is one reason why we conveniently have a generous Federal Reserve chairman who is willing to accommodate the Congress. With borrowing and inflating, the “tax” is delayed and distributed in a way that makes it difficult for those paying the tax to identify it. Like future generations and those on fixed incomes who suffer from rising prices, and those who lose jobs they certainly feel the consequences of economic dislocation that this process causes. Government spending is always a “tax” burden on the American people and is never equally or fairly distributed. The poor and low-middle income workers always suffer the most from the deceitful tax of inflation and borrowing. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:15 In spite of the floundering economy, Congress and the Administration continue to take on new commitments in foreign aid, education, farming, medicine, multiple efforts at nation building, and preemptive wars around the world. Already we’re entrenched in Iraq and Afghanistan, with plans to soon add new trophies to our conquest. War talk abounds as to when Syria, Iran and North Korea will be attacked. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:20 Neoconservatives are obviously in positions of influence and are well-placed throughout our government and the media. An apathetic Congress put up little resistance and abdicated its responsibilities over foreign affairs. The electorate was easily influenced to join in the patriotic fervor supporting the military adventurism advocated by the neoconservatives. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:21 The numbers of those who still hope for truly limited government diminished and had their concerns ignored these past 22 months, during the aftermath of 9-11. Members of Congress were easily influenced to publicly support any domestic policy or foreign military adventure that was supposed to help reduce the threat of a terrorist attack. Believers in limited government were harder to find. Political money, as usual, played a role in pressing Congress into supporting almost any proposal suggested by the neocons. This process—where campaign dollars and lobbying efforts affect policy—is hardly the domain of any single political party, and unfortunately, is the way of life in Washington. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:50 Let there be no doubt, those in the neocon camp had been anxious to go to war against Iraq for a decade. They justified the use of force to accomplish their goals, even if it required preemptive war. If anyone doubts this assertion, they need only to read of their strategy in “A Clean Break: a New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” Although they felt morally justified in changing the government in Iraq, they knew that public support was important, and justification had to be given to pursue the war. Of course, a threat to us had to exist before the people and the Congress would go along with war. The majority of Americans became convinced of this threat, which, in actuality, never really existed. Now we have the ongoing debate over the location of weapons of mass destruction. Where was the danger? Was all this killing and spending necessary? How long will this nation building and dying go on? When will we become more concerned about the needs of our own citizens than the problems we sought in Iraq and Afghanistan? Who knows where we’ll go next—Iran, Syria or North Korea? Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:55 Not only did Leo Strauss write favorably of Machiavelli, Michael Ledeen, a current leader of the neoconservative movement, did the same in 1999 in his book with the title, Machiavelli on Modern Leadership, and subtitled: Why Machiavelli’s iron rules are as timely and important today as five centuries ago. Ledeen is indeed an influential neocon theorist whose views get lots of attention today in Washington. His book on Machiavelli, interestingly enough, was passed out to Members of Congress attending a political strategy meeting shortly after its publication and at just about the time A Clean Break was issued. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:79 We know those who lead us—both in the administration and in Congress—show no appetite to challenge the tax or monetary systems that do so much damage to our economy. The IRS and the Federal Reserve are off limits for criticism or reform. There’s no resistance to spending, either domestic or foreign. Debt is not seen as a problem. The supply-siders won on this issue, and now many conservatives readily endorse deficit spending. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:80 There’s no serious opposition to the expanding welfare state, with rapid growth of the education, agriculture and medical-care bureaucracy. Support for labor unions and protectionism are not uncommon. Civil liberties are easily sacrificed in the post 9-11 atmosphere prevailing in Washington. Privacy issues are of little concern, except for a few members of Congress. Foreign aid and internationalism—in spite of some healthy criticism of the UN and growing concerns for our national sovereignty—are championed on both sides of the aisle. Lip service is given to the free market and free trade, yet the entire economy is run by special-interest legislation favoring big business, big labor and, especially, big money. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:86 I realize that all conservatives are not neoconservatives, and all neocons don’t necessarily agree on all points—which means that in spite of their tremendous influence, most Members of Congress and those in the administration do not necessarily take their marching orders from the AEI or Richard Perle. But to use this as a reason to ignore what neoconservative leaders believe, write about it and agitate for—with amazing success I might point out—would be at our own peril. This country still allows open discourse—though less everyday—and we who disagree should push the discussion and expose those who drive our policies. It is getting more difficult to get fair and balanced discussion on the issues, because it has become routine for the hegemons to label those who object to preemptive war and domestic surveillance as traitors, unpatriotic and un-American. The uniformity of support for our current foreign policy by major and cable-news networks should concern every American. We should all be thankful for CSPAN and the internet. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:90 In spite of the deteriorating conditions in Washington—with loss of personal liberty, a weak economy, exploding deficits, and perpetual war, followed by nation building—there are still quite a number of us who would relish the opportunity to improve things, in one way or another. Certainly, a growing number of frustrated Americans, from both the right and the left, are getting anxious to see this Congress do a better job. But first, Congress must stop doing a bad job. Congress Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:94 Once enough of us decide we’ve had enough of all these so-called good things that the government is always promising—or more likely, when the country is broke and the government is unable to fulfill its promises to the people—we can start a serious discussion on the proper role for government in a free society. Unfortunately, it will be some time before Congress gets the message that the people are demanding true reform. This requires that those responsible for today’s problems are exposed and their philosophy of pervasive government intrusion is rejected. Congress Amendment 6 To de-Fund The United Nations — Part 2 15 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 77:4 However, too often I think they leave doing these programs that are designed to help people who are truly suffering versus getting involved with what we call peacekeeping missions. The United Nations are not allowed to declare war. They never go to war, and yet too often we get involved in war. That is why they were called peacekeepers in Korea. That is why it is a peacekeeping mission when we go to Iraq. But, still, the armies are raised, and young men are called off, and people are killed on these peacekeeping missions. Therefore, I say that the United Nations has tended to take away the responsibilities of this Congress to make these very, very important decisions. Congress Amendment 6 To de-Fund The United Nations — Part 2 15 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 77:5 I believe in many ways that by joining the United Nations we have allowed our Constitution to be amended merely by U.N. vote. If the U.N. votes and says something and we go along with that, we do that by majority vote here in the Congress. Where if we look to the Constitution for the authorities that we are allowed to do and what we are not permitted to do, we look to article I, section 8; and what the U.N. is doing is not permissible under the article. Congress Legislation To Prohibit The Federal Government From Imposing A “Carry Tax” 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 78:4 Unfortunately, rather than finally putting an end to the boom-and-bust cycle, most in Washington are preparing to resume the cycle by calling on the Federal Reserve and the Treasury to flood the economy with new money. If Congress is not going to stabilize the American economy by reforming our unstable monetary policy, it should at least refrain from using this government failure as an excuse to further restrict the American people’s liberty through an odious carry tax. I therefore hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation. Congress The Monetary Freedom And Accountability Act 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 79:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act. This simple bill takes a step toward restoring Congress’ constitutional authority over U.S. monetary policy by requiring congressional approval before the President or the Treasury secretary buys or sells gold. I also ask for unanimous consent to insert into the RECORD articles by Kelly Patricia O Meara of Insight magazine detailing the evidence supporting allegations that the United States Government has manipulated the price of gold over the past decade and the harm such manipulation caused American investors, taxpayers, consumers, and workers. Congress The Monetary Freedom And Accountability Act 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 79:6 Mr. Speaker, while I certainly share GATA’s concerns over the effects of federal dealings in the gold market, my bill in no way interferes with the ability of the federal government to buy or sell gold. It simply requires that before the executive branch engages in such transactions, Congress has the chance to review it, debate it, and approve it. Congress The Monetary Freedom And Accountability Act 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 79:7 Given the tremendous effects on the American economy from federal dealings in the gold market, it certainly is reasonable that the people’s representatives have a role in approving these transactions, especially since Congress has a neglected but vital constitutional role V in overseeing monetary policy. Therefore, I urge all my colleagues to stand up for sound economics, open government, and Congress’ constitutional role in monetary policy by cosponsoring the Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act. Congress The Foreign Aid Limitation Act 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 80:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the Foreign Aid Limitation Act. This bill limits the ability of the Executive Branch to use the Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF) to distribute largesse to foreign countries without the approval of Congress. Congress The Foreign Aid Limitation Act 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 80:2 The Foreign Aid Limitation Act prohibits the Secretary of the Treasury from using the ESF to make a loan or extend credit to any foreign government or entity for an amount exceeding $250,000,000. The bill also forbids the ESF from being used to finance a loan or to extend credit, to any foreign government or entity for a period exceeding 60 days. The 60-day limitation can be waived if the President certifies in writing to the Chair and ranking members of the relevant House and Senate Committees that the United States obtained an assured source of repayment before making the loan or extending the credit. Finally, the bill prohibits the use of the ESF to make loans or extend credit in an amount exceeding $1,000,000,000 to a foreign government or entity without express statutory authorization. This provision can also be waived if the President certifies in writing to the heads of the relevant committees that the loan is necessary to address a financial crisis threatening the United States and Congress does not pass a joint resolution disapproving the loan or credit. Congress The Foreign Aid Limitation Act 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 80:3 Mr. Speaker, these provisions all passed Congress as “riders” on appropriations bills in the 1990s. However, they have not been included in the appropriations bills for the past several years. It is long past time for Congress to make these provisions permanent. Over the past several years there has been great controversy over the use of the Exchange Stabilization Fund. This fund was created in the 1930s to help stabilize the exchange value of the dollar, yet it has mutated into a “slush fund” used by the executive branch to funnel money to foreign governments and even foreign companies free of congressional oversight. Congress The Foreign Aid Limitation Act 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 80:4 In particular, there was great controversy over the Clinton administration’s use of the ESF to finance the Mexican bailout without Congressional approval in 1995. Today, there is a similar controversy over the use of the ESF in the Iraq rebuilding process. Ensuring the fund is only used for narrow purposes will help end the controversy by bringing greater transparency to the disbursement of foreign aid. Even supporters of a vigorous foreign aid program should support restoring Congress’ rightful role as appropriator and overseer of foreign aid funds. Congress The Foreign Aid Limitation Act 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 80:5 Mr. Speaker, it long past time for Congress to begin reasserting its constitutional role in the appropriation of funds for foreign aid programs. For too long, the Exchange Stabilization Fund has allowed the executive branch to commit the American taxpayer to supporting foreign governments without even consulting with Congress. I hope all my colleagues will join my efforts to end this practice by cosponsoring my Foreign Aid Limitation Act. Congress The Senior Citizens Freedom Of Choice Act 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 81:7 Congressman RON PAUL U.S. Congress, Washington, DC. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PAUL: I am writing to inform you about a structural problem in Medicare of which you may he unaware and that I believe must be remedied, all the more so now that there are rumors that Medicare, Part A, might be combined with Medicare, Part B. Congress The Senior Citizens Freedom Of Choice Act 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 81:13 Thus I was left with no recourse. I could not appeal a denial of my “restricted” application, because I was not even permitted to make the application. Short of an expensive lawsuit or an Act of Congress, there appears to be no remedy. Congress Bring Back Honest Money 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 82:8 The drafters of the Constitution were well aware of how a government armed with legal tender powers could ravage the people’s liberty and prosperity. That is why the Constitution does not grant legal tender power to the federal government, and the states are empowered to make legal tender only out of gold and silver (see Article 1, Section 10). Instead, Congress was given the power to regulate money against a standard, i.e., the dollar. When Alexander Hamilton wrote the Coinage Act of 1792, he simply made into law the market-definition of a dollar as equaling the silver content of the Spanish milled dollar (371.25 grains of silver), which is the dollar referred to in the Constitution. This historical definition of the dollar has never been changed, and cannot be changed any more than the term “inch,” as a measure of length, can be changed. It is a gross misrepresentation to equate our irredeemable paper-ticket or electronic money to “dollars.” Congress Bring Back Honest Money 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 82:11 Another prescient Justice was Stephen Field, the only Justice to dissent in every legal tender case to come before the Court. Justice Field accurately described the dangers to our constitutional republic posed by legal tender laws: “The arguments in favor of the constitutionality of legal tender paper currency tend directly to break down the barriers which separate a government of limited powers from a government resting in the unrestrained will of Congress. Those limitations must be preserved, or our government will inevitably drift from the system established by our Fathers into a vast, centralized, and consolidated government.” A government with unrestrained powers is properly characterized as tyrannical. Congress Abolishing The Federal Reserve 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 83:6 Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of the special interests and their own appetite for big government. Congress Abolishing The Federal Reserve 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 83:7 Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy. Congress Abolishing The Federal Reserve 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 83:8 In fact, Congress’ constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our nation’s founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true free-market economy. Congress Abolishing The Federal Reserve 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 83:23 Thus, Federal Reserve policy aids and abets the legalized theft of hundreds of billions of dollars per year from low-and middle- income families to the economic elites of this country and profligate governments at all levels — all with the approval of the U.S. Congress and the Bush administration. Congress Legislation To Withdraw The United States From The Bretton Woods Agreement 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 84:3 According to Congressman JIM SAXTON, Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, this “Continued lending over many years sustained and subsidized a bankrupt Argentine economic policy, whose collapse is now all the more serious. The IMF’s generous subsidized bailouts lead to moral hazard problems, and enable shaky governments to pressure the IMF for even more funding or risk disaster.” Congress Legislation To Withdraw The United States From The Bretton Woods Agreement 17 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 84:8 In all my years in Congress, I have never been approached by a taxpayer asking that he or she be forced to provide more subsidies to Wall Street executives and foreign dictators. The only constituency for the IMF is the huge multinational banks and corporations. Big banks used IMF funds — taxpayer funds — to bail themselves out from billions in losses after the Asian financial crisis. Big corporations obtain lucrative contracts for a wide variety of construction projects funded with IMF loans. It’s a familiar game in Washington, with corporate welfare disguised as compassion for the poor. Congress The Justifications for War July 21, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 85:11 Only a few correctly look to the Constitution and to Congress to sort out the pros and cons of each conflict, and decide whether or not a declaration of war is warranted. Congress The Justifications for War July 21, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 85:12 The sad fact is that we have lost our way. A legitimate threat to national security is no longer a litmus test for sending troops hither and yon, and the American people no longer require Congress to declare the wars we fight. Hopefully, some day this will change. Congress UNESCO — Part 2 22 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 87:3 But more importantly, it is the goals of UNESCO. For instance, UNESCO’s position on international taxation is that they would like to impose an international tax. If that is what the people want, if that is what the Congress wants, then you vote against my amendment. But if you think it is a bad idea for the U.N. and UNESCO to be leveling a worldwide tax, then you vote for my amendment. Congress UNESCO — Part 2 22 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 87:6 But they do other things as well. UNESCO, for instance, has been fully supportive of the United Nations Population Fund in its assistance to China’s brutal, coercive population control program. That is part of UNESCO. I do not believe the majority of the Members of Congress really believe that is a good expenditure. And you cannot control the money once it gets to UNESCO, believe me. We send the money, we send a larger amount of money than anybody else, we lose control of it and they do these things that I think are illegitimate as far as our Constitution is concerned. Congress UNESCO — Part 2 22 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 87:7 UNESCO has designated already 47 U.N. biosphere reserves in the United States covering more than 70 million acres without congressional consultation. This project has led to the confiscation of private lands and restrictions. Because we do go along with the restrictions, it is somewhat like following WTO mandates. They come back with regulations and mandates, and we accommodate them by rewriting our tax laws. In the same way, they are moving in, with radical environmentism that originates from UNESCO and it filters into our grade schools as well as our kindergartens. UNESCO effectively bypasses congressional authority to manage Federal lands, including places like the Everglades, and it is done without congressional approval. Congress PATRIOT Act 22 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 88:4 I have had many Members in the Congress come to me and on the quiet admit to me that voting for the PATRIOT Act was the worst bill and the worst vote they have ever cast; and this will give them an opportunity to change it, although this is very narrow. It is too bad we could not have made this more broad, and it is too bad we are not going to get to vote on the amendment of the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. SANDERS) to make sure that without the proper search warrant that the Federal Government would not have access to the library records. Congress PATRIOT Act 22 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 88:10 Not only should we do whatever we can to reform that legislation, but we already know that there is a PATRIOT Act No. 2. It has not been given to us, the Congress; but the administration has it for the future. It is available, but we have only gotten to see it from the Internet. Congress PATRIOT Act 22 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 88:12 I see this as a very, very important issue, if anybody cares about liberty, if anybody cares about personal freedom and the rule of law and the need for probable cause before our government comes barging into our houses. It has been under the guise of drug laws that have in the past instituted many of these abuses, but this is much worse. This has been put into an explicit piece of legislation, and the American people and this Congress ought to become very alert to this and realize how serious the PATRIOT Act is. Congress PATRIOT Act 22 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 88:13 I hope that the Congress and our colleagues here will support this amendment. It is very necessary, and it will be voting for the Constitution; and it will be voting for liberty if we support this amendment. Congress Stay out of Liberia! 24 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 90:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce a resolution expressing the sense of the Congress that while we encourage a regional West African effort to resolve the Liberia crisis, the United States military has no role - either alone or as part of a multinational force - in that country. Congress Stay out of Liberia! 24 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 90:4 Before we commit our troops to yet another foreign intervention, Congress must at the very least consider the implications of further committing our already seriously overextended military. According to recent press reporting, of the 33 brigades that make up the entirety of the US Army’s active duty combat forces, all but just three brigades are either currently engaged in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea; are committed to other missions; or are reconstituting. This suggests that the US military is in serious danger of becoming over-extended. Congress H.R. 2427, the Pharmaceutical Market Access Act 24 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 91:3 But in looking at the particular bill, one of the specific reasons why I oppose it, is I came to Congress opposing all welfare. Some people oppose welfare for the poor, but they support welfare for the rich. Others support welfare for the rich, but not for the poor; and some people support both kinds of welfare. I do not support any kind of welfare. This bill is needed to stop the indirect welfare through regulation for the rich and the pharmaceutical corporations. This is corporate welfare. That is one of the strong reasons why I am opposed to that. Congress H.R. 2427, the Pharmaceutical Market Access Act 24 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 91:7 However, the fact that Medicare, that is already on shaky financial ground, will soon be subsidizing prescription drug costs makes it more important than ever that Congress address the issue of prescription drug costs. Of course, Congress’s actions should respect our constitutional limits and not further expand the role of government in the health care market. Congress H.R. 2427, the Pharmaceutical Market Access Act 24 July 2003    2003 Ron Paul 91:8 Fortunately, there are a number of marketoriented policies Congress can adopt to lower the prices of prescription drugs. This is because the main reason prescription drug prices are high is government policies, that give a few powerful companies monopoly power. For example, policies restricting the importation of quality pharmaceuticals enable pharmaceutical companies to charge abovemarket prices for their products. Therefore, all members of Congress who are serious about lowering prescription drug prices should support H.R. 2427. Congress Stop Subsidizing Foreign Shrimpers July 25, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 92:1 The United States domestic shrimping industry is a vital social and economic force in many coastal communities across the United States, including several in my congressional district. A thriving shrimping industry benefits not only those who own and operate shrimp boats, but also food processors, hotels, restaurants, grocery stores, and those who work in and service these industries. Shrimping also serves as a key source of safe domestic food at a time when the nation is engaged in hostilities abroad. Congress Stop Subsidizing Foreign Shrimpers July 25, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 92:7 Mr. Speaker, it is time for Congress to stop subsidizing the domestic shrimping industry’s leading competitors. Otherwise, the government-manufactured depression in the price of shrimp will decimate the domestic shrimping industry and the communities whose economies depend on this industry. I therefore hope that Congress will soon stand up for American shrimpers by passing my Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act. Congress Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:6 Our Founders thoroughly understood this issue, and warned us against the temptation to seek wealth and fortune without the work and savings that real prosperity requires. James Madison warned of “The pestilent effects of paper money,” as the Founders had vivid memories of the destructiveness of the Continental dollar. George Mason of Virginia said that he had a “Mortal hatred to paper money.” Constitutional Convention delegate Oliver Ellsworth from Connecticut thought the convention “A favorable moment to shut and bar the door against paper money.” This view of the evils of paper money was shared by almost all the delegates to the convention, and was the reason the Constitution limited congressional authority to deal with the issue and mandated that only gold and silver could be legal tender. Paper money was prohibited and no central bank was authorized. Over and above the economic reasons for honest money, however, Madison argued the moral case for such. Paper money, he explained, destroyed “The necessary confidence between man and man, on necessary confidence in public councils, on the industry and morals of people and on the character of republican government.” Congress Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:8 Even with this history and great concern expressed by the Founders, the barriers to paper money have been torn asunder. The Constitution has not been changed, but is no longer applied to the issue of money. It was once explained to me, during the debate over going to war in Iraq, that a declaration of war was not needed because to ask for such a declaration was “frivolous” and that the portion of the Constitution dealing with congressional war power was “anachronistic.” So too, it seems that the power over money given to Congress alone and limited to coinage and honest weights, is now also “anachronistic.” Congress Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:10 Though the need for sound money is currently not a pressing issue for Congress, it’s something that cannot be ignored because serious economic problems resulting from our paper money system are being forced upon us. As a matter of fact, we deal with the consequences on a daily basis, yet fail to see the connection between our economic problems and the mischief orchestrated by the Federal Reserve. Congress Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:13 The moral issue regarding money should be the easiest to understand, but almost no one in Washington thinks of money in these terms. Although there is a growing and deserved distrust in government per se, trust in money and the Federal Reserve’s ability to manage it remains strong. No one would welcome a counterfeiter to town, yet this same authority is blindly given to our central bank without any serious oversight by the Congress. Congress Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:19 Printing money, which is literally inflation, is nothing more than a sinister and evil form of hidden taxation. It’s unfair and deceptive, and accordingly strongly opposed by the authors of the Constitution. That is why there is no authority for Congress, the Federal Reserve, or the executive branch to operate the current system of money we have today. Money As a Political Issue Congress Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:39 That’s why the Fed screams about a coming deflation, so it can continue the devaluation of the dollar unabated. The politicians don’t mind, the bankers welcome the business activity, and the recipients of the funds passed out by Congress never complain. The greater the debt, the greater the need to inflate the currency, since debt cannot be the source of long-term wealth. Individuals and corporations who borrow too much eventually must cut back and pay off debt and start anew, but governments rarely do. Congress Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:43 Artificially low interest rates deceive investors into believing that rates are low because savings are high and represent funds not spent on consumption. When the Fed creates bank deposits out of thin air making loans available at below-market rates, mal-investment and overcapacity results, setting the stage for the next recession or depression. The easy credit policy is welcomed by many: stock-market investors, home builders, home buyers, congressional spendthrifts, bankers, and many other consumers who enjoy borrowing at low rates and not worrying about repayment. However, perpetual good times cannot come from a printing press or easy credit created by a Federal Reserve computer. The piper will demand payment, and the downturn in the business cycle will see to it. The downturn is locked into place by the artificial boom that everyone enjoys, despite the dreams that we have ushered in a “new economic era.” Let there be no doubt: the business cycle, the stagflation, the recessions, the depressions, and the inflations are not a result of capitalism and sound money, but rather are a direct result of paper money and a central bank that is incapable of managing it. Congress Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:52 We own the printing press and create as many dollars as we please. These dollars are used to buy federal debt. This allows our debt to be monetized and the spendthrift Congress, of course, finds this a delightful convenience and never complains. As the dollars circulate through our fractional reserve banking system, they expand many times over. With our excess dollars at home, our trading partners are only too happy to accept these dollars in order to sell us their products. Because our dollar is relatively strong compared to other currencies, we can buy foreign products at a discounted price. In other words, we get to create the world’s reserve currency at no cost, spend it overseas, and receive manufactured goods in return. Our excess dollars go abroad and other countries-especially Japan and China- are only too happy to loan them right back to us by buying our government and GSE debt. Up until now both sides have been happy with this arrangement. Congress Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:72 The odds aren’t very good that the Fed will adopt a policy of not inflating the money supply because of some very painful consequences that would result. Also there would be a need to remove the pressure on the Fed to accommodate the big spenders in Congress. Since there are essentially only two groups that have any influence on spending levels, big-government liberals and big- government conservatives, that’s not about to happen. Poverty is going to worsen due to our monetary and fiscal policies, so spending on the war on poverty will accelerate. Our obsession with policing the world, nation building, and pre-emptive war are not likely to soon go away, since both Republican and Democratic leaders endorse them. Instead, the cost of defending the American empire is going to accelerate. A country that is getting poorer cannot pay these bills with higher taxation nor can they find enough excess funds for the people to loan to the government. The only recourse is for the Federal Reserve to accommodate and monetize the federal debt, and that, of course, is inflation. Congress Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:73 It’s now admitted that the deficit is out of control, with next year’s deficit reaching over one-half trillion dollars, not counting the billions borrowed from “trust funds” like Social Security. I’m sticking to my prediction that within a few years the national debt will increase over $1 trillion in one fiscal year. So far, so good, no big market reactions, the dollar is holding its own and the administration and congressional leaders are not alarmed. But they ought to be. Congress Statement Opposing the Continuity of Government Proposal September 9, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 94:2 Since the COG Commission proposal was introduced I, along with other members of Congress, journalists, academics, and policy experts have expressed concerns that having appointed members serve in Congress function is inconsistent with the House’s historic function as the branch of Congress most directly accountable to the people. A superior way to address concerns regarding continuity of House operations in the event of an emergency is contained in HR 2844, the Continuity of Representation Act, introduced by my distinguished colleague, House Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner. Congress Statement Opposing the Continuity of Government Proposal September 9, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 94:3 Even with the direct election of Senators, the fact that members of the House are elected every two years while Senators run for statewide office every six years, means that members of the House of Representatives are still more accountable to the people than any other part of the federal government. Appointed members of Congress simply cannot be truly representative. Turning once again to Federalist 52, we find this point eloquently made by Mssrs. Madison and Hamilton: “As it is essential to liberty that the government in general should have a common interest with the people, so it is particularly essential that the branch of it under consideration should have an immediate dependence on, and an intimate sympathy with, the people. Frequent elections are unquestionably the only policy by which this dependence and sympathy can be effectually secured.” Congress Statement Opposing the Continuity of Government Proposal September 9, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 94:6 Mr. Chairman, this country has faced the possibility of threats to the continuity of this body several times throughout our history, yet no one suggested removing the people’s right to vote for members of Congress. For example, the British in the War of 1812 attacked the city of Washington, yet nobody suggested the states could not address the lack of a quorum in the House of Representatives though elections. During the Civil War, the neighboring state of Virginia (where today many Capitol Hill staffers and members reside) was actively involved in hostilities against the United States government. Yet Abraham Lincoln never suggested that non-elected persons serve in the House. Congress Statement Opposing the Continuity of Government Proposal September 9, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 94:7 The Constitution already provides the framework for Congress to function after a catastrophic event. Article I section 2 grants the governors of the various states authority to hold special elections to fill vacancies in the House of Representatives. Article I section 4 gives Congress the authority to designate the time, manner, and place of such special elections if states should fail to act expeditiously following a national emergency. As Hamilton explains in Federalist 59, the “time, place, and manner” clause was specifically designed to address the kind of extraordinary circumstances imagined by COGC. Hamilton characterized authority over federal elections as shared between the states and Congress, with neither being able to control the process entirely. Congress Statement Opposing the Continuity of Government Proposal September 9, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 94:8 Chairman Sensenbrenner’s bill exercises Congress’ power to regulate the time, place, and manner of elections by requiring the holding of special elections within 21 days after the Speaker or acting Speaker declares a majority of House members are incapacitated. This proposal protects the people’s right to choose their representatives at the time when such a right may be most important, while ensuring continuity of the legislative branch. Congress Statement Opposing the Continuity of Government Proposal September 9, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 94:9 I have no doubt that the people of the states are quite competent to hold elections in a timely fashion. After all, it is in each state’s interest to ensure it has adequate elected representation in Washington as soon as possible. The re-call election in California shows it is possible to have a gubernatorial election, in the most populous state in the union no less, in less than three months time. Surely it is possible to hold an election in a congressional district in under that amount of time. Congress Statement Opposing the Continuity of Government Proposal September 9, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 94:10 In conclusion, I once again thank the Chairman of this Committee for allowing me to express my views before the House. I also once again urge my colleagues to reject any proposal that takes away the people’s right to elect their representatives and instead support HR 2844, the Continuity of Congress Act, which ensures an elected Congress can continue to operate in the event of an emergency. This is what the drafters of the Constitution intended. Congress Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Subsidies Distort the Housing Market September 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 95:2 I hope this committee spends some time examining the special privileges provided to GSEs by the federal government. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received 13.6 billion worth of indirect federal subsidies in fiscal year 2000 alone. Today, I will introduce the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act, which removes government subsidies from the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), and the National Home Loan Bank Board. Congress Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Subsidies Distort the Housing Market September 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 95:10 Mr. Chairman, I would like to once again thank the Financial Services Committee for holding this hearing. I would also like to thank Secretaries Snow and Martinez for their presence here today. I hope today’s hearing sheds light on how special privileges granted to GSEs distort the housing market and endanger American taxpayers. Congress should act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors who were misled by foolish government interference in the market. I therefore hope this committee will soon stand up for American taxpayers and investors by acting on my Free Housing Market Enhancement Act. Congress Introducing Free Housing Market Enhancement Act 10 September 2003    2003 Ron Paul 96:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act. This legislation restores a free market in housing by repealing special privileges for the housing-related government sponsored enterprises (GSE). These entities are the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), and the National Home Loan Bank Board. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received 13.6 billion worth of indirect Federal subsidies in Fiscal Year 2000 alone. Congress Introducing Free Housing Market Enhancement Act 10 September 2003    2003 Ron Paul 96:9 Mr. Speaker, it is time for Congress to act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors who were misled by foolish government interference in the market. I therefore hope my colleagues will stand up for American taxpayers and investors by cosponsoring the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act. Congress Introduction Of The Steel Financing Fairness Act 10 September 2003    2003 Ron Paul 97:8 I have no doubt that America’s steel industry can out-compete the steel industry of any country if allowed to compete on a level planning field. Unfortunately, due in part to government policy, today’s playing field is in no way level. Congress must end this economically destructive, immoral, and unconstitutional policy of forcing owners and workers in the domestic steel industry to subsidize their competitors. I therefore call upon my colleagues to cosponsor the Steel Financing Fairness Act. Congress We Cannot Afford Another $87 Billion in Iraq September 16, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 98:4 The question we in the Congress ought to ask is this: What if our efforts to westernize and democratize Iraq do not work? Who knows? Many believe that our pursuit of nation building in Iraq will actually make things worse in Iraq, in the entire Middle East, throughout the entire Muslim world, and even here in the United States. Congress Thrift Savings Improvement Act 16 September 2003    2003 Ron Paul 99:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Thrift Savings Fund Improvement Act. This legislation to expand the investment options available to congressional and other federal employees by creating a precious metals investment fund in the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). Adding a precious metals fund to the TSP will enhance the plan’s ability to offer congressional employees a wide range of investment options that can provide financial security even during difficult economic conditions. Congress Thrift Savings Improvement Act 16 September 2003    2003 Ron Paul 99:2 All of us recognize the importance of maintaining a professional congressional staff and promoting longevity of service in order to enhance stability in the operations of Congress. This is why we have recently enacted legislation authorizing new benefits, such as a student loan forgiveness program, and have taken other measures to improve staff compensation and benefits. Congress Thrift Savings Improvement Act 16 September 2003    2003 Ron Paul 99:3 The Thrift Savings Plan is one of the most important benefits offered to congressional employees. A strong TSP can obviously play a key role in attracting and retaining talented individuals to serve in the legislative branch. However, the three stock index funds in the Thrift Savings Plan have not recently performed well, especially when measured against inflation. In 2002, for example, losses from these funds were greater than three, four, and five percent, respectively, in the month of December and, more than 15, 18, and 22 percent, respectively, for the entire year! Congress Congratulations 17 September 2003    2003 Ron Paul 100:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor John and Geraldine Dettling, a couple with longstanding roots in the 14th congressional district of Texas. Mr. and Mrs. Dettling recently celebrated 60 years of marriage, an incredible milestone that deserves recognition and great respect. The longevity of their marriage serves as an inspiration for all couples today. Congress Reject UN Gun Control! September 18, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 101:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the “Right to Keep and Bear Arms Act.” This legislation prohibits US taxpayer dollars from being used to support or promote any United Nations actions that could infringe on the Second Amendment. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Act also expresses the sense of Congress that proposals to tax, or otherwise limit, the right to keep and bear arms are “reprehensible and deserving of condemnation.” Congress Tribute To Larry Reed 25 september 2003    2003 Ron Paul 102:2 Prior to founding Mackinac, Larry served as Chair of the Department of Economics at Northwood University in Midland, Michigan. While at Northwood, Larry developed the university dual major in Economic and Business management and founded the University’s “Freedom Seminar.” Larry has also been a candidate for Congress. Congress Are Vouchers the Solution for Our Failing Public Schools? September 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 103:3 It may be argued that vouchers are at least a more efficient welfare program than continuing to throw taxpayer money at public schools. However, the likely effect of a voucher program is to increase spending on new programs for private schools while continuing to increase spending on programs for public schools. For example, Mr. Speaker, during the debate on the DC voucher program, voucher proponents vehemently denied that any public schools would lose any Federal funding. Some even promised to support increased Federal spending on DC’s public and charter schools. Instead of reducing funding for failed programs, Congress simply added another 10 million dollars (from taxes or debt) to the bill to pay for the vouchers without making any offsetting cuts. In a true free market, failing competitors are not guaranteed a continued revenue stream. Congress Are Vouchers the Solution for Our Failing Public Schools? September 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 103:11 Instead of expanding the Federal control over education in the name of parental control, Congress should embrace a true agenda of parental control by passing generous education tax credits. Education tax credits empower parents to spend their own money on their children’s education. Since the parents control the education dollar, the parents control their children’s education. In order to provide parents with control of education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 612) that provides all parents with a tax credit of up to $3,000. The credit is available to parents who choose to send their children to public, private, or home school. Education tax credits are particularly valuable to lower income parents. Congress American Dream Downpayment Act 1 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 104:2 H.R. 1276 not only warps the true meaning of the American dream, but also exceeds Congress’ constitutional boundaries and interferes with and distorts the operation of the free market. Instead of expanding unconstitutional federal power, Congress should focus its energies on dismantling the federal housing bureaucracy so the American people can control housing resources and use the free market to meet their demands for affordable housing. Congress American Dream Downpayment Act 1 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 104:5 Finally, while I know this argument is unlikely to have much effect on my colleagues, I must point out that Congress has no constitutional authority to take money from one American and redistribute it to another. Legislation such as H.R. 1276, which takes tax money from some Americans to give to others whom Congress has determined are worthy, is thus blatantly unconstitutional. Congress American Dream Downpayment Act 1 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 104:6 I hope no one confuses my opposition to this bill as opposition to any congressional actions to ensure more Americans have access to affordable housing. After all, one reason many Americans lack affordable housing is because taxes and regulations have made it impossible for builders to provide housing at a price that could be afforded by many lower-income Americans. Therefore, Congress should cut taxes and regulations. A good start would be generous housing tax credits. Congress should also consider tax credits and regulatory relief for developers who provide housing for those with low incomes. For example, I am cosponsoring H.R. 839, the Renewing the Dream Tax Credit Act, which provides a tax credit to developers who construct or rehabilitate low-income housing. Congress American Dream Downpayment Act 1 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 104:7 H.R. 1276 distorts the economy and violates constitutional prohibitions on income redistribution. A better way of guaranteeing an efficient housing market where everyone could meet their own needs for housing would be for Congress to repeal taxes and programs that burden the housing industry and allow housing needs to be met by the free market. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and instead develop housing policies consistent with constitutional principles, the laws of economics, and respect for individual rights. Congress Commending The National Endowment For Democracy For Contributions To democratic Development Around The World On The 20th Anniversary Of Its Establishment 7 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 105:6 The National Endowment for Democracy is dependent on the U.S. taxpayer for funding, but because NED is not a government agency, it is not subject to Congressional oversight. It is indeed a heavily subsidized foreign policy loose cannon. Congress Defense Production Reauthorization Act 15 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 107:2 Under this bill, the President is given authority to void private contracts in order to ensure that federal defense priorities, as determined by the executive, are met. The only limitation on the President’s judgment is a requirement that he submits a series of “findings” to Congress. The Executive also has what appears to be unchecked authority to use financial incentives such as loan guarantees, direct loans, and purchase guarantees to ensure production of items he determines are in the national interest. Congress Defense Production Reauthorization Act 15 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 107:3 Congress appears to have no ability to perform any real oversight of a Presidential action under the DPA. In fact, my office has been informed by the Congressional Research Service that past Presidents may have invoked the DPA without even submitting the required findings to Congress! Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:5 But the debate, instead of ending, I think is really just starting. Because the vote today, although it was overwhelmingly in support of the $87 billion, I noticed a lot more people in the Congress voted against the appropriations reflecting probably the views of many taxpayers in this country who are very reluctant to spend this kind of money overseas, especially if they perceive what we are doing is not being very productive. And not only do we have to deal with whether or not what we are doing is productive or not, but the final analysis will be, can we afford it? Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:6 It may be that the lack of affordability may bring us to our senses before the logic of a foreign policy. That might make more sense than what we have been doing. Before the Iraqi war, the 18 months, actually there was a pretty strong debate here in the Congress. Several of us, quite a few of us, got to the floor and talked about the potentiality of war and why we thought it was a bad idea. My conclusion in October of 2002, 6 months or so before the invasion, was that we should not go in to Iraq. And it was a deeply held conviction, not only philosophically, because of a strong belief I have in nonintervention and the restraints that are placed on us by the Constitution, but also because I was convinced that our national security was not threatened by Saddam Hussein and that 9–11 had nothing to do with Iraq and Iraq had nothing to do with 9–11 nor Saddam Hussein. And I think the events since that time have proven that assumption to be correct. Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:8 Now, the argument goes that whether or not we supported the war at the beginning, we should support the troops now. The troops are there and if you vote against the appropriations, it means that you lack support for the troops. Well, this is not true; and those who argue that case know it is the case, that it is not true because the funding that is already in the pipeline is certainly enough for several months of leaving and coming home. And so that argument just does not hold water. And besides, if you really talk to the troops, and now we are getting so much more information from the troops, if you ask them whether there is somebody in the Congress that votes to have them come home, whether that indicates a lack of support for them, I think you would get a very clear answer. Probably a very large number, if not all of them, would like to come home tomorrow and they do not see a lot of benefit by the sacrifices that are being made over there. But I think if the support for the war is weak, why are we there? What drives us? And what drives our foreign policy? Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:9 Basically, we have come to the acceptance, at least especially throughout the 20th century, of accepting the notion that we have some moral obligation to make the world safe for democracy. And we have heard so much about this that we are over there to spread democracy. Well, if you look to the Constitution, there is no grant of authority even to the Congress or to the President that that should be a goal. That does not mean that our values should not be looked upon and spread; but to be done through the military and by force, that is an entirely different story. Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:10 What we are involved here now with our intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan and other places, we are involved in nation-building. And nobody in this country campaigns, whether it is for the Presidency or for a congressional seat or a Senate seat, nobody goes out and says, Elect me to Congress because I want to get into the business of nation- building. Nobody does that and yet really that is what we are talking about today. Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:12 So although it was seen by the world that we went into Iraq by defying the United Nations, if anybody would like to check and go back and look at the authorization for the use of force which was a transfer, illegal transfer of power to the President to pursue war, the United Nations was cited 16 times. There was a need to enforce the United Nations resolution. That was the justification for the Congress to transfer this power to the President in allowing him to make his own decision. Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:13 Well, that is technically flaunting the Constitution and that the proper method for us going to war is for the Congress to declare war, and then, of course, go out and win the war. But the authority comes from the people to the Congress and the Congress cannot transfer this power and this decisionmaking to the President under a majority vote in the legislative body. Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:26 I express my concern about the way we went to war because it was a transfer of power from the Congress by mere vote, which circumvented the Constitution, rather than a declaration of war, and I base my concern on the fact that we have had a lot more trouble in the last 50 years when we quit declaring war and at least prior to that the wars we declared, they came to an end. Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:31 James Madison early on in 1798 gave us some advice about the Presidential power and congressional power to go to war, but he was explaining why it was important to keep it in the hands of the legislative body. He says, The Constitution supposes what the history of all governments demonstrate, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war and the most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the legislature. Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:33 How do the people stay involved in this? In one way, they pay the bills and the young people die. That is what is at stake. Our economy’s at stake, our young people are at stake and our freedoms are at stake because we allow the prerogatives that were explicitly given to the Congress to drift away and get into the hands of the executive branch and into the United Nations. We do not declare war. We do not win them. They persist, they last a long time, and this is the reason why we should really and truly talk about how do we get out of this mess, instead of just expanding the mess, how do we get out and restore a policy that makes a lot more sense. Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:36 One thing that we did not talk about in the debate of the $87 billion was a $600 million appropriation. It is not written in there explicitly, but there is a $9.3 billion authority to transfer funds over into the Pentagon and more or less having a slush fund to spend just about any way they want without any significant congressional oversight, but the $600 million has been asked for and will be achieved through this appropriation to continue the search for weapons of mass destruction. They have spent $300 million for six months, with 1,200 individuals combing the entire country of Iraq, and nothing has been found. So typically, American style, modern America, that is, double the amount of money, double the number of people and keep searching, because something will be found. Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:49 It is such a grand idea that the Founding Fathers gave us about nonintervention and nonentangling alliances. It will do more to serve the cause of peace and prosperity than any other single change of any policy we could have here in this Congress. Congress Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:50 I am a little bit encouraged, though, about the fact that the debate may be shifting. In the Congress, not yet. Not yet. There are not too many supporters, and I know that, for nonintervention, for a constitutional foreign policy, to looking to the Founders. It is considered old-fashioned, and that truths do not stay so static, and times are different, and we have this obligation, and all the reasons why we have this moral obligation to go about the world. But where I am encouraged is outside of this place, where the American people are getting concerned. Congress Congratulations On LaGrange Noon Lion’s Club’s 75th Anniversary 21 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 112:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the LaGrange Noon Lion’s Club on the occasion of their 75th anniversary. Since its founding, the LaGrange Noon Lion’s Club has been a cornerstone of charitable service to its community. I am therefore pleased to submit this proclamation honoring the LaGrange Noon Lion’s Club into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Congress Congratulations On LaGrange Noon Lion’s Club’s 75th Anniversary 21 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 112:2 CONGRESSIONAL PROCLAMATION, LA GRANGE NOON LION’S CLUB 75TH ANNIVERSARY Whereas, the LaGrange Noon Lion’s Club serves the citizens of LaGrange, Fayette County, the great state of Texas and the United States of America, AND Congress Congress Shouldn’t Censor Foreign Leaders 28 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 113:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise with great concerns over this legislation — both over its content and what it represents. First, I think it is absurd that the U.S. Congress believes it has the responsibility and authority to rectify the inappropriate statements of individuals in foreign countries. Have we moved beyond meddling in the internal affairs of foreign countries — as bad as that is — to even meddling in the very thoughts and words of foreign leaders and citizens? It is the obligation of the U.S. Congress to correct the “wrong thoughts” of others that have nothing to do with the United States? Additionally, is it our place to demand that other sovereign states, such as the members of the European Union, react as we say they must to certain international events? Congress Encouraging People’s Republic Of China To Fulfill Commitments Under International Trade Agreements, Support United States Manufacturing Sector, And Establish Monetary And Financial Market Reforms 29 october 2003    2003 Ron Paul 115:7 Congress should also consider how the Chinese benefit the United States Government by holding our debt. The dollars the Chinese acquire by selling us goods and services must be returned to the United States. Since the Chinese are not buying an equivalent amount of American goods and services, they are using the dollars to finance our extravagant spending. Congress Encouraging People’s Republic Of China To Fulfill Commitments Under International Trade Agreements, Support United States Manufacturing Sector, And Establish Monetary And Financial Market Reforms 29 october 2003    2003 Ron Paul 115:9 H. Res. 414’s underlying premise is that sovereign countries have a duty to fashion economic policies that benefit the United States and it is a proper concern of Congress if these countries fail to do so. H. Res. 414 attempts to justify Congressional interference in the internal economic affairs of China by claiming that China is not living up to its obligations as a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO). I would remind my colleagues that the WTO has oftentimes ruled against the United States and Congress is right now changing United States tax laws to please the WTO. Ceding control over United States tax and trade policy to this international organization violates the United States Constitution and is contrary to the interests of American citizens. Therefore, it is not wise to endorse the WTO process by encouraging other countries to submit to WTO control. Congress Encouraging People’s Republic Of China To Fulfill Commitments Under International Trade Agreements, Support United States Manufacturing Sector, And Establish Monetary And Financial Market Reforms 29 october 2003    2003 Ron Paul 115:10 Instead of promoting global economic government, the United States Congress should reform those policies that reduce our manufacturers’ competitiveness. Recently, a financial journalist visited with businessmen who are launching new enterprises in China. When he asked them why they chose to invest in China, they answered: “It is so much easier to start a business in China than in the United States, especially in places like Massachusetts and California.” This answer should send a clear message to every lawmaker in America: the taxes and regulations imposed on American businesses are damaging economic growth and killing jobs. If we were serious about creating jobs, we would be working on an aggressive agenda of cutting taxes and repealing needless regulations. Congress Encouraging People’s Republic Of China To Fulfill Commitments Under International Trade Agreements, Support United States Manufacturing Sector, And Establish Monetary And Financial Market Reforms 29 october 2003    2003 Ron Paul 115:11 Congress can also improve America’s competitive position by ending the practice of forcing American workers to subsidize their foreign competitors through organizations such as the Export-Import Bank and the International Monetary Fund. I have introduced the Steel Financing Fairness Act (H.R. 3072) to accomplish this goal. H.R. 3072 prevents taxpayer funds from being sent to countries, such as China, that subsidize their steel industries. Of course, our ultimate goal should be to end all taxpayer subsidies of foreign corporations and governments. Congress Encouraging People’s Republic Of China To Fulfill Commitments Under International Trade Agreements, Support United States Manufacturing Sector, And Establish Monetary And Financial Market Reforms 29 october 2003    2003 Ron Paul 115:12 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleagues that stability in currencies is something we should seek, not something we should condemn Instead of urging China to adopt a floating rate, Congress should be working to adopt a stable, commodity-backed currency whose value is determined by the market and encourage other countries to also adopt a market-based currency. This will benefit American workers, entrepreneurs, and consumers. Congress should also strengthen America’s economy by reducing taxes and repealing unnecessary and unconstitutional regulations and stop forcing American taxpayers to subsidize their foreign competitors. Congress Redrawing Coastal Barrier Resources Map 17 November 2003    2003 Ron Paul 117:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support S. 1066, the Senate version of my H.R. 154, which I introduced on the first day of the 108th Congress. This legislation fixes a mistake in the official Fish and Wildlife Services’ maps by removing a 19-acre area known as Matagorda Dunes, in Matagorda County, Texas, from the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources Act (COBRA). This change is fully supported by the Fish and Wildlife Service. In fact, a Fish and Wildlife Service created map, dated July 12, 2002, acknowledges the error. Congress Redrawing Coastal Barrier Resources Map 17 November 2003    2003 Ron Paul 117:2 This change will ensure property owners who had already begun developing this area are able to obtain insurance. Congress never intended to deny these landowners access to insurance. Matagorda Dunes was included in COBRA as a result of a drafting error when the COBRA maps were revised in the early eighties. Unless this mistake is fixed, the result could be catastrophic for these property owners who invested in developing Matagorda Dunes under the belief that the land was excluded from COBRA. A failure to fix this mistake could also be quite costly to the American taxpayers. Congress Best Energy Policy Is The Free Market 18 November 2003    2003 Ron Paul 118:4 It’s always the same old story in Washington: instead of allowing the free market to work, Congress regulates, subsidizes, and taxes an industry, and when inevitable problems arise, the free market is blamed! The solution is always more Federal intervention; no one suggests that too much Federal involvement created the problems in the first place. Congress Don’t Meddle With Religion In Vietnam 19 November 2003    2003 Ron Paul 119:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to this ill-conceived and ill-timed bill. I would like to remind my colleagues that according to our own Constitution, Congress is prohibited from making any law “respecting the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof.” Yet are we not doing that today — albeit in a country some 10,000 miles away? Why on earth are we commending one particular church in Vietnam in the name of “religious freedom”? At the risk of being blunt, what business is the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam of the United States Congress? The answer, of course, is that this legislation is of a much more political than a religious nature: this bill tells the Vietnamese government how it should enforce its own constitution, commits the United States government to promoting religious freedom in Vietnam, and tells the U.S. embassy staff in Vietnam to “closely monitor” religious issues in Vietnam. It is an attempt to meddle in the affairs of Vietnam and force them to adopt the kinds of laws we think they should have. Mr. Speaker, as much as we value our own religious liberty, we must realize that setting the example of the benefits of a society that values such liberty is much more effective than demanding that other countries pass the kinds of laws we want them to pass. The unintended consequences of this otherwise well-meaning legislation is that relations with the Vietnamese government will likely suffer, making it less likely that Vietnam’s leaders look favorably upon our own history of religious liberty. Congress Advancing Religious Freedom Worldwide Not Our Job 19 November 2003    2003 Ron Paul 120:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this legislation but want to make it clear that I am not doing so because I oppose religious freedom, as one might falsely conclude from the way this bill is crafted. My concerns with this bill are the same concerns I raise whenever Congress attempts to act in areas in which it has no constitutional authority: under the guise of promoting a laudable cause — religious freedom — this legislation seeks to impose our views of this topic on other sovereign nations. In short, it is yet another example of the U.S. meddling in the affairs of other countries. Congress Conference Report On H.R. 2417 Intelligence Authorization Act For Fiscal year 2004 20 November 2003    2003 Ron Paul 121:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise with great concerns over the Intelligence Authorization Conference Report. I do not agree that Members of Congress should vote in favor of an authorization that most know almost nothing about — including the most basic issue of the level of funding. Congress Say No To Involuntary Servitude November 21, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 122:2 Woodrow Wilson orchestrated our entry into World War I by first promising during the election of 1916 to keep us out of the European conflict, then a few months later pressuring and maneuvering Congress into declaring war against Germany. Whether it was the Spanish American War before that or all the wars since, U.S. presidents have deceived the people to gain popular support for ill-conceived military ventures. Wilson wanted the war and immediately demanded conscription to fight it. He didn’t have the guts even to name the program a military draft; instead in a speech before Congress calling for war he advised the army should be “chosen upon the principle of universal liability to service.” Most Americans at the time of the declaration didn’t believe actual combat troops would be sent. What a dramatic change from this early perception, when the people endorsed the war, to the carnage that followed – and the later disillusionment with Wilson and his grand scheme for world government under the League of Nations. The American people rejected this gross new entanglement, a reflection of a somewhat healthier age than the one we find ourselves in today. Congress Say No To Involuntary Servitude November 21, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 122:15 But the real sacrifice comes with conscription – forcing a small number of youngvulnerable citizens to fight the wars that older men and women, who seek glory in military victory without themselves being exposed to danger, promote. These are wars with neither purpose nor moral justification, and too often not even declared by the Congress. Congress Congress Abandoned its Duty to Debate and Declare War February 4, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 1:3 But before Congress gets too carried away with condemning the administration or the intelligence gathering agencies, it ought to look to itself. A proper investigation and debate by this Congress — as we’re now scrambling to accomplish — clearly was warranted prior to any decision to go to war. An open and detailed debate on a proper declaration of war certainly would have revealed that U.S. national security was not threatened — and the whole war could have been avoided. Because Congress did not do that, it deserves the greatest criticism for its dereliction of duty. Congress Congress Abandoned its Duty to Debate and Declare War February 4, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 1:7 Regardless of the results, the process of the inquiry is missing the most important point — the failure of Congress to meet its responsibility on the decision to go, or not go, to war. The current mess was predictable from the beginning. Unfortunately, Congress voluntarily gave up its prerogative over war and illegally transferred this power to the president in October of 2002. The debate we are having now should have occurred here in the halls of Congress then. We should have debated a declaration of war resolution. Instead, Congress chose to transfer this decision-making power to the president to avoid the responsibility of making the hard choice of sending our young people into harms way, against a weak, third world country. This the president did on his own, with congressional acquiescence. The blame game has emerged only now that we are in the political season. Sadly, the call for and the appointment of the commission is all part of this political process. Congress Congress Abandoned its Duty to Debate and Declare War February 4, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 1:8 It is truly disturbing to see many who abdicated their congressional responsibility to declare or reject war, who timidly voted to give the president the power he wanted, now posturing as his harshest critics. Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:1 A wise consistency is the foundation of a free society. Yet everyone knows, or thinks they know, that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. How many times has Ralph Waldo Emerson been quoted to belittle a consistent philosophy defending freedom? Even on this floor I have been rebuked by colleagues with this quote, for pointing out the shortcomings of Congress in not consistently and precisely following our oath to uphold the Constitution. Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:4 It’s quite a distortion of Emerson’s views to use them as justification for the incoherent and nonsensical policies coming out of Washington today. But, the political benefits of not needing to be consistent are so overwhelming that there’s no interest in being philosophically consistent in one’s votes. It is a welcome convenience to be able to support whatever seems best for the moment, the congressional district, or one’s political party. Therefore, it’s quite advantageous to cling to the notion that consistency is a hobgoblin. For this reason, statesmanship in D.C. has come to mean one’s willingness to give up one’s own personal beliefs in order to serve the greater good — whatever that is. But it is not possible to preserve the rule of law or individual liberty if our convictions are no stronger than this. Otherwise something will replace our republic that was so carefully designed by the Founders. That something is not known, but we can be certain it will be less desirable than what we have. Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:11 Trade as an issue of personal liberty is totally ignored. But simply put, one ought to have the right to spend one’s own money any way one wants. Buying cheap foreign products can have a great economic benefit for our citizens and serve as an incentive to improve production here at home. It also puts pressure on us to reassess the onerous regulations and tax burdens placed on our business community. Monopoly wages that force wage rates above the market also are challenged when true free trade is permitted. And this, of course, is the reason free trade is rejected. Labor likes higher-than-market wages, and business likes less competition. In the end, consumers — all of us — suffer. Ironically, the free traders in Congress were the most outspoken opponents of drug reimportation, with a convoluted argument claiming that the free-trade position should prohibit the reimportation of pharmaceuticals. So much for a wise consistency! Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:12 Following the Constitution—Arbitrarily, Of Course : Following the Constitution is a convenience shared by both liberals and conservatives — at times. Everyone takes the same oath of office, and most Members of Congress invoke the Constitution, at one time or another, to make some legislative point. The fact that the Constitution is used periodically to embarrass one’s opponents, when convenient, requires that no one feel embarrassed by an inconsistent voting record. Believing that any consistency, not just a foolish one, is a philosophic hobgoblin gives many Members welcome reassurance. This allows limited-government conservatives to massively increase the size and scope of government, while ignoring the deficit. Liberals, who also preach their own form of limited government in the areas of civil liberties and militarism, have no problem with a flexible pragmatic approach to all government expenditures and intrusions. The net result is that the oath of office to abide by all the constitutional restraints on government power is rarely followed. Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:15 FDA and Legal Drugs—For Our Own Protection : Our laws and attitudes regarding legal drugs are almost as harmful. The FDA supposedly exists to protect the consumer and patients. This conclusion is based on an assumption that consumers are idiots and all physicians and drug manufacturers are unethical or criminals. It also assumes that bureaucrats and politicians, motivated by good intentions, can efficiently bring drugs onto the market in a timely manner and at reasonable cost. These same naïve dreamers are the ones who say that in order to protect the people from themselves, we must prohibit them from being allowed to re-import drugs from Canada or Mexico at great savings. The FDA virtually guarantees that new drugs come online slower and cost more money. Small companies are unable to pay the legal expenses, and don’t get the friendly treatment that politically connected big drug companies receive. If a drug seems to offer promise, especially for a life-threatening disease, why is it not available, with full disclosure, to anyone who wants to try it? No, our protectors say that no one gets to use it, or make their own decisions, until the FDA guarantees that each drug has been proven safe and effective. And believe me, the FDA is quite capable of making mistakes, even after years of testing. It seems criminal when cancer patients come to our congressional offices begging and pleading for a waiver to try some new drug. We call this a free society! For those who can’t get a potentially helpful drug but might receive a little comfort from some marijuana, raised in their own back yard legally in their home state, the heavy hand of the DEA comes down hard, actually arresting and imprisoning ill patients. Federal drug laws blatantly preempt state laws, adding insult to injury. Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:18 A strong case can be made that all the conflicts, starting with the Spanish-American War up to our current conflict in the Middle East, could have been avoided. For instance, the foolish entrance into World War I to satisfy Wilson’s ego led to a disastrous peace at Versailles, practically guaranteeing World War II. Likewise, our ill-advised role in the Persian Gulf War I placed us in an ongoing guerilla war in Iraq and Afghanistan, which may become a worldwide conflict before it ends. Our foolish antics over the years have prompted our support for many thugs throughout the 20th Century — Stalin, Samoza, Batista, the Shah of Iran, Noriega, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and many others — only to regret it once the unintended consequences became known. Many of those we supported turned on us, or our interference generated a much worse replacement — such as the Ayatollah in Iran. If we had consistently followed the wise advice of our early presidents, we could have avoided the foreign policy problems we face today. And if we had, we literally would have prevented hundreds of thousands of needless deaths over the last century. The odds are slim to none that our current failure in Afghanistan and Iraq will prompt our administration to change its policies of intervention. Ignoring the facts and rigidly sticking to a failed policy — a foolish consistency — as our leaders have repeatedly done over the past 100 years, unfortunately will prevail despite its failure and huge costs. This hostility toward principled consistency and common sense allows for gross errors in policy making. Most Americans believed, and still do, that we went to war against Saddam Hussein because he threatened us with weapons of mass destruction and his regime was connected to al Qaeda. The fact that Saddam Hussein not only did not have weapons of mass destruction, but essentially had no military force at all, seems to be of little concern to those who took us to war. It was argued, after our allies refused to join in our efforts, that a unilateral approach without the United Nations was proper under our notion of national sovereignty. Yet resolutions giving the President authority to go to war cited the United Nations 21 times, forgetting the U.S. Constitution allows only Congress to declare war. A correct declaration of war was rejected out of hand. Now with events going badly, the administration is practically begging the UN to take over the transition — except, of course, for the Iraqi Development Fund that controls the oil and all the seized financial assets. The contradictions and distortions surrounding the Iraqi conflict are too numerous to count. Those who wanted to institutionalize the doctrine of pre-emptive war were not concerned about the Constitution or consistency in our foreign policy. And for this, the American people and world peace will suffer. Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:21 This makes the point that our persistence in imposing our will on others through military force ignores sound thinking, but we never hear serious discussions about changing our foreign policy of meddling and empire building, no matter how bad the results. Regardless of the human and financial costs for all the wars fought over the past hundred years, few question the principle and legitimacy of interventionism. Bad results, while only sowing the seeds of our next conflict, concern few here in Congress. Jingoism, the dream of empire, and the interests of the military-industrial complex generate the false patriotism that energizes supporters of our foreign entanglements. Direct media coverage of the more than 500 body bags coming back from Iraq is now prohibited by the administration. Seeing the mangled lives and damaged health of thousands of other casualties of this war would help the American people put this war in proper perspective. Almost all war is unnecessary and rarely worth the cost. Seldom does a good peace result. Since World War II, we have intervened 35 times in developing countries, according to the LA Times, without a single successful example of a stable democracy. Their conclusion: “American engagement abroad has not led to more freedom or more democracy in countries where we’ve become involved.” So far, the peace in Iraq — that is, the period following the declared end of hostilities — has set the stage for a civil war in this forlorn Western-created artificial state. A U.S.- imposed national government unifying the Kurds, the Sunnis, and the Shiites will never work. Our allies deserted us in this misadventure. Dumping the responsibility on the UN, while retaining control of the spoils of war, is a policy of folly that can result only in more Americans being killed. This will only fuel the festering wounds of Middle East hatred toward all Western occupiers. The Halliburton scandals and other military-industrial connections to the occupation of Iraq will continue to annoy our allies, and hopefully a growing number of American taxpayers. Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:26 -A representative republic, loosely held together with autonomy for each state or providence, is the only hope in a situation like this. But since we have systematically destroyed that form of government here in the United States, we can’t possibly be the ones who will impose this system on a foreign and very different land 6,000 miles away — no matter how many bombs we drop or people we kill. This type of change can come only with a change in philosophy, and an understanding of the true nature of liberty. It must be an intellectual adventure, not a military crusade. If for no other reason, Congress must soon realize that we no longer can afford to maintain an empire circling the globe. It’s a Sisyphean task to rebuild the Iraq we helped to destroy while our financial problems mount here at home. The American people eventually will rebel and demand that all job and social programs start at home before we waste billions more in Iraq, Afghanistan, and many other forlorn lands around the world. Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:27 -The Constitution places restraints on Congress and the executive branch, so as not to wage war casually and without proper declaration. It provides no authority to spend money or lives to spread our political message around the world. A strict adherence to the rule of law and the Constitution would bring an immediate halt to our ill-advised experiment in assuming the role of world policeman. We have been told that our effort in Iraq has been worth the 500-plus lives lost and the thousands wounded. I disagree — with great sadness for the families who have lost so much, and with so little hope for a good peace — I can only say, I disagree and hope I’m wrong. Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:34 Judicial Review : Respect for the original intent of the Constitution is low in Washington. It’s so low, it’s virtually non-existent. This causes many foolish inconsistencies in our federal courts. The Constitution, we have been told, is a living, evolving document and it’s no longer necessary to change it in the proper fashion. That method is too slow and cumbersome, it is claimed. While we amended it to institute alcohol prohibition, the federal drug prohibition is accomplished by majority vote of the U.S. Congress. Wars are not declared by Congress, but pursued by Executive Order to enforce UN Resolutions. The debate of the pros and cons of the war come afterward — usually following the war’s failure — in the political arena, rather than before with the proper debate on a declaration of war resolution. Laws are routinely written by un-elected bureaucrats, with themselves becoming the judicial and enforcement authority. Little desire is expressed in Congress to alter this monster that creates thousands of pages each year in the Federal Register. Even the nearly 100,000 bureaucrats who now carry guns stir little controversy. For decades, Executive Orders have been arrogantly used to write laws to circumvent a plodding or disagreeable Congress. This attitude was best described by a Clinton presidential aide who bragged: “…stroke of the pen, law of the land, kinda cool!” This is quite a testimonial to the rule of law and constitutional restraint on government power. The courts are no better than the executive or legislative branches in limiting the unconstitutional expansion of the federal monolith. Members of Congress, including committee chairmen, downplay my concern that proposed legislation is unconstitutional by insisting that the courts are the ones to make such weighty decisions, not mere Members of Congress. This was an informal argument made by House leadership on the floor during the debate on campaign finance reform. In essence, they said “We know it’s bad, but we’ll let the courts clean it up.” And look what happened! The courts did not save us from ourselves. Congress A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:35 Something must be done, however, if we expect to rein in our ever growing and intrusive government. Instead of depending on the courts to rule favorably, when Congress and the executive branch go astray, we must curtail the courts when they overstep their authority by writing laws, rubber stamping bad legislation, or overruling state laws. Hopefully in the future we will have a Congress more cognizant of its responsibility to legislate within the confines of the Constitution. There is something Congress, by majority vote, can do to empower the states to deal with their First Amendment issues. It’s clear that Congress has been instructed to write no laws regarding freedom of speech, religion, or assembly. This obviously means that federal courts have no authority to do so either. Therefore, the remaining option is for Congress to specifically remove jurisdiction of all First Amendment controversies from all federal courts, including the Supreme Court. Issues dealing with prayer, the Ten Commandments, religious symbols or clothing, and songs, even the issue of abortion, are properly left as a prerogative of the states. A giant step in this direction could be achieved with the passage my proposed legislation, the We the People Act. Congress Social Security Protection Act 11 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 3:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I intend to vote for H.R. 743, the Social Security Protection Act, because it contains an important provision that was not included in previous versions of this bill. This provision takes a first step toward ensuring that non-citizens who are unauthorized to work in the United States do not receive Social Security benefits. Giving Social Security benefits to illegal immigrants is a slap in the faces of Americans who pay their entire working lives into the Social Security system and now face the possibility that there will be nothing left when it is their turn to retire. This is why, at the beginning of the 108th Congress, I introduced legislation, the Social Security for American Citizens Only Act (H.R. 489), which ensures no non-citizen can receive Social Security benefits. Therefore, I am pleased to see Congress beginning at last to address this issue. Congress Social Security Protection Act 11 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 3:4 Instead of repealing the only means Texas teachers have of avoiding the Government Pension Offset, Congress should pass H.R. 594, the Social Security Fairness Act that repeals both the Government Pension Offset and the Windfall Elimination Provision, another provision that denies public employees full Social Security benefits. Congress Social Security Protection Act 11 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 3:5 Congress should also be encouraging good people to enter the education profession by passing my Teacher Tax Cut Act (H.R. 613) that provides every teacher with a $1,000 tax credit, as well as my Professional Educators Tax Credit Act (H.R. 614), which provides a $1,000 tax credit to counselors, librarians, and all school personnel. Congress Social Security Protection Act 11 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 3:6 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I will support H.R. 743 because it restricts the ability of illegal immigrants to raid the Social Security Trust Fund. However, I remain opposed to the provision that punishes teachers by denying them Social Security benefits for which they would be eligible if they were not teachers. Instead of punishing teachers, Congress should be enacting pro-teacher legislation, such as the Social Security Fairness Act and the Teacher Tax Cut Act. Congress Federal War On Drugs Threatens The Effective Treatment Of Chronic Pain 11 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 4:11 Mr. Speaker, Congress should take action to rein in overzealous prosecutors and law enforcement officials and stop the harassment of legitimate pain management physicians, who are acting in good faith in prescribing opioids for relief from chronic pain. Doctors should not be prosecuted for doing what, in their best medical judgment, is in their patients’ best interest. Doctors should also not be prosecuted for the misdeeds of their patients. Finally, I wish to express my hope that Mr. Limbaugh’s case will encourage his many fans and supporters to consider how their support for the federal War on Drugs is inconsistent with their support of individual liberty and Constitutional government. Congress Rush Limbaugh and the Sick Federal War on Pain Relief February 12, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 5:11 Mr. Speaker, Congress should take action to rein in overzealous prosecutors and law enforcement officials, and stop the harassment of legitimate physicians who act in good faith when prescribing opioids for relief from chronic pain. Doctors should not be prosecuted for using their best medical judgment to act in their patients’ best interests. Doctors also should not be prosecuted for the misdeeds of their patients. Congress The Financial Services Committees “Views and Estimates for 2005” February 26, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 7:6 While the committee’s “Views and Estimates” devote considerable space to discussing Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs), it makes no mention of the billions of dollars in subsidies Congress has given to GSEs. These subsidies distort the market, create a short-term boom in housing, and endanger the economy by allowing GSEs to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. Congress The Financial Services Committees “Views and Estimates for 2005” February 26, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 7:11 The committee’s inconsistency regarding deficit reduction is shown by its support for increased spending for almost every foreign aid program under its jurisdiction. Of course, Congress has neither constitutional nor moral authority to take money from the American people and send it overseas. Furthermore, foreign aid rarely helps improve the standard of living for citizens of “beneficiary” countries. Instead, the aid all too often enriches corrupt politicians and helps stave off pressure for real reform. Furthermore, certain proposals the committee embraces smack of economic imperialism, suggesting that a country whose economic and other policies please American politicians and bureaucrats will be rewarded with money stolen from the American taxpayer. Congress The Financial Services Committees “Views and Estimates for 2005” February 26, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 7:16 It is long past time for Congress to examine seriously the need to reform the fiat currency system. The committee also should examine how Federal Reserve policies encourage excessive public and private sector debt, and the threat that debt poses to the long-term health of the American economy. Additionally, the committee should examine how the American government and economy would be affected if the dollar lost its privileged status as the world’s reserve currency. After all, the main reason the United States government is able to run such large deficits without suffering hyperinflation is the willingness of foreign investors to hold US debt instruments. If, or when, the dollar’s weakness causes foreigners to become reluctant to invest in US debt instruments, the results could be cataclysmic for our economy. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 8:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, while it is the independent duty of each branch of the Federal Government to act constitutionally, Congress will likely continue to ignore not only its constitutional limits but earlier criticisms from Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as well. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 8:3 Of course, it is much easier to ride the current wave of federalizing every human misdeed in the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a constitutional oath which prescribes a procedural structure by which the Nation is protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism. Who, after all, wants to be amongst those Members of Congress who are portrayed as soft on violent crimes initiated against the unborn? Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 8:4 Nevertheless, our Federal Government is constitutionally, a government of limited powers. Article one, section eight, enumerates the legislative areas for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every other issue, the Federal Government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the State governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The 10th amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our Nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 8:5 However, Congress does more damage than just expanding the class to whom Federal murder and assault statutes apply — it further entrenches and seemingly concurs with the Roe v. Wade decision — the Court’s intrusion into rights of States and their previous attempts to protect by criminal statute the unborn’s right not to be aggressed against. By specifically exempting from prosecution both abortionists and the mothers of the unborn — as is the case with this legislation — Congress appears to say that protection of the unborn child is not only a Federal matter but conditioned upon motive. In fact, the Judiciary Committee in marking up the bill, took an odd legal turn by making the assault on the unborn a strict liability offense insofar as the bill does not even require knowledge on the part of the aggressor that the unborn child exists. Murder statutes and common law murder require intent to kill — which implies knowledge — on the part of the aggressor. Here, however, we have the odd legal philosophy that an abortionist with full knowledge of his terminal act is not subject to prosecution while an aggressor acting without knowledge of the child’s existence is subject to nearly the full penalty of the law. With respect to only the fetus, the bill exempts the murderer from the death sentence — yet another diminution of the unborn’s personhood status and clearly a violation of the equal protection clause. It is becoming more and more difficult for Congress and the courts to pass the smell test as government simultaneously treats the unborn as a person in some instances and as a nonperson in others. Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 8:6 In his first formal complaint to Congress on behalf of the Federal Judiciary, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist said “the trend to federalize crimes that have traditionally been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of Federal system.” Rehnquist further criticized Congress for yielding to the political pressure to “appear responsive to every highly publicized societal ill or sensational crime.” Congress Unborn Victims Of Violence Act 26 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 8:8 Occasionaly the argument is put forth that States may be less effective than a centralized Federal Government in dealing with those who leave one State jurisdiction for another. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of State sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit clause allow States to exact judgments from those who violate their State laws. The Constitution even allows the Federal Government to legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow States to enforce their substantive laws without the Federal Government imposing its substantive edicts on the States. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one State to another. While not self-enacting, in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. There is, of course, a cost imposed upon States in working with one another rather than relying on a national, unified police force. At the same time, there is a greater cost to centralization of police power. Congress H. Res. 412 Honoring Men And Women Of The Drug Enforcement Administration — Part 1 3 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 10:3 I would like to call attention to my colleagues and to the Congress the lack of success on the war on drugs. The war has been going on for 30 years. The success is not there, and I think we are deceiving ourselves if we think that everything is going well and that we have achieved something, because there is really no evidence for that. Not only that, there have been many unintended consequences that we fail to look at, and I want to take this time to make that the point and try to get some of us to think that there may be another way to fight the war on drugs. Congress H. Res. 412 Honoring Men And Women Of The Drug Enforcement Administration — Part 1 3 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 10:6 The one thing that this country recognized was that the Congress had no authority to march around the country and tell people not to drink beer, and what did they do? They resorted to amending the Constitution, a proper procedure, and of course, it turned out to be a failed experiment. After 12 years, they woke up and the American people changed it. Congress H. Res. 412 Honoring Men And Women Of The Drug Enforcement Administration — Part 1 3 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 10:8 Another thing that is rather astounding to me, is that not only have we lost the respect for the Constitution to say that the Federal Government can be involved in teaching habits, but we literally did this not even through congressional legislation. Congress H. Res. 412 Honoring Men And Women Of The Drug Enforcement Administration — Part 1 3 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 10:9 The DEA was created by an executive order. Imagine the size of this program created merely by a President signing an executive order. Of course, the ultimate responsibility falls on the Congress because we acquiesce and we vote for all the funding. The DEA has received over $24 billion in the past 30 years, but the real cost of law enforcement is well over $240 billion when we add up all the costs. Congress H. Res. 412 Honoring Men And Women Of The Drug Enforcement Administration — Part 2 3 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 11:11 It is still astounding to me to find out that the DEA was not even created by congressional legislation. It was created by an executive order. We have gone a long way, colleagues, from where the respect for the Constitution existed and that at least the Congress should legislate. Even in the 1920s, when we attacked alcohol, we had enough respect for the Constitution to amend the Constitution. Congress We The People Act 4 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 13:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning state laws and policies relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the president, according to rules established by the Congress. Congress We The People Act 4 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 13:2 The United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to establish and limit the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts and limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Founders intended Congress to use this authority to correct abuses of power by the federal judiciary. Congress We The People Act 4 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 13:4 In recent years, we have seen numerous abuses of power by federal courts. Federal judges regularly strike down state and local laws on subjects such as religious liberty, sexual orientation, family relations, education, and abortion. This government by federal judiciary causes a virtual nullification of the Tenth Amendment’s limitations on federal power. Furthermore, when federal judges impose their preferred policies on state and local governments, instead of respecting the policies adopted by those elected by, and thus accountable to, the people, republican government is threatened. Article IV, section 4 of the United States Constitution guarantees each state a republican form of government. Thus, Congress must act when the executive or judicial branch threatens the republican governments of the individual states. Therefore, Congress has a responsibility to stop federal judges from running roughshod over state and local laws. The Founders would certainly have supported congressional action to reign in federal judges who tell citizens where they can and can’t place manger scenes at Christmas. Congress We The People Act 4 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 13:6 Unless Congress acts, a state’s authority to define and regulate marriage may be the next victim of activist judges. After all, such a decision would simply take the Supreme Court’s decision in the Lawrence case, which overturned all state sodomy laws, to its logical conclusion. Congress must launch a preemptive strike against any further federal usurpation of the states’ authority to regulate marriage by removing issues concerning the definition of marriage from the jurisdiction of federal courts. Congress We The People Act 4 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 13:7 Although marriage is licensed and otherwise regulated by the states, government did not create the institution of marriage. Government regulation of marriage is based on state recognition of the practices and customs formulated by private individuals interacting in civil institutions, such as churches and synagogues. Having federal officials, whether judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose a new definition of marriage on the people is an act of social engineering profoundly hostile to liberty. Congress We The People Act 4 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 13:8 It is long past time that Congress exercises its authority to protect the republican government of the states from out-of-control federal judges. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the We the People Act. Congress An Indecent Attack on the First Amendment March 10, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 14:3 Regulating speech is a dangerous notion, and not compatible with the principles of a free society. The Founders recognized this, and thus explicitly prohibited Congress from making any laws that might abridge freedom of speech or of the press. Congress An Indecent Attack on the First Amendment March 10, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 14:7 Just one year ago we saw a coalition of both left and right push through the radical Campaign Finance Reform Act, which strictly curtails the rights all Americans to speak out against particular candidates at the time of elections. Amazingly, this usurpation by Congress was upheld by the Supreme Court, which showed no concern for the restrictions on political speech during political campaigns. Instead of admitting that money and corruption in government is not a consequence of too much freedom of expression, but rather a result of government acting outside the bounds of the Constitution, this new law addressed a symptom rather than the cause of special interest control of our legislative process. Congress An Indecent Attack on the First Amendment March 10, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 14:12 Proponents of using government authority to censor certain undesirable images and comments on the airwaves resort to the claim that the airways belong to all the people, and therefore it’s the government’s responsibility to protect them. The mistake of never having privatized the radio and TV airwaves does not justify ignoring the 1st Amendment mandate that “Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech.” When everyone owns something, in reality nobody owns it. Control then occurs merely by the whims of the politicians in power. From the very start, licensing of radio and TV frequencies invited government censorship that is no less threatening than that found in totalitarian societies. Congress An Indecent Attack on the First Amendment March 10, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 14:24 Congress has been a poor steward of the 1st Amendment. This newest attack should alert us all to the dangers of government regulating freedom of speech — of any kind. Congress Federalizing Tort Law 10 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 15:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, Congress is once again using abusive litigation at the state level as a justification nationalizing tort law. In this case, the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act (H.R. 339) usurps state jurisdiction over lawsuits related to obesity against food manufactures. Congress Federalizing Tort Law 10 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 15:3 Congress bears some responsibility for the decline of personal responsibility that led to the obesity lawsuits. After all, Congress created the welfare state that popularized the notion that people should not bear the costs of their mistakes. Thanks to the welfare state, too many Americans believe they are entitled to pass the costs of their mistakes on to a third party — such as the taxpayers or a corporation with “deep pockets.” Congress Federalizing Tort Law 10 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 15:4 While I oppose the idea of holding food manufactures responsible for their customers’ misuse of their products, I cannot support addressing this problem by nationalizing tort law. It is long past time for Congress to recognize that not every problem requires a federal solution. This country’s founders recognized the genius of separating power among federal, state, and local governments as a means to maximize individual liberty and make government most responsive to those persons who might most responsibly influence it. This separation of powers strictly limits the role of the federal government in dealing with civil liability matters; and reserves jurisdiction over matters of civil tort, such as food related negligence suits, to the state legislatures. Congress Undermining First Amendment 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 16:2 I am convinced that the Congress has been a very poor steward of the first amendment, and we are moving in the direction of further undermining the first amendment with this legislation. Congress Undermining First Amendment 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 16:5 Now, once again, we are attacking indecency, which we all should, but how we do it is critical; because “indecency” is a subjective term, and it has yet to be defined by the courts. We should remember that the Congress very clearly by the Constitution is instructed to: “make no laws abridging the freedom of speech.” It cannot be any clearer. If we have problems with indecency they are to be solved in different manners. The excuse, because the government is responsible and owns the airwaves, that we can suspend the first amendment is incorrect. That is a good argument for privatizing the airwaves rather than an excuse for suspension of the first amendment. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, Americans are right to be outraged at much of the content of broadcast television and radio today. Too many television and radio programs regularly mock the values of millions of Americans and feature lude, inappropriate conduct. It is totally legitimate and even praiseworthy for people to use market forces, such as boycotts of the sponsors of the offensive programs, to pressure networks to remove objectionable programming. However, it is not legitimate for Congress to censor broadcast programs. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:2 The First Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech. . . .” It does not make an exception for broadcast television. Some argue that broadcast speech is different because broadcasters are using the “people’s airwaves.” Of course, the “people” don’t really control the airwaves anymore then the “people” control the government in the “People’s Republic” of China! Instead, the “people’s airwaves” is a euphemism for government control of the airwaves. Of course, government exceeded its Constitutional authority when it nationalized the broadcast industry. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:3 Furthermore, there was no economic justification for Congress determining who is, and is not, allowed to access the broadcast spectrum. Instead of nationalizing the spectrum, the Federal Government should have allowed private parties to homestead parts of the broadcast spectrum and settle disputes over ownership and use through market processes, contracts, and, if necessary, application of the common law of contracts and torts. Such a market-based solution would have provided a more efficient allocation of the broadcast spectrum than has government regulation. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:4 Congress used its unconstitutional and unjustified power-grab over the allocation of broadcast spectrum to justify imposing federal regulations on broadcasters. Thus, the Federal Government used one unconstitutional action to justify another seizing of regulatory control over the content of a means of communication in direct violation of the First Amendment. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:5 Congress should reject H.R. 3717, the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act, because, by increasing fines and making it easier for governments to revoke the licenses of broadcasters who violate federal standards, H.R. 3717 expands an unconstitutional exercise of federal power. H.R. 3717 also establishes new frontiers in censorship by levying fines on individual artists for violating FCC regulations. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:6 Congress should also reject H.R. 3717 because the new powers granted to the FCC may be abused by a future administration to crack down on political speech. The bill applies to speech the agency has determined is “obscene” or “indecent.” While this may not appear to include political speech, I would remind my colleagues that there is a serious political movement that believes that the expression of certain political opinions should be censored by the government because it is “hate speech.” Proponents of these views would not hesitate to redefine indecency to include “hate speech.” Ironically, many of the strongest proponents of H.R. 3717 also hold views that would likely be classified as “indecent hate speech.” Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:8 The reason we are considering H.R. 3717 is not unrelated to questions regarding state censorship of political speech. Many of this bill’s most rabid supporters appear to be motivated by the attacks on a member of Congress, and other statements critical of the current administration and violating the standards of political correctness, by “shock jock” Howard Stern. I have heard descriptions of Stern’s radio program that suggest this is a despicable program. However, I find even more troubling the idea that the Federal Government should censor anyone because of his comments about a member of Congress. Such behavior is more suited for members of a Soviet politburo than members of a representative body in a constitutional republic. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:16 Even the proponents of the commercial speech doctrine agreed that the Federal Government should never restrict political speech. Yet, this Congress, this administration, and this Supreme Court have restricted political speech with the recently enacted campaign finance reform law. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice has indicated it will use the war against terrorism to monitor critics of the administration’s foreign policy, thus chilling antiwar political speech. Of course, on many college campuses students have to watch what they say lest they run afoul of the rules of “political correctness.” Even telling a “politically incorrect” joke can bring a student up on charges before the thought police! Now, selfproclaimed opponents of political correctness want to use federal power to punish colleges that allows the expression of views they consider “unpatriotic” and/or punish colleges when the composition of the facility does not meet their definition of diversity. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:17 Just this week, there was a full-page ad in Roll Call, the daily paper distributed to House members, from people who want Congress to impose new regulations on movies featuring smoking. No doubt the sponsors of this ads are drooling over the prospect of fining stations that show Humphrey Bogart movies for indecent broadcasts. Congress Oppose a Flawed Policy of Preemptive War March 17, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 18:5 Reasserting U.N. Security Council resolutions as a justification for the war further emphasizes our sacrifice of sovereignty, and only underscores how Congress has reneged its constitutional responsibility over war. Congress Opposing H.R. 557 17 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 19:3 Denying that we are interested in oil and that occupying an Islamic country is not an affront to the sensitivities of most Arabs and Muslims is foolhardy. Reasserting U.N. Security Council resolutions as the justification for war further emphasizes our sacrifice of sovereignty and Congress’s reneging on its Constitutional responsibility on war. Congress Don’t Let the FDA Block Access to Needed Health Care Information March 22, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 20:5 In 1994, Congress responded to the American people’s desire for greater access to information about the benefits of dietary supplements by passing the Dietary Supplements and Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), liberalizing rules regarding the regulation of dietary supplements. Congressional offices received a record number of comments in favor of DSHEA. Congress Don’t Let the FDA Block Access to Needed Health Care Information March 22, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 20:7 In the years since the Pearson decision, members of Congress have had to continually intervene with the FDA to ensure it followed the court order. The FDA continues to deny consumers access to truthful health information. Clearly, the FDA is determined to continue to (as the Pearson court pointed out) act as though liberalizing regulations regarding health claims is the equivalent of “asking consumers to buy something while hypnotized and therefore they are bound to be misled.” Congress Don’t Let the FDA Block Access to Needed Health Care Information March 22, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 20:9 If Congress is serious about respecting First Amendment rights, and the people’s right to improve their own health, we must remove the FDA’s authority to censor non-misleading health claims, and claims that can be rendered non-misleading by the simple device of adopting a disclaimer. Congress North American Development Bank 24 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 21:3 When Congress funds institutions like NAD, it transfers resources from the private sector to the government. When resources are left in the private sector, they are put to the use most highly valued by individual consumers. In contrast, the use of resources transferred to the public sector by agencies like NAD is determined by bureaucrats and politically powerful special interests, thus assuring that the resources cannot be put to their highest-valued use. Therefore, determining the allocation of resources through the political process decreases economic efficiency. Thus, NAD will actually cost jobs and reduce the standard of living of the very workers NAD’s supporters claim to benefit! Congress North American Development Bank 24 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 21:4 I would also like to remind my colleagues that there is no constitutional authorization for Congress to fund organizations like the NAD. If my colleagues are not convinced by the constitutional argument, I would hope they would consider the wisdom of expanding the scope of taxpayer support of programs like the NAD at a time when the government is facing massive deficits and Congress is scrambling to find the money to pay for national priorities. Congress The Television Consumer Freedom Act 24 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 22:2 My office has received numerous calls from rural satellite and cable TV customers who are upset because their satellite or cable service providers have informed them that they will lose access to certain network and cable programming. The reason my constituents cannot obtain their desired satellite and cable services is that the satellite and cable “marketplace” is fraught with government interventionism at every level. Local governments have historically granted cable companies franchises of monopoly privilege. Government has previously intervened to invalidate “exclusive dealings” contracts between private parties, namely cable service providers and program creators, and has most recently imposed price controls. The Library of Congress has even been delegated the power to determine prices at which program suppliers must make their programs available to cable and satellite programming service providers. Congress The Television Consumer Freedom Act 24 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 22:3 It is, of course, within the constitutionally enumerated powers of Congress to “promote the progress of Science and Useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the Exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” However, operating a clearing-house for the subsequent transfer of such property rights in the name of setting a just price or “instilling competition” via “central planning” seems to be neither economically prudent nor justifiable under this enumerated power. This process is one best reserved to the competitive marketplace. Congress The Child Health Care Affordability Act 24 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 23:3 As an OB–GYN who has had the privilege of delivering more than four thousand babies, I know how important it is that parents have the resources to provide adequate health care for their children. The inability of many working Americans to provide health care for their children is rooted in one of the great inequities of the tax code — Congress’ failure to allow individuals the same ability to deduct health care costs that it grants to businesses. As a direct result of Congress’ refusal to provide individuals with health care related tax credits, parents whose employers do not provide health insurance have to struggle to provide health care for their children. Many of these parents work in low-income jobs; oftentimes, their only recourse for health care is the local emergency room. Congress The Child Health Care Affordability Act 24 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 23:7 Mr. Speaker, this Congress has a moral responsibility to provide tax relief so that low-income parents struggling to care for a sick child can better meet their child’s medical expenses. Some may say that we cannot enact the Child Health Care Affordability Act because it would cause the government to lose revenue. But, who is more deserving of this money, Congress or the working parents of a sick child? Congress Oppose the Spendthrift 2005 Federal Budget Resolution March 25, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 24:4 Furthermore, today’s budget debate further entrenches the phony concept of discretionary versus nondiscretionary spending. An increasing percentage of the annual federal budget is categorized as “nondiscretionary” entitlement spending, meaning Congress ostensibly has no choice whether to fund certain programs. In fact, roughly two-thirds of the fiscal year 2005 budget is consumed by nondiscretionary spending. When Congress has no say over how two-thirds of the federal budget is spent, the American people effectively have no say either. Why in the world should the American people be forced to spend 1.5 trillion dollars funding programs that cannot even be reviewed at budget time? The very concept of nondiscretionary spending is a big-government statist’s dream, because it assumes that we as a society simply have accepted that most of the federal leviathan must be funded as a matter of course. NO program or agency should be considered sacred, and no funding should be considered inevitable. Congress Oppose the Spendthrift 2005 Federal Budget Resolution March 25, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 24:5 The assertion that this budget will reduce taxes is nonsense. Budget bills do not change the tax laws one bit. Congress can pass this budget today and raise taxes tomorrow- budget and tax bills are completely separate and originate from different committees. The budget may make revenue projections based on tax cuts, but the truth is that Congress has no idea what federal revenues will be in any future year. Similarly, the deficit reduction supposedly contained in the budget is illusory. The federal government always spends more in future years than originally projected, and always runs single-year deficits when one factors in raids on funds supposedly earmarked for Social Security. The notion that today’s budget will impose fiscal restraint on Congress in the future is laughable- Congress will vote for new budgets every year without the slightest regard for what we do today. Congress Oppose the Spendthrift 2005 Federal Budget Resolution March 25, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 24:6 Mr. Speaker, my colleagues have discussed the details of this budget ad nauseam. The increases in domestic, foreign, and military spending would not be needed if Congress stopped trying to build an empire abroad and a nanny state at home. Our interventionist foreign policy and growing entitlement society will bankrupt this nation if we do not change the way we think about the proper role of the federal government. Congress Introducing The American Justice For American Citizens Act 1 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 26:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the American Justice for American Citizens Act, which exercises Congress’s Constitutional authority to regulate the federal judiciary to ensure that federal judges base their decisions solely on American Constitutional, statutory, and traditional common law. Federal judges increasing practice of “transjudicialism” makes this act necessary. Transjudicialism is a new legal theory that encourages judges to disregard American law, including the United States Constitution, and base their decisions on foreign law. For example, Supreme Court justices recently used international law to justify upholding race-based college admissions and overturning all state sodomy laws. Congress Introducing The American Justice For American Citizens Act 1 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 26:6 Mr. Speaker, the drafters of the Constitution gave Congress the power to regulate the jurisdiction of federal courts precisely so we could intervene when the federal judiciary betrays its responsibility to uphold the Constitution and American law. Congress has a duty to use this power to ensure that judges base their decisions solely on American law. Congress The Lessons of 9/11 April 22, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 27:41 Regardless of one’s enthusiasm or lack thereof for the war and the general policy of maintaining American troops in more than 130 countries, one cold fact soon must be recognized by all of us in Congress. The American people cannot afford it, and when the market finally recognizes the over commitment we’ve made, the results will not be pleasing to anyone. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 22 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 28:3 The version of H.R. 2844 before Congress today was drafted with input from the State election commissioners to make sure it sets realistic goals and will not unduly burden State governments. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 22 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 28:7 The Framers gave Congress all the tools it needs to address problems of mass vacancies in the House without compromising this institution’s primary function as a representative body. In fact, as Hamilton explains in Federalist 59, the “time, place, and manner” clause was specifically designed to address the kind of extraordinary circumstances imagined by those who support amending the Constitution. In conclusion, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2844, the Continuity in Representation Act, which ensures an elected Congress can continue to operate in the event of an emergency. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 22 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 28:9 Article I Section 2 of the United States Constitution grants state governors the authority to hold special elections to fill vacancies in the House of Representatives. Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to designate the time, place, and manner of such special elections if states should fail to act expeditiously following a national emergency. Alexander Hamilton, who played a major role in the drafting and ratification of the United States Constitution, characterized authority over federal elections as shared between the states and Congress, with neither being able to control the process entirely. H.R. 2844 exercises Congress’s power to regulate the time, place, and manner of elections by requiring the holding of special elections within 45 days after the Speaker or acting Speaker declares 100 members of the House have been killed. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 22 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 28:10 I have no doubt that the people of the states are quite competent to hold elections in a timely fashion. After all, it is in each state’s interest to ensure it has adequate elected representation in Washington. The version of H.R. 2844 before Congress today was drafted with input from state elections commissioners to make sure it sets realistic goals and will not unduly burden state governments. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 22 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 28:12 Even with the direct election of Senators, the fact that members of the House are elected every 2 years while Senators run for statewide office every 6 years means that members of the House of Representatives are still more accountable to the people than members of any other part of the federal government. Appointed members of Congress simply cannot be truly representative. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton eloquently made this point in Federalist 52: “As it is essential to liberty that the government in general should have a common interest with the people, so it is particularly essential that the branch of it under consideration should have an immediate dependence on, and an intimate sympathy with, the people. Frequent elections are unquestionably the only policy by which this dependence and sympathy can be effectually secured.” Congress Continuity In Representation Act 22 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 28:15 Mr. Chairman, this country has faced the possibility of threats to the continuity of this body several times in our history. Yet no one suggested removing the people’s right to vote for members of Congress. For example, the British in the War of 1812 attacked the city of Washington, yet nobody suggested the States could not address the lack of a quorum in the House of Representatives through elections. During the Civil War, the neighboring State of Virginia, where today many Capitol Hill staffers reside and many members stay while Congress is in session, was actively involved in hostilities against the United States Government. Yet, Abraham Lincoln never suggested that non-elected persons serve in the House. Adopting any of the proposals to deny the people the ability to choose their own representatives would let the terrorists know that they can succeed in altering our republican institutions. I hope all my colleagues who are considering rejecting H.R. 2844 in favor of a Constitutional amendment will question the wisdom of handing terrorists a preemptive victory over republican government. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 22 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 28:16 As noted above, the Framers gave Congress all the tools it needs to address problems of mass vacancies in the House without compromising this institution’s primary function as a representative body. In fact, as Hamilton explains in Federalist 59, the “time, place, and manner” clause was specifically designed to address the kind of extraordinary circumstances imagined by those who support amending the Constitution. In conclusion, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2844, the Continuity in Representation Act, which ensures an elected Congress can continue to operate in the event of an emergency. This is what the Drafters of the Constitution intended. Furthermore, passage of H.R. 2844 sends a strong message to terrorists that they cannot alter our republican government. Congress Introducing Cassandra Tamez’s Essay Into The Congressional Record    2004 Ron Paul 29:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to enter into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the following essay by Miss Cassandra Tamez, a high school student who resides in my Congressional district. Miss Tamez’s essay, entitled “My Commitment to America’s Future,” earned her a Voice of Democracy Scholarship award from the Veterans of Foreign Wars. I am very proud of Miss Tamez’s efforts and I wish her well in her future endeavors. Congress In Support Of The Gutierrez-Paul Bill 28 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 30:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to cosponsor the legislation offered by Mr. GUTIERREZ using the Congressional Review Act to disapprove the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s (OCC) preemption regulation because I strongly oppose any attempt to expand the OCC’s regulatory functions beyond the power Congress originally granted the OCC. The OCC was never meant to serve as a national consumer protection agency. Its limited, intended role has been underscored by Federal court rulings that State law remains applicable to national banks in the absence of explicit Federal preemption. Congress In Support Of The Gutierrez-Paul Bill 28 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 30:2 Expanding the jurisdiction of OCC necessarily infringes on the ability of State lawmakers to determine their own consumer protection standards. One-size-fits-all policies crafted in Washington cannot serve the 50 diverse States well. Different States and markets have different needs that are better understood by State and local legislators. Congressional conservatives, in particular, should not endorse an expansion of the Federal regulatory power at the expense of States’ rights. The Tenth Amendment is clear: regulatory powers not specifically granted to Congress remain with the States. Congress should stop usurping State authority and leave consumer protection laws to those with far more experience and expertise. Congress In Support Of The Gutierrez-Paul Bill 28 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 30:3 This new OCC authority will have far-reaching and unintended consequences. State law governing mortgage brokers, sub-prime lenders, check cashing centers, leasing companies, and even car dealers could be preempted under the new proposal. This proposal may also give national banks and their subsidiaries a competitive advantage over small mortgage companies. OCC undoubtedly will need to hire new staff. Yet the OCC still may be unable to handle the flood of new responsibilities. Unless Congress resists any expansion of OCC, it risks creating another huge, unaccountable, bureaucratic agency. Therefore, I respectfully urge all my colleagues to support Mr. Gutierriez’s legislation disapproving the OCC’s preemption regulation. Congress Statement on the Abuse of Prisoners in Iraq May 6, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 31:6 This resolution decries the fact that the administration had not informed Congress of these abuses and that the administration has not kept Congress in the information loop. Yet, Congress made it clear to the administration from the very beginning that Congress wanted no responsibility for the war in Iraq. If Congress wanted to be kept in the loop it should have vigorously exercised its responsibilities from the very beginning. This means, first and foremost, that Congress should have voted on a declaration of war as required in the Constitution. Congress, after abrogating this responsibility in October 2002, now is complaining that it is in the dark. Indeed, who is to say that the legal ambiguity created by the Congressional refusal to declare war may not have contributed to the notion that detainees need not be treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention, that governs the treatment of prisoners during a time of war? Until Congress takes up its constitutional responsibilities, complaints that the administration is not sufficiently forthcoming with information ring hollow. Congress Statement on the Abuse of Prisoners in Iraq May 6, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 31:7 This resolution calls on the administration to keep Congress better informed. But Congress has the power – and the obligation – to keep itself better informed! If Congress is truly interested in being informed, it should hold hearings – exercising its subpoena power if necessary. Depending on the administration to fulfill what is our own constitutional responsibility is once again passing the buck. Isn’t this what has gotten us into this trouble in the first place? Congress Don’t Start a War with Iran! May 6, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 32:4 It is somewhat ironic that we are again meddling in Iranian affairs. Students of history will recall that the US government’s ill-advised coup against Iranian leader Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 and its subsequent installation of the Shah as the supreme ruler led to intense hatred of the United States and eventually to the radical Islamic revolution of 1979. One can only wonder what our relations would be with Iran if not for the decades of meddling in that country’s internal affairs. We likely would not be considering resolutions such as this. Yet the solution to all the difficulties created by our meddling foreign policy always seems to always be yet more meddling. Will Congress ever learn? Congress H. Con. Res. 398: Expressing The Concern Of Congress Over Iran’s Development Of The Means To Produce Nuclear Weapons 17 May 2004    2004 Ron Paul 34:4 It is somewhat ironic that vie are again meddling in Iranian affairs. Students of history will recall that the U.S. government’s ill-advised coup against Iranian leader Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 and its subsequent installation of the Shah as the supreme ruler led to intense hatred of the United States and eventually to the radical Islamic revolution of 1979. One can only wonder what our relations would be with Iran if not for the decades of meddling in that country’s internal affairs. We likely would not be considering resolutions such as this. Yet the solution to all the difficulties created by our meddling foreign policy always seems to be yet more meddling. Will Congress ever learn? Congress The House of Representatives Must be Elected! June 2, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 36:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J.Res. 83, which amends the United States Constitution to allow appointed persons to fill vacancies in the House of Representatives in the event of an emergency. Since the Continuity of Government (COG) Commission first proposed altering our system of government by allowing appointed members to serve in this body. I, along with other members of Congress, journalists, academics, and policy experts, have expressed concerns that having appointed members serve in the House of Representatives is inconsistent with the House’s historic function as the branch of Congress most directly accountable to the people. Congress The House of Representatives Must be Elected! June 2, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 36:2 Even with the direct election of Senators, the fact that members of the House of Representatives are elected every two years (while Senators run for statewide office every six years) means that members of the House are still more accountable to the people than members of any other part of the federal government. Appointed members of Congress simply cannot be truly representative. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton eloquently made this point in Federalist 52: “As it is essential to liberty that the government in general should have a common interest with the people, so it is particularly essential that the branch of it under consideration should have an immediate dependence on, and an intimate sympathy with, the people. Frequent elections are unquestionably the only policy by which this dependence and sympathy can be effectually secured.” Congress The House of Representatives Must be Elected! June 2, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 36:7 The Constitution already provides the framework for Congress to function after a catastrophic event. Article I Section 2 grants the governors of the various states authority to hold special elections to fill vacancies in the House of Representatives. Article I Section 4 gives Congress the authority to designate the time, manner, and place of such special elections if states should fail to act expeditiously following a national emergency. As Hamilton explains in Federalist 59, the “time, place, and manner” clause was specifically designed to address the kind of extraordinary circumstances imagined by the supporters of H.J.Res. 83. Hamilton characterized authority over federal elections as shared between the states and Congress, with neither being able to control the process entirely. Congress The House of Representatives Must be Elected! June 2, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 36:8 Last month, this body fulfilled its constitutional duty by passing HR 2844, the Continuity of Representation Act. HR 2844 exercises Congress’s power to regulate the time, place, and manner of elections by requiring the holding of special elections within 45 days after the Speaker or acting Speaker declares 100 or more members of the House have been killed. This proposal protects the people’s right to choose their representatives at the time when such a right may be most important, while ensuring continuity of the legislative branch. Congress The Same Old Failed Policies in Iraq June 3, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 37:2 But something happened on the way to the coronation. The State Department finally won out in its struggle with the Pentagon to dump Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress, delivering Iraq to a competing exiled group, Dr. Iyad Allawi’s Iraqi National Accord. But never fear, both groups were CIA supported and both would be expected to govern as an American puppet. And that’s the problem. Under the conditions that currently exist in Iraq, American sponsorship of a government, or even United Nations approval, for that matter, will be rejected by a nationalistic Iraqi people. Congress The Same Old Failed Policies in Iraq June 3, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 37:3 We never seem to learn, and the Muslim Middle East never forgets. Our support for the Shah of Iran and Saddam Hussein’s war against Iran has never endeared us to the Iranians. We’re supposed to be surprised to discover that our close confidant Ahmed Chalabi turns out to be a cozy pragmatic friend of Iran. The CIA may have questioned the authenticity of Iranian intelligence passed on to the U.S. by Chalabi, yet still this intelligence was used eagerly to promote the pro-war propaganda that so many in Congress and the nation bought into. And now it looks like the intelligence fed to Chalabi by Iran was deliberately falsified, but because it fit in so neatly with the neocon’s determination to remake the entire Middle East, starting with a preemptive war against Iraq, it was received enthusiastically. Congress Mourning The Death Of Ronald Reagan 9 June 2004    2004 Ron Paul 38:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, all Americans mourn the death of President Ronald Reagan, but those of us who had the opportunity to know President Reagan are especially saddened. I got to know President Reagan in 1976 when, as a freshman congressman, I was one of only four members of this body to endorse then-Governor Reagan’s primary challenge to President Gerald Ford. I had the privilege of serving as the leader of President Reagan’s Texas delegation at the Republican convention of 1976, where Ronald Reagan almost defeated an incumbent president for his party’s nomination. Congress American Jobs Creation Act 17 June 2004    2004 Ron Paul 39:2 My biggest concern with the bill, however, is not based on its contents. I object to the process underlying the bill and the political reason for which it was written. This bill is on the floor for one reason and one reason only: the World Trade Organization demanded that we change our domestic tax law. Since America first joined the WTO in 1994, Europe has objected to how we tax American companies on their overseas earnings. The EU took its dispute to the WTO grievance board, which voted in favor of the Europeans. After all, it’s not fair for high-tax Europe to compete with relatively low tax America; the only solution is to force the U.S. to tax its companies more. The WTO ruling was clear: Congress must change American tax rules to comply with “international law.” Congress American Jobs Creation Act 17 June 2004    2004 Ron Paul 39:3 Sadly, Congress chose to comply. We scrambled to change our corporate tax laws in 2001, but failed to appease the Europeans. They again complained to the WTO, which again sided with the EU. So we’re back to the drawing board, working overtime to change our domestic laws to satisfy the WTO and the Europeans. Congress American Jobs Creation Act 17 June 2004    2004 Ron Paul 39:4 This outrageous affront to our national sovereignty was of course predictable when we joined the WTO. During congressional debates we were assured that entry into the organization posed no threat whatsoever to our sovereignty. But this was nonsense. A Congressional Research Service report was quite clear about the consequences of our membership: “As a member of the WTO, the United States does commit to act in accordance with the rules of the multi-lateral body. It is legally obligated to insure that national laws do not conflict with WTO rules.” With the Europeans and the WTO now telling us our laws are illegal and must be changed, it’s hard to imagine a more blatant loss of American sovereignty. Congress Bill Would Not Bring Middle East Peace 23 June 2004    2004 Ron Paul 40:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation. As I have argued so many times in the past when legislation like this is brought to the Floor of Congress, the resolution before us is in actuality an endorsement of our failed policy of foreign interventionism. It attempts to create an illusion of our success when the truth is rather different. It seeks not peace in the Middle East, but rather to justify our continued meddling in the affairs of Israel and the Palestinians. As recent history should make clear, our sustained involvement in that part of the world has cost the American taxpayer billions of dollars yet has delivered no results. On the contrary, despite our continued intervention and promises that the invasion of Iraq would solve the Israeli/Palestinian problem the conflict appears as intractable as ever. Congress Bill Would Not Bring Middle East Peace 23 June 2004    2004 Ron Paul 40:3 I do agree with one of the statements in this legislation, though it is hardly necessary for us to affirm that which is self-evident: “. . . Israel has the right to defend itself against terrorism, including the right to take actions against terrorist organizations that threaten the citizens of Israel.” Yes, they do. But do the Israelis really need the U.S. Congress to tell them they are free to defend themselves? Congress Opposing H. Res. 676 23 June 2004    2004 Ron Paul 42:3 This expansion of federal power was based on an erroneous interpretation of the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The framers of the Constitution intended the interstate commerce clause to create a free trade zone among the states, not to give the federal government regulatory power over every business that has any connection with interstate commerce. Congress A Token Attempt to Reduce Government Spending June 24, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 43:1 Mr. Speaker, I support HR 4663, the Spending Control Act of 2004, because I believe those of us concerned about the effects of excessive government spending on American liberty and prosperity should support any effort to rein in spending. However, I hold no great expectations that this bill will result in a new dawn of fiscal responsibility. In fact, since this bill is unlikely to pass the Senate, the main effect of today’s vote will be to allow members to brag to their constituents that they voted to keep a lid on spending. Many of these members will not tell their constituents that later this year they will likely vote for a budget busting, pork laden, omnibus spending bill that most members will not even have a chance to read before voting! In fact, last week, many members who I am sure will vote for HR 4663 voted against cutting funding for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). Last November, many of these same members voted for the greatest expansion of the welfare state since the Great Society. If Congress cannot even bring itself to cut the budget of the NEA or refuse to expand the welfare state, what are the odds that Congress will make the tough choices necessary to restore fiscal order, much less constitutional government? Congress A Token Attempt to Reduce Government Spending June 24, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 43:2 Even if this bill becomes law, it is likely that the provision in this bill allowing spending for emergency purposes to exceed the bill’s spending caps will prove to be an easily abused loophole allowing future Congresses to avoid the spending limitations in this bill. I am also concerned that, by not applying the spending caps to international or military programs, this bill invites future Congresses to misplace priorities, and ignores a major source of fiscal imprudence. Congress will not get our fiscal house in order until we seriously examine our overseas commitments, such as giving welfare to multinational corporations and subsidizing the defense of allies who are perfectly capable of defending themselves. Congress A Token Attempt to Reduce Government Spending June 24, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 43:3 Congress already has made numerous attempts to restore fiscal discipline, and none of them has succeeded. Even the much-heralded “surpluses” of the nineties were due to the Federal Reserve creating an economic boom and Congress continuing to raid the social security trust fund. The surplus was not caused by a sudden outbreak of fiscal conservativism in Washington, DC. Congress A Token Attempt to Reduce Government Spending June 24, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 43:4 The only way Congress will cease excessive spending is by rejecting the idea that the federal government has the authority and the competence to solve all ills, both domestic and international. If the last century taught us anything, it was that big government cannot create utopia. Yet, too many members believe that we can solve all economic problems, eliminate all social ills, and bring about worldwide peace and prosperity by simply creating new federal programs and regulations. However, the well-intended efforts of Congress have exacerbated America’s economic and social problems. Meanwhile our international meddling has failed to create perpetual peace but rather lead to perpetual war for perpetual peace. Congress A Token Attempt to Reduce Government Spending June 24, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 43:5 Every member of Congress has already promised to support limited government by swearing to uphold the United States Constitution. The Constitution limits the federal government to a few, well-defined functions. A good start toward restoring Constitutional government would be debating my Liberty Amendment (H.J.Res. 15). The Liberty Amendment repeals the Sixteenth Amendment, thus eliminating the income tax the source of much of the growth of government and loss of individual liberty. The Liberty Amendment also explicitly limits the federal government to those functions it is constitutionally authorized to perform. Congress A Token Attempt to Reduce Government Spending June 24, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 43:6 If Congress were serious about reining in government, it would also eliminate the Federal Reserve Board’s ability to inflate the currency. Federal Reserve policy enables excessive government spending by allowing the government to monitorize the debt, and hide the cost of big government through the hidden tax of inflation. Congress A Token Attempt to Reduce Government Spending June 24, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 43:7 In 1974, during debate on the Congressional Budget Reform and Impoundment Control Act, Congressman H.R. Gross, a libertarian-conservative from Iowa, eloquently addressed the flaws in thinking that budget process reform absent the political will to cut spending would reduce the size of government. Mr. Speaker, I would like to conclude my remarks by quoting Mr. Gross: Congress A Token Attempt to Reduce Government Spending June 24, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 43:9 Congress already has the tools to halt the headlong flight into bankruptcy. It holds the purse strings. No President can impound funds or spend unwisely unless an improvident, reckless Congress makes available the money. Congress A Token Attempt to Reduce Government Spending June 24, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 43:10 I repeat, neither this nor any other legislation will provide morality and responsibility on the part of Members of Congress. Congress American Community Survey 7 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 45:6 It was stated earlier in the discussion about the census that this was certainly the law of the land. The law of the land is very clear that the Congress gave the authority; the Census Bureau certainly does not do this on its own. We, the Congress, gave it the authority to do this. But it just happens to be an authority that we had no right to give. We have no right to give this authority to meddle into the privacy of American citizens. Congress American Community Survey 7 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 45:7 Article 1, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution mandates a national census every 10 years. I am in support of that, and I vote for funding for a national census every 10 years for the sole purpose of congressional redistricting. But, boy, this is out of hand now. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars and it is perpetual. The argument earlier was, we have to have to survey continuously because we save money by spending more money. Ask people a lot of questions, personal questions about bathrooms and incomes and who knows what. Congress Stop Prosecuting Doctors For Prescribing Legal Drugs 7 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 46:4 As I say, some of them may well be involved in something illegal and unethical; and because I still want to stop this, this does not mean I endorse it, because all the problems that do exist with some doctors can be taken care of in many different ways. Doctors are regulated by their reputation, by medical boards, State and local laws, as well as malpractice suits. So this is not to give license and say the doctors can do anything they want and cause abuse because there are ways of monitoring physicians; but what has happened is we have, as a Congress, developed a great atmosphere of fear among the doctors. Congress Stop Prosecuting Doctors For Prescribing Legal Drugs 7 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 46:10 And let me tell you, there are plenty, because all they have to do is to be reported that they prescribed an unusual number of tablets for a certain patient, and before you know it, they are intimidated, their license is threatened, their lives are ruined, they spend millions of dollars in defense of their case, and they cannot ever recover. And it is all because we here in the Congress write these regulations, all with good intentions that we are going to make sure there is no abuse. Congress UNESCO 7 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 47:5 Last year, the Congress approved $60 million for this purpose, which was 25 percent of UNESCO’s budget. Does that mean we have 25 percent of the vote in UNESCO? Do the American people get represented by 25 percent? How much do we get out of it? What is the American taxpayer going to get? The American taxpayer gets a bill, that is all. They do not get any benefits from it. Congress UNESCO 7 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 47:7 Now, let me just give my colleagues an idea of the type of philosophy they are promoting, but what we as the Congress promote with what the American taxpayers are paying for. Here it is: Congress UNESCO 7 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 47:9 I mean, if those are not threatening terms about what they want to do, and yet here we are funding this program and the American taxpayers are forced to pay for it. Now, there are a few of us left in the Congress, I see a couple on the floor tonight, that might even object to the Federal Government telling our States what to do with education, and of course there is no constitutional authority for that. We have the Leave No Child Behind, but it looks like everyone is going to be left behind before we know it. Congress Marinol And Terrorism 7 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 48:4 The States’ rights issue is almost a dead issue in the Congress, but we ought to continue to talk about it, and I am delighted somebody has brought this up. Congress Restore Rights Violated By PATRIOT Act 8 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 51:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I think it would be proper to rename this amendment and call it the “partial restoration of the fourth amendment,” and that is our attempt here. We are doing exactly what the gentleman early on suggested: this is oversight; this is our responsibility. This is the proper place to have the debate. It was the Congress that created the PATRIOT Act; it is the responsibility of the Congress to do something about it if it was a mistake. And it, indeed, was a mistake. Congress Government Spending – A Tax on the Middle Class July 8, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 52:2 The never-ending political squabble in Congress over taxing the rich, helping the poor, “Pay-Go,” deficits, and special interests, ignores the most insidious of all taxes- the inflation tax. Simply put, printing money to pay for federal spending dilutes the value of the dollar, which causes higher prices for goods and services. Inflation may be an indirect tax, but it is very real- the individuals who suffer most from cost of living increases certainly pay a “tax.” Congress Government Spending – A Tax on the Middle Class July 8, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 52:6 The Left hardly deserves credit when complaining about Republican deficits. Likewise, we’ve been told by the Vice President that Ronald Reagan “proved deficits don’t matter”- a tenet of supply-side economics. With this the prevailing wisdom in Washington, no one should be surprised that spending and deficits are skyrocketing. The vocal concerns expressed about huge deficits coming from big spenders on both sides are nothing more than political grandstanding. If Members feel so strongly about spending, Congress simply could do what it ought to do- cut spending. That, however, is never seriously considered by either side. Congress Government Spending – A Tax on the Middle Class July 8, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 52:9 All spending ultimately must be a tax, even when direct taxes and direct borrowing are avoided. The third option is for the Federal Reserve to create credit to pay the bills Congress runs up. Nobody objects, and most Members hope that deficits don’t really matter if the Fed accommodates Congress by creating more money. Besides, interest payments to the Fed are lower than they would be if funds were borrowed from the public, and payments can be delayed indefinitely merely by creating more credit out of thin air to buy U.S. treasuries. No need to soak the rich. A good deal, it seems, for everyone. But is it? Congress Government Spending – A Tax on the Middle Class July 8, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 52:12 The Fed is solely responsible for inflation by creating money out of thin air. It does so either to monetize federal debt, or in the process of economic planning through interest rate manipulation. This Fed intervention in our economy, though rarely even acknowledged by Congress, is more destructive than Members can imagine. Congress Government Spending – A Tax on the Middle Class July 8, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 52:14 The Fed’s great power over the money supply, interest rates, the business cycle, unemployment, and inflation is wielded with essentially no Congressional oversight or understanding. The process of inflating our currency to pay for government debt indeed imposes a tax without legislative authority. Congress Millennium Challenge Account — Part 1 15 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 57:12 My suggestion is, since I am a moderate here in the Congress, my moderate approach would be when we have a program like this, whether it is 1.25 or the whole $20 billion, my suggestion is cut it, cut the whole thing. Let us say we cut the $20 billion of foreign aid. I would take $10 billion and put it toward the deficit, and I would join my colleagues on the left and say, look, let us fund some of these programs that are needed or are coming up short. Why are we cutting veterans benefits at the same time? Why do we cut the Corps of Engineers? Why do we not fully fund our infrastructure? Congress End the Two-Party Monopoly! July 15, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 63:3 The United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to regulate the time, place, and manner of federal elections. Thus, ballot access is one of the few areas where Congress has explicit constitutional authority to establish national standards. In order to open up the political process, I have introduced the Voter Freedom Act (HR 1941). HR 1941 established uniform standards for ballot access so third party and independent candidates can at last compete on a level playing field. Congress Protecting Marriage from Judicial Tyranny July 22, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 64:6 In 1996 Congress exercised its authority under the full faith and credit clause of Article IV of the Constitution by passing the Defense of Marriage Act. This ensured each state could set its own policy regarding marriage and not be forced to adopt the marriage policies of another state. Since the full faith and credit clause grants Congress the clear authority to “prescribe the effects” that state documents such as marriage licenses have on other states, the Defense of Marriage Act is unquestionably constitutional. However, the lack of respect federal judges show for the plain language of the Constitution necessitates congressional action so that state officials are not forced to recognize another states’ same-sex marriage licenses because of a flawed judicial interpretation. The drafters of the Constitution gave Congress the power to limit federal jurisdiction to provide a check on out-of-control federal judges. It is long past time we begin using our legitimate authority to protect the states and the people from judicial tyranny. Congress Protecting Marriage from Judicial Tyranny July 22, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 64:7 Since the Marriage Protection Act requires only a majority vote in both houses of Congress (and the president’s signature) to become law, it is a more practical way to deal with this issue than the time-consuming process of passing a constitutional amendment. In fact, since the Defense of Marriage Act overwhelmingly passed both houses, and the president supports protecting state marriage laws from judicial tyranny, there is no reason why the Marriage Protection Act cannot become law this year. Congress Protecting Marriage from Judicial Tyranny July 22, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 64:9 While marriage is licensed and otherwise regulated by the states, government did not create the institution of marriage. In fact, the institution of marriage most likely pre-dates the institution of government! Government regulation of marriage is based on state recognition of the practices and customs formulated by private individuals interacting in civil society. Many people associate their wedding day with completing the rituals and other requirements of their faith, thus being joined in the eyes of their church- not the day they received their marriage license from the state. Having federal officials, whether judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose a new definition of marriage on the people is an act of social engineering profoundly hostile to liberty. Congress Protecting Marriage from Judicial Tyranny July 22, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 64:10 Mr. Speaker, Congress has a constitutional responsibility to stop rogue federal judges from using a flawed interpretation of the Constitution to rewrite the laws and traditions governing marriage. I urge my colleagues to stand against destructive judicial activism and for marriage by voting for the Marriage Protection Act. Congress Opposes Commemorating 9/11 9 September 2004    2004 Ron Paul 66:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am forced to rise in opposition to this legislation, I do so despite my desire to commemorate the horrific attacks on September 11, 2001 and again express my sympathy to the families of the victims. But don’t be fooled by the label. This legislation is no mere commemoration of the events of September 11, 2001. Rather, it is page after page of Congressional self-congratulation. It is page after page of praise for policies that have made us no safer from terrorist attack, but that have certainly made us much less free at home. Does it not strike anyone else as a bit unseemly for Congress to be congratulating itself on this solemn occasion? Congress The Constitution 23 September 2004    2004 Ron Paul 70:10 The answer to the dilemma of unconstitutional government and runaway spending is simple: restore a burning conviction in the hearts and minds of the people that freedom works and government largesse is a fraud. When the people once again regain their confidence in the benefits of liberty and demand it from their elected leaders, Congress will act appropriately. Congress Federal Courts and the Pledge of Allegiance September 23, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 71:1 Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support, and cosponsor, the Pledge Protection Act (HR 2028), which restricts federal court jurisdiction over the question of whether the phrase “under God” should be included in the pledge of allegiance. Local schools should determine for themselves whether or not students should say “under God” in the pledge. The case finding it is a violation of the First Amendment to include the words “under God” in the pledge is yet another example of federal judges abusing their power by usurping state and local governments’ authority over matters such as education. Congress has the constitutional authority to rein in the federal courts’ jurisdiction and the duty to preserve the states’ republican forms of governments. Since government by the federal judiciary undermines the states’ republican governments, Congress has a duty to rein in rogue federal judges. I am pleased to see Congress exercise its authority to protect the states from an out-of-control judiciary. Congress Federal Courts and the Pledge of Allegiance September 23, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 71:2 Many of my colleagues base their votes on issues regarding federalism on whether or not they agree with the particular state policy at issue. However, under the federalist system as protected by the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, states have the authority to legislate in ways that most members of Congress, and even the majority of the citizens of other states, disapprove. Consistently upholding state autonomy does not mean approving of all actions taken by state governments; it simply means acknowledging that the constitutional limits on federal power require Congress to respect the wishes of the states even when the states act unwisely. I would remind my colleagues that an unwise state law, by definition, only affects the people of one state. Therefore, it does far less damage than a national law that affects all Americans. Congress Federal Courts and the Pledge of Allegiance September 23, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 71:3 While I will support this bill even if the language removing the United States Supreme Court’s jurisdiction over cases regarding the pledge is eliminated, I am troubled that some of my colleagues question whether Congress has the authority to limit Supreme Court jurisdiction in this case. Both the clear language of the United States Constitution and a long line of legal precedents make it clear that Congress has the authority to limit the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction. The Framers intended Congress to use the power to limit jurisdiction as a check on all federal judges, including Supreme Court judges , who, after all, have lifetime tenure and are thus unaccountable to the people. Congress District Of Columbia Personal Protection Act 29 September 2004    2004 Ron Paul 72:6 Enacting H.R. 3193 would be a good first step in adopting legislation to restore the Federal Government’s respect for the right to bear arms throughout the United States. The Federal Government has trampled on gun rights nationwide — not just in Washington, DC. I have introduced several pieces of legislation this Congress that would help restore respect for the right to bear arms, including the Second Amendment Protection Act, H.R. 153, that would repeal the now-sunset semi-auto ban, repeal the 5-day waiting period and “instant” background check imposed on gun purchases, and delete the “sporting purposes” test that allows the Treasury Secretary to classify a firearm as a destructive device simply because the Secretary deems the gun to be “non-sporting.” Additionally, Congress should consider my Right to Keep and Bear Arms Act, H.R. 3125, that prohibits U.S. taxpayers’ dollars from being used to support or promote any United Nations actions that could infringe on the second amendment. Congress Cultural Conservatives Lose if Gay Marriage is Federalized September 30, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 73:3 If I were in Congress in 1996, I would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’s constitutional authority to define what official state documents other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a “same sex” marriage license issued in another state. This Congress, I was an original cosponsor of the Marriage Protection Act, HR 3313, that removes challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from federal courts’ jurisdiction. If I were a member of the Texas legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state. Congress Cultural Conservatives Lose if Gay Marriage is Federalized September 30, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 73:5 Conservatives in particular should be leery of anything that increases federal power, since centralized government power is traditionally the enemy of conservative values. I agree with the assessment of former Congressman Bob Barr, who authored the Defense of Marriage Act: Congress Cultural Conservatives Lose if Gay Marriage is Federalized September 30, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 73:7 Passing a constitutional amendment is a long, drawn-out process. The fact that the marriage amendment already failed to gather the necessary two-thirds support in the Senate means that, even if two-thirds of House members support the amendment, it will not be sent to states for ratification this year. Even if the amendment gathers the necessary two-thirds support in both houses of Congress, it still must go through the time-consuming process of state ratification. This process requires three-quarters of the state legislatures to approve the amendment before it can become effective. Those who believe that immediate action to protect the traditional definition of marriage is necessary should consider that the Equal Rights Amendment easily passed both houses of Congress and was quickly ratified by a number of states. Yet, that amendment remains unratified today. Proponents of this marriage amendment should also consider that efforts to amend the Constitution to address flag burning and require the federal government to balance the budget have been ongoing for years, without any success. Congress Cultural Conservatives Lose if Gay Marriage is Federalized September 30, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 73:8 Ironically, liberal social engineers who wish to use federal government power to redefine marriage will be able to point to the constitutional marriage amendment as proof that the definition of marriage is indeed a federal matter! I am unwilling either to cede to federal courts the authority to redefine marriage, or to deny a state’s ability to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. Instead, I believe it is time for Congress and state legislatures to reassert their authority by refusing to enforce judicial usurpations of power. Congress Cultural Conservatives Lose if Gay Marriage is Federalized September 30, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 73:9 In contrast to a constitutional amendment, the Marriage Protection Act requires only a majority vote of both houses of Congress and the president’s signature to become law. The bill already has passed the House of Representatives; at least 51 senators would vote for it; and the president would sign this legislation given his commitment to protecting the traditional definition of marriage. Therefore, those who believe Congress needs to take immediate action to protect marriage this year should focus on passing the Marriage Protection Act. Congress Reject a National Prescription Database October 5, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 74:8 Instead of further eroding our medical privacy, Congress should take steps to protect it. Why should someone be prevented from denying the government and third parties access to his medical records without his permission or a warrant? Congress Reject a National Prescription Database October 5, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 74:9 One way the House can act to protect patients’ privacy is by enacting my Patient Privacy Act (HR 1699) that repeals the provision of federal law establishing a medical ID for every American. Under the guise of “protecting privacy,” the Health and Human Services’ so-called “medical privacy” regulations allow medical researchers, insurance agents, and government officials access to your personal medical records — without your consent! Congress should act now to reverse this government-imposed invasion of our medical privacy. Congress Reject Draft Slavery October 5, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 75:7 But the real sacrifice comes with conscription — forcing a small number of young vulnerable citizens to fight the wars that older men and women, who seek glory in military victory without themselves being exposed to danger, promote. The draft encourages wars with neither purpose nor moral justification, wars that too often are not even declared by the Congress. Congress No Mandatory Mental Health Screening for Kids October 6, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 76:7 Mr. Speaker, universal or mandatory mental-health screening threatens to undermine parents’ right to raise their children as the parents see fit. Forced mental-health screening could also endanger the health of children by leading to more children being improperly placed on psychotropic drugs, such as Ritalin, or stigmatized as “mentally ill” or a risk of causing violence because they adhere to traditional values. Congress has a responsibility to the nation’s parents and children to stop this from happening. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Let Raise Their Kids Act. Congress The 9-11 Intelligence Bill: More Bureaucracy, More Intervention, Less Freedom October 8, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 77:1 Mr. Speaker, the 9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act (HR 10) is yet another attempt to address the threat of terrorism by giving more money and power to the federal bureaucracy. Most of the reforms contained in this bill will not make America safer, though they definitely will make us less free. HR 10 also wastes American taxpayer money on unconstitutional and ineffective foreign aid programs. Congress should make America safer by expanding liberty and refocusing our foreign policy on defending this nation’s vital interests, rather than expanding the welfare state and wasting American blood and treasure on quixotic crusades to “democratize” the world. Congress The 9-11 Intelligence Bill: More Bureaucracy, More Intervention, Less Freedom October 8, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 77:7 Congress could promote both liberty and security by encouraging private property owners to take more responsibility to protect themselves and their property. Congress could enhance safety by removing the roadblocks thrown up by the misnamed Transportation Security Agency that prevent the full implementation of the armed pilots program. I cosponsored an amendment with my colleague from Virginia, Mr. Goode, to do just that, and I am disappointed it was ruled out of order. Congress Honoring Phil Crane November 17, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 78:1 Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take this opportunity to pay tribute to my friend and colleague Phil Crane. During his 35 years in Congress, Phil has been one of the House’s most consistent defenders of low taxes, free-markets, limited government, and individual liberty. I count myself among the numerous elected officials and activists in the free-market movement who have been inspired by his example. Congress Honoring Phil Crane November 17, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 78:2 As a conservative professor, author, and activist, Phil was already a nationally known conservative leader before he ran for Congress. Two of his books, “The Democrat’s Dilemma” and “The Sum of Good Government” stand out as conservative classics that educated and motivated many conservative activists. Among the attributes that have made Phil a hero to the free-market movement is his understanding of sound economics. Phil is one of the few members of Congress who is well versed in the teachings of great free-market teachers such as Ludwig von Misses. This country would be much better off if more representatives understood economics as well as Phil Crane. Congress Honoring Phil Crane November 17, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 78:3 When Phil Crane came to Congress in the late sixties, there were only a handful of members supporting free-markets. This was a time when a “conservative” president imposed wage and price controls and “conservative” representatives and senators called for balancing the budget with tax increases rather than spending cuts. Thanks in large part to Phil’s effort; the political and intellectual climate of the nation became more receptive to free-market ideas. Phil’s work with groups such as the American Conservative Union, the Free Congress Foundation, and the Republican Study Committee (which he founded) played a major role in growing the movement for individual liberty. Phil’s service as an advisor to Young Americans for Freedom and as a director of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, Hillsdale College, and the Ashbrook Center helped inspire new generations of young people to become active in the movement for liberty. Congress Honoring Phil Crane November 17, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 78:4 When I came to Congress in the seventies to fight to limit the size and scope of the federal government, I was pleased to find a kindred sprit in the gentleman from Illinois. I had the privilege of working with Phil on several efforts to cut taxes, reduce regulations, and return the government to its constitutional size. I also had the privilege of working with Phil when we where two of only four members to endorse Ronald Reagan’s 1976 primary challenge to President Gerald Ford. Congress Honoring Phil Crane November 17, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 78:5 As the number of representatives committed to free-markets and low taxes increased, Phil’s status as a congressional leader and accomplished legislator grew. Thanks in large part to Phil’s leadership; Congress has provided tax relief to American families and businesses during each of the last four years. Congress Honoring Phil Crane November 17, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 78:6 As his distinguished congressional career draws to a close, I hope all who value free-markets, individual liberty, and limited government will join me in thanking Phil Crane for his work on behalf of freedom. Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace November 18, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 79:1 Mr. Speaker, Congress is once again engaging in fiscal irresponsibility and endangering the American economy by raising the debt ceiling, this time by $800 billion dollars. One particularly troubling aspect of today’s debate is how many members who won their seats in part by pledging never to raise taxes, will now vote for this tax increase on future generations without so much as a second thought. Congress has become like the drunk who promises to sober up tomorrow, if only he can keep drinking today. Does anyone really believe this will be the last time, that Congress will tighten its belt if we just grant it one last loan? What a joke! There is only one approach to dealing with an incorrigible spendthrift: cut him off. Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace November 18, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 79:3 Most Americans do not spend much time worrying about the national debt, which now totals more than eight trillion dollars. The number is so staggering that it hardly seems real, even when economists issue bleak warnings about how much every American owes — currently about $25,000. Of course, Congress never hands each taxpayer a bill for that amount. Instead, the federal government uses your hard-earned money to pay interest on this debt, which is like making minimum payments on a credit card. Notice that the principal never goes down. In fact, it is rising steadily. Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace November 18, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 79:4 The problem is very simple: Congress almost always spends more each year than the IRS collects in revenues. Federal spending always goes up, but revenues are not so dependable, especially since raising income taxes to sufficiently fund the government would be highly unpopular. So long as Congress spends more than the government takes via taxes, the federal government must raise taxes, print more dollars, or borrow money. Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace November 18, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 79:6 Federal law limits the total amount of debt the Treasury can carry. Despite a historic increase in the debt limit in 2002 and another increase in 2003, the current limit of $7.38 trillion was reached last month. So Congress must once again vote to raise the limit. Hard as it may be for the American people to believe, many experts expect government spending will exceed this new limit next year! Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace November 18, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 79:8 The whole point of the debt ceiling law was to limit borrowing by forcing Congress into an open and presumably somewhat shameful vote when it wants to borrow more than a preset amount of money. Yet, since there have been no political consequences for members who vote to raise the debt limit and support the outrageous spending bills in the first place, the debt limit has become merely another technicality on the road to bankruptcy. Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace November 18, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 79:9 The only way to control federal spending is to take away the government’s credit card. Therefore, I call upon my colleagues to reject S. 2986 and, instead, to reduce government spending. It is time Congress forces the federal government to live within its constitutional means. Congress should end the immoral practice of excessive spending and passing the bill to the next generation. Congress Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:10 Both candidates agreed that a president can initiate war without a declaration by Congress. Congress Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:12 Both supported our current monetary system, which permits the Federal Reserve to accommodate deficit spending by Congress through the dangerous process of debt monetization. Congress Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:17 More important was the reaction of the international exchange markets immediately following the election. The dollar took a dive and gold rose. This indicated that holders of the trillions of dollars slushing around the world interpreted the results to mean that even with conservatives in charge, unbridled spending will not decrease and will actually grow. They also expect the current account deficit and our national debt to increase. This means the economic consequence of continuing our risky fiscal and monetary policy is something Congress should be a lot more concerned about. Congress Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:23 One cannot expect the needed changes to occur soon, considering that these options were not even considered or discussed in the campaign. But just because they weren’t part of the campaign, and there was no disagreement between the two candidates on the major issues, doesn’t distract from their significance nor disqualify these issues from being crucial in the years to come. My guess is that in the next four years little legislation will be offered dealing with family and moral issues. Foreign policy and domestic spending, along with the ballooning deficit, will be thrust into the forefront and will demand attention. The inability of our Congress and leaders to change direction, and their determination to pursue policies that require huge expenditures, will force a financial crisis upon us as the dollar is further challenged as the reserve currency of the world on international exchange markets. Congress Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:33 President Eisenhower, not exactly a champion of a strict interpretation of the Constitution, made some interesting comments years ago when approached about more welfare benefits for the needy: “If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They’ll have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government.” Our country sure could use a little bit more of this sentiment, as Congress rushes to pass new laws relating to the fear of another terrorist attack. Congress Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:35 The debt, both domestic and foreign, is difficult to comprehend. Our national debt is $7.4 trillion, and this limit will be raised in the lame duck session. This plus our U.S. foreign debt breaks all records, and is a threat to sustained economic growth. The amazing thing is that deficits and increases in the debt limit no longer have a stigma attached to them. Some demagoguery takes place, but the limit is easily raised. With stronger partisan control over Congress, the president will have even less difficulty in raising the limit as necessary. It is now acceptable policy to spend excessively without worrying about debt limits. It may be a sign of the times, but the laws of economics cannot be repealed and eventually a price will be paid for this extravagance. Congress Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:42 The 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling caused great harm in two distinct ways. First, it legalized abortion at any stage, establishing clearly that the Supreme Court and the government condoned the cheapening of human life. Second, it firmly placed this crucial issue in the hands of the federal courts and national government. The federalization of abortion was endorsed even by those who opposed abortion. Instead of looking for state-by-state solutions and limiting federal court jurisdiction, those anxious to protect life came to rely on federal laws, eroding the constitutional process. The authors of the Constitution intended for criminal matters and acts of violence (except for a few rare exceptions) to be dealt with at the state level. Now, however, conservatives as well as liberals find it acceptable to nationalize issues such as abortion, marriage, prayer, and personal sexual matters — with more federal legislation offered as the only solution. This trend of transferring power from the states to the federal government compounds our problems — for when we lose, it affects all 50 states, and overriding Congress or the Supreme Court becomes far more difficult than dealing with a single state. Congress Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:47 First : The United States should never go to war without an express Declaration by Congress. If we had followed this crucial but long-forgotten rule the lives lost in Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, and Iraq might have been prevented. And instead of making us less secure, this process would make us more secure. Absent our foreign occupations and support for certain governments in the Middle East and central Asia over the past fifty years, the 9-11 attack would have been far less likely to happen. Congress Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:68 1. The Constitution is on the side of peace. Under the Constitution — the law of the land — only Congress can declare war. The president is prohibited from taking us to war on his own. Congress U.S. Hypocrisy in Ukraine December 7, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 82:13 That is what I find so disturbing: there are so many cut-out organizations and sub-grantees that we have no idea how much US government money was really spent on Ukraine, and most importantly how it was spent. Perhaps the several examples of blatant partisan support that we have been able to uncover are but an anomaly. I believe Congress and the American taxpayers have a right to know. I believe we urgently need an investigation by the Government Accounting Office into how much US government money was spent in Ukraine and exactly how it was spent. I would hope very much for the support of Chairman Hyde, Chairman Lugar, Deputy Assistant Secretary Tefft, and my colleagues on the Committee in this request. Congress Introducing The Parental Consent Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 1:7 Mr. Speaker, universal or mandatory mental- health screening threatens to undermine parents’ right to raise their children as the parents see fit. Forced mental-health screening could also endanger the health of children by leading to more children being improperly placed on psychotropic drugs, such as Ritalin, or stigmatized as “mentally ill” or a risk of causing violence because they adhere to traditional values. Congress has a responsibility to the nation’s parents and children to stop this from happening. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Parental Consent Act. Congress Introducing The Identity Theft protection Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 2:2 Mr. Speaker, Congress has a moral responsibility to address this problem because it was Congress that transformed the Social Security number into a national identifier. Thanks to Congress, today no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get a driver’s license without presenting his Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license. Congress Introducing The Identity Theft protection Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 2:3 One of the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the congressionally authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim the children as dependents. Forcing parents to register their children with the State is more like something out of the nightmares of George Orwell than the dreams of a free republic that inspired this Nation’s Founders. Congress Introducing The Identity Theft protection Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 2:4 Congressionally mandated use of the Social Security number as an identifier facilitates the horrendous crime of identity theft. Thanks to Congress, an unscrupulous person may simply obtain someone’s Social Security number in order to access that person’s bank accounts, credit cards, and other financial assets. Many Americans have lost their life savings and had their credit destroyed as a result of identity theft. Yet the Federal Government continues to encourage such crimes by mandating use of the Social Security number as a uniform ID. Congress Introducing The Identity Theft protection Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 2:5 This act also forbids the Federal Government from creating national ID cards or establishing any identifiers for the purpose of investigating, monitoring, overseeing, or regulating private transactions among American citizens. At the very end of the 108th Congress, this body established a de facto national ID card with a provision buried in the “intelligence” reform bill mandating Federal standards for drivers’ licenses, and mandating that Federal agents only accept a license that conforms to these standards as a valid ID. Congress Introducing The Identity Theft protection Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 2:10 In addition to forbidding the Federal Government from creating national identifiers, this legislation forbids the Federal Government from blackmailing States into adopting uniform standard identifiers by withholding Federal funds. One of the most onerous practices of Congress is the use of Federal funds illegitimately taken from the American people to bribe States into obeying Federal dictates. Congress Introducing The Identity Theft protection Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 2:11 Some Members of Congress will claim that the Federal Government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that, in a constitutional republic, the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the jobs of government officials easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient. Congress Introducing The Identity Theft protection Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 2:12 Mr. Speaker, while I do not question the sincerity of those Members who suggest that Congress can ensure that citizens’ rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the only effective privacy protection is to forbid the Federal Government from mandating national identifiers. Legislative “privacy protections” are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for a couple of reasons. Congress Introducing The Identity Theft protection Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 2:17 Any action short of repealing laws authorizing privacy violations is insufficient primarily because the Federal Government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any Federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the Federal Government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the Federal Government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress Introducing The Identity Theft protection Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 2:18 Mr. Speaker, those members who are not persuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Identity Theft Prevention Act should consider the American people’s opposition to national identifiers. The numerous complaints over the ever-growing uses of the Social Security number show that Americans want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Furthermore, according to a survey by the Gallup company, 91 percent of the American people oppose forcing Americans to obtain a universal health ID. Congress Introducing The Social Security Beneficiary Tax reduction Act And The Senior Citizens’ Tax Elimination Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 3:2 Since Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another example of double taxation. Furthermore, “taxing” benefits paid by the government is merely an accounting trick, a shell game which allows members of Congress to reduce benefits by subterfuge. This allows Congress to continue using the Social Security trust fund as a means of financing other government programs, and masks the true size of the federal deficit. Congress Introducing The Social Security Beneficiary Tax reduction Act And The Senior Citizens’ Tax Elimination Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 3:3 Instead of imposing ridiculous taxes on senior citizens, Congress should ensure the integrity of the Social Security trust fund by ending the practice of using trust fund monies for other programs. In order to accomplish this goal I introduced the Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which ensures that all money in the Social Security trust fund is spent solely on Social Security. At a time when Congress’ inability to control spending is once again threatening the Social Security trust fund, the need for this legislation has never been greater. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress Introducing The Social Security Preservation Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 4:2 The Social Security Preservation Act ensures that the government will keep its promises to America’s seniors that taxes collected for Social Security will be used for Social Security. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress Introducing The Social Security Preservation Act 4 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 4:3 With federal deficits reaching historic levels the pressure from special interests for massive new raids on the trust fund is greater than ever. Thus it is vital that Congress act now to protect the trust fund from big spending, pork- barrel politics. Social Security reform will be one of the major issues discussed in this Congress and many of my colleagues have different ideas regarding how to best preserve the long-term solvency of the program. However, as a medical doctor, I know the first step in treatment is to stop the bleeding, and the Social Security Preservation Act stops the bleeding of the Social Security trust fund. I therefore call upon all my colleagues, regardless of which proposal for long-term Social Security reform they support, to stand up for America’s seniors by cosponsoring the Social Security Preservation Act. Congress Government IDs and Identity Theft January 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 5:2 Mr. Speaker, Congress has a moral responsibility to address this problem because it was Congress that transformed the Social Security number into a national identifier. Thanks to Congress, today no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get a driver’s license without presenting his Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license! Congress Government IDs and Identity Theft January 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 5:3 One of the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the congressionally-authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim the children as dependents. Forcing parents to register their children with the state is more like something out of the nightmares of George Orwell than the dreams of a free republic that inspired this nation’s founders. Congress Government IDs and Identity Theft January 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 5:4 Congressionally-mandated use of the Social Security number as an identifier facilitates the horrendous crime of identity theft. Thanks to Congress, an unscrupulous person may simply obtain someone’s Social Security number in order to access that person’s bank accounts, credit cards, and other financial assets. Many Americans have lost their life savings and had their credit destroyed as a result of identity theft. Yet the federal government continues to encourage such crimes by mandating use of the Social Security number as a uniform ID! Congress Government IDs and Identity Theft January 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 5:5 This act also forbids the federal government from creating national ID cards or establishing any identifiers for the purpose of investigating, monitoring, overseeing, or regulating private transactions among American citizens. At the very end of the 108th Congress, this body established a de facto national ID card with a provisions buried in the “intelligence” reform bill mandating federal standards for drivers’ licenses, and mandating that federal agents only accept a license that conforms to these standards as a valid ID. Congress Government IDs and Identity Theft January 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 5:10 In addition to forbidding the federal government from creating national identifiers, this legislation forbids the federal government from blackmailing states into adopting uniform standard identifiers by withholding federal funds. One of the most onerous practices of Congress is the use of federal funds illegitimately taken from the American people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates. Congress Government IDs and Identity Theft January 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 5:11 Some members of Congress will claim that the federal government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that, in a constitutional republic, the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the jobs of government officials easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient. Congress Government IDs and Identity Theft January 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 5:12 Mr. Speaker, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure that citizens’ rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the only effective privacy protection is to forbid the federal government from mandating national identifiers. Legislative “privacy protections” are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for a couple of reasons. Congress Government IDs and Identity Theft January 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 5:17 Any action short of repealing laws authorizing privacy violations is insufficient primarily because the federal government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress Government IDs and Identity Theft January 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 5:18 Mr. Speaker, those members who are not persuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Identity Theft Prevention Act should consider the American people’s opposition to national identifiers. The numerous complaints over the ever-growing uses of the Social Security number show that Americans want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Furthermore, according to a survey by the Gallup company, 91 percent of the American people oppose forcing Americans to obtain a universal health ID. Congress Family Education Freedom Act 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 9:4 According to a June 2001 poll by McLaughlin and Associates, two-thirds of Americans believe education tax credits would have a positive effect on American education. This poll also found strong support for education tax credits among liberals, moderates, conservatives, low-income individuals, and African- Americans. This is just one of numerous studies and public opinion polls showing that Americans want Congress to get the federal bureaucracy out of the schoolroom and give parents more control over their children’s education. Congress Family Education Freedom Act 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 9:5 Today, Congress can fulfill the wishes of the American people for greater control over their children’s education by simply allowing parents to keep more of their hard-earned money to spend on education rather than force them to send it to Washington to support education programs reflective only of the values and priorities of Congress and the federal bureaucracy. Congress Family Education Freedom Act 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 9:9 Clearly, enactment of the Family Education Freedom Act is the best thing this Congress could do to improve public education. Furthermore, a greater reliance on parental expenditures rather than government tax dollars will help make the public schools into true community schools that reflect the wishes of parents and the interests of the students. Congress Introduction Of The Liberty Amendment 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 10:2 The 16th Amendment gives the federal government a direct claim on the lives of American citizens by enabling Congress to levy a direct income tax on individuals. Until the passage of the 16th amendment, the Supreme Court had consistently held that Congress had no power to impose an income tax. Congress Introducing The Make College Affordable Act 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 11:4 Helping the American people use their own money to ensure every qualified American can receive a college education is one of the best investments this Congress can make in the future. I therefore urge my colleagues to help strengthen America by ensuring more Americans can obtain college educations by cosponsoring the Make College Affordable Act. Congress Introduction Of The Teacher Tax Cut And The Professional Educators Tax relief Act 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 13:2 Quality education is impossible without quality teaching. If we continue to undervalue educators, it will become harder to attract, and keep, good people in the education profession. While educators’ pay is primarily a local issue, Congress can, and should, help raise educators’ take-home pay by reducing educators’ taxes. Congress Introduction Of The Teacher Tax Cut And The Professional Educators Tax relief Act 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 13:4 The Teacher Tax Cut Act and the Professional Educators Tax Relief Act increase the salaries of teachers and other education professionals without raising federal expenditures. By raising the take-home pay of professional educators, these bills encourage highly qualified people to enter, and remain in, education. These bills also let America’s professional educators know that the American people and the Congress respect their work. Congress Introduction Of The Education Improvement Tax Cut Act 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 14:2 I need not remind my colleagues that education is one of the top priorities of the American people. After all, many members of Congress have proposed education reforms and a great deal of time is spent debating these proposals. However, most of these proposals either expand federal control over education or engage in the pseudo-federalism of block grants. Many proposals that claim to increase local control over education actually extend federal power by holding schools “accountable” to federal bureaucrats and politicians. Of course, schools should be held accountable for their results, but they should be held accountable to parents and school boards not to federal officials. Therefore, I propose we move in a different direction and embrace true federalism by returning control over the education dollar to the American people. Congress Introduction Of The Education Improvement Tax Cut Act 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 14:5 Children in some communities may benefit most from the opportunity to attend private, parochial, or other religious schools. One of the most encouraging trends in education has been the establishment of private scholarship programs. These scholarship funds use voluntary contributions to open the doors of quality private schools to low-income children. By providing a tax credit for donations to these programs, Congress can widen the educational opportunities and increase the quality of education for all children. Furthermore, privately- funded scholarships raise none of the concerns of state entanglement raised by publicly- funded vouchers. Congress Harmful And Counterproductive United States Embargo On Cuba 2 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 16:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise again this Congress to introduce a bill to lift the harmful and counterproductive United States Embargo on Cuba. Congress Harmful And Counterproductive United States Embargo On Cuba 2 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 16:2 On June 29, 2001, the Texas State legislature adopted a resolution calling for an end to U.S. economic sanctions against Cuba. Lawmakers emphasized the failure of sanctions to remove Castro from power, and the unwillingness of other nations to respect the embargo. One Texas Representative stated: “We have a lot of rice and agricultural products, as well as high-tech products, that would be much cheaper for Cuba to purchase from Texas. All that could come through the ports of Houston and Corpus Christi.” I wholeheartedly support this resolution, and I have introduced similar Federal legislation in past years to lift all trade, travel, and telecommunications restrictions with Cuba. I only wish Congress understood the simple wisdom expressed in Austin; so that we could end the harmful and ineffective trade sanctions that serve no national purpose. Congress Harmful And Counterproductive United States Embargo On Cuba 2 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 16:4 Second, sanctions hurt American industries, particularly agriculture. Sanctions destroy American jobs. Every market we close to our Nation’s farmers is a market exploited by foreign farmers. China, Russia, the Middle East, North Korea, and Cuba all represent huge markets for our farm products, yet many in Congress favor current or proposed trade restrictions that prevent our farmers from selling to the billions of people in these countries. Given our status as one of the world’s largest agricultural producers, why would we ever choose to restrict our exports? The only beneficiaries of our sanctions policies are our foreign competitors. Congress Harmful And Counterproductive United States Embargo On Cuba 2 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 16:5 I certainly understand the emotional feelings many Americans have toward nations such as Cuba. Yet we must not let our emotions overwhelm our judgment in foreign policy matters, because ultimately human lives are at stake. Economic common sense, self-interested foreign policy goals, and humanitarian ideals all point to the same conclusion: Congress should work to end economic sanctions against all nations immediately. Congress Ayn Rand’s Birthday 2 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 17:2 AYN RAND CENTENARY CELEBRATION (By Don Ernsberger) February 2nd marks the 100th Anniversary of the birth of philosopher and novelist Ayn Rand. The Russian born author of Atlas Shrugged, Fountainhead and a number of nonfiction works in economics and ethics became, in the twentieth century, a major influence on the intellectual culture of the United States. Her most famous work, Atlas Shrugged remains ranked by the Library of Congress Center for the Book as the second most influential books ever published. Congress Introduction Of The Prescription Drug Affordability Act 2 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 18:2 The first provision of my legislation provides seniors a tax credit equal to 80 percent of their prescription drug costs. While Congress did add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare in the last Congress, many seniors still have difficulty affording the prescription drugs they need in order to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle. One reason is because the new program creates a “doughnut hole,” where seniors lose coverage once their prescription expenses reach a certain amount and must pay for their prescriptions above a certain amount out of their own pockets until their expenses reach a level where Medicare coverage resumes. This tax credit will help seniors cover the expenses provided by the doughnut hole. This bill will also help seniors obtain prescription medicines that may not be covered by the new Medicare prescription drug program. Congress Introduction Of The Prescription Drug Affordability Act 2 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 18:4 I need not remind my colleagues that many senior citizens and other Americans impacted by the high costs of prescription medicine have demanded Congress reduce the barriers which prevent American consumers from purchasing imported pharmaceuticals. Congress has responded to these demands by repeatedly passing legislation liberalizing the rules governing the importation of pharmaceuticals. However, implementation of this provision has been blocked by the Federal bureaucracy. It is time Congress stood up for the American consumer and removed all unnecessary regulations on importing pharmaceuticals. Congress HR 418- A National ID Bill Masquerading as Immigration Reform February 9, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 19:12 Although Congress funded an additional 2,000 border guards last year, the administration has announced that it will only ask for an additional 210 guards. Why are we not pursuing these avenues as a way of safeguarding our country? Why are we punishing Americans by taking away their freedoms instead of making life more difficult for those who would enter our country illegally? Congress Sense Of The Congress Resolution That The United States Should Not Ratify The Law Of The Sea Treaty 10 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 20:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce a Resolution expressing the Sense of the Congress that the United States should not ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty (“LOST”). Congress Sense Of The Congress Resolution That The United States Should Not Ratify The Law Of The Sea Treaty 10 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 20:8 Mr. Speaker, the Law of the Sea Treaty is a perfect example of “taxation without representation” that our Founding Fathers rebelled against. We should under no circumstances surrender one bit of American sovereignty or treasure to the United Nations or any other global body. I hope my colleagues will join me by co-sponsoring this Sense of the Congress legislation and defeating this destructive treaty. Congress Introducing The Sanity Of Life Act And The Taxpayer Freedom Of Conscience Act 10 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 21:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce two bills relating to abortion. These bills stop the federal government from promoting abortion. My bills accomplish this goal by prohibiting federal funds from being used for population control or “family planning” through exercising Congress’s constitutional power to restrict federal court’s jurisdiction by restoring each state’s authority to protect unborn life. Congress Introducing The Sanity Of Life Act And The Taxpayer Freedom Of Conscience Act 10 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 21:3 One of the bills I am introducing today, the Sanctity of Life Act of 2005, reverses some of the damage done by Roe v. Wade. The Sanctity of Life Act provides that the federal courts of the United States, up to and including the Supreme Court, do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases. Congress must use the authority granted to it in Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution to rein in rogue federal judges from interfering with a state’s ability to protect unborn life. Congress Introducing The Sanity Of Life Act And The Taxpayer Freedom Of Conscience Act 10 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 21:4 In addition to restricting federal court jurisdiction over abortion, Congress must stop the unconstitutional practice of forcing Americans to subsidize abortion providers. It is not enough to say that “family planning” groups may not use federal funds to perform or promote abortion. After all, since money is fungible, federal funding of any activities of these organizations forces taxpayers to underwrite the organizations abortion activities. This is why I am also introducing the Taxpayer Freedom of Conscience Act. The Taxpayer Freedom of Conscience Act prohibits any federal official from expending any federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, it is “sinful and tyrannical” to force the American taxpayers to subsidize programs and practices they find morally abhorrent. Congress Introducing The Sanity Of Life Act And The Taxpayer Freedom Of Conscience Act 10 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 21:5 Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that my colleagues will join me in support of these two bills. By following the Constitution and using the power granted to the Congress by the Constitution, we can restore respect for freedom of conscience and the sanctity of human life. Congress Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Americans are right to be outraged at much of the content of broadcast television and radio today. Too many television and radio programs regularly mock the values of millions of Americans and feature lewd, inappropriate conduct. It is totally legitimate and even praiseworthy for people to use market forces, such as boycotts of the sponsors of the offensive programs, to pressure networks to remove objectionable programming. However, it is not legitimate for Congress to censor broadcast programs. Congress Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:2 The First Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech. . . .” It does not make an expectation for broadcast television. Some argue that broadcast speech is different because broadcasters are using the “people’s airwaves.” Of course, the people do not really control the airwaves any more than the people control the government in the People’s Republic of China. Instead, the people’s airwaves is a euphemism for government control of the airwaves. Of course, government exceeded its Constitutional authority when it nationalized the broadcast industry. Congress Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:3 Furthermore, there was no economic justification for Congress determining who is, and is not, allowed to access the broadcast spectrum. Instead of nationalizing the spectrum, the Federal Government should have allowed private parties to homestead parts of the broadcast spectrum and settle disputes over ownership and use through market processes, contracts, and, if necessary, application of the common law of contracts and torts. Such a market-based solution would have provided a more efficient allocation of the broadcast spectrum than has government regulation. Congress Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:4 Congress used its unconstitutional and unjustified power-grab over the allocation of broadcast spectrum to justify imposing Federal regulations on broadcasters. Thus, the Federal Government used one unconstitutional action to justify another seizing of regulatory control over the content of a means of communication in direct violation of the first amendment. Congress Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:5 Congress should reject H.R. 310, the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act, because, by increasing fines and making it easier for governments to revoke the licenses of broadcasters who violate Federal standards, H.R. 310 expands an unconstitutional exercise of Federal power. H.R. 310 also establishes new frontiers in censorship by levying fines on individual artists for violating FCC regulations. Congress Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:6 Congress should also reject H.R. 310 because the new powers granted to the FCC may be abused by a future administration to crack down on political speech. The bill applies to speech the agency has determined is “obscene” or “indecent.” While this may not appear to include political speech, I would remind my colleagues that there is a serious political movement that believes that the expression of certain political opinions should be censored by the government because it is “hate speech.” Proponents of these views would not hesitate to redefine indecency to include hate speech. Ironically, many of the strongest proponents of H.R. 310 also hold views that would likely be classified as “indecent hate speech.” Congress Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:8 The reason we are considering H.R. 310 is not unrelated to questions regarding state censorship of political speech. Many of this bill’s supporters are motivated by the attacks on a Member of Congress, and other statements critical of the current administration and violating the standards of political correctness, by “shock jock” Howard Stern. I have heard descriptions of Stern’s radio program that suggest this is a despicable program. However, I find even more troubling the idea that the Federal Government should censor anyone because of his comments about a Member of Congress. Such behavior is more suited for members of a Soviet politburo than members of a representative body in a constitutional republic. Congress Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:16 Even the proponents of the commercial speech doctrine agreed that the Federal Government should never restrict political speech. Yet, this Congress, this administration, and this Supreme Court have restricted political speech with the campaign finance reform law. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice has indicated it will use the war against terrorism to monitor critics of the administration’s foreign policy, thus chilling anti-war political speech. Of course, on many college campuses students have to watch what they say lest they run afoul of the rules of “political correctness.” Even telling a “politically incorrect” joke can bring a student up on charges before the thought police. Now, self-proclaimed opponents of political correctness want to use Federal power to punish colleges that allow the expression of views they consider “unpatriotic” and/or punish colleges when the composition of the facility does not meet their definition of diversity. Congress Introduction Of The Social Security For American Citizens Only Act 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 23:7 It is long past time for Congress to stand up to the internationalist bureaucrats and start looking out for the American worker. I therefore call upon my colleagues to stop the use of the Social Security Trust Fund as yet another vehicle for foreign aid by cosponsoring the Social Security for American Citizens Only Act. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 3 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 26:2 Article I section 2 of the United States Constitution grants State governors the authority to hold special elections to fill vacancies in the House of Representatives. Article I, section 4 of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to designate the time, place and manner of such special elections if States should fail to act expeditiously following a national emergency. Alexander Hamilton, who played a major role in the drafting and ratification of the United States Constitution, characterized authority over Federal elections as shared between the States and Congress, with neither being able to control the process entirety. H.R. 841 exercises Congress’s power to regulate the time, place and manner of elections by requiring the holding of special elections within 45 days after the Speaker or Acting Speaker declares 100 Members of the House have been killed. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 3 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 26:3 I have no doubt that the people of the States are quite competent to hold elections in a timely fashion. After all, it is in each State’s interest to ensure it has adequate elected representation in Washington. The version of H.R. 841 before Congress today was drafted with input from State elections commissioners to make sure it sets realistic goals and will not unduly burden State governments. I am disappointed that some of my colleagues reject the sensible approach of H.R. 841 and instead support amending the Constitution to allow appointed Members to serve in this body. Allowing appointed Members to serve in “the people’s house” will fundamentally alter the nature of this institution and sever the people’s most direct connection with their government. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 3 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 26:4 Even with the direct election of Senators, the fact that Members of the House are elected every 2 years while Senators run for statewide office every 6 years means that Members of the House of Representatives are still more accountable to the people than members of any other part of the Federal Government. Appointed Members of Congress simply cannot be truly representative. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton eloquently made this point in Federalist 52: Congress Continuity In Representation Act 3 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 26:8 Mr. Chairman, this country has faced the possibility of threats to the continuity of this body several times in our history. Yet no one suggested removing the people’s right to vote for Members of Congress. For example, the British in the War of 1812 attacked the city of Washington, yet nobody suggested the States could not address the lack of a quorum in the House of Representatives through elections. During the Civil War, the neighboring State of Virginia, where today many Capitol Hill staffers reside and many Members stay while Congress is in session, was actively involved in hostilities against the United States Government. Yet, Abraham Lincoln never suggested that non-elected persons serve in the House. Adopting any of the proposals to deny the people the ability to choose their own Representatives would let the terrorists know that they can succeed in altering our republican institutions. I hope all my colleagues who are considering rejecting H.R. 841 in favor of a constitutional amendment will question the wisdom of handing terrorists a preemptive victory over republican government. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 3 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 26:9 As noted above, the Framers gave Congress all the tools it needs to address problems of mass vacancies in the House without compromising this institution’s primary function as a representative body. In fact, as Hamilton explains in Federalist 59, the “time, place, and manner” clause was specifically designed to address the kind of extraordinary circumstances imagined by those who support amending the Constitution. Congress Continuity In Representation Act 3 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 26:10 In conclusion, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 841, the Continuity in Representation Act, which ensures an elected Congress can continue to operate in the event of an emergency. This is what the drafters of the Constitution intended. Furthermore, passage of H.R. 841 sends a strong message to terrorists that they cannot alter our republican government. Congress Introducing The American Sovereignty Restoration Act Of 2005 8 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 27:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to re- introduce the American Sovereignty Restoration Act. I submitted this bill, which would end United States membership in the United Nations, in the 106th, 107th, and 108th Congresses and if anything, conditions have made its relevance and importance more evident now than ever. The United Nations assault on the sovereignty of the United States proceeds apace; it shows no signs of slowing. Mr. Speaker, since I last introduced this measure, the United Nations has been embroiled in scandal after scandal, from the Oil for Food Scandal to several recent particularly appalling sex scandals. Congress Introducing The American Sovereignty Restoration Act Of 2005 8 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 27:6 The U.S. Congress, by passing H.R. 1146, and the U.S. President, by signing H.R. 1146, will heed the wise counsel of our first President, George Washington, when he advised his countrymen to “steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world,” lest the nation’s security and liberties be compromised by endless and overriding international commitments. I urge my colleagues to support this measure and I hope for its quick consideration. Congress Introducing The American Sovereignty Restoration Act Of 2005 8 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 27:21 As a direct consequence of this original power of the people to constitute a new government, the Congress under the new constitution was authorized to admit new states to join the original 13 states without submitting the admission of each state to the 13 original states. In like manner, the Charter of the United Nations, forged in the name of the “peoples” of those nations, established a new international government with independent powers to admit to membership whichever nations the United Nations governing authorities chose without submitting such admissions to each individual member nation for ratification. See Charter of the United Nations, Article 4, Section 2. No treaty could legitimately confer upon the United Nations General Assembly such powers and remain within the legal and political definition of a treaty. Congress Reject the Latest Foreign Welfare Scheme March 14, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 28:3 Mr. Speaker, this bill will do more than just take money from Americans. This commission will enable members of Congress and congressional staff employees to travel the world meddling in the affairs of foreign governing bodies. It is counterproductive to tell other nations how they should govern themselves, as even if we come loaded with dollars to hand out, our meddling is always resented by the local population -- just as we would resent a foreign government telling us how to govern ourselves. Don’t we have enough of our own problems to solve without going abroad in search of foreign parliaments to aid? Congress “Emergency” Supplemental Spending Bill 16 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 29:2 This “emergency” supplemental is the second largest supplemental appropriations bill in United States history, second only to the one last year. The funds will be considered “emergency” funds so Congress can ignore spending caps that would require the billions in new spending to be offset by reducing spending elsewhere. Congress Consequences Of Foreign Policy — Part 1 16 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 30:15 It is fully endorsed. The American people certainly have not been up in arms about it and have endorsed it, along with the large majority in the Congress. But long term it does not work. Just look how long the American people supported Vietnam, until finally they had to throw up their arms and demand an end to the senseless war. Congress The Deficit 16 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 33:3 But I would like to make a suggestion that we are not facing primarily a budgetary crisis or a budgetary problem. I see this more as a philosophic problem, dealing more with the philosophy of government rather than thinking that we can tinker with the budget, dealing with this as a tactical problem when really it is a strategic problem. So as long as we endorse the type of government that we have and there is a willingness for the people as well the Congress to finance it, we are going to continue with this process and the frustrations are going to grow because it is just not likely that these deficits will shrink. Congress The Deficit 16 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 33:7 The other day I heard an interview with one of our Members, and he was asked about a particular program about where the authority came from in the Constitution for that program. And his answer was very straightforward; and he explained that in the Constitution there was no prohibition against that program, so therefore it was permitted. In his mind, as it is in the minds of many Members of Congress, if there is no strict prohibition, it is permitted. Congress The Deficit 16 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 33:8 And that is just absolutely opposite of what was intended by the authors of the Constitution that we would only be able to do those things which are explicitly permitted in the Congress, and they are spelled out rather clearly in article I, section 8. Congress The Deficit 16 March 2005    2005 Ron Paul 33:11 But it is not simply the ignoring of the Constitution that I think is our problem. I think our other problem is our country and our people and our Congresses and our Senators have accepted the notion of faith in government, faith in the State, that the State can provide these great services and do it efficiently. Congress Hypocrisy and the Ordeal of Terri Schiavo April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 34:10 More importantly, where are those who rightfully condemn congressional meddling in the Schiavo case-- because of federalism and separation of powers-- on the issue of abortion? These same folks strongly defend Roe vs. Wade and the so-called constitutional right to abort healthy human fetuses at any stage. There’s no hesitation to demand support of this phony right from both Congress and the federal courts. Not only do they demand federal legal protection for abortion, they insist that abortion foes be forced to fund this act that many of them equate with murder. Congress Hypocrisy and the Ordeal of Terri Schiavo April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 34:15 My suggestion to my colleagues, who did argue convincingly that Congress should not be involved in the Schiavo case, is please consider using these same arguments consistently and avoid the false accusation that if one opposes increases in welfare one is not pro-life. Being pro-liberty and pro-Constitution is indeed being pro-life, as well as pro-prosperity. Congress Hypocrisy and the Ordeal of Terri Schiavo April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 34:16 Conservatives on the other hand are equally inconsistent in their arguments for life. There’s little hesitation by the conservative right to come to Congress to promote their moral agenda even when it’s not within the jurisdiction of the federal government to do so. Take for instance the funding of faith-based charities. The process is of little concern to conservatives if their agenda is met by passing more federal laws and increasing spending. Instead of concentrating on the repeal of Roe vs. Wade and eliminating federal judicial authority over issues best dealt with at the state level, more federal laws are passed, which strictly speaking should not be the prerogative of the federal government. Congress Who’s Better Off? April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 35:2 The information Congress was given prior to the war was false. There were no weapons of mass destruction; the Iraqis did not participate in the 9/11 attacks; Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were enemies and did not conspire against the United States; our security was not threatened; we were not welcomed by cheering Iraqi crowds as we were told; and Iraqi oil has not paid any of the bills. Congress failed to declare war, but instead passed a wishy-washy resolution citing UN resolutions as justification for our invasion. After the fact we’re now told the real reason for the Iraq invasion was to spread democracy, and that the Iraqis are better off. Anyone who questions the war risks being accused of supporting Saddam Hussein, disapproving of democracy, or “supporting terrorists.” It’s implied that lack of enthusiasm for the war means one is not patriotic and doesn’t support the troops. In other words, one must march lock-step with the consensus or be ostracized. Congress Who’s Better Off? April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 35:14 Sure, there are only 800,000 Christians living in Iraq, but under Saddam Hussein they were free to practice their religion. Tariq Aziz, a Christian, served in Saddam Hussein’s cabinet as Foreign Minister-- something that would never happen in Saudi Arabia, Israel, or any other Middle Eastern country. Today, the Christian churches in Iraq are under attack and Christians are no longer safe. Many Christians have been forced to flee Iraq and migrate to Syria. It’s strange that the human rights advocates in the U.S. Congress have expressed no concern for the persecution now going on against Christians in Iraq. Both the Sunni and the Shiite Muslims support the attacks on Christians. In fact, persecuting Christians is one of the few areas in which they agree-- the other being the removal of all foreign forces from Iraqi soil. Congress Who’s Better Off? April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 35:28 We have come to accept pre-emptive war as necessary, constitutional, and morally justifiable. Starting a war without a proper declaration is now of no concern to most Americans or the U.S. Congress. Let’s hope and pray the rumors of an attack on Iran in June by U.S. Armed Forces are wrong. Congress Who’s Better Off? April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 35:32 In the process, Congress and the people have endorsed a usurpation of their own authority, generously delivered to the executive and judicial branches-- not to mention international government bodies. The concept of national sovereignty is now seen as an issue that concerns only the fringe in our society. Congress Who’s Better Off? April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 35:33 Protection of life and liberty must once again become the issue that drives political thought in this country. If this goal is replaced by an effort to promote world government, use force to plan the economy, regulate the people, and police the world, against the voluntary desires of the people, it can be done only with the establishment of a totalitarian state. There’s no need for that. It’s up to Congress and the American people to decide our fate, and there is still time to correct our mistakes. Congress Repeal Sarbanes-Oxley! April 14, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 39:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Due Process and Economic Competitiveness Restoration Act, which repeals Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Sarbanes-Oxley was rushed into law in the hysterical atmosphere surrounding the Enron and WorldCom bankruptcies, by a Congress more concerned with doing something than doing the right thing. Today, American businesses, workers, and investors are suffering because Congress was so eager to appear “tough on corporate crime.” Sarbanes-Oxley imposes costly new regulations on the financial services industry. These regulations are damaging American capital markets by providing an incentive for small US firms and foreign firms to deregister from US stock exchanges. According to a study by the prestigious Wharton Business School, the number of American companies deregistering from public stock exchanges nearly tripled during the year after Sarbanes-Oxley became law, while the New York Stock Exchange had only 10 new foreign listings in all of 2004. Congress Repeal Sarbanes-Oxley! April 14, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 39:6 The US Constitution does not give the federal government authority to regulate the accounting standards of private corporations. These questions should be resolved by private contracts between a company and its shareholders, and by state and local regulations. Let me remind my colleagues who are skeptical of the ability of markets and local law enforcement to protect against fraud: the market passed judgment on Enron, in the form of declining stock prices, before Congress even held the first hearing on the matter. My colleagues also should keep in mind that certain state attorneys general have been very aggressive in prosecuting financial crimes Congress Repeal Sarbanes-Oxley! April 14, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 39:7 Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has raised the costs of doing business, thus causing foreign companies to withdraw from American markets and retarding economic growth. By criminalizing inadvertent mistakes and exceeding congressional authority, Section 404 also undermines the rule of law and individual liberty. I therefore urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Due Process and Economic Competitiveness Restoration Act. Congress The United States Should Withdraw From UNESCO 14 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 40:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a concurrent resolution expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States should withdraw from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Congress The United States Should Withdraw From UNESCO 14 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 40:3 Since the United States decided to re-join UNESCO in 2003, Congress has appropriated funds to cover some 25 percent of the organization’s entire budget. But what are we getting for this money? Congress The United States Should Withdraw From UNESCO 14 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 40:7 UNESCO has designated 47 U.N. Biosphere Reserves in the United States covering more than 70 million acres, without Congressional consultation. Congress The American Justice For American Citizens Act 14 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 41:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the American Justice for American Citizens Act, which exercises Congress’s Constitutional authority to regulate the federal judiciary to ensure that federal judges base their decisions solely on American Constitutional, statutory, and traditional common law. Federal judges increasing practice of “transjudicialism” makes this act necessary. Transjudicialism is a new legal theory that encourages judges to disregard American law, including the United States Constitution, and base their decisions on foreign law. For example, Supreme Court justices have used international law to justify upholding race-based college admissions, overturning all state sodomy laws, and, most recently, to usurp state authority to decide the age at which criminals becomes subject to the death penalty. Congress The American Justice For American Citizens Act 14 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 41:6 Mr. Speaker, the drafters of the Constitution gave Congress the power to regulate the jurisdiction of federal courts precisely so we could intervene when the federal judiciary betrays its responsibility to uphold the Constitution and American law. Congress has a duty to use this power to ensure that judges base their decisions solely on American law. Congress Federalizing Abortion Law 27 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 42:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, in the name of a truly laudable cause, preventing abortion and protecting parental rights, today the Congress could potentially move our Nation one step closer to a national police state by further expanding the list of Federal crimes and usurping power from the States to adequately address the issue of parental rights and family law. Of course, it is much easier to ride the current wave of criminally federalizing all human malfeasance in the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a constitutional oath, which prescribes a procedural structure by which the Nation is protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism carried out by a centralized government. Who, after all, wants to be amongst those Members of Congress who are portrayed as trampling parental rights or supporting the transportation of minor females across State lines for ignoble purposes. Congress Federalizing Abortion Law 27 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 42:3 Our Federal government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers, article I, section 8, enumerates the legislative area for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every other issues, the Federal Government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the State governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The 10th amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our Nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Congress Federalizing Abortion Law 27 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 42:4 Nevertheless, rather than abide by our constitutional limits, Congress today will likely pass H.R. 748. H.R. 748 amends title 18, United States Code, to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions. Should parents be involved in decisions regarding the health of their children? Absolutely. Should the law respect parents’ rights to not have their children taken across State lines for contemptible purposes? Absolutely. Can a State pass an enforceable statute to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions? Absolutely. But when asked if there exists constitutional authority for the Federal criminalizing of just such an action the answer is absolutely not. Congress Federalizing Abortion Law 27 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 42:6 We have been reminded by both Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese that more Federal crimes, while they make politicians feel good, are neither constitutionally sound nor prudent. Rehnquist has stated that “The trend to federalize crimes that traditionally have been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our federal system.” Meese stated that Congress’s tendency in recent decades to make Federal crimes out of offenses that have historically been State matters has dangerous implications both for the fair administration of justice and for the principle that States are something more than mere administrative districts of a Nation governed mainly from Washington. Congress Federalizing Abortion Law 27 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 42:7 The argument which springs from the criticism of a federalized criminal code and a Federal police force is that States may be less effective than a centralized Federal Government in dealing with those who leave one State jurisdiction for another. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of State sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the 10th amendment. The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit clause allow States to exact judgments from those who violate their State laws. The Constitution even allows the Federal Government to legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow States to enforce their substantive laws without the Federal Government imposing its substantive edicts on the States. Article IV, section 2, clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one State to another. While not self-enacting, in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. There is, of course, a cost imposed upon States in working with one another rather than relying on a national, unified police force. At the same time, there is a greater cost to State autonomy and individual liberty from centralization of police power. Congress Introducing The “American Citizenship Amendment” 28 April 2005    2005 Ron Paul 44:2 Thus far the U.S. courts have asserted authority by interpreting the 14th Amendment to include the concept of birthright citizenship. However it is up to the U.S. Congress — and not the U.S. Supreme Court — to define American citizenship. That is why, I am introducing this Constitutional Amendment clarifying that the happenstance of birth on U.S. soil does not a U.S. citizen make. Congress Republicans Should Not Support a UN Court May 4, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 45:1 Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this resolution. The idea that the United States Congress should demand that Nigeria deport a former president of Liberia to stand trial in a United Nations court in Liberia is absurd! Congress Republicans Should Not Support a UN Court May 4, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 45:2 I do not object to this legislation because I dispute the charges against Charles Taylor. Frankly, as a United States Congressman my authority does not extend to deciding whether a foreign leader has committed crimes in his own county. The charges may well be true. I do, however, dispute our authority as the United States Congress to demand that a foreign country transfer a former leader of a third country back to that country to stand trial before a United Nations kangaroo court. Congress Republicans Should Not Support a UN Court May 4, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 45:3 As the resolution itself cites, one top UN official, Jaques Klein, has already pronounced Taylor guilty, stating “Charles Taylor is a psychopath and a killer.” But the resolution concludes that “Congress urges the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to expeditiously transfer Charles Ghankay Taylor, former President of the Republic of Liberia, to the jurisdiction of the Special Court for Sierra Leone to undergo a fair and open trial…” So it is probably safe to guess what kind of “trial” this will be - a Soviet-style show trial. The United Nations has no business conducting trials for anyone, regardless of the individual or the crime. It is the business of Liberia and Nigeria to determine the fate of Charles Taylor. Congress Reject Taxpayer Bank Bailouts May 4, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 46:3 In the event of a severe banking crisis, Congress likely will transfer funds from general revenues into the Deposit Insurance Fund, which would make all taxpayers liable for the mistakes of a few. Of course, such a bailout would require separate authorization from Congress, but can anyone imagine Congress saying no to banking lobbyists pleading for relief from the costs of bailing out their weaker competitors? Congress Reject Taxpayer Bank Bailouts May 4, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 46:5 Immediately after a problem in the banking industry comes to light, the media and Congress inevitably blame it on regulators who were “asleep at the switch.” Yet most politicians continue to believe that giving more power to the very regulators whose incompetence (or worse) either caused or contributed to the problem somehow will prevent future crises! Congress Reject Taxpayer Bank Bailouts May 4, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 46:7 Finally, I would remind my colleagues that the federal deposit insurance program lacks constitutional authority. Congress’ only mandate in the area of money, and banking is to maintain the value of the money. Unfortunately, Congress abdicated its responsibility over monetary policy with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, which allows the federal government to erode the value of the currency at the will of the central bank. Congress’ embrace of fiat money is directly responsible for the instability in the banking system that created the justification for deposit insurance. Congress Gang Deterrence And Community Protection Act 11 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 47:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, the Gang Deterrence and Community Protection Act, (H.R. 1279), is the latest example of Congress disregarding its constitutional limitations in the name of “getting tough on crime.” Gang crime is certainly a serious issue in many parts of the country. However, unless criminal gangs are engaging in counterfeiting, treason, or piracy, the federal government has no jurisdiction over the criminal activities of gangs. In fact, by creating new federal crimes related to gang activities, but unrelated to one of the federal crimes enumerated in the Constitution, the new federal crimes and enhanced penalties in this bill usurp state and local authority. Congress Gang Deterrence And Community Protection Act 11 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 47:2 H.R. 1279 broadly defines “criminal street gangs” and “gang activity.” This is a major expansion of Federal criminal jurisdiction. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese, two men who no one has ever accused of being “soft on crime,” have both warned that, although creating more Federal crimes may make politicians feel good, it is neither constitutionally sound nor prudent. Rehnquist has stated that, “[t]he trend to federalize crimes that traditionally have been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our federal system.” Meese stated that Congress’s tendency in recent decades to make federal crimes out of offenses that have historically been state matters has dangerous implications both for the fair administration of justice and for the principle that states are something more than mere administrative districts of a nation governed mainly from Washington. Congress Gang Deterrence And Community Protection Act 11 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 47:3 Those who want the American criminal justice system to actually deliver justice should oppose H.R. I279 because it imposes “mandatory minimum” sentences for certain gang- related crimes. Mandatory minimum sentences impose a “one-size-fits-all” formula in place of the discretion of a judge, or jury, to weigh all the circumstances surrounding an individual’s crime and decide on an appropriate punishment. Taking away judicial discretion over sentencing may represent a legislative usurpation of areas properly left to the judiciary. I have long been critical of judicial usurpation of legislative functions, and have introduced legislation using Congress’s constitutional powers to rein in the judiciary. However, I recognize that Congress must make sure it does not overstep its constitutional authority by imposing legislative solutions on matters best resolved by the judicial branch. Congress Gang Deterrence And Community Protection Act 11 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 47:4 Mandatory minimums almost guarantee unjust sentences. Reverend Nicholas DiMarzio, Chairman of the Domestic Policy Committee of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and Reverend Kerry Snyder, President of Catholic Charities USA, summed it up well in a letter to Congress opposing this bill: “. . . rigid sentencing formulations could prevent judges from properly assessing an individual’s culpability during the crime of other factors that have bearing on recidivism, thus sometimes resulting in harsh and inappropriate sentences.” Congress Gang Deterrence And Community Protection Act 11 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 47:8 H.R. 1279 exceeds Congress’s constitutional authority by creating new Federal crimes, thus further burdening the already overwhelmed Federal judiciary system and taking another step toward upending our constitutional system by turning the States into administrative districts of the Federal Government. This bill also creates unwise mandatory minimum sentences, usurping the sentencing decisions of judges and juries. Finally, H.R. 1279 raises serious moral issues by expanding the use of the Federal death penalty. Therefore, I must oppose H.R. 1279 and urge my colleagues to do same. Congress Introducing The Consumers Access To Health Information Act 12 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 48:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to enhance the health and liberty of American citizens by introducing the Consumers Access to Health Information Act of 2005. This act ensures consumers can receive truthful information about how foods and dietary supplements can cure, mitigate, and prevent specific diseases. The act does this simply by correcting an erroneous court decision and thus restoring congressional intent to allow consumers to have access to information regarding the health benefits of dietary supplements without government interference. Congress Introducing The Consumers Access To Health Information Act 12 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 48:2 In 1990, responding to the demands of the American people that the federal government respect consumers’ right to receive information about the ways foods and dietary supplements can improve their health, Congress passed the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act. The intent of that act was to allow the manufacturers of foods and dietary supplements to provide consumers with accurate and specific information regarding the curative and preventive effects of foods and dietary supplements. However, the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, ignored repeated efforts by Congress to protect consumers’ First Amendment rights to receive truthful information about the health benefits of foods and dietary supplements. Congress Introducing The Consumers Access To Health Information Act 12 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 48:3 Incredibly, in the case of Whitaker v. Thompson, 353 F.3d 947 (2004), rehearing den. 2004 U.S.D. App. LEXIS 4617 (D.C. Cir. March 9, 2004) the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit supported the FDA’s interpretation of Congress’s intent and rejected the clear restraints of the First Amendment by ruling that the FDA had the authority to censor information regarding the specific benefits of foods and dietary supplements. Congress Introducing The Consumers Access To Health Information Act 12 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 48:7 At a time when health care costs are rising it is absurd for the federal government to prevent Americans from learning about how they increase their chances of staying healthy by making simple changes in their diets. However, this bill is about more than physical health; it is about freedom. The First Amendment forbids Congress from abridging freedom of all speech, including commercial speech. The type of prior restraint the FDA exercises over these health claims has also been thought to be particularly repugnant to the First Amendment. In a free society, the federal government must not be allowed to prevent people from receiving information enabling them to make informed decisions about whether or not they will use dietary supplements or eat certain foods. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to take a step toward restoring freedom by cosponsoring the Consumer Access to Health Information Act. Congress Introducing A Bill To Postpone The 2005 Round Of Defense Base Closure And Realignment 19 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 50:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill to postpone the 2005 round of military base closure and realignment. This bill would postpone the conclusion of the Realignment report issued by the Department of Defense on 13 May 2005, as well as any preceding or subsequent plans that may ultimately be enacted to close or realign military bases on U.S. territory. This bill will postpone such closures and realignments until a specific set of criteria have been fulfilled, including until both the Defense Department and Congress have had the opportunity to fully study the recommendations and their implications for the national security and defense of the United States. Congress Introducing A Bill To Postpone The 2005 Round Of Defense Base Closure And Realignment 19 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 50:3 Also, we should not proceed with this round of base closures and realignments before the 2006 release of the Quadrennial Defense Review. Congress must have ample time to study the recommendations of the QDR before agreeing on any major closure and realignment strategy. To do otherwise just does not make any sense. Congress No Federal Funding for Stem Cell Research May 24, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 51:2 The question that should concern Congress today is: Does the US government have the constitutional authority to fund any form of stem cell research? The clear answer to that question is no. A proper constitutional position would reject federal funding for stem cell research, while allowing individual states and private citizens to decide whether to permit, ban, or fund this research. Therefore, I must vote against HR 810. Congress No Federal Funding for Stem Cell Research May 24, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 51:3 Unfortunately, many congressional opponents of embryonic stem cell research disregard the Constitution by supporting HR 2520, an “acceptable” alternative that funds umbilical-cord stem cell research. While this approach is much less objectionable than funding embryonic stem cell research, it is still unconstitutional. Therefore, I must also oppose HR 2520. Congress No Federal Funding for Stem Cell Research May 24, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 51:5 Legal questions relating to ethical dilemmas should be resolved at the local level, as the Constitution provides. Congress should follow the Constitution and reject federal funding of stem cell research. Congress Bad Policy For Base Closings 25 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 52:2 Some Members wonder why I would support this amendment, considering the fact that I am the most fiscally conservative Member of Congress and vote for the least amount of spending. But I think this amendment is a good amendment, and I think the closing of these bases represents bad policy. I do not have a base in my district that is being threatened to be closed. Congress Bad Policy For Base Closings 25 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 52:3 Let me tell Members why I think this is a mistake. First, I think the process is very poor. I think we are ducking our responsibility. To turn this responsibility over to a commission and duck the responsibility of facing up to making tough decisions, I think, is something we do too often. Too often in the Congress, we do things we should not be doing, and we forget to assume the responsibilities we have. In this case, I think we are not assuming the responsibility to face up to making this tough decision. Congress Public Safety Tax Cut Act 8 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 54:6 President George Bush has called on Americans to volunteer their time and energy to enhancing public safety. Shouldn’t Congress do its part by reducing taxes that discourage public safety volunteerism? Shouldn’t Congress also show its appreciation to police officers and firefighters by reducing their taxes? I believe the answer to both of these questions is a resounding “yes” and therefore I am proud to introduce the Public Safety Tax Cut Act. I request that my fellow Members join in support of this key legislation. Congress Police Security Protection Act 8 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 55:2 Professional law enforcement officers put their lives on the line each and every day. Reducing the tax liability of law enforcement officers so they can afford armored vests is one of the best ways Congress can help and encourage these brave men and women. After all, an armored vest could literally make the difference between life or death for a police officer, I hope my colleagues will join me in helping our nation’s law enforcement officers by cosponsoring the Police Security Protection Act. Congress United States Should Leave World Trade Organization 9 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 57:3 I happen to believe in minimum tariffs, if any, but I do not believe that the process of the WTO and world government is a good way to do it. I do not think the WTO achieves its purpose, and I do not think it is permissible under the Constitution. Therefore, I strongly argue the case that, through the process, that we should defend the position of the Congress which gives us the responsibility of dealing with international trade, with international foreign commerce. That is our responsibility. We cannot transfer that responsibility to the President, and we cannot transfer that responsibility to an international government body. Congress United States Should Leave World Trade Organization 9 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 57:4 Therefore, there are many of us who ally together to argue that case, although we may have a disagreement on how much tariffs we should have, because the Congress should decide that. We could have no tariffs; we could have a uniform tariff, which the Founders believed in and permitted; or we could have protective tariffs, which some of those individuals on our side defend, and I am not that much interested in. But the issue that unifies us is who should determine it. For me, the determination should be by the U.S. Congress and not to defer to an international government body. Congress United States Should Leave World Trade Organization 9 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 57:6 We all know that we raised taxes not too long ago, not because the American people rose up and called their Congressmen and said we wanted you to repeal this tax and change the taxes. It was done in order to be an upstanding member of the WTO. We responded and took instructions from the WTO and adapted our tax policy to what they desired. Congress United States Should Leave World Trade Organization 9 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 57:9 In the 1990s when the WTO was originally passed, the former Speaker of the House made a statement about this. I want to quote from him. This is from Newt Gingrich. He was talking about the WTO: “I am just saying that we need to be honest about the fact that we are transferring from the United States at a practical level significant authority to a new organization. This is a transformational moment. I would feel better if the people who favor this would be honest about the scale of change. This is not just another trade agreement. This is adopting something which twice, once in the 1940s and once in the 1950s, the U.S. Congress rejected. I am not even saying that we should reject it. I, in fact, lean toward it. But I think we have to be very careful, because it is a very big transfer of power.” Congress United States Should Leave World Trade Organization 9 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 57:17 So I ask Members to consider, why should we not reclaim some of our prerogatives, our authorities, our responsibility? We have given up too much over the years. We have clearly given up our prerogatives on the declaration of war, and on monetary issues. That has been given away by the Congress. And here it is on the trade issue. Congress United States Should Leave World Trade Organization 9 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 57:19 So if you are a believer in big government and world government and you believe in giving up the prerogatives of the Congress and not assuming our responsibility, I would say, go with the WTO. But if you believe in freedom, if you believe in the Constitution and if you really believe in free trade, I would say we should vote to get out of the WTO. Congress The Hidden Cost of War June 14, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 58:12 In almost all wars, governments use deception about the enemy that needs to be vanquished to gain the support of the people. In our recent history, just since 1941, our government has entirely ignored the requirement that war be fought only after a formal congressional declaration-- further setting the stage for disenchantment once the war progresses poorly. Respect for the truth is easily sacrificed in order to rally the people for the war effort. Professional propagandists, by a coalition of the media and government officials, beat the war drums. The people follow out of fear of being labeled unpatriotic and weak in the defense of our nation-- even when there is no national security threat at all. Congress The Hidden Cost of War June 14, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 58:26 There’s essentially no one, not even among the neo-con crowd, claiming that the Iraqi war is defensive in nature for America. Early on there was an attempt to do so, and it was successful to a large degree in convincing the American people that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was connected to al Qaeda. Now the justification for the war is completely different and far less impressive. If the current justification had been used to rally the American people and Congress from the beginning, the war would have been rejected. The fact that we are bogged down in an offensive war makes it quite difficult to extricate ourselves from the mess. Without the enthusiasm that a defensive war generates, prolonging the Iraq war will play havoc with our economy. The insult of paying for the war in addition to the fact that the war was not truly necessary makes the hardship less tolerable. This leads to domestic turmoil, as proponents become more vocal in demanding patriotic support and opponents become angrier for the burden they must bear. Congress The Hidden Cost of War June 14, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 58:33 This ability to print the reserve currency of the world, and the willingness of foreigners to take it, causes gross distortions in our current account deficits and total foreign indebtedness. It plays a major role in the erosion of our manufacturing base, and causes the exporting of our jobs along with our dollars. Bashing foreigners, in particularly the Chinese and the Japanese, as the cause of our dwindling manufacturing and job base is misplaced. It prevents the evaluation of our own policies-- policies that undermine and increase the price of our own manufacturing goods while distorting the trade balance. Though we continue to benefit from the current circumstances, through cheap imports on borrowed money, the shaky fundamentals make our economy and financial system vulnerable to sudden and severe adjustments. Foreigners will not finance our excessive standard of living and our expensive war overseas indefinitely. It will end! What we do in the meantime to prepare for that day will make all the difference in the world for the future of freedom in this country. It’s the future of freedom in this country that is truly the legitimate responsibility of us as Members of Congress. Congress Belief In The Constitution Is A Conservative View 14 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 60:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. DUNCAN) for participating, and thank him for his leadership, his votes and his energy that he puts in in trying to keep this Congress straight and the budget straight. Congress Belief In The Constitution Is A Conservative View 14 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 60:4 During the time when this resolution came up, I am on the Committee on International Relations, I offered an amendment to declare war, not that I supported the war nor would I vote for the amendment, but to make the point that if this country, this Congress wants to go to war, they ought to be up front with it and make a declaration of war, decide what we have to do and go and win it. But not one single person voted to declare war. As a matter of fact, it was turned back to me and said, why would I think of bringing up such a frivolous notion about the Constitution and declaration of war? Another Member said, That part of the Constitution is anachronistic. We don’t look at that anymore. Mr. DUNCAN. If the gentleman will yield, just one brief comment. Probably, unfortunately, one of the weakest arguments up here against any legislation is that it is unconstitutional, but it should be the strongest argument. Congress An Article By Mr. Lee Jackson 14 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 62:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to place in today’s record the following article by Mr. Lee Jackson, a constituent of mine who is battling a perverse tax law. Mr. Jackson and several other individuals were the target of a frivolous lawsuit that rightfully was dismissed for its lack of merit. Mr. Jackson and his fellow defendants — all totally blameless — spent many thousands of dollars in legal fees fighting the meritless suit. They understandably filed their own lawsuit against both the original plaintiffs and the plaintiffs’ law firm. However, they cannot reach a monetary settlement for damages because our tax code treats all proceeds from such a settlement — even the portion Mr. Jackson owes to his attorneys — as taxable income for Mr. Jackson. As a result, Mr. Jackson literally cannot afford to settle his case because he will owe more in income taxes than he receives from the settlement! Furthermore, he cannot deduct his attorneys fees because of the alternative minimum tax. Mr. Jackson’s story, as told below, provides a vivid example of why Congress must change the tax code to ensure that attorney fees are deemed taxable income to the attorneys who actually receive them, not their clients. Congress An Article By Mr. Lee Jackson 14 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 62:15 There is an exemption to that decision. Inspired by the Spina case, Congress last year passed the Civil Rights Tax Relief Act. It provided that, in Civil Rights cases, attorneys’ fees would not be taxed to plaintiffs (on the basis that the amount had been taxed twice — first to plaintiffs, then to attorneys). Unfortunately for Spina, the law was not made retroactive, so as of this moment, she still contends with the IRS over her tax bill. However, other plaintiffs with similar cases realized tremendous relief. Congress An Article By Mr. Lee Jackson 14 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 62:21 Another major factor that should weigh in favor of plaintiffs and obviate taxes on awards is that courts, state legislatures, and Congress establish the rules under which a citizen seeks justice. A plaintiff going into court in pro per is in extreme jeopardy of losing over factors as innocuous as presenting the case in a form that violates local-court determined rules. When citizens are sued, they often have no choice but to retain the very best legal expertise possible. When they win their cases and are left with oppressive debt, they should have recourse to the courts for relief without incurring even more horrendous debt to the government. The idea is laughable that people would willingly choose to spend their hard-earned income and scarce time to be in court for recreation (i.e. the “pursuit of happiness”). Congress An Article By Mr. Lee Jackson 14 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 62:23 At present, there is legislative effort under way to cure the situation for plaintiffs excluded by current exemptions. There is also a strong Congressional move to abolish AMT altogether. (That would be a great thing for the country, but a subject for another time.) A danger for plaintiffs is that, should AMT be abolished, a strong sense could I devolve that the plight of plaintiffs would then be resolved. Such is not the case. Congress An Article By Mr. Lee Jackson 14 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 62:26 The real issues are: Should any legislature ever be deciding the relative merit of any civil dispute over any other civil dispute by creating rapacious tax laws and then establishing exemptions? (As soon as they do so, they create violations of equal protection and access.) Should the government ever be entitled to a share of what a jury has decided is the amount required to restore a plaintiff to equilibrium? (Every dollar taxed on an award is a dollar subtraction from that plaintiff’s restoration as determined by a jury after due deliberation over all facts pertinent to the case — justice becomes impossible as a practical and mathematical matter). Should attorneys’ fees be taxed to plaintiffs? (The government is going to tax that amount to the attorney. When the attorney is retained on a contingency basis, both attorney and plaintiff are entering into a transaction that is high risk with no gain for either unless they win at court. And, it is the courts, Congress, and state legislators that set the conditions under which requiring an attorney for any court proceeding is mandated as a practical matter for most citizens.) Congress An Article By Mr. Lee Jackson 14 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 62:31 It is hard to conceive of a single congressional district left unaffected. Corrective action should be swift. Congress PATRIOT Act Violates Fourth Amendment 15 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 64:2 The fourth amendment is worth fighting for. The Founders of the country thought it was literally worth fighting for, and yet I see us here in the Congress willing to sacrifice it too easily. Congress Protect Privacy 15 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 65:2 Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment. I do not see any necessity for the amendment. It was put in in the period of time after 9/11 where a lot of people were very frightened; and I think, quite frankly, that we as a Congress overreacted. Congress Introduction of the Industrial Hemp Farming Act June 22, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 70:4 The United States is the only industrialized nation that prohibits industrial hemp cultivation. The Congressional Research Service has noted that hemp is grown as an established agricultural commodity in over 30 nations in Europe, Asia, and North America. My Industrial Hemp Farming Act will end this nonsensical restriction on American farmers and allow them to grow industrial hemp in accordance with state law. Congress Statement on the Flag Burning Amendment June 22, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 71:11 However, I cannot support an amendment to give Congress new power to prohibit flag burning. I served my country to protect our freedoms and to protect our Constitution. I believe very sincerely that today we are undermining to some degree that freedom that we have had all these many years. Congress Statement on the Flag Burning Amendment June 22, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 71:13 Let me emphasize how the First Amendment is written, “Congress shall make no law.” That was the spirit of our nation at that time: “Congress shall make no laws.” Congress Statement on the Flag Burning Amendment June 22, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 71:14 Unfortunately, Congress has long since disregarded the original intent of the Founders and has written a lot of laws regulating private property and private conduct. But I would ask my colleagues to remember that every time we write a law to control private behavior, we imply that somebody has to arrive with a gun, because if you desecrate the flag, you have to punish that person. So how do you do that? You send an agent of the government, perhaps an employee of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Flags, to arrest him. This is in many ways patriotism with a gun--if your actions do not fit the official definition of a “patriot,” we will send somebody to arrest you. Congress Statement on the Flag Burning Amendment June 22, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 71:15 Congress has models of flag desecration laws. For example, Saddam Hussein made desecration of the Iraq flag a criminal offense punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Congress Statement on the Flag Burning Amendment June 22, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 71:21 Mr. Speaker, this is ultimately an attack on private property. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression depend on property. We do not have freedom of expression of our religion in other people’s churches; it is honored and respected because we respect the ownership of the property. The property conveys the right of free expression, as a newspaper would or a radio station. Once Congress limits property rights, for any cause, no matter how noble, it limits freedom. Congress Tribute To Rear Admiral John D. Butler 24 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 74:9 Mr. Speaker, Admiral Butler has given 30 years of service to the Navy, to Congress, and to the people of the United States of America. He has served our Nation well and has helped to ensure that our undersea fleet remains the best in the world. He has left a large and meaningful legacy and I am honored to rise today to express my appreciation for Admiral Butler and for his wife Eileen who has served her Nation right along side her husband. Being a Navy wife is not an easy task, and she has been nothing less than a model of courage, patience, and devotion. Congress Introducing The Comprehensive Health Care Act 27 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 75:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, America faces a crisis in health care. Health care costs continue to rise, leaving many Americans unable to afford health insurance, while those with health care coverage, and their physicians, struggle under the control of managed-care “gatekeepers.” Obviously, fundamental health care reform should be one of Congress’ top priorities. Congress Introducing The Agriculture Education Freedom Act 27 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 76:2 Think about this for a moment. These kids are trying to better themselves, earn some money, save some money and what does Congress do? We pick on these kids by taxing them. It is truly amazing that with all the hand- wringing in Congress over the alleged need to further restrict liberty and grow the size of government “for the children” we would continue to tax young people who are trying to lead responsible lives and prepare for the future. Even if the serious social problems today’s youth face could be solved by new Federal bureaucracies and programs, it is still unfair to pick on those kids who are trying to do the right thing. Congress Introducing The Quality Health Care Coalition Act 27 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 78:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Quality Health Care Coalition Act, which takes a first step towards restoring a true free market in health care by restoring the rights of freedom of contract and association to health care professionals. Over the past few years, we have had much debate in Congress about the difficulties medical professionals and patients are having with Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs). HMOs are devices used by insurance industries to ration health care. While it is politically popular for members of Congress to bash the HMOs and the insurance industry, the growth of the HMOs are rooted in past government interventions in the health care market though the tax code, the Employment Retirement Security Act (ERSIA), and the federal anti-trust laws. These interventions took control of the health care dollar away from individual patients and providers, thus making it inevitable that something like the HMOs would emerge as a means to control costs. Congress Introducing The Quality Health Care Coalition Act 27 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 78:6 By restoring the freedom of medical professionals to voluntarily come together to negotiate as a group with HMOs and insurance companies, this bill removes a government-imposed barrier to a true free market in health care. Of course, this bill does not infringe on the rights of health care professionals by forcing them to join a bargaining organization against their will. While Congress should protect the rights of all Americans to join organizations for the purpose of bargaining collectively, Congress also has a moral responsibility to ensure that no worker is forced by law to join or financially support such an organization. Congress Introducing The Quality Health Care Coalition Act 27 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 78:7 Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that Congress will not only remove the restraints on medical professionals’ freedom of contract, but will also empower patients to control their health care by passing my Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act. The Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act puts individuals back in charge of their own health care by providing Americans with large tax credits and tax deductions for their health care expenses, including a deduction for premiums for a high-deductible insurance policy purchased in combination with a Health Savings Account. Putting individuals back in charge of their own health care decisions will enable patients to work with providers to ensure they receive the best possible health care at the lowest possible price. If providers and patients have the ability to form the contractual arrangements that they find most beneficial to them, the HMO monster will wither on the vine without the imposition of new Federal regulations on the insurance industry. Congress Introducing The Cancer And Terminal Illness Patient Health Care Act 27 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 79:5 It is hard to think of a more compassionate tax policy this Congress could enact than to stop taking the resources away from working Americans that could help them treat cancer, AIDS, or other terrible health problems. I hope all my colleagues will help people suffering from terminal illnesses, and their caregivers, by cosponsoring the Cancer and Terminal Illness Patient Health Care Act. Congress Introducing The Child Health Care Affordability Act 27 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 80:3 As an OB–GYN who has had the privilege of delivering more than four thousand babies, I know how important it is that parents have the resources to provide adequate health care for their children. The inability of many working Americans to provide health care for their children is rooted in one of the great inequities of the tax code — Congress’ failure to allow individuals the same ability to deduct health care costs that it grants to businesses. As a direct result of Congress’ refusal to provide individuals with health care related tax credits, parents whose employers do not provide health insurance have to struggle to provide health care for their children. Many of these parents work in low-income jobs; oftentimes, their only recourse for health care is the local emergency room. Congress Introducing The Child Health Care Affordability Act 27 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 80:7 Mr. Speaker, this Congress has a moral responsibility to provide tax relief so that low-income parents struggling to care for a sick child can better meet their child’s medical expenses. Some may say that we cannot enact the Child Health Care Affordability Act because it would cause the government to lose revenue. But, who is more deserving of this money, Congress or the working parents of a sick child? Congress Congress Lacks Authority To Sell Unocal 30 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 82:2 I would remind my colleagues that Unocal is a private company with shareholders and a board of directors. That is the governance of the company — not the U.S. Congress. Do we really believe that we should be the real board of governors of Unocal? Congress Congress Lacks Authority To Sell Unocal 30 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 82:3 If in the United States a private company does not have the right to be sold on the free market, should we really be criticizing the lack of freedom in China? Many conservatives who have decried the recent Supreme Court decision that severely undermines the principle of private property in the United States are now on the other side, cheering this blatant Congressional attempt to do something that may be even worse than Kelo vs. New London. Congress Congress Lacks Authority To Sell Unocal 30 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 82:4 I voted recently against allowing the EximBank to use U.S. taxpayer money to underwrite Chinese construction of nuclear power plants. I do not support subsidizing the Chinese government’s economic activities. But I also do not support the U.S. Congress involving itself in the private economic transactions of U.S. companies. Congress Congress Lacks Authority To Sell Unocal 30 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 82:6 Mr. Speaker, we should not criticize a lack of economic freedom in China when Congress, as evidenced in this legislation, attempts to restrict the economic freedom of American citizens. Congress Henry Lamb- A Great Freedom Fighter Documents how your Dietary Supplements are Under Attack July 11, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 83:10 Of immediate concern is the ongoing effort to bring dietary supplements in America under the control of standards set by this commission. Dietary supplements generate a $17 billion industry in the United States, which affects more than 150 million consumers, according to Congressional findings (H.R. 2485). Proposed procedures and standards could virtually destroy this market and deprive millions of Americans of the supplements they want to use. Congress Henry Lamb- A Great Freedom Fighter Documents how your Dietary Supplements are Under Attack July 11, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 83:14 The effort to regulate dietary supplements has been under way for more than a decade. In 1994, Congress adopted the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act, which kept supplements beyond the reach of the drug police. In the past, Codex recommendations have been non-binding. Now, however, the Codex Alimentarius Commission is teaming up with the World Trade Organization to bring international enforcement to the dietary-supplement battle. Congress Tribute To A.J. Pete Reixach 14 July 2005    2005 Ron Paul 85:4 Mr. Speaker, Port Freeport now ranks 12th among all U.S. ports in international cargo. The Port has added new berths and continues to grow. A cool storage facility has been built and is set for expansion. The harbor channel was deepened to 45 feet with efforts now moving forward in this Congress toward approval of a 60-foot depth, a project I have been pleased to support. Public dock activity at the Port has burgeoned; so, too, has that at berths of such firms as Teppco/Seaway, ConocoPhillips and The Dow Chemical Co. This has all happened during Reixach’s time as Executive Director of the Port. Congress The Republican Congress Wastes Billions Overseas July 20, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 86:2 Now we have a Republican-controlled Congress and White House, and foreign spending soars. It was not that long ago when conservatives looked at such cavalier handling of US tax dollars with consternation. Now it seems that they are in a race with the Left to see who can spend more. Congress The Republican Congress Wastes Billions Overseas July 20, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 86:8 Mr. Speaker, this is a shameful day for the US Congress. We are taking billions out of the pockets of Americans and sending the money overseas in violation of the Constitution. These are billions that will not be available for investment inside the United States: investment in infrastructure, roads, new businesses, education. These are billions that will not be available to American families, to take care of their children or senior relatives, or to give to their churches or favorite charities. We must not continue to spend money like there is no tomorrow. We are going broke, and bills like this are like a lead foot on the accelerator toward bankruptcy. Congress Amend The PATRIOT Act — Part 1 21 July 2005    2005 Ron Paul 87:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment. mBR> The text of the amendment is as follows: Amendment No. 19 offered by Mr. PAUL: Add at the end the following: mBR> SEC. 17. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO LAWFUL POLITICAL ACTIVITY. It is the sense of Congress that the Federal Government should not investigate an American citizen for alleged criminal conduct solely on the basis of the citizen’s membership in a non-violent political organization or the fact that the citizen was engaging in other lawful political activity. The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 369, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL). Congress Amend The PATRIOT Act — Part 1 21 July 2005    2005 Ron Paul 87:3 Mr. Chairman, this is a straightforward amendment intended to modestly improve the PATRIOT Act, and let me just state exactly what it does. “It is the sense of Congress that the Federal government should not investigate any American citizen for alleged criminal conduct solely on the basis of citizen’s membership in a nonviolent political organization or the fact that the citizen was engaging in other lawful political activity.” Congress Amend The PATRIOT Act — Part 2 21 July 2005    2005 Ron Paul 88:9 The sunset clauses do perform one useful service in that they force Congress to regularly re-examine the PATRIOT Act. As the people’s representatives, it is our responsibility to keep a close eye on the executive branch to ensure it does not abuse its power. Even if the claims of H.R. 3199’s supporters that there have been no abuses of PATRIOT Act powers under this administration are true, that does not mean that future administrations will not abuse these powers. Congress Don’t Reauthorize the Patriot Act July 21, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 89:3 The sunset clauses do perform one useful service in that they force Congress to regularly re-examine the PATRIOT Act. As the people’s representatives, it is our responsibility to keep a close eye on the executive branch to ensure it does not abuse its power. Even if the claims of HR 3199’s supporters that there have been no abuses of PATRIOT Act powers under this administration are true, that does not mean that future administrations will not abuse these powers. Congress Congress, Not The President, Should Regulate Foreign Commerce 27 July 2005    2005 Ron Paul 92:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise in strong opposition to this legislation. As many Members know, I frequently vote no in this House because I have a very strict rule. The rule is I look to Article I, section 8 for authority. Article I, section 8 gives very precise items that we have authority over. One is foreign commerce. We, the Congress alone, have authority over regulating foreign commerce. Congress Congress, Not The President, Should Regulate Foreign Commerce 27 July 2005    2005 Ron Paul 92:2 This bill is a violation of that provision in the Constitution. We as a Congress have done something over the past several years that is unconstitutional in transferring this power first to the President and then to an international bureaucratic agency. This is wrong. It is not practical. It is not beneficial, it is unconstitutional, and it is a threat to our national sovereignty. Congress Introducing The Rice Farmers Fairness Act 6 September 2005    2005 Ron Paul 93:5 America’s rice farmers are the most efficient, effective producers of rice in the world, despite the many hurdles erected by Washington. The Rice Farmer Fairness Act helps removes one of these hurdles and this makes America’s rice farmers even more efficient. In order to enhance our competitive position, we should also end our embargoes of other nations. Congress should eliminate the burdensome taxes and regulations imposed on America’s farmers. I hope my colleagues will join me in removing these federally imposed burdens on rice farmers by supporting free trade, low taxes and regulations, and cosponsoring my Rice Farmer Fairness Act. Congress Introducing The Texas Educator Retirement Equity Act 6 September 2005    2005 Ron Paul 94:2 Until last year, Texas schoolteachers could qualify for full widow benefits by working one day in a school that participates in Social Security. Unfortunately, last year Congress took that option away from Texas teachers. Congress Introducing The Texas Educator Retirement Equity Act 6 September 2005    2005 Ron Paul 94:5 Congress should also be encouraging good people to enter the education profession by passing my Teacher Tax Cut Act (H.R. 402) that provides every teacher with a $1,000 tax credit, as well as my Professional Educators Tax Relief Act (H.R. 405) that provides a $1,000 tax credit to counselors, librarians, and all school personnel. Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:1 Many reasons have been given for why we fight and our youth must die in Iraq. The reasons now given for why we must continue this war bear no resemblance to the reasons given to gain the support of the American people and the United States Congress prior to our invasion in March of 2003. Before the war, we were told we faced an imminent threat to our national security from Saddam Hussein. This rationale, now proven grossly mistaken, has been changed. Now we’re told we must honor the fallen by “completing the mission.” To do otherwise would demean the sacrifice of those who have died or been wounded. Any lack of support for “completing the mission” is said, by the promoters of the war, to be unpatriotic, un-American, and detrimental to the troops. They insist the only way one can support the troops is to never waver on the policy of nation building, no matter how ill-founded that policy may be. The obvious flaw in this argument is that the mission, of which they so reverently speak, has changed constantly from the very beginning. Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:5 In 1998 Congress capitulated to the desires of the Clinton administration and overwhelmingly passed the Iraq Liberation Act, which stated quite clearly that our policy was to get rid of Saddam Hussein. This act made it official: “The policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein.” This resolution has been cited on numerous occasions by neo-conservatives as justification for the pre-emptive, deliberate invasion of Iraq. When the resolution was debated, I saw it as a significant step toward a war that would bear no good fruit. No legitimate national security concerns were cited for this dramatic and serious shift in policy. Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:6 Shortly after the new administration took office in January 2001, this goal of eliminating Saddam Hussein quickly morphed into a policy of remaking the entire Middle East, starting with regime change in Iraq. This aggressive interventionist policy surprised some people, since the victorious 2000 campaign indicated we should pursue a foreign policy of humility, no nation building, reduced deployment of our forces overseas, and a rejection of the notion that we serve as world policemen. The 9/11 disaster proved a catalyst to push for invading Iraq and restructuring the entire Middle East. Though the plan had existed for years, it quickly was recognized that the fear engendered by the 9/11 attacks could be used to mobilize the American people and Congress to support this war. Nevertheless, supposedly legitimate reasons had to be given for the already planned pre-emptive war, and as we now know the “intelligence had to be fixed to the policy.” Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:7 Immediately after 9/11 the American people were led to believe that Saddam Hussein somehow was responsible for the attacks. The fact that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were enemies, not friends, was kept from the public by a compliant media and a lazy Congress. Even today many Americans still are convinced of an alliance between the two. The truth is Saddam Hussein never permitted al Qaeda into Iraq out of fear that his secular government would be challenged. And yet today we find that al Qaeda is now very much present in Iraq, and causing chaos there. Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:23 Many other reasons were given to stir the emotions of the American public and the U.S. Congress, reasons that were grossly misleading and found not to be true. The pretense of a legal justification was a sham. Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:24 The fact that Congress is not permitted under the Constitution to transfer the war power to a president was ignored. Only Congress can declare war, if we were inclined to follow the rule of law. To add insult to injury, HJ RES 114 cited United Nations resolutions as justifications for the war. Ignoring the Constitution while using the UN to justify the war showed callous disregard for the restraints carefully written in the Constitution. The authors deliberately wanted to make war difficult to enter without legislative debate, and they purposely kept the responsibility out of the hands of the executive branch. Surely they never dreamed an international government would have influence over our foreign policy or tell us when we should enter into armed conflict. Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:49 It isn’t only our presidents that deserve the blame when they overstep their authority and lead the country into inappropriate wars. Congress deserves equally severe criticism for acquiescing to the demands of the executive to go needlessly to war. It has been known throughout history that kings, dictators, and the executive branch of governments are always overly eager to go to war. This is precisely why our founders tried desperately to keep decisions about going to war in the hands of the legislature. But this process has failed us for the last 65 years. Congress routinely has rubber stamped the plans of our presidents and even the United Nations to enter into war through the back door. Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:50 Congress at any time can prevent or stop all undue foreign entanglements pursued by the executive branch merely by refusing to finance them. The current Iraq war, now going on for 15 years, spans the administration of three presidents and many congresses controlled by both parties. This makes Congress every bit as responsible for the current quagmire as the president. But the real problem is the acceptance by our country as a whole of the principle of meddling in the internal affairs of other nations when unrelated to our national security. Intervention, no matter how well intended, inevitably boomerangs and comes back to haunt us. Minding our own business is not only economical; it’s the only policy that serves our national security interests and the cause of peace. Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:54 In this war, like all others, the propagandists and promoters themselves don’t fight, nor do their children. It’s always worth the effort to wage war when others must suffer and die. Many of those who today pump the nation up with war fever were nowhere to be found when their numbers were called in the 1960s-- when previous presidents and Congresses thought so little about sending young men off to war. Then it was in their best interests to find more important things to do-- despite the so-called equalizing draft. Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:64 1. We must soon, and Congress can do this through the budget process, stop the construction of all permanent bases in Iraq and any other Muslim country in the region. Think of how we would react if the Chinese had the military edge on us and laid claims to the Gulf of Mexico, building bases within the U.S. in order to promote their superior way of life. Isn’t it ironic that we close down bases here at home while building new ones overseas? Domestic bases might well promote security, while bases in Muslim nations only elicit more hatred toward us. Congress Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:73 A powerful bureaucratic military state negates all efforts to preserve these conditions that have served America so well up until recent times. That is not what the American dream is all about. Without a change in attitude, the American dream dies: a simple change that restates the principles of liberty enshrined in our Constitution will serve us well in solving all the problems we face. The American people are up to the task; I hope Congress is as well. Congress Statement On H.R. 3673, Making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations For 2005 8 September 2005    2005 Ron Paul 96:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this ill-considered $51.8 billion disaster relief appropriation. Many have come to the floor today to discuss how we must help the victims of this terrible disaster and its aftermath. But why do they think that the best way to do so is simply to write a huge check to the very government agency that failed so spectacularly? This does not make sense. We have all seen the numerous articles detailing the seemingly inexcusable mistakes FEMA made — before and after the hurricane. Yet, in typical fashion, Congress seems to think that the best way to fix the mess is to throw money at the very government agency that failed. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3132, Children’s Safety Act Pf 2005 14 September 2005    2005 Ron Paul 97:2 However, Mr. Chairman, I cannot support this bill because it infringes on the States’ constitutional authority over the prevention and punishment of sex crimes. The late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and former United States Attorney General Ed Meese, two men who no one has ever accused of being “soft on crime,” have both warned that, although creating more Federal crimes may make politicians feel good, it is neither constitutionally sound nor prudent. Rehnquist has stated that, “[t]he trend to federalize crimes that traditionally have been handled in state courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our federal system.” Meese stated that Congress’s tendency in recent decades to make Federal crimes out of offenses that have historically been State matters has dangerous implications both for the fair administration of justice and for the principle that States are something more than mere administrative districts of a nation governed mainly from Washington. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3132, Children’s Safety Act Pf 2005 14 September 2005    2005 Ron Paul 97:5 Mr. Chairman, Congress could both honor the Constitution and help States and local governments protect children by using our power to limit Federal jurisdiction to stop Federal judges from preventing States and local governments from keeping these criminals off the streets. My colleagues should remember that it was a Federal judge in a Federal court who ruled that the death penalty is inappropriate for sex offenders. Instead of endorsing a bill to let people know when a convicted child molester or rapist is in their neighborhood after being released, perhaps we should respect the authority of State courts and legislators to give child molesters and rapists the life or even death sentences, depending on the will of the people of those States. Congress Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3132, Children’s Safety Act Pf 2005 14 September 2005    2005 Ron Paul 97:6 Just as the Founders never intended the Congress to create a national police force, they never intended the Federal courts to dictate criminal procedures to the States. The Founding Fathers knew quite well that it would be impossible for a central government to successfully manage crime prevention programs for as large and diverse a country as America. That is one reason why they reserved to the States the exclusive authority and jurisdiction to deal with crime. Our children would likely be safe today if the police powers and budgets were under the direct and total control of the States as called for in the Constitution. Congress The Coming Category 5 Financial Hurricane September 15, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 98:3 Congress reacted to Katrina in the expected irresponsible manner. It immediately appropriated over $60 billion with little planning or debate. Taxes won’t be raised to pay the bill-- fortunately. There will be no offsets or spending reductions to pay the bill. Welfare and entitlement spending is sacrosanct. Spending for the war in Iraq and the military-industrial complex is sacrosanct. There is no guarantee that gracious foreign lenders will step forward, especially without raising interest rates. This means the Federal Reserve and Treasury will print the money needed to pay the bills. The sad truth is that monetary debasement hurts poor people the most-- the very people we saw on TV after Katrina. Inflating our currency hurts the poor and destroys the middle class, while transferring wealth to the ruling class. This occurs in spite of good intentions and misplaced compassion. Congress The Coming Category 5 Financial Hurricane September 15, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 98:12 Our spending habits, in combination with our flawed monetary system, if not changed will bring us a financial whirlwind that will make Katrina look like a minor storm. Loss of confidence in the dollar and the international financial system is a frightening possibility-- but it need not happen if Congress can curb its appetite for buying the people’s support through unrestrained spending. Congress The Coming Category 5 Financial Hurricane September 15, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 98:13 If Congress does not show some sense of financial restraint soon, we can expect the poor to become poorer; the middle class to become smaller; and the government to get bigger and more authoritarian-- while the liberty of the people is diminished. The illusion that deficits, printing money, and expanding the welfare and warfare states serves the people must come to an end. Congress Introduction Of The Affordable Gas Price Act 6 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 99:4 Instead of expanding government, Congress should repeal Federal laws and policies that raise the price of gas, either directly through taxes or indirectly through regulations that discourage the development of new fuel sources. This is why my legislation repeals the Federal moratorium on offshore drilling and allows oil exploration in the ANWR reserve in Alaska. My bill also ensures that the National Environmental Policy Act’s environmental impact statement requirement will no longer be used as a tool to force refiners to waste valuable time and capital on nuisance litigation. The Affordable Gas Price Act also provides tax incentives to encourage investment in new refineries. Congress Personal Responsibility In Food Consumption Act 19 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 105:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, Congress is once again using abusive litigation at the State level as a justification nationalizing tort law. In this case, the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act (H.R. 554) usurps State jurisdiction over lawsuits related to obesity against food manufacturers. Congress Personal Responsibility In Food Consumption Act 19 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 105:3 Congress bears some responsibility for the decline of personal responsibility that led to the obesity lawsuits. After all, Congress created the welfare state that popularized the notion that people should not bear the costs of their mistakes. Thanks to the welfare state, too many Americans believe they are entitled to pass the costs of their mistakes on to a third party — such as the taxpayers or a corporation with “deep pockets.” Congress Personal Responsibility In Food Consumption Act 19 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 105:4 While I oppose the idea of holding food manufacturers responsible for their customers’ misuse of their products, I cannot support addressing this problem by nationalizing tort law. It is long past time for Congress to recognize that not every problem requires a Federal solution. This country’s founders recognized the genius of separating power among Federal, State, and local governments as a means to maximize individual liberty and make government most responsive to those persons who might most responsibly influence it. This separation of powers strictly limits the role of the Federal Government in dealing with civil liability matters; and reserves jurisdiction over matters of civil tort, such as food related negligence suits, to the State legislatures. Congress Protection Of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act 20 october 2005    2005 Ron Paul 106:5 Second, a section was added to the bill to create draconian penalties for people who possess “armor piercing” bullets. Just like the Democratic Congress before it that passed the “assault weapons” ban, the Republican Congress is poised to give in to anti-gun rights scare tactics by selectively banning bullets. Instead of each gun owner being able to decide what ammunition he uses in his gun, Federal bureaucrats will make that decision. To recognize the threat such regulation places on gun owners, just consider that a gun without ammunition is nothing more than an expensive club. Regulating ammunition is the back door path to gun regulation. Congress Government Sponsored Enterprises 26 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 108:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1461 fails to address the core problems with the Government Sponsored Enterprises, GSEs. Furthermore, since this legislation creates new government programs that will further artificially increase the demand for housing, H.R. 1461 increases the economic damage that will occur when the housing bubble bursts. The main problem with the GSEs is the special privileges the Federal Government gives the GSEs. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received almost 20 billion dollars worth of indirect federal subsidies in fiscal year 2004 alone. Congress Government Sponsored Enterprises 26 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 108:6 Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1461 compounds these problems by further insulating the GSEs from market discipline. By creating a “world-class” regulator, Congress would send a signal to investors that investors need not concern themselves with investigating the financial health and stability of Fannie and Freddie since a “world-class” regulator is performing that function. Congress Government Sponsored Enterprises 26 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 108:11 Thus, these independent regulators have a concentration of powers of all three branches and lack direct accountability to any of the democratically chosen branches of government. This flies in the face of the Founders’ opposition to concentrations of power and government bureaucracies that lack accountability. These concerns are especially relevant considering the remarkable degree of power and autonomy this bill gives to the regulator. For example, in the scheme established by H.R. 1461 the regulator’s budget is not subject to appropriations. This removes a powerful mechanism for holding the regulator accountable to Congress. While the regulator is accountable to a board of directors, this board may conduct all deliberations in private because it is not subject to the sunshine act. Congress Government Sponsored Enterprises 26 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 108:17 In conclusion, H.R. 1461 compounds the problems with the GSEs and may increases the damage that will be inflicted by a bursting of the housing bubble. This is because this bill creates a new unaccountable regulator and introduces further distortions into the housing market via increased regulatory power. H.R. 1461 also violates the Constitution by creating yet another unaccountable regulator with quasi-executive, judicial, and legislative powers. Instead of expanding unconstitutional and market distorting government bureaucracies, Congress should act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bailout investors who were misled by foolish government interference in the market. Congress U.S. Interfering In Middle East 26 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 113:7 Congress already has assisted these plans by authorizing the sanctions placed on Syria last year. Harmful sanctions, as applied to Iraq in the 1990s, inevitably represent a major step toward war since they bring havoc to so many innocent people. Syria already has been charged with developing weapons of mass destruction based on no more evidence than was available when Iraq was similarly charged. Congress U.S. Interfering In Middle East 26 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 113:11 The statement that should scare all Americans and the world is the assurance by Secretary Rice that the President needs no additional authority from Congress to attack Syria. She argues that authority already has been granted by the resolutions on 9/11 and Iraq. This is not true, but if Congress remains passive to the powers assumed by the executive branch, it will not matter. As the war spreads, the only role for the Congress will be to provide funding lest they be criticized for not supporting the troops. In the meantime, the Constitution and our liberties here at home will be further eroded as more Americans die. Congress We Have Been Warned October 26, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 114:3 Congress already has assisted these plans by authorizing the sanctions placed on Syria last year. Harmful sanctions, as applied to Iraq in the 1990s, inevitably represent a major step toward war since they bring havoc to so many innocent people. Syria already has been charged with developing weapons of mass destruction based on no more evidence than was available when Iraq was similarly charged. Congress We Have Been Warned October 26, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 114:7 The statement that should scare all Americans (and the world) is the assurance by Secretary Rice that the President needs no additional authority from Congress to attack Syria. She argues that authority already has been granted by the resolutions on 9/11 and Iraq. This is not true, but if Congress remains passive to the powers assumed by the executive branch it won’t matter. As the war spreads, the only role for Congress will be to provide funding lest they be criticized for not supporting the troops. In the meantime, the Constitution and our liberties here at home will be further eroded as more Americans die. Congress Big Lies and Little Lies November 2, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 116:3 There are much more serious charges of lying and cover-ups that deserve congressional attention. The country now knows the decision to go to war in Iraq was based on information that was not factual. Congress and the people of this country were misled. Because of this, more than 2,000 U. S. troops and many innocent people have died. Tens of thousands have been severely wounded, their lives forever changed if not totally ruined. Congress Big Lies and Little Lies November 2, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 116:6 The decision to go to war is profound. It behooves Congress to ask more questions and investigate exactly how the President, Congress, and the people were misled into believing that invading Iraq was necessary for our national security. Congress Big Lies and Little Lies November 2, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 116:11 If lies were told to justify the invasion of Iraq, the American people deserve to know the truth. Congress has a responsibility to seek this truth and change our policies accordingly. The sooner this is done the better. Congress Free Speech and Dietary Supplements November 10, 2005 HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS    2005 Ron Paul 118:2 The American people have made it clear they do not want the federal government to interfere with their access to dietary supplements, yet the FDA and the FTC continue to engage in heavy-handed attempts to restrict such access. The FDA continues to frustrate consumers’ efforts to learn how they can improve their health even after Congress, responding to a record number of constituents’ comments, passed the Dietary Supplement and Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA). FDA bureaucrats are so determined to frustrate consumer access to truthful information that they are even evading their duty to comply with four federal court decisions vindicating consumers’ First Amendment rights to discover the health benefits of foods and dietary supplements. Congress Free Speech and Dietary Supplements November 10, 2005 HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS    2005 Ron Paul 118:6 The Health Freedom Protection Act will force the FDA to at last comply with the commands of Congress, the First Amendment, and the American people by codifying the First Amendment standards adopted by the federal courts. Specifically, the Health Freedom Protection Act stops the FDA from censoring truthful claims about the curative, mitigative, or preventative effects of dietary supplements, and adopts the federal court’s suggested use of disclaimers as an alternative to censorship. The Health Freedom Protection Act also stops the FDA from prohibiting the distribution of scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against disease. Congress Congress Erodes Privacy November 16, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 121:4 From the 1970s forward, national security letters were used sparingly in circumventing the legal process and search warrant requirements. Since 9-11 and the subsequent passage of the Patriot Act, however, use of these instruments has skyrocketed, from 300 annually to over 30,000. There is essentially no oversight nor understanding by the U.S. Congress of the significance of this pervasive government surveillance. It’s all shrugged off as necessary to make us safe from terrorism. Sacrificing personal liberty and privacy, the majority feels, is not a big deal. Congress Congress Erodes Privacy November 16, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 121:5 We soon will vote on the conference report reauthorizing the Patriot Act. Though one could argue there’s been a large grass-roots effort to discredit the Patriot Act, Congress has ignored the message. Amazingly, over 391 communities and 7 states have passed resolutions highly critical of the Patriot Act. Congress Congress Erodes Privacy November 16, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 121:6 The debate in Congress—if that’s what one wants to call it—boils down to whether the most egregious parts of the Act will be sunsetted after 4 years or 7. The conference report will adjust the numbers, and members will vote willingly for the “compromise” and feel good about their effort to protect individual privacy. Congress Congress Erodes Privacy November 16, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 121:8 Congress is not much better when it comes to protecting against the erosion of the centuries-old habeas corpus doctrine. By declaring anyone an “enemy combatant”—a totally arbitrary designation by the President— the government can deny an individual his right to petition a judge or even speak with an attorney. Though there has been a good debate on the insanity of our policy of torturing prisoners, holding foreigners and Americans without charges seems acceptable to many. Did it never occur to those who condemn torture that unlimited detention of individuals without a writ of habeas corpus is itself torture—especially for those who are totally innocent? Add this to the controversial worldwide network of secret CIA prisons now known of for 2 years, and we should be asking ourselves what we have become as a people. Recent evidence that we’re using white phosphorus chemical weapons in Iraq does nothing to improve our image. Congress Introducing We The People 17 November 2005    2005 Ron Paul 122:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids Federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning State laws and polices relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold Federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the President, according to rules established by the Congress. Congress Introducing We The People 17 November 2005    2005 Ron Paul 122:2 The United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to establish and limit the jurisdiction of the lower Federal courts and limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Founders intended Congress to use this authority to correct abuses of power by the federal judiciary. Congress Introducing We The People 17 November 2005    2005 Ron Paul 122:4 In recent years, we have seen numerous abuses of power by Federal courts. Federal judges regularly strike down State and local laws on subjects such as religious liberty, sexual orientation, family relations, education, and abortion. This government by Federal judiciary causes a virtual nullification of the Tenth Amendment’s limitations on Federal power. Furthermore, when Federal judges impose their preferred polices on State and local governments, instead of respecting the polices adopted by those elected by, and thus accountable to, the people, republican government is threatened. Article IV, section 40 of the Untied States Constitution guarantees each State a republican form of government Thus, Congress must act when the executive or judicial branch threatens the republican governments of the individual States. Therefore, Congress has a responsibility to stop Federal judges from running roughshod over State and local laws. The Founders would certainly have supported congressional action to reign in Federal judges who tell citizens where they can and can’t place manger scenes at Christmas. Congress Introducing We The People 17 November 2005    2005 Ron Paul 122:6 Unless Congress acts, a State’s authority to define and regulate marriage may be the next victim of activist judges. After all, such a decision would simply take the Supreme Court’s decision in the Lawrence case, which overturned all State sodomy laws, to its logical conclusion. Congress must launch a preemptive strike against any further Federal usurpation of the States’ authority to regulate marriage by removing issues concerning the definition of marriage from the jurisdiction of Federal courts. Congress Introducing We The People 17 November 2005    2005 Ron Paul 122:7 Although marriage is licensed and otherwise regulated by the States, government did not create the institution of marriage. Government regulation of marriage is based on State recognition of the practices and customs formulated by private individuals interacting in civil institutions, such as churches and synagogues. Having Federal officials, whether judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose a new definition of marriage on the people is an act of social engineering profoundly hostile to liberty. Congress Introducing We The People 17 November 2005    2005 Ron Paul 122:8 It is long past time that Congress exercises its authority to protect the republican government of the States from out-of-control Federal judges. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the We the People Act. Congress Statement on So-Called "Deficit Reduction Act" November 18, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 123:1 Mr. Speaker, as one who has long urged my colleagues to cut spending, and who has consistently voted against excessive and unconstitutional expenditures, I am sure many in this body expect me to be an enthusiastic supporter of HR 4241, the Deficit Reduction Act. After all, supporters of this bill are claiming it dramatically reforms federal programs and puts Congress back on the road to fiscal responsibility. Congress Statement on So-Called "Deficit Reduction Act" November 18, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 123:2 For all the passionate debate this bill has generated, its effect on the federal government and taxpayers are relatively minor. HR 4241 does not even reduce federal expenditures! That’s right--if HR 4241 passes, the federal budget, including entitlement programs, will continue to grow. HR 4241 simply slows down the rate of growth of federal spending. The federal government may spend less in the future if this bill passes then it otherwise would, but it will still spend more than it does today. To put HR 4241 in perspective, consider that this bill reduces spending by less than $50 billion over 10 years, while the most recent “emergency” supplemental passed by this Congress appropriated $82 billion dollars to be spent this year. Congress Statement on So-Called "Deficit Reduction Act" November 18, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 123:3 HR 4241 reduces total federal entitlement expenditures by one half of one percent over the next five years. For all the trumpeting about how this bill gets “runaway entitlement spending” under control, HR 4241 fails to deal with the biggest entitlement problem facing our nation--the multi-billion dollar Medicare prescription drug plan, which actually will harm many seniors by causing them to lose their private coverage, forcing them into an inferior government-run program. In fact, the Medicare prescription drug plan will cost $55 billion in fiscal year 2006 alone, while HR 4241 will reduce spending by only $5 billion next year. Yet some House members who voted for every expansion of the federal government considered by this Congress will vote for these small reductions in spending and then brag about their fiscal conservatism to their constituents. Congress Statement on So-Called "Deficit Reduction Act" November 18, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 123:4 As is common with bills claiming to reduce spending, the majority of spending reductions occur in the later years of the plan. Since it is impossible to bind future Congresses, this represents little more than a suggestion that spending in fiscal years 2009 and 2010 reflect the levels stated in this bill. My fiscally responsible colleagues should keep in mind that rarely, if ever, does a Congress actually follow through on spending reductions set by a previous Congress. Thus, relying on future Congresses to cut spending in the “out years” is a recipe for failure. Congress Statement on So-Called "Deficit Reduction Act" November 18, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 123:5 One provision of the bill that undeniably would have benefited the American people, the language opening up the ANWR region of Alaska and expanding offshore drilling, was removed from the bill. As my colleagues know, increased gas prices are a top concern of the American people. Expanding the supply of domestically produced oil is an obvious way to address these concerns, yet Congress refuses to take this reasonable step. Congress Statement on So-Called "Deficit Reduction Act" November 18, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 123:7 I also question the priorities of singling out programs, such as Medicaid and food stamps, that benefit the neediest Americans, while continuing to increase spending on corporate welfare and foreign aid. Just two weeks ago, Congress passed a bill sending $21 billion overseas. That is $21 billion that will be spent this fiscal year, not spread out over five years. Then, last week, Congress passed, on suspension of the rules, a bill proposing to spend $130 million dollars on water projects--not in Texas, but in foreign nations! Meanwhile, the Financial Services Committee, on which I sit, has begun the process of reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank, which uses taxpayer money to support business projects that cannot attract capital in the market. Mr. Speaker, the Export-Import Bank’s biggest beneficiaries are Boeing and communist China. I find it hard to believe that federal funding for Fortune 500 companies and China is a higher priority for most Americans than Medicaid and food stamps. Congress Statement on So-Called "Deficit Reduction Act" November 18, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 123:8 HR 4241 fails to address the root of the spending problem--the belief that Congress can solve any problem simply by creating a new federal program or agency. However, with the federal government’s unfunded liabilities projected to reach as much as $50 trillion by the end of this year, Congress no longer can avoid serious efforts to rein in spending. Instead of the smoke-and-mirrors approach of HR 4241, Congress should begin the journey toward fiscal responsibility by declaring a ten percent reduction in real spending, followed by a renewed commitment to reduce spending in a manner consistent with our obligation to uphold the Constitution and the priorities of the American people. This is the only way to make real progress on reducing spending without cutting programs for the poor while increasing funding for programs that benefit foreign governments and corporate interests. Congress The Blame Game December 7, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 124:5 The American people are becoming more aware of the serious crisis this country faces. Their deep concern is reflected in the current mood in Congress. The recent debate over Iraq shows the parties are now looking for someone to blame for the mess we’re in. It’s a high stakes political game. The fact that a majority of both parties and their leadership endorsed the war, and accept the same approach toward Iran and Syria, does nothing to tone down the accusatory nature of the current blame game. Congress The Blame Game December 7, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 124:7 If we hope to pursue a more sensible foreign policy, it is imperative that Congress face up to its explicit constitutional responsibility to declare war. It’s easy to condemn the management of a war one endorsed, while deferring the final decision about whether to deploy troops to the president. When Congress accepts and assumes its awesome responsibility to declare war, as directed by the Constitution, fewer wars will be fought. Congress The Blame Game December 7, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 124:14 The blame game is a political event, designed to avoid the serious philosophic debate over our foreign policy of interventionism. The mistakes made by both parties in dragging us into an unwise war are obvious, but the effort to blame one group over the other confuses the real issue. Obviously Congress failed to meet its constitutional obligation regarding war. Debate over prewar intelligence elicits charges of errors, lies, and complicity. It is now argued that those who are critical of the outcome in Iraq are just as much at fault, since they too accepted flawed intelligence when deciding to support the war. This charge is leveled at previous administrations, foreign governments, Members of Congress, and the United Nations-- all who made the same mistake of blindly accepting the prewar intelligence. Complicity, errors of judgment, and malice are hardly an excuse for such a serious commitment as a pre-emptive war against a non-existent enemy. Congress The Blame Game December 7, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 124:22 By limiting the debate to technical points over intelligence, strategy, the number of troops, and how to get out of the mess, we ignore our continued policy of sanctions, threats, and intimidation of Iraq’s neighbors, Iran and Syria. Even as Congress pretends to argue about how or when we might come home, leaders from both parties continue to support the policy of spreading the war by precipitating a crisis with these two countries. Congress The Blame Game December 7, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 124:23 The likelihood of agreeing about who deliberately or innocently misled Congress, the media, and the American people is virtually nil. Maybe historians at a later date will sort out the whole mess. The debate over tactics and diplomacy will go on, but that only serves to distract from the important issue of policy. Few today in Congress are interested in changing from our current accepted policy of intervention to one of strategic independence: No nation building, no policing the world, no dangerous alliances. Congress Terrorism Insurance Program 7 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 125:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, 4 years ago, when the Congress considered the bill creating the terrorism insurance program, I urged my colleagues to reject it. One of the reasons I opposed the bill was my concern that, contrary to the claims of the bill’s supporters, terrorism insurance would not be allowed to sunset after 3 years. As I said then: Congress Terrorism Insurance Program 7 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 125:2 The drafters of H.R. 3210 claim that this creates a “temporary” government program. However, Mr. Speaker, what happens in 3 years if industry lobbyists come to Capitol Hill to explain that there is still a need for this program because of the continuing threat of terrorist attacks. Does anyone seriously believe that Congress will refuse to reauthorize this “temporary” insurance program or provide some other form of taxpayer help to the insurance industry? I would like to remind my colleagues that the Federal budget is full of expenditures for long-lasting programs that were originally intended to be “temporary.” Congress Terrorism Insurance Program 7 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 125:3 I am disappointed to be proven correct. I am also skeptical that, having renewed the program once, Congress will ever allow it to expire, regardless of the recommendations made by the commission created by this bill. Congress Terrorism Insurance Program 7 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 125:4 As Congress considers extending this program, I renew my opposition to it for substantially the same reasons I stated 4 years ago. However, I do have a suggestion on how to improve the program. Since one claimed problem with allowing the private market to provide terrorism insurance is the difficulty of quantifying the risk of an attack, the taxpayers’ liability under the terrorism reinsurance program should be reduced for an attack occurring when the country is under orange or red alert. After all, because the point of the alert system is to let Americans know when there is an increased likelihood of an attack it is reasonable to expect insurance companies to demand that their clients take extra precautionary measures during periods of high alert. Reducing taxpayer subsidies will provide an incentive to ensure private parties take every possible precaution to minimize the potential damage from possible terrorists attack. Congress Terrorism Insurance Program 7 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 125:5 While this bill does contain some provisions making it more favorable to taxpayers than the original program, my fundamental objections to the program remain the same as 4 years ago. Therefore, I am attaching my statement regarding H.R. 3210, which created the terrorist insurance program in the 107th Congress: Congress Terrorism Insurance Program 7 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 125:6 Mr. Speaker, no one doubts that the government has a role to play in compensating American citizens who are victimized by terrorist attacks. However, Congress should not lose sight of fundamental economic and constitutional principles when considering how best to provide the victims of terrorist attacks just compensation. I am afraid that H.R. 3210, the Terrorism Risk Protection Act, violates several of those principles and therefore passage of this bill is not in the best interests of the American people. Congress Terrorism Insurance Program 7 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 125:8 The drafters of H.R. 3210 claim that this creates a “temporary” government program. However, Mr. Speaker, what happens in 3 years if industry lobbyists come to Capitol Hill to explain that there is still a need for this program because of the continuing threat of terrorist attacks. Does anyone seriously believe that Congress will refuse to reauthorize this “temporary” insurance program or provide some other form of taxpayer help to the insurance industry? I would like to remind my colleagues that the Federal budget is full of expenditures for long-lasting programs that were originally intended to be “temporary.” Congress Terrorism Insurance Program 7 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 125:11 Instead of forcing taxpayers to subsidize the costs of terrorism insurance, Congress should consider creating a tax credit or deduction for premiums paid for terrorism insurance, as well as a deduction for claims and other costs borne by the insurance industry connected with offering terrorism insurance. A tax credit approach reduces government’s control over the insurance market. Furthermore, since a tax credit approach encourages people to devote more of their own resources to terrorism insurance, the moral hazard problems associated with federally funded insurance is avoided. Congress Border Protection Antiterrorism, And Illegal Immigration Control Act Of 2005 16 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 127:3 Here is a road map for real immigration reform. First we need better enforcement of the laws we’ve got — which plainly call for illegal immigrants to be arrested and deported and for our borders to be secure. These things are already law, but the executive branch over the past decades has failed to enforce them. Congress can pass any law it wants, but unless federal agencies enforce those laws they are meaningless. Congress Foreign Policy 17 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 128:5 The American people are becoming more aware of the serious crisis this country faces. Their deep concern is reflected in the current mood in Congress. The recent debate over Iraq shows the parties are now looking for someone to blame for the mess we are in. It is a high-stakes political game. The fact that a majority of both parties and their leadership endorsed the war and accept the same approach towards Syria and Iran does nothing to tone down the accusatory nature of the current blame game. Congress Foreign Policy 17 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 128:7 If we hope to pursue a more sensible foreign policy, it is imperative that Congress face up to its explicit constitutional responsibility to declare war. It is easy to condemn the management of a war, one endorsed, while deferring to the final decision about whether to deploy the troops to the President. When Congress accepts and assumes its awesome responsibility to declare or not declare war as directed by the Constitution, fewer wars will be fought. Congress Foreign Policy 17 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 128:15 The blame game is a political event designed to avoid the serious philosophic debate over our foreign policy of interventionism. The mistakes made by both parties in dragging us into an unwise war are obvious, but the effort to blame one group over the other confuses the real issue. Obviously, Congress failed to meet its constitutional obligation regarding war. Debate over prewar intelligence elicits charges of errors, lies, and complicity. Congress Foreign Policy 17 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 128:16 It is argued that those who are now critical of the outcome are just as much at fault since they too accepted flawed intelligence when in deciding to support the war. This charge is leveled at previous administrations, foreign governments, Members of Congress, and the United Nations, all who made the same mistake of blindly accepting the pre-war intelligence. Congress Foreign Policy 17 December 2005    2005 Ron Paul 128:23 We need to think more about how to avoid these military encounters rather than dwelling on the complications that result when we meddle in the affairs of others with no moral or legal authority to do so. We need less blame game and more reflection about the root cause of our aggressive foreign policy. By limiting the debate to technical points over intelligence, strategy, the number of troops and how to get out of the mess, we ignore our continued policy of sanctions, threats and intimidation of Iraqi neighbors, Iran and Syria. Even as Congress pretends to argue about how or when we might come home, leaders from both parties continue to support the policy of spreading the war by precipitating a crisis with these two countries. The likelihood of agreeing about who deliberately or innocently misled Congress, the media and the American people is virtually nil. Maybe historians at a later date will sort out the whole mess. The debate over tactics and diplomacy will go on, but that only serves to distract from the important issue of policy. Few today in Congress are interested in changing from our current accepted policy of intervention to one of strategic independence. No nation building, no policing the world, no dangerous alliances. But the result of this latest military incursion into a foreign country should not be ignored. Those who dwell on pragmatic matters should pay close attention to the result so far. Congress Return To Constitutional Government 1 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 1:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, anyone who doubts that symbols often take priority over substance in Washington only needs to consider that among our first items of business the House of Representatives is considering this year is a measure banning from the House gym former members of Congress who are now lobbyists. This bill is being rushed to the floor in order to assure the American people that Congress is “cracking down” on lobbying practices in response to recent scandals. Congress Eliminating Foreign Aid That Helps Manipulate Elections 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 2:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I intend to vote in favor of this legislation because I support any statement by Congress indicating hesitation to send U.S. taxpayer money abroad. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:17 This transition only could have occurred with a dramatic change in monetary policy and the nature of the dollar itself. Congress created the Federal Reserve system in 1913. Between then and 1971, the principle of sound money was systematically undermined. Between 1913 and 1971, the Federal Reserve found it much easier to expand the money supply at will for financing war or manipulating an economy with little resistance from Congress while benefiting the special interests that influence Congress. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:35 In the short run, the issuer of a fiat reserve currency can accrue great economic benefits. In the long run, it poses a threat to the country issuing the world currency. In this case, that is the United States. As long as foreign countries take our dollars in return for real goods, we come out ahead. This is a benefit many in Congress fail to recognize as they bash China for maintaining a positive trade balance with us. But this leads to a loss of manufacturing jobs to overseas markets as we become more dependent on others and less self-sufficient. Foreign countries accumulate our dollars due to their high savings rates and graciously lend them back to us at low interest rates to finance our excessive consumption and our wars. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:42 It is now common knowledge that the immediate reaction of the administration after 9/11 revolved around how they could connect Saddam Hussein to the attacks to justify an invasion and overthrow of his government. Even with no evidence of any connection to 9/11 or evidence of weapons of mass destruction, public and congressional support was generated through distortions and flat-out misrepresentations of the facts to justify overthrowing Saddam Hussein. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:55 Once again, Congress has bought into the war propaganda against Iran just as it did against Iraq. Arguments are now made for attacking Iran economically and militarily if necessary. These arguments are based on the same false reasons given for the ill-fated and costly occupation of Iraq. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:59 It seems that the people and Congress are easily persuaded by the jingoism of the preemptive war promoters. It is only after the cost of human life and dollars are tallied up that the people object to unwise militarism. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:60 The strange thing is that the failure in Iraq is now apparent to a large number of Americans, yet they and Congress are acquiescing to the call for a needless and dangerous confrontation with Iran. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:66 It has prompted urgent proposals of suggested reforms to deal with the mess. If only we had more rules and regulations, more reporting requirements and stricter enforcement of laws, the American people will be assured we mean business. Ethics and character will return to the Halls of Congress. It is argued that new champions of reform should be elected to leadership positions to show how serious we are about dealing with the crisis of confidence generated by the Abramoff affair. Then all will be well. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:68 It has been suggested we need to change course and correct the way Congress is run. A good idea, but if we merely tinker with current attitudes about what role the Federal Government ought to play in our lives, it won’t do much to solve the ethics crisis. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:69 True reform is impossible without addressing the immorality of wealth redistribution. Merely electing new leaders and writing more rules to regulate those who petition Congress will achieve nothing. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:70 Could it be that we are all looking in the wrong places for our solution to a recurring, constant, and pervasive corruption in government? Perhaps some of us in Congress are mistaken about the true problem. Perhaps others deliberately distract us from exposing the truth about how miserably corrupt the budget process in Congress is. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:71 Others simply are in a State of denial. But the denial will come to an end as the Abramoff scandal reveals more and more. It eventually will expose the scandal of the ages, how and to what degree the American people have become indebted by the totally irresponsible spending habits of the U.S. Congress as encouraged by successive administrations, condoned by our courts, and enjoyed by the recipients of the largesse. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:77 Under these circumstances, it is no wonder a system of runaway lobbying and special interests has developed. Add this to the military industrial complex that developed over the decades due to a foreign policy of perpetual war and foreign military intervention, and we shouldn’t wonder why there is such a powerful motivation to learn the tricks of the lobbying trade and why former Members of Congress and their aides become such high- priced commodities. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:79 Dealing with lobbying scandals while ignoring the scandal of unconstitutional runaway government will solve nothing. If people truly believe that reform is the solution through regulating lobbyists and increasing congressional reporting requirements, the real problem will be ignored and never identified. This reform only makes things worse. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:80 Greater regulation of lobbyists is a dangerous and unnecessary proposition. If one expects to solve a problem without correctly identifying its source, the problem persists. The first amendment clearly states “Congress shall make no laws respecting the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” That means no law. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:83 The theft that the Federal Government commits against its citizens and the power that Congress has assumed illegally are the real crimes that need to be dealt with. In this regard, we truly need a new direction: get rid of the evil tax system, the fraudulent monetary system and the power of the government to run our lives, the economy and the world, and the Abramoff types would be exposed for the mere gnats they are. There would be a lot less of them since the incentive to buy politicians would be removed. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:92 Excessive consumption using borrowed money is hardly the way to secure a sound economy. Instead of reining in government spending, Congress remains oblivious to the financial dangers and panders to special interests by offering no resistance whatsoever to every request for new spending. Congress spends $2.7 trillion annually in an attempt to satisfy everyone’s demands. The system has generated over $200 trillion in derivatives. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:94 As current policy further erodes the budget, special interests and Members of Congress become even more aggressive in their efforts to capture a piece of the dwindling economic pie. That success is the measure of effectiveness that guarantees a Member’s reelection. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:101 The consequences of this system, fully in place for the past 34 years, are astronomical and impossible to accurately measure. Industries go offshore, and the jobs follow. Price inflation eats away at the middle class and deficits soar, while spending escalates rapidly as Congress hopes to keep up with the problems it created. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:110 The Abramoff-type scandals come and go in Washington, patched over with grandiose schemes and reform that amount to nothing more than government and congressional mischief. But our efforts should be directed toward eliminating the greatest of all frauds, printing press money that creates the political conditions breeding the vultures and leaches who feed off the corrupt system. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:116 Finally, why not try something novel like having Congress act as an independent and equal branch of government? Restore the principle of the separation of powers so that we can perform our duty to provide checks and balances on an executive branch and an accommodating judiciary that spies on Americans, glorifies the welfare state, fights undeclared wars, and enormously increases the national debt. Congress The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 3:117 Congress was not meant to be a rubber stamp. It is time for a new direction. Congress Introduction Of The Citizen Soldier Protection Act Of 2006 16 February 2006    2006 Ron Paul 5:2 Mr. Speaker, there have been instances where members of the U.S. Armed Forces were compelled, without lawful authority, to serve under United Nations or other foreign command and to wear as part of their military uniform visible indicia or insignia of the United Nations and foreign states. This is absolutely unacceptable, as the Constitutional role of the United States Armed Forces is to protect the United States of America. It is the responsibility of the U.S. Congress to ensure that the men and women who sign up for the noble duty of defending our country do not end up serving under a foreign flag or foreign commander. And American soldiers certainly should not be forced to serve the sovereignty- destroying plans of the United Nations! Congress Debt Addiction 1 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 6:7 This means we currently are $73 billion over the legal debt limit. Creative financing Washington-style allows this to happen, but soon Congress will be forced to increase the national debt limit by hundreds of billions of dollars. Congress will raise the limit, quietly if necessary; and the deficit spiral will continue for a while longer. Congress Introduction Of The Treat Physicians Fairly Act 2 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 7:3 The professional skills with which one’s earns a living are property. Therefore, the clear language of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment prevents Congress from mandating that physicians and hospitals bear the entire costs of providing health care to any group. Congress Introduction Of The Sunlight Rule 2 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 8:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously said, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” In order to shine sunlight on the practices of the House of Representatives, and thus restore public trust and integrity to this institution, I am introducing the sunlight rule, which amends House rules to ensure that Members have adequate time to study a bill before being asked to vote on it. One of the chief causes of increasing public cynicism regarding Congress is the way major pieces of legislation are brought to the floor without Members having an opportunity to read the bills. This is particularly a problem with the Appropriations conference reports, which are often rushed to the floor of the House in late-night sessions at the end of the year. For example, just this past December, the House voted on the Fiscal Year 2006 Defense Appropriations Conference Report at approximately 4 a.m. — just 4 hours after the report was filed. Yet, the report contained language dealing with avian flu, including controversial language regarding immunity liability for vaccine manufacturers, that was added in the House-Senate conference on the bill. Considering legislation on important issues in this manner is a dereliction of our duty as the people’s elected representatives. Congress Introduction Of The Sunlight Rule 2 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 8:4 Mr. Speaker, the practice of rushing bills to the floor before individual Members have had a chance to study the bills is one of the major factors contributing to public distrust of Congress. Voting on bills before Members have had time to study them makes a mockery of representative government and cheats the voters who sent us here to make informed decisions on public policy. Adopting the sunlight rule is one of, if not the, most important changes to the House rules this Congress could make to restore public trust in, and help preserve the integrity of, this institution. I hope my colleagues will support this change to the House rules. Congress S. 2271 Fails To Address The Constitutional Flaws In The PATRIOT Act 7 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 9:2 The Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee essentially admitted that S. 2271 does nothing to address the core concerns constitutionalists and civil libertarians have with the PATRIOT Act. In fact, he has announced his intention to introduce his own PATRIOT Act reform bill! However, if S. 2271 passes and PATRIOT Act extension becomes law, it is highly unlikely that this Congress will consider any other PATRIOT Act reform legislation. Congress S. 2271 Fails To Address The Constitutional Flaws In The PATRIOT Act 7 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 9:3 USA Today’s Editorial of March 1, “Patriot Act ‘compromise’ trades liberty for safety,” accurately describes how people concerned about individual liberty should react to S. 2271’s “reforms”: “Big Deal. By any standard of respect for the Bill of Rights, those provisions never should have been in the law in the first place. What is it about the Fourth Amendment (‘The right of the people to be secure . . . against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated’) that Congress doesn’t get?” Congress Introduction Of The Sunshine In Monetary Policy Act 7 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 10:2 The Federal Reserve Board has recently announced it will stop reporting M3, thus depriving Congress and the American people of the most comprehensive measure of the money supply. The cessation of Federal Reserve’s weekly M3 report will make it more difficult for policymakers, economists, investors, and the general public to learn the true rate of inflation. As Nobel laureate Milton Friedman famously said, “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.” Therefore, having access to a comprehensive measure of the money supply like M3 is a vital tool for those seeking to track inflation. Thorsten Polleit, honorary professor at HfB-Business School of Finance and Management, in his article “Why Money Supply Matters” posted on the Ludwig von Mises Institute’s website mises.org, examined the relationship between changes in the money supply and inflation and concluded that “money supply signals might actually be far more important for inflation — even in the short-term — than current central bank practice suggests,” thus demonstrating the importance of the M3 aggregate. Congress Introduction Of The Sunshine In Monetary Policy Act 7 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 10:5 Economists and others who are following M3 have become increasingly concerned about inflation because last year the rate of M3 rose almost twice as fast as other monetary aggregates. This suggests that the inflation picture is not as rosy as the Federal Reserve would like Congress and the American people to believe. Discontinuing reporting the monetary aggregate that provides the best evidence that the Federal Reserve Board has not conquered inflation suggests to many people that the government is trying to conceal information about the true state of the economy from the American people. Brad Conrad, a professor of investing who has also worked with IBM, CDC, and Amdahl, spoke for many when he said, “It [the discontinuance of M3] is unsettling. It detracts from the transparency the Fed preaches and adds to the suspicion that the Fed wants to hide anything showing money growth high enough to fuel inflation...” Discontinuing reporting M3 will only save 0.00000699% of the Federal Reserve Board’s yearly budget. This savings hardly seems to justify depriving the American people of an important measurement of money supply, especially since Congress has tasked the Federal Reserve Board with reporting on monetary aggregates. Congress Introduction Of The Sunshine In Monetary Policy Act 7 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 10:6 Discontinuing reporting M3 may not be a violation of the letter of the Federal Reserve Board’s statutory duty, but it is a violation of the spirit of the congressional command that the Federal Reserve Board ensure the American public is fully informed about the effects of monetary policy. Congress Opposes Supplemental Spending Bill 15 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 15:2 First, I should note to my colleagues and the American taxpayer that, at almost $92 billion, this is the largest supplemental appropriations request in the history of the U.S. Congress. Congress Making The World Safe For Christianity 28 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 19:9 Pointing out the lack of success is taboo. It seems of little concern to many Members of Congress that we lack both the moral right and constitutional authority to impose our will on other nations. Congress College Access and Opportunity Act 30 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 20:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, anyone in need of proof that Federal control follows Federal funding need only examine H.R. 609, the College Access and Opportunity Act. H.R. 609 imposes several new mandates on colleges, and extends numerous mandates imposed on that previous Congress imposed on colleges. H.R. 609 proves the prophetic soundness of people who warned that Federal higher education programs would lead to Federal control of higher education. Congress College Access and Opportunity Act 30 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 20:2 Opponents of increasing Federal control over higher education should be especially concerned about H.R. 609’s “Academic Bill of Rights.” This provision takes a step toward complete Federal control of college curriculum, grading, and teaching practices. While this provision is worded as a “sense of Congress,” the clear intent of the “bill of rights” is to intimidate college administrators into ensuring professors’ lectures and lesson plans meet with Federal approval. Congress College Access and Opportunity Act 30 March 2006    2006 Ron Paul 20:3 The Academic Bill of Rights is a response to concerns that federally funded institutions of higher learning are refusing to allow students to express, or even be exposed to, points of view that differ from those held by their professors. Ironically, the proliferation of “political correctness” on college campuses is largely a direct result of increased government funding of colleges and universities. Federal funding has isolated institutions of higher education from market discipline, thus freeing professors to promulgate their “politically correct” views regardless of whether this type of instruction benefits their students — who are, after all, the professors’ customers. Now, in a perfect illustration of how politicians use the problems created by previous interventions in the market as a justification for further interventions, Congress proposes to use the problem of “political correctness” to justify more Federal control over college classrooms. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:4 Even with the horrible results of the past 3 years, Congress is abuzz with plans to change the Iranian government. There is little resistance to the rise and clamor for democratization in Iran, even though their current President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is an elected leader. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:6 It is amazing how soon after being thoroughly discredited over the charges levied against Saddam Hussein the neoconservatives are willing to use the same arguments against Iran. It is frightening to see how easily Congress, the media and the people accept many of the same arguments against Iran that were used to justify an invasion of Iraq. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:18 I worry that before we can finish the war we are in and extricate ourselves, the patriotic fervor for expanding into Iran will drown out the cries of, “Enough already.” The agitation and congressional resolutions painting Iran as an enemy about to attack us have already begun. It is too bad we cannot learn from our mistakes. This time, there will be a greater pretense of an international effort sanctioned by the U.N. before the bombs are dropped. But even without support from the international community, we should expect the plan for regime change to continue. We have been forewarned that all options remain on the table, and there is little reason to expect much resistance from Congress. So far there is little resistance expressed in Congress for taking on Iran than there was prior to going into Iraq. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:24 For whatever reasons the neoconservatives might give, they are bound and determined to confront the Iranian government and demand changes in its leadership. This policy will further spread our military presence and undermine our security. The sad truth is that the supposed dangers posed by Iran are no more real than those claimed about Iraq. The charges made against Iran are unsubstantiated and amazingly sound very similar to the false charges made against Iraq. One would think promoters of the war against Iraq would be a little bit more reluctant to use the same arguments to stir up hatred toward Iran. The American people and Congress should be more cautious in accepting these charges at face value, yet it seems the propaganda is working since few in Washington object as Congress passes resolutions condemning Iran and asking for U.N. sanctions against her. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:27 There has been a lot of misinformation regarding Iran’s nuclear program. This distortion of the truth has been used to pump up emotions in Congress to pass resolutions condemning her and promoting U.N. sanctions. IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei has never reported any evidence of undeclared sources or special nuclear material in Iran or any diversion of nuclear material. We demand that Iran prove it is not in violation of nuclear agreements, which is asking them impossibly to prove a negative. ElBaradei states Iran is in compliance with the nuclear nonproliferation treaty required IAEA safeguards agreement. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:30 The demand for U.N. sanctions is now being strongly encouraged by Congress. The Iran Freedom Support Act, H.R. 282 passed in the International Relations Committee and recently the House passed H. Con. Res. 341, which inaccurately condemned Iran for violating its international nuclear nonproliferation obligations. At present, the likelihood of reason prevailing in Congress is minimal. Let there be no doubt, the neoconservative warriors are still in charge and are conditioning Congress, the media, and the American people for a preemptive attack on Iran, never mind that Afghanistan has unraveled and Iraq is in a Civil War. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:35 Sanctions, along with financial and political support to persons and groups dedicated to the overthrow of the Iranian government, are acts of war. Once again, we are unilaterally declaring a preemptive war against a country and a people that have not harmed us and do not have the capacity to do so. And do not expect Congress to seriously debate a declaration of war. For the past 56 years, Congress has transferred to the executive branch the power to go to war as it pleases, regardless of the tragic results and costs. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:39 Exactly when an attack will occur is not known, but we have been forewarned more than once that all options are on the table. The sequence of events now occurring with regards to Iran are eerily reminiscent of the hype to our preemptive strike against Iraq. We should remember the saying: “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.” It looks to me like the Congress and the country is open to being fooled once again. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:42 The President states: Iran’s “desire to have a nuclear weapon is unacceptable.” A desire is purely subjective and cannot be substantiated nor disproved. Therefore, all that is necessary to justify an attack is if Iran fails to prove it does not have a desire to be like the United States, China, Russia, Britain, France, Pakistan, North Korea, India and Israel whose nuclear missiles surround Iran. Logic like this to justify a new war, without the least consideration for a congressional declaration of war, is indeed frightening. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:43 Commonsense telling us Congress, especially given the civil war in Iraq and the mess in Afghanistan, should move with great caution in condoning a military confrontation with Iran. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:45 Unfortunately, the legislative branch of our government too often defers to the executive branch and offers little resistance to war plans, even with no significant threat to our security. The need to go to war is always couched in patriotic terms and falsehoods regarding an imaginary, imminent danger. Not supporting the effort is painted as unpatriotic and wimpish against some evil that is about to engulf us. The real reason for our militarism is rarely revealed and hidden from the public. Even Congress is deceived into supporting adventurism they would not accept if fully informed. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:47 One of the greatest losses suffered these past 60 years from interventionism becoming an acceptable policy of both major parties is respect for the Constitution. Congress flatly has reneged on its huge responsibility to declare war. Going to war was never meant to be an executive decision, used indiscriminately with no resistance from Congress. The strongest attempt by Congress in the past 60 years to properly exert itself over foreign policy was the passage of the Foley amendment, demanding no assistance be given to the Nicaraguan contras. Even this explicit prohibition was flaunted by an earlier administration. Congress Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:57 In a way, it is amazing there is not a lot more outrage expressed by the American people. There is plenty of complaining but no outrage over policies that are not part of our American tradition. War based on false pretenses, 20,000 American casualties, torture policies, thousands jailed without due process, illegal surveillance of citizens, warrantless searches, and yet no outrage. When the issues come before Congress, executive authority is maintained or even strengthened while real oversight is ignored. Congress Gold And The U.S. Dollar 25 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 23:24 Today, no one in Washington believes for a minute that runaway deficits are going to be curtailed. In March alone, the Federal Government created a historic $85 billion deficit. The current supplemental bill going through Congress has grown from $92 billion to over $106 billion, and everyone knows it will not draw President Bush’s first veto. Congress Gold And The U.S. Dollar 25 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 23:26 There is no single measurement that reveals what the Fed has done in the recent past or tells us exactly what it is about to do in the future. Forget about the lip service given to transparency by the new Fed Chairman Bernanke. Not only is this administration one of the most secretive across the board in our history, the current Fed firmly supports denying the most important measurement of current monetary policy to Congress, the financial community and the American public. Congress Gold And The U.S. Dollar 25 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 23:27 Because of a lack of interest and poor understanding of monetary policy, Congress has expressed essentially no concern about the significant change in reporting statistics on the money supply. Beginning in March, though planned before Bernanke arrived at the Fed, the central bank discontinued compiling and reporting monetary aggregates known as M3. M3 is the best description of how quickly the Fed is creating new money and credit. Common sense tells us that a government central bank creating new money out of thin air depreciates the value of each dollar in circulation. Yet this report is no longer available to us, and Congress makes no demands to receive it. Congress Gold And The U.S. Dollar 25 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 23:31 A soaring gold price is a vote of no confidence in the central bank and the dollar. This certainly was the case in 1979 and 1980. Today gold prices reflect a growing restlessness with the increasing money supply, our budgetary and trade deficits, our unfunded liabilities, and the inability of this Congress and the administration to rein in runaway spending. Congress Gold And The U.S. Dollar 25 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 23:86 Today, we face a 60 percent devaluation and counting, yet no one seems to care. It is of greater significance than the three events mentioned above, and yet the one measurement that best reflects the degree of inflation, the Fed and our government denies us. Since March, M3 reporting has been discontinued. For starters, I would like to see Congress demand that this report be resumed. I fully believe the American people and Congress are entitled to this information. Congress Gold And The U.S. Dollar 25 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 23:89 A sharply rising gold price is a vote of no confidence in the Congress’ ability to control the budget, the Fed’s ability to control the money supply, and the administration’s ability to bring stability to the Middle East. Congress Gold And The U.S. Dollar 25 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 23:94 The time for action is now, and it is up to the American people and the U.S. Congress to demand it. Congress 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.” Congress 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. Congress What To Do About Soaring Oil Prices 2 May 2006    2006 Ron Paul 32:5 Second, we must end our obsession for a military confrontation with Iran. Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, and according to our own CIA is not on the verge of obtaining one for years. Iran is not in violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and has a guaranteed right to enrich uranium for energy, in spite of the incessant government and media propaganda to the contrary. Iran has never been sanctioned by the U.N. Security Council, yet the drumbeat grows louder for attacking certain sites in Iran, either by conventional or even by nuclear means. Repeated resolutions by Congress stirs up unnecessary animosity toward Iran, and creates even more concern about future oil supplies from the Middle East. Congress What To Do About Soaring Oil Prices 2 May 2006    2006 Ron Paul 32:7 Third, we must remember that prices of all things go up because of inflation. Inflation, by definition, is an increase in the money supply. The money supply is controlled by the Federal Reserve and responds to the deficits Congress creates. When deficits are excessive, as they are today, the Fed creates new dollars out of thin air to buy Treasury bills and keeps interest rates artificially low. But when new money is created out of nothing, the money already in circulation loses value. Congress Jack Abramoff Scandal 3 May 2006    2006 Ron Paul 33:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, the public outrage over the Jack Abramoff scandal presented Congress with an opportunity to support real reform by addressing the root cause of the corruption: the amount of money and power located in Washington, D.C. A true reform agenda would focus on ending federal funding for unconstitutional programs, beginning with those programs that benefit wealthy corporations and powerful special interests. Congress should also change the way we do business in the House by passing the Sunlight Rule (H. Res. 709). The Sunlight Rule ensures that members of the House of Representatives and the American public have adequate time to read and study legislation before it is voted upon. Ending the practice of rushing major legislation to the House floor before members have had a chance to find out the details of bills will do more to improve the legislative process and restore public confidence in this institution than will imposing new registration requirements on lobbyists or making staffers waste their time at an “ethics class.” Congress Jack Abramoff Scandal 3 May 2006    2006 Ron Paul 33:2 I am disappointed, but not surprised, to see that Congress is failing to go after the root cause of corruption. Instead, we are considering placing further burdens on the people’s exercise of their free speech rights. H.R. 4975 will not deter corrupt lobbyists, staffers, or members. What H.R. 4975 will do is discourage ordinary Americans from participating in the policy process. Among the ways H.R. 4975 silences ordinary Americans is by requiring grassroots citizens’ action organizations to divulge their membership lists so Congress can scrutinize the organizations’ relationships with members of Congress. The result of this will be to make many Americans reluctant to support or join these organizations. Making it more difficult for average Americans to have their voices heard is an odd response to concerns that Congress is more responsive to special interests than to the American public. Congress Jack Abramoff Scandal 3 May 2006    2006 Ron Paul 33:5 However, I would like to remind my colleagues that, since earmark reform does not reduce the total amount of spending, instead giving more power to the executive branch to allocate federal funds, the problem of members trading their votes in exchange for earmarks will continue. The only difference will be that instead of trading their votes to win favor with Congressional appropriators and House leadership, members will trade their votes to get funding from the Executive branch. Transferring power over allocation of taxpayer dollars from the legislative branch to the executive branch is hardly a victory for republican government. Reducing Congress’s role in allocating of tax dollars, without reducing the Federal budget, also means State and local officials, to say nothing of ordinary citizens, will have less input into how Federal funds are spent. Congress Jack Abramoff Scandal 3 May 2006    2006 Ron Paul 33:7 The principals in the recent scandals where not deterred by existing laws and congressional ethics rules. Why would a future Jack Abramoff be deterred by H.R. 4975? H.R. 4975 is not just ineffective to the extent that it burdens the ability of average citizens to support and join grassroots organizations to more effectively participate in the policy process, H.R. 4975 violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the First Amendment. I therefore urge my colleagues to reject this bill and instead work to reduce corruption in Washington by reducing the size and power of the Federal Government. Congress Tribute To Calhoun High School 11 May 2006    2006 Ron Paul 34:4 We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution is a nationally acclaimed civic education program focusing on the history and principles of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. In addition to the requirements of the standard government class, students in this program must master a rigorous curriculum in the background and philosophy of the U.S. Constitution. They participate in oral assessment that involves both prepared and extemporaneous responses to challenging questions. In this nationwide competition, students play the role of “experts in the Constitution,” testifying before a mock Congressional hearing. Among other criteria, students are evaluated on their depth of knowledge, ability to apply academic data to current problems, and understanding of landmark Supreme Court cases. Teams of three students each present a four-minute prepared testimony to answer questions they have researched all semester, and then they respond to extemporaneous follow- up questions from the judges for another six minutes. Judges at the state contest include practicing attorneys, university professors, historians, and legislative staff members. Congress National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2007 11 May 2006    2006 Ron Paul 35:6 The bill also opens the door for more military interventionism overseas, directing the Pentagon to report to Congress on any current or planned U.S. military activities in support of peacekeeping missions of U.N. or NATO forces in Sudan. Congress Amending Title 49, United States Code 6 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 42:2 Some people, including many House of Representatives members with whom I usually agree, are claiming that H.R. 5449 will cost American taxpayers billions of dollars. This claim is based on an assumption that the final result of the mediation process established by H.R. 5449 will be significantly more costly to the taxpayer then the contract the FAA will impose on the controllers if H.R. 5449 fails to pass. However, under H.R. 5449, the dispute will be resolved by a Federal mediation panel whose members are appointed by the president. I am skeptical that a presidentially appointed mediation board will give an exorbitant package to NATCA, especially since the difference between the FAA’s current proposal and the NATCA’s last offer is less than a billion dollars. It is true that a future mediation panel may be populated by people appointed by an administration more friendly to the air traffic controllers than the current administration, but it is also possible that a future Congress would use its leverage in the current process to force the FAA to accept contracts tilted in favor of the NATCA. We should not judge procedural issues based on uncertain predictions about results. Congress Introduction Of The Steel Financing Fairness Act 15 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 44:7 I have no doubt that America’s steel industry can out-compete the steel industry of any country if allowed to compete on a level planning field. Unfortunately, due in part to government policy, today’s playing field is in no way level. Congress must end this economically destructive, immoral, and unconstitutional policy of forcing owners and workers in the domestic steel industry to subsidize their competitors. I therefore call upon my colleagues to cosponsor the Steel Financing Fairness Act. Congress Legislative Line Item Veto Act 22 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 47:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4890, the Legislative Line Item Veto Act, is not an effective means of reining in excessive government spending. In fact, H.R. 4890 would most likely increase the size of government because future presidents will use their line item veto powers to pressure members of Congress to vote for presidential priorities in order to avoid having their spending projects “line item” vetoed. In my years in Congress, I cannot recall a single instance where a president lobbied Congress to reduce spending. In fact, in 1996 Vice President Al Gore suggested that President Clinton could use his new line item veto power to force Congress to restore federal spending and programs eliminated in the 1996 welfare reform bill. Giving the president authority to pressure members of Congress to vote for new government programs in exchange for protecting members’ pet spending projects is hardly a victory for fiscal responsibility or limited government. Congress Legislative Line Item Veto Act 22 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 47:2 H.R. 4890 supporters claim that this bill does not violate the Constitution. I am skeptical of this claim since giving the president the power to pick and choose which parts of legislation to sign into law transforms the president into a legislator, thus upending the Constitution’s careful balance of powers between the Congress and the president. I doubt the drafters of the Constitution, who rightly saw that giving legislative power to the executive branch would undermine republican government and threaten individual liberty, would support H.R. 4890. Congress Legislative Line Item Veto Act 22 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 47:3 Mr. Speaker, it is simply not true that Congress needs to give the president the line item veto power to end excessive spending. Congress can end excessive spending simply by returning to the limitations on government power contained in the United States Constitution. The problem is a lack of will among members of Congress to rein in spending, not a lack of presidential power. Congress’s failure to do its duty and cut spending is no excuse for granting new authority to the executive branch. Congress Agreeing To Talk To Iran Unconditionally 22 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 48:8 As my colleagues are well aware, I am strongly opposed to the United Nations and our participation in that organization. Every Congress I introduce a bill to get us out of the U.N., but I also recognize problems with our demanding to have it both ways. On one hand, we pretend to abide by the U.N. and international laws, such as when Congress cited the U.N. on numerous occasions in its resolution authorizing the President to initiate war against Iraq. On the other hand, we feel free to completely ignore the terms of treaties, and even unilaterally demand a change in the terms of the treaties without hesitation. This leads to an increasing perception around the world that we are no longer an honest broker, that we are not to be trusted. Is this the message we want to send at this critical time? Congress Society For Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications 29 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 49:2 According to investigative journalist James Bovard, writing in the Baltimore Sun on June 28, “[a] U.N. report on terrorist financing released in May 2002 noted that a ‘suspicious transaction report’ had been filed with the U.S. government over a $69,985 wire transfer that Mohamed Atta, leader of the hijackers, received from the United Arab Emirates. The report noted that ‘this particular transaction was not noticed quickly enough because the report was just one of a very large number and was not distinguishable from those related to other financial crimes.’ ” Congress should be skeptical, to say the least, that giving federal bureaucrats even more data to sift through will make the American people safer. Congress Society For Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications 29 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 49:3 Congress should examine all government programs that monitor the financial transactions of American citizens to ensure they are effective and they do not violate the rights of Americans. Unfortunately, many of my colleagues are attacking newspapers that inform the American people about government surveillance on the grounds that revealing that the federal government is monitoring financial transactions somehow damages national security. It is odd to claim that, until last Friday, neither the American people nor America’s enemies had any idea that the government is engaging in massive surveillance of financial transactions, since the government has been openly operating major financial surveillance programs since the 1970s and both the administration and Congress have repeatedly discussed increasing the government’s power to monitor financial transactions. In fact, such an expansion of the government’s ability to spy on Americans’ banking activites was a major part of the PATRIOT Act. Congress Society For Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications 29 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 49:4 Congress should be leery of criticizing media reporting on government activity. Attacking the media for revealing information about government surveillance of American citizens may make reporters reluctant to aggressively pursue stories that may embarrass the government. A reluctance by the media to “embarrass the state” will make it easier for the federal government to get away with violating the people’s rights. Media reports on government surveillance and other security programs can help Congress and the Americans people ensure the government’s actions effectively protect Americans’ security without infringing on basic constitutional liberties. I therefore urge my colleagues to reject this resolution. Congress Introduction Of The We The People Act 29 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 51:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning state laws and polices relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the president, according to rules established by the Congress. Congress Introduction Of The We The People Act 29 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 51:2 The United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to establish and limit the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts and limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Founders intended Congress to use this authority to correct abuses of power by the federal judiciary. Congress Introduction Of The We The People Act 29 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 51:4 In recent years, we have seen numerous abuses of power by federal courts. Federal judges regularly strike down state and local laws on subjects such as religious liberty, sexual orientation, family relations, education, and abortion. This government by federal judiciary causes a virtual nullification of the Tenth Amendment’s limitations on federal power. Furthermore, when federal judges impose their preferred polices on state and local governments, instead of respecting the polices adopted by those elected by, and thus accountable to, the people, republican government is threatened. Article IV, section 4 of the United States Constitution guarantees each state a republican form of government. Thus, Congress must act when the executive or judicial branch threatens the republican governments of the individual states. Therefore, Congress has a responsibility to stop federal judges from running roughshod over state and local laws. The Founders would certainly have supported congressional action to reign in federal judges who tell citizens where they can and can’t place manger scenes at Christmas. Congress Introduction Of The We The People Act 29 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 51:6 Unless Congress acts, a state’s authority to define and regulate marriage may be the next victim of activist judges. After all, such a decision would simply take the Supreme Court’s decision in the Lawrence case, which overturned all state sodomy laws, to its logical conclusion. Congress must launch a preemptive strike against any further federal usurpation of the states’ authority to regulate marriage by removing issues concerning the definition of marriage from the jurisdiction of federal courts. Congress Introduction Of The We The People Act 29 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 51:7 Although marriage is licensed and otherwise regulated by the states, government did not create the institution of marriage. Government regulation of marriage is based on state recognition of the practices and customs formulated by private individuals interacting in civil institutions, such as churches and synagogues. Having federal officials, whether judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose a new definition of marriage on the people is an act of social engineering profoundly hostile to liberty. Congress Introduction Of The We The People Act 29 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 51:8 It is long past time that Congress exercises its authority to protect the republican government of the states from out-of-control federal judges. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the We the People Act. Congress Why Are Americans So Angry? June 29, 2006    2006 Ron Paul 52:62 Policy changes in wartime are difficult, for it is almost impossible for the administration to change course since so much emotional energy has been invested in the effort. That’s why Eisenhower ended the Korean War, and not Truman. That’s why Nixon ended the Vietnam War, and not LBJ. Even in the case of Vietnam the end was too slow and costly, as more then 30,000 military deaths came after Nixon’s election in 1968. It makes a lot more sense to avoid unnecessary wars than to overcome the politics involved in stopping them once started. I personally am convinced that many of our wars could be prevented by paying stricter attention to the method whereby our troops are committed to battle. I also am convinced that when Congress does not declare war, victory is unlikely. Congress Why Are Americans So Angry? June 29, 2006    2006 Ron Paul 52:63 The most important thing Congress can do to prevent needless and foolish wars is for every member to take seriously his or her oath to obey the Constitution. Wars should be entered into only after great deliberation and caution. Wars that are declared by Congress should reflect the support of the people, and the goal should be a quick and successful resolution. Congress Why Are Americans So Angry? June 29, 2006    2006 Ron Paul 52:65 The 2002 resolution allowing the president to decide when and if to invade Iraq is an embarrassment. The Constitution authorizes only Congress to declare war. Our refusal to declare war transferred power to the president illegally, without a constitutional amendment. Congress did this with a simple resolution, passed by majority vote. This means Congress reneged on its responsibility as a separate branch of government, and should be held accountable for the bad policy in Iraq that the majority of Americans are now upset about. Congress is every bit as much at fault as the president. Congress Why Are Americans So Angry? June 29, 2006    2006 Ron Paul 52:74 The cost of war since 1945, and our military presence in over 100 countries, exceeds two trillion dollars in today’s dollars. The cost in higher taxes, debt, and persistent inflation is immeasurable. Likewise, the economic opportunities lost by diverting trillions of dollars into war is impossible to measure, but it is huge. Yet our presidents persist in picking fights with countries that pose no threat to us, refusing to participate in true diplomacy to resolve differences. Congress over the decades has never resisted the political pressures to send our troops abroad on missions that defy imagination. Congress Why Are Americans So Angry? June 29, 2006    2006 Ron Paul 52:76 The military-industrial complex we were warned about has been transformed into a military-media-industrial-government complex that is capable of silencing the dissenters and cheerleading for war. It’s only after years of failure that people are able to overcome the propaganda for war and pressure their representatives in Congress to stop the needless killing. Many times the economic costs of war stir people to demand an end. This time around the war might be brought to a halt by our actual inability to pay the bills due to a dollar crisis. A dollar crisis will make borrowing 2.5 billion dollars per day from foreign powers like China and Japan virtually impossible, at least at affordable interest rates. Congress Why Are Americans So Angry? June 29, 2006    2006 Ron Paul 52:78 The solution to this mess is not complicated; but the changes needed are nearly impossible for political reasons. Sound free market economics, sound money, and a sensible foreign policy would all result from strict adherence to the Constitution. If the people desired it, and Congress was filled with responsible members, a smooth although challenging transition could be achieved. Since this is unlikely, we can only hope that the rule of law and the goal of liberty can be reestablished without chaos. Congress Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act 11 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 53:9 H.R. 4411, the Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act, should be rejected by Congress since the Federal Government has no constitutional authority to ban or even discourage any form of gambling. Congress Bilingual Ballots 13 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 56:2 I had joined with my colleague from Iowa, Mr. KING, in supporting an amendment to strike the bilingual ballot mandate, which was unfortunately rejected by this House. Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that a person must demonstrate a basic command of the English language before becoming a citizen, Congress is continuing to force States to provide ballots in languages other than English. If a knowledge of English is important enough to be a precondition of citizenship, then why should we force States to facilitate voting in languages other than English? Congress Alternative Pluripotent Stem cell Therapies Enhancement Act 18 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 57:2 The main question that should concern Congress today is does the United States Government have the constitutional authority to fund any form of stem cell research. The clear answer to that question is no. A proper constitutional position would reject federal funding for stem cell research, while allowing the individual states and private citizens to decide whether to permit, ban, or fund this research. Therefore, I will vote to uphold President Bush’s expected veto of H.R. 810. Congress Alternative Pluripotent Stem cell Therapies Enhancement Act 18 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 57:8 Mr. Speaker, there is no question that forcing taxpayers to subsidize embryonic stem cell research violates basic constitutional principles. However, S. 2754 also exceeds Congress’s constitutional authority and may even retard effective adult stem cell research. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote against S. 2754 and vote to uphold President Bush’s veto of H.R. 810. Instead, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3444, the Cures Can Be Found Act. Congress Marriage Protection Amendment 18 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 58:3 If I were in Congress in 1996, I would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’s constitutional authority to define what official state documents other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a “same sex” marriage license issued in another state. This Congress, I am an original cosponsor of the Marriage Protection Act, H.R. 1100, that removes challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from federal courts’ jurisdiction. If I were a member of the Texas legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state. Congress Marriage Protection Amendment 18 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 58:5 Conservatives in particular should be leery of anything that increases federal power, since centralized government power is traditionally the enemy of conservative values. I agree with the assessment of former Congressman Bob Barr, who authored the Defense of Marriage Act: Congress Marriage Protection Amendment 18 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 58:7 Passing a constitutional amendment is a long, drawn-out process. The fact that the marriage amendment already failed to gather the necessary two-thirds support in the Senate means that, even if two-thirds of House members support the amendment, it will not be sent to states for ratification this year. Even if the amendment gathers the necessary two- thirds support in both houses of Congress, it still must go through the time-consuming process of state ratification. This process requires three-quarters of the state legislatures to approve the amendment before it can become effective. Those who believe that immediate action to protect the traditional definition of marriage is necessary should consider that the Equal Rights Amendment easily passed both houses of Congress and was quickly ratified by a number of states. Yet, that amendment remains unratified today. Proponents of this marriage amendment should also consider that efforts to amend the Constitution to address flag burning and require the federal government to balance the budget have been ongoing for years, without any success. Congress Marriage Protection Amendment 18 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 58:8 Ironically, liberal social engineers who wish to use federal government power to redefine marriage will be able to point to the constitutional marriage amendment as proof that the definition of marriage is indeed a federal matter! I am unwilling either to cede to federal courts the authority to redefine marriage, or to deny a state’s ability to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. Instead, I believe it is time for Congress and state legislatures to reassert their authority by refusing to enforce judicial usurpations of power. Congress Marriage Protection Amendment 18 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 58:9 In contrast to a constitutional amendment, the Marriage Protection Act requires only a majority vote of both houses of Congress and the President’s signature to become law. The bill already has passed the House of Representatives; at least 51 Senators would vote for it; and the President would sign this legislation given his commitment to protecting the traditional definition of marriage. Therefore, those who believe Congress needs to take immediate action to protect marriage this year should focus on passing the Marriage Protection Act. Congress National Aeronautics And Spaca Administration 19 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 59:8 I would like now to close with a particular quote that is very pertinent for what we are doing here with this resolution. This comes from a famous author of the last century, who might have been one of the most famous, who wrote a book that many Members of this Congress may well have read. The interesting thing about this quote, it comes from an individual who was not much in favor of big government. As a matter of fact, she was in favor of very, very limited government, and she introduced the ideas of libertarianism to millions of Americans. Congress Noninterventionist Policy — Part 2 19 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 63:5 So I think it would be fairer within this Congress to allow us to have a chance to debate these in the committee, to bring them to the floor. Congress Noninterventionist Policy — Part 3 19 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 64:3 I was in the Congress in the early 1980s, and then I left Congress, and I just come back recently. But I was here when the Marines were sent in to Lebanon, and I strenuously came to the floor before they went, when they went, and before they were killed, arguing my case. And then they were killed. Ronald Reagan, when he sent the troops in, said he would never turn tail and run. Congress Whom to Blame 19 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 66:27 And domestic spending is never curtailed. We have been in charge of the Congress and the Presidency for several years now, and the government gets bigger, probably faster than it was getting before. Congress Condemning The Recent Attacks Against The State Of Israel 19 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 68:5 I was in Congress in the early 1980s when the U.S. Marines were sent into Lebanon, and I came to the Floor before they went, when they went, and before they were killed, arguing my case against getting involved in that conflict. Congress H.R. 5068, the Export-Import Reauthorization Act 25 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 69:2 Mr. Speaker, Congress should reject H.R. 5068, the Export-Import Reauthorization Act, for economic, constitutional, and moral reasons. The Export- Import Bank takes money from American taxpayers to subsidize exports by American companies. Of course it is not just any company that receives Ex- Im support. Congress 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? Congress H.R. 5068, the Export-Import Reauthorization Act 25 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 69:16 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, Eximbank distorts the market by allowing government bureaucrats to make economic decisions in place of individual consumers. Eximbank also violates basic principles of morality, by forcing working Americans to subsidize the trade of wealthy companies that could easily afford to subsidize their own trade, as well as subsidizing brutal governments like Red China and the Sudan. Eximbank also violates the limitations on congressional power to take the property of individual citizens and use it to benefit powerful special interests. It is for these reasons that I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 5068, the Export-Import Bank Reauthorization Act. Congress Tribute To UTMB 26 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 71:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I wish to commend the University of Texas Medical Branch of Galveston (UTMB), Texas, which is in my congressional district, on being named by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation one of the best workplaces for commuters among colleges and universities. UTMB earned this recognition because of its efforts to improve both the environment and the quality of life for commuters. UTMB has also recently received Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need grant to support seven fellowships for nursing students who intend to teach nursing at the university level. UTMB only applied for funding for three nursing fellowships, but the Department of Education awarded UTMB funding for seven fellowships. I am sure I do not have to tell my colleagues how unusual it is for a college to be awarded more funding than they requested. Congress Health Information Technology Promotion Act Of 2006 27 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 72:4 Those who are concerned with the increasing erosion of medical privacy should also oppose H.R. 4157. H.R. 4157 facilitates the invasion of medical privacy by explicitly making electronic medical records subject to the misnamed federal “medical privacy” regulation. Mr. Chairman, many things in Washington are misnamed, however this regulation may be the most blatant case of false advertising I have come across in all my years in Congress. Rather than protect an individual right to medical privacy, these regulations empower government officials to determine how much medical privacy an individual needs. Congress Raising The Minimum Wage 28 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 73:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address my concerns with H.R. 5970, a bill to raise the federally mandated minimum wage. Before addressing the substance of this bill, I must address the flaws in the process under which this bill is brought before us. Neither I nor my staff had received any indication the bill before us tonight would be considered by the House until late this afternoon, and the only way a member of the general public could learn about this bill is to look on the Rules Committee website. Therefore, Members of Congress are being asked to vote for a major piece of legislation that was introduced just hours before being voted on the Friday night before Congress adjourns for the month of August. Congress Raising The Minimum Wage 28 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 73:2 The practice of rushing bills to the floor before individual Members have had a chance to study the bills is one of the major factors contributing to public distrust of Congress. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced legislation, the Sunlight Rule (H. Res. 709), to prevent situations like the one currently confronting Members. The Sunlight Rule prohibits any piece of legislation, including conference reports, from being brought before the House of Representatives unless it has been available to Members and staff in both print and electronic versions for at least 10 days. H. Res. 709 also requires that conference reports and manager’s amendments that make substantive changes to a bill must be available in both printed and electronic forms at least 72 hours before a vote. Congress Raising The Minimum Wage 28 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 73:3 The announced purpose of this bill is to raise living standards for all Americans. This is certainly an admirable goal, however, to believe that Congress can raise the standard of living for working Americans by simply forcing employers to pay their employees a higher wage is equivalent to claiming that Congress can repeal gravity by passing a law saying humans shall have the ability to fly. Congress Raising The Minimum Wage 28 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 73:7 Mr. Speaker, I do not wish my opposition to this bill to be misconstrued as counseling inaction. Quite the contrary, Congress must enact ambitious program of tax cuts and regulatory reform to remove government-created obstacles to job growth. However, Mr. Speaker, Congress should not fool itself into believing that the package of tax cuts included in this bill will compensate for the damage inflicted on small businesses and their employees by the minimum wage increase. This assumes that Congress is omnipotent and thus can strike a perfect balance between tax cuts and regulations so that no firm, or worker, in the country is adversely affected by Federal policies. If the 20th Century taught us anything it was that any and all attempts to centrally plan an economy, especially one as large and diverse as America’s, are doomed to fail. Congress Raising The Minimum Wage 28 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 73:8 In conclusion, I would remind my colleagues that while it may make them feel good to raise the Federal minimum wage, the real life consequences of this bill will be vested upon those who can least afford to be deprived of work opportunities. Therefore, rather than pretend that Congress can repeal the economic principles, I urge my colleagues to reject this legislation and instead embrace a program of tax cuts and regulatory reform to strengthen the greatest producer of jobs and prosperity in human history: the free market. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:3 Not long ago, I spoke on this floor about why I believe Americans are so angry in spite of rosy government economic reports. The majority of Americans are angry, disgusted, and frustrated that so little is being done in Congress to solve their problems. The fact is, a majority of American citizens expect the Federal Government to provide for every need without considering whether government causes many economic problems in the first place. This certainly is an incentive for politicians to embrace the role of omnipotent problem-solvers, since nobody asked first whether they, the politicians themselves, are at fault. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:4 At home, I am frequently asked about my frustration with Congress since so many reform proposals go unheeded. I jokingly reply, No, I am never frustrated because I have such low expectations. But the American people have higher expectations, and without forthcoming solutions are beyond frustrated with their government. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:5 If solutions to American problems won’t be found in the frequent clamor for more government, it still is up to Congress to explain how our problems developed and how solutions can be found in an atmosphere of liberty, private property, and a free market order. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:18 On top of this, the daily operation of Congress reflects the power of special interests, not the will of the people, regardless of which party is in power. Critically important legislation comes up for votes late in the evening without much warning, leaving Members little chance to read or study the bills. Key changes are buried in conference reports, often containing new legislation not even mentioned in either the House or the Senate versions. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:20 Congress spends hundreds of billions of dollars in emergency supplemental bills to avoid the budgetary rules meant to hold down the deficit. Wartime spending money is appropriated and attached to emergency relief funds, making it difficult for politicians to resist. The principle of the pork barrel is alive and well, and it shows how huge appropriations are passed easily with supporters of the system getting their share for their district. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:24 Both politicians and the media place blame on everything except bad policy authored by the Congress. Scapegoats are needed since there is so much blame to go around and so little understanding as to why we are in such a mess. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:25 In the 1920s and the 1930s, Europe’s financial system collapsed and inflation raged. It was commonplace to blame the Jews. Today, in America the blame is spread out: illegal immigrants, Muslims, big business, whether they got special deals from the government or not, price gouging oil companies, regardless of the circumstances, and labor unions. Ignorance of economics and denial of the political power system that prevails in the District of Columbia makes it possible for Congress to shift the blame. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:31 One of the major reasons we have drifted from the Founders’ vision of liberty in the Constitution was the division of the concept of freedom into two parts. Instead of freedom being applied equally to social and economic transactions, it has come to be thought of as two different concepts. Some in Congress now protect economic liberty and market choices but ignore personal liberty and private choices. Others defend personal liberty but concede the realm of property and economic transaction to government control. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:34 Everyone is aware of the law of unintended consequences. Most Members of Congress understand that government actions can have unintended consequences. Yet few quit voting for government solutions, always hoping there won’t be any particular unintended consequences the next time. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:37 Though tens of millions of deaths are associated with these wars, it seems we haven’t learned a thing. We went into Korea by direction of the United Nations, not a Congressional declaration of war, to unify Korea. Yet that war ensured that Korea remained divided to this day. Our troops are still there. South Korea today is much more willing to reconcile differences with North Korea, and yet we obstruct such efforts. It doesn’t make much sense. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:81 I find it amazing that we in this country seem determined to completely separate religious expression and the state, even to the detriment of the first amendment, yet we can say little about how Christian and Jewish religious beliefs greatly influence our policies in the Middle East? It should be the other way around. Religious expression, according to the First Amendment, cannot be regulated anywhere by Congress or the Federal courts. But deeply held theological beliefs should never dictate our foreign policy. Being falsely accused of anti- Semitism and being a supporter of radical fascism is not an enviable position for any politician. Most realize it is best to be quiet and support our Middle East involvement. Congress Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 74:90 Economic realities will prevail regardless of the enthusiasm by most Members of Congress for a continued expansion of the welfare state and support for our dangerously aggressive foreign policy. The welfare/warfare state will come to an end when the dollar fails and the wealth simply runs out. Congress Opposes 9/11 Resolution 13 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 77:3 Mr. Speaker, I believe we should show due respect the victims of the attacks of September 11, 2001. Congress patting itself on the back over legislation it has passed since then strikes me as disrespectful to those who suffered and continue to suffer from the attacks on New York and the Pentagon. Congress Congressional Medal Of Honor For The Dalai Lama 13 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 78:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, with great sadness I must rise to oppose this measure granting a congressional gold medal to the 14th Dalai Lama. While I greatly admire and respect His Holiness the Dalai Lama, and fully recognize his tremendous status both as a Buddhist leader and international advocate for peace, I must object to the manner in which this body chooses to honor him. Congress Congressional Medal Of Honor For The Dalai Lama 13 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 78:2 I wonder if my colleagues see the irony in honoring a devout Buddhist monk with a material gift of gold. The Buddhist tradition, of course, eschews worldly possessions in favor of purity of thought and action. Buddhism urges its practitioners to alleviate the suffering of others whenever possible. I’m sure His Holiness the Dalai Lama would rather see $30,000 spent to help those less fortunate, rather than for a feel-good congressional gesture. Congress Congressional Medal Of Honor For The Dalai Lama 13 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 78:3 We cannot forget that Congress has no authority under the Constitution to spend taxpayer money on medals and awards, no matter how richly deserved. And I reiterate my offer of $100 from my own pocket to pay for this medal — if members wish to honor the Dalai Lama, all we need to do is pay for it ourselves. If all 435 of us contribute, the cost will be roughly $70 each. So while a gold medal sounds like a great idea, it becomes a bit strange when we see the actual cost involved. Congress Congressional Medal Of Honor For The Dalai Lama 13 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 78:4 If Congress truly wishes to honor the Dalai Lama, it could instead start by showing more respect for his views in the areas of foreign policy, war, and terrorism. The bellicosity often demonstrated on the floor of this institution toward entire nations and their people conflicts sharply with the peaceful teachings of the Dalai Lama. Congress Congressional Medal Of Honor For The Dalai Lama 13 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 78:12 Mr. Speaker, in closing let me join my colleagues in stating my tremendous respect for His Holiness the Dalai Lama. While I cannot agree with forcible taxation to pay for gold medals, I certainly hope Congress takes the teaching of His Holiness to heart and begins to rethink our aggressive, interventionist foreign policy. Congress Senior Citizens’ Improved Quality Of Life Act 19 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 79:2 I hope that, in the limited time left in this congressional session, we would further demonstrate our commitment to America’s seniors by voting on my Senior Citizens’ Improved Quality of Life Act, H.R. 5211. H.R. 5211 contains a number of items of great importance to America’s seniors. H.R. 5211 helps seniors by: Congress Senior Citizens’ Improved Quality Of Life Act 19 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 79:8 Providing seniors with a tax credit to help cover their prescription drug expenses not covered by Medicare and repealing Federal barriers that prohibit seniors from obtaining quality prescription drugs from overseas. Even though Congress added a prescription drug benefit to Medicare, many seniors still have difficulty affording their prescription drugs. One reason is because the new program creates a “doughnut hole,” where seniors must pay for their prescriptions above a certain amount out of their own pockets until their expenses reach a level where Medicare coverage resumes. H.R. 5211 helps seniors cope with these costs by providing them with a tax credit equal to 80 percent of their out-of-pocket pharmaceutical costs. Congress Senior Citizens’ Improved Quality Of Life Act 19 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 79:10 In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I reiterate my support for H. Res. 874 and my hope that Congress will continue to show its appreciation for America’s seniors by voting on my Senior Citizens’ Improved Quality of Life Act before adjourning for the year. Congress Introduction Of taxpayer Protection From Genetic Discrimination Act 20 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 81:2 I recently met with some of my constituents who are concerned that people with polycentric kidney disease, which can be identified with a genetic test, often lose their insurance coverage because their insurance companies companies or employers discover they have polycentric kidney disease. Whatever long- term reforms designed to address this problem one favors, I hope that all my colleagues could agree that Congress should make sure that American citizens are not forced to subsidize government agencies or contractors who deny health insurance based on someone’s genetic profile. I therefore hope all my colleagues support the Taxpayer Protection from Genetic Discrimination Act. Congress Military Personnel Financial Services Protection Act 20 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 82:3 When the Congress last looked at this product in 1970, we recognized periodic payment mutual funds are a valuable means to help encourage savings by people who do not have large amounts of discretionary income. I have seen no evidence in the record indicating that the judgment then was incorrect. In fact, testimony received by the Financial Services Committee indicates that these periodic payment mutual funds are working for those military members choosing to utilize them. Congress Military Personnel Financial Services Protection Act 20 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 82:4 Before voting on S. 418, Congress should consider whether it is in the best interests of our armed services to substitute our judgment for theirs by banning a financial product that the armed services deem well-suited for their financial security. Congress Military Personnel Financial Services Protection Act 20 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 82:7 My colleagues may be interested to know that the idea for this bill comes from Marcella Henke, an administrator of Jackson County Hospital, a critical access hospital in my congressional district. Ms. Henke conceived of this idea as a way to meet the increasing demand for assisted living services in rural areas and provide hospitals with a profitable way to use beds not being used for critical access purposes. I urge my colleagues to embrace this practical way of strengthening rural health care without increasing federal expenditures by cosponsoring the Enhanced Options for Rural Health Care Act. Congress Tribute To Lee College 25 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 84:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, residents of Chambers County and Baytown, in my Congressional district, who currently lack high-speed internet access, will soon be able to obtain an extremely reliable high-speed internet service comparably priced to DSL. This is due to the efforts of a consortium consisting of Lee College, Chambers County, Chambers Liberty Counties Navigation District, East Chambers Independent School District, and Trinity Bay Conservation District. Congress Introduction Of The Enhanced Options For Rural Health Care Act 25 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 85:3 My colleagues may be interested to know that the idea for this bill comes from Marcella Henke, an administrator of Jackson County Hospital, a critical access hospital in my congressional district. Ms. Henke conceived of this idea as a way to meet the increasing demand for assisted living services in rural areas and provide hospitals with a profitable way use beds not being used for critical access purposes. I urge my colleagues to embrace this practical way of strengthening rural health care without increasing federal expenditures by cosponsoring the Enhanced Options for Rural Health Care Act (H.R. 6154). Congress Overstepping Constitutional Authority 26 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 86:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, in the name of a truly laudable cause (preventing abortion and protecting parental rights), today the Congress could potentially move our Nation one step closer to a national police state by further expanding the list of Federal crimes and usurping power from the States to adequately address the issue of parental rights and family law. Of course, it is much easier to ride the current wave of criminally federalizing all human malfeasance in the name of saving the world from some evil than to uphold a Constitutional oath which prescribes a procedural structure by which the nation is protected from what is perhaps the worst evil, totalitarianism carried out by a centralized government. Who, after all, wants to be amongst those Members of Congress who are portrayed as trampling parental rights or supporting the transportation of minor females across state lines for ignoble purposes. Congress Overstepping Constitutional Authority 26 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 86:3 Our Federal Government is, constitutionally, a government of limited powers, Article one, Section eight, enumerates the legislative area for which the U.S. Congress is allowed to act or enact legislation. For every other issue, the Federal Government lacks any authority or consent of the governed and only the State governments, their designees, or the people in their private market actions enjoy such rights to governance. The tenth amendment is brutally clear in stating “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Our Nation’s history makes clear that the U.S. Constitution is a document intended to limit the power of central government. No serious reading of historical events surrounding the creation of the Constitution could reasonably portray it differently. Congress Overstepping Constitutional Authority 26 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 86:4 Nevertheless, rather than abide by our constitutional limits, Congress today will likely pass S. 403. S. 403 amends title 18, United States Code, to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions. Should parents be involved in decisions regarding the health of their children? Absolutely. Should the law respect parents’ rights to not have their children taken across State lines for contemptible purposes? Absolutely. Can a State pass an enforceable statute to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions? Absolutely. But when asked if there exists constitutional authority for the Federal criminalizing of just such an action the answer is absolutely not. Congress Overstepping Constitutional Authority 26 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 86:6 We have been reminded by both Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese that more Federal crimes, while they make politicians feel good, are neither constitutionally sound nor prudent. Rehnquist has stated that “The trend to federalize crimes that traditionally have been handled in State courts . . . threatens to change entirely the nature of our Federal system.” Meese stated that Congress’ tendency in recent decades to make Federal crimes out of offenses that have historically been State matters has dangerous implications both for the fair administration of justice and for the principle that States are something more than mere administrative districts of a nation governed mainly from Washington. Congress Overstepping Constitutional Authority 26 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 86:7 The argument which springs from the criticism of a federalized criminal code and a Federal police force is that States may be less effective than a centralized Federal Government in dealing with those who leave one State jurisdiction for another. Fortunately, the Constitution provides for the procedural means for preserving the integrity of State sovereignty over those issues delegated to it via the tenth amendment. The privilege and immunities clause as well as full faith and credit clause allow States to exact judgments from those who violate their State laws. The Constitution even allows the Federal Government to legislatively preserve the procedural mechanisms which allow States to enforce their substantive laws without the Federal Government imposing its substantive edicts on the States. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 makes provision for the rendition of fugitives from one State to another. While not self-enacting, in 1783 Congress passed an act which did exactly this. There is, of course, a cost imposed upon States in working with one another rather than relying on a national, unified police force. At the same time, there is a greater cost to State autonomy and individual liberty from centralization of police power. Congress President Would Define Enemy Combatants 27 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 88:2 Mr. Speaker, this legislation will fundamentally change our country. It will establish a system whereby the President of the United States can determine unilaterally that an individual is an “unlawful enemy combatant” and subject to detention without access to court appeal. What is most troubling is that nothing in the bill would prevent a United States citizen from being named an “enemy combatant” by the President and thus possibly subject to indefinite detention. Congress is making an enormous mistake in allowing such power to be concentrated in one person. Congress President Would Define Enemy Combatants 27 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 88:7 Mr. Speaker, we must seek out, detain, try, and punish if found guilty anyone who seeks to attack the United States. We in Congress have an obligation to pass legislation that ensures that process will go forward. What Congress has done in this bill, though, is to tell the President “you take charge of this, we reject our Constitutional duties.” I urge my colleagues to reject this ill-conceived piece of legislation. Congress National Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day 28 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 90:2 I also wish to pay tribute to the efforts of Mrs. Robyn Bear, who played an instrumental role in bringing this issue before Congress. Mrs. Bear’s story is an inspirational example of how a dedicated individual can make something good come from even the most tragic circumstances. After suffering six first trimester miscarriages between 1997 and 1999, Mrs. Bear began working to create a support system for parents who lost their children because of medical complications during or shortly after pregnancy. Largely due to her efforts, Governors of all 50 States have signed proclamations recognizing National Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day. Mrs. Bear has also been instrumental in founding several online support groups for families that have suffered the loss of an unborn or newborn child. Mrs. Bear’s efforts were also the inspiration for this legislation. I am pleased to let my colleagues know that today Mrs. Bear is the proud mother of a 6-year old girl and 3-year old twins. Congress Warrantless Wiretaps 28 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 91:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Congress is once again rushing to abandon its constitutional duty to protect the constitution balance between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government by expanding the executive’s authority to conduct warrantless wiretaps without approval from either a regular federal court or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court. Congress’s refusal to provide any effective checks on the warrantless wiretapping program is a blatant violation of the Fourth Amendment and is not necessary to protect the safety of the American people. In fact, this broad grant of power to conduct unchecked surveillance may undermine the government’s ability to identify threats to American security. Congress Warrantless Wiretaps 28 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 91:2 Instead of creating standards for warrantless wiretapping, H.R. 5825 leaves it to the President to determine when “imminent” threat requiring warrantless wiretapping exists. The legislation does not even define what constitutes an imminent threat; it requires the executive branch to determine when a threat is “imminent.” By passing this bill, Congress is thus abdicating its constitutional role while making it impossible for the judiciary to perform its constitutional function. Congress Warrantless Wiretaps 28 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 91:3 According to former Congressman Bob Barr, thanks to Congress’ failure to establish clear standards for wiretapping, under H.R. 5825 “. . .simply making an international call or sending an e-mail to another country, even to a relative (or a constituent) who is an American citizen, will be fair game for the government to listen in on or read. Moreover, this legislation allows the government to conduct secret, warrantless searches of American citizens’ homes in a broad range of circumstances that are essentially undefined in the legislation.” Congress Warrantless Wiretaps 28 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 91:4 Mr. Speaker, I do not deny that there may be certain circumstances justifying warrantless wiretapping. However, my colleagues should consider that current law allows for warrantless wiretapping in emergency situations as long as a “retroactive” warrant is sought within 72 hours of commencing the surveillance or the warrantless surveillance commences within 15 days after Congress declares war. If there are legitimate reasons why the current authorization for warrantless wiretapping is inadequate, then perhaps Congress should extend the time allowed to wiretap before applying to the FISA court for a “retroactive” warrant. This step could enhance security without posing the dangers to liberty and republican government contained in H.R. 5825. Congress Warrantless Wiretaps 28 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 91:6 Warrantless wiretapping may hinder the ability to identify true threats to safety. This is because experience has shown that, when Congress makes it easier for the federal government to monitor the activities of Americans, there is a tendency to collect so much information that it becomes impossible to weed out the true threats. My colleagues should consider how the over-filing of “suspicious transaction reports” regarding financial transactions hampers effective anti-terrorism efforts. According to investigative journalist James Bovard, writing in the Baltimore Sun on June 28, “[a] U.N. report on terrorist financing released in May 2002 noted that a ‘suspicious transaction report’ had been filed with the U.S. government over a $69,985 wire transfer that Mohamed Atta, leader of the hijackers, received from the United Arab Emirates. The report noted that ‘this particular transaction was not noticed quickly enough because the report was just one of a very large number and was not distinguishable from those related to other financial crimes.’ ” Congress should be skeptical, to say the least, regarding the assertion that allowing federal bureaucrats to accumulate even more data without having to demonstrate a link between the data sought and national security will make the American people safer. Congress Introduction Of The Taxpayer Protection From Frivolous Litigation Act 28 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 92:3 Frivolous lawsuits and the accompanying increase in malpractice insurance payments have driven many physicians out of medical practice. The malpractice crisis has further increased the cost of health care by forcing physicians to practice defensive medicine. While most malpractice reform issues are properly addressed at the state level, Congress does have a duty to act to protect physicians from frivolous lawsuits stemming from cases involving federally funded programs or federal mandates. After all, these programs already impose tremendous costs on physicians. For example, Medicare imposes so many rules and regulations on health care providers that the Medicare code is actually larger than the infamous tax code! Congress SAFE Ports Act 29 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 94:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to vote for the SAFE Ports Act when it was considered by Congress in May and I intend to do so tonight. However, I am disturbed that The Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act was added to this bill during conference. My understanding is that this provision was slipped into the bill at the conclusion of the conference even though internet gambling has nothing to do with port security. Congress SAFE Ports Act 29 september 2006    2006 Ron Paul 94:2 I have long opposed The Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act since the federal government has no constitutional authority to ban or even discourage any form of internet gambling. In addition to being unconstitutional, this provision is likely to prove ineffective at ending internet gambling. Instead, by passing law proportion to ban internet gambling Congress will ensure that gambling is controlled by organized crime. History, from the failed experiment of prohibition to today’s futile “war on drugs,” shows that the government cannot eliminate demand for something like internet gambling simply by passing a law. Instead, this provision will force those who wish to gamble over the internet to patronize suppliers willing to flaunt the ban. In many cases, providers of services banned by the government will be members of criminal organizations. Even if organized crime does not operate internet gambling enterprises their competitors are likely to be controlled by organized crime. After all, since the owners and patrons of internet gambling cannot rely on the police and courts to enforce contracts and resolve other disputes, they will be forced to rely on members of organized crime to perform those functions. Thus, the profits of internet gambling will flow into organized crime. Furthermore, outlawing an activity will raise the price vendors are able to charge consumers, thus increasing the profits flowing to organized crime from internet gambling. It is bitterly ironic that a bill masquerading as an attack on crime will actually increase organized crime’s ability to control and profit from internet gambling! Congress Introduction Of Legislation Repealing Two Unconstitutional And Paternalistic Federal Financials Regulations 29 September 2006    2006 Ron Paul 97:2 These regulations exceed Congress’s constitutional powers and violate individual property and contract rights. Furthermore, these regulations insult Americans by treating them as children who are unable to manage their own affairs without federal control. I urge my colleagues to show their respect for the Constitution and the American people by cosponsoring this legislation. Congress Tribute To Dr. Victor Rodriguez 13 November 2006    2006 Ron Paul 98:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to honor Dr. Victor Rodriguez, a native of Edna, Texas in my congressional district. Dr. Rodriguez’s achievements in, and dedication to, education are an inspiration to us all. As detailed in his autobiography, The Bell Ringer, Dr. Rodriguez developed endurance and perseverance at an early age when his third grade teacher assigned him the task of ringing the bell for the St. Agnes Catholic Church. Congress Statement On Helen Chenoweth-Hage 13 November 2006    2006 Ron Paul 99:2 Unlike all too many people who come to Washington, Helen never forgot the principles that inspired her to seek office. I was honored when Helen became the first member of Congress to join my Liberty Caucus. She understood the importance of creating a support system to help members of Congress resist the constant pressures to “go along to get along. “ Congress Milton Friedman 6 December 2006    2006 Ron Paul 100:8 On a personal note, I was honored to receive Milton Friedman’s endorsement of my congressional campaign in 1996. One particular quote from his endorsement exemplifies how Milton Friedman’s commitment to the free market was rooted in a recognition that a society that respects the dignity and worth of every individual is impossible without limited government, private property, and sound money: “We very badly need to have more Representatives in the House who understand in a principled way the importance of property rights and religious freedom for the preservation and extension of human freedom in general . . .” Congress Milton Friedman 6 December 2006    2006 Ron Paul 100:14 Milton Friedman’s work against the draft began in December 1966, when he gave a presentation at a four-day conference at the University of Chicago. Various prominent and less-prominent academics, politicians, and activists had been invited. Papers had been commissioned, and the authors gave summaries, after which the discussion was open to all. Fortunately, the discussion was transcribed. The papers and discussions appear in a book edited by sociologist Sol Tax and titled The Draft: A Handbook of Facts and Alternatives. The invitees included two young anti-draft congressmen, Robert Kastenmeier (D–Wisc.) and Donald Rumsfeld (R–Ill.), and one pro-draft senator, Edward Kennedy (D- Mass.). Also attending were pro-draft anthropologist Margaret Mead and anti-draft economists Milton Friedman and Walter Oi. Friedman gave the general economic and philosophical case for a voluntary military in his presentation, “Why Not a Voluntary Army?” Friedman pointed out that the draft is a tax on young men. He stated: Congress Milton Friedman 6 December 2006    2006 Ron Paul 100:24 And Friedman stuck around as an opponent of the draft when the going got tough. In the late 1970s, high inflation caused a serious drop in real military pay and a consequent increase in difficulty meeting recruiting quotas. Of all the threats to bring back the draft in the last 32 years, the threat in 1979 to 1980 was the most serious. Sen. Sam Nunn (D–Ga.) held hearings with the goal of building support for the draft and, at least, registration for a future draft. Hoover economist Martin Anderson organized an important conference on the draft at the Hoover Institution in November 1979 and invited the top proponents and opponents of the draft. (For the papers and transcript of the discussion, see Martin Anderson, ed., Registration and the Draft: Proceedings of the Hoover-Rochester Conference on the All-Volunteer Force, Stanford, California: Hoover Institution Press, 1982.) Friedman was one of the attendees and, at the end, debated Congressman Pete McCloskey on the draft. It was actually the weakest performance I’ve ever seen by Friedman, but Friedman’s “weak” is still pretty good. Congress Introducing The Social Security Beneficiary Tax reduction Act And The Senior Citizens’ Tax Elimination Act 4 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 1:2 Since Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another example of double taxation. Furthermore, “taxing” benefits paid by the government is merely an accounting trick, a shell game which allows Members of Congress to reduce benefits by subterfuge. This allows Congress to continue using the Social Security trust fund as a means of financing other government programs, and masks the true size of the federal deficit. Congress Introducing The Social Security Beneficiary Tax reduction Act And The Senior Citizens’ Tax Elimination Act 4 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 1:3 Instead of imposing ridiculous taxes on senior citizens, Congress should ensure the integrity of the Social Security trust fund by ending the practice of using trust fund monies for other programs. This is why I am also introducing the Social Security Preservation Act, which ensures that all money in the Social Security trust fund is spent solely on Social Security. At a time when Congress’ inability to control spending is once again threatening the Social Security trust fund, the need for this legislation has never been greater. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress Introducing The Social Security For American Citizens Only Act 4 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 3:3 Obviously, this program provides a threat to the already fragile Social Security system, and the threat is looming larger. The administration’s totalization proposal, a version of which passed the other body in the 109th Congress, actually allows thousands of foreigners who would qualify for U.S. Social Security benefits actually came to the United States and worked here illegally. Adding insult to injury, the federal government may even give Social Security benefits to non-citizens who worked here for as little as 18 months. Congress Introducing The Social Security For American Citizens Only Act 4 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 3:7 It is long past time for Congress to stand up to the internationalist bureaucrats and start looking out for the American worker. I therefore call upon my colleagues to stop the use of the Social Security Trust Fund as yet another vehicle for foreign aid by cosponsoring the Social Security for American Citizens Only Act. Congress Introduction Of The Social Security Preservation Act 4 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 4:2 The Social Security Preservation Act ensures that the government will keep its promises to America’s seniors that taxes collected for Social Security will be used for Social Security. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress Introduction Of The Social Security Preservation Act 4 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 4:3 With federal deficits reaching historic levels the pressure from special interests for massive new raids on the trust fund is greater than ever. Thus it is vital that Congress act now to protect the trust fund from big spending, pork- barrel politics. Social Security reform will be one of the major issues discussed in this Congress and many of my colleagues have different ideas regarding how to best preserve the long-term solvency of the program. However, as a medical doctor, I know the first step in treatment is to stop the bleeding, and the Social Security Preservation Act stops the bleeding of the Social Security trust fund. I therefore call upon all my colleagues, regardless of which proposal for long-term Social Security reform they support, to stand up for America’s seniors by cosponsoring the Social Security Preservation Act. Congress Introducing The Prescription Drug Affordability Act 4 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 5:2 The first provision of my legislation provides seniors a tax credit equal to 80 percent of their prescription drug costs. While Congress did add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare in 2003, many seniors still have difficulty affording the prescription drugs they need in order to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle. One reason is because the new program creates a “doughnut hole,” where seniors lose coverage once their prescription expenses reach a certain amount and must pay for their prescriptions above a certain amount out of their own pockets until their expenses reach a level where Medicare coverage resumes. This tax credit will help seniors cover the expenses provided by the doughnut hole. This bill will also help seniors obtain prescription medicines that may not be covered by the Medicare prescription drug program. Congress Introducing The Prescription Drug Affordability Act 4 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 5:4 I need not remind my colleagues that many senior citizens and other Americans impacted by the high costs of prescription medicine have demanded Congress reduce the barriers which prevent American consumers from purchasing imported pharmaceuticals. Congress has responded to these demands by repeatedly passing legislation liberalizing the rules governing the importation of pharmaceuticals. However, implementation of this provision has been blocked by the federal bureaucracy. It is time Congress stood up for the American consumer and removed all unnecessary regulations on importing pharmaceuticals. Congress Introducing The Make College Affordable Act 4 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 6:4 Helping the American people use their own money to ensure every qualified American can receive a college education is one of the best investments this Congress can make in the future. I therefore urge my colleagues to help strengthen America by ensuring more Americans can obtain college educations by cosponsoring the Make College Affordable Act. Congress The War In Iraq 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 7:8 We at least must pretend that our bankrupt empire is intact, but then again, the Soviet empire appeared intact in 1988. Some Members of Congress intent on equitably distributing the suffering among all Americans want to bring back the draft. Administration officials vehemently deny making any concrete plans for a draft. Congress The War In Iraq 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 7:11 We get into trouble by not following the precepts of liberty or obeying the rule of law. Preemptive, undeclared wars fought under false pretenses are a road to disaster. If a full declaration of war by Congress had been demanded as the Constitution requires, this war never would have been fought. Congress Identity Theft Protection Act 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 8:2 Madame Speaker, Congress has a moral responsibility to address this problem because it was Congress that transformed the Social Security number into a national identifier. Thanks to Congress, today no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get a driver’s license without presenting his Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license! Congress Identity Theft Protection Act 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 8:3 One of the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the congressionally- authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim the children as dependents. Forcing parents to register their children with the State is more like something out of the nightmares of George Orwell than the dreams of a free republic that inspired this nation’s founders. Congress Identity Theft Protection Act 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 8:4 Congressionally-mandated use of the Social Security number as an identifier facilitates the horrendous crime of identity theft. Thanks to Congress, an unscrupulous person may simply obtain someone’s Social Security number in order to access that person’s bank accounts, credit cards, and other financial assets. Many Americans have lost their life savings and had their credit destroyed as a result of identity theft. Yet the Federal Government continues to encourage such crimes by mandating use of the Social Security number as a uniform ID! Congress Identity Theft Protection Act 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 8:9 Madam Speaker, no wonder there is a groundswell of opposition to this mandate. There is even a movement in several State legislatures to refuse to comply with this mandate! The Identity Theft Prevention Act not only repeals those sections of the Federal law creating a national UD, it forbids the Federal Government from using Federal funds to blackmail States into adopting uniform Federal identifiers. Passing the Identity Theft Prevention Act is thus an excellent way for this Congress to show renewed commitment to federalism and opposition to imposing unfunded mandates on the States. Congress Identity Theft Protection Act 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 8:12 Some members of Congress will claim that the Federal Government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that, in a constitutional republic, the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the jobs of government officials easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient. Congress Identity Theft Protection Act 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 8:13 Madam Speaker, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure that citizens’ rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the only effective privacy protection is to forbid the Federal Government from mandating national identifiers. Legislative “privacy protections” are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for a couple of reasons. Congress Identity Theft Protection Act 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 8:18 Any action short of repealing laws authorizing privacy violations is insufficient primarily because the Federal Government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any Federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the Federal Government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the Federal Government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress Identity Theft Protection Act 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 8:19 Madam Speaker, those members who are not persuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Identity Theft Prevention Act should consider the American people’s opposition to national identifiers. The numerous complaints over the evergrowing uses of the Social Security number show that Americans want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Furthermore, according to a survey by the Gallup company, 91 percent of the American people oppose forcing Americans to obtain a universal health ID. Congress Introducing We The People 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 9:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning state laws and polices relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the president, according to rules established by the Congress. Congress Introducing We The People 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 9:2 The United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to establish and limit the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts and limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Founders intended Congress to use this authority to correct abuses of power by the federal judiciary. Congress Introducing We The People 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 9:4 In recent years, we have seen numerous abuses of power by Federal courts. Federal judges regularly strike down state and local laws on subjects such as religious liberty, sexual orientation, family relations, education, and abortion. This government by Federal judiciary causes a virtual nullification of the Tenth Amendment’s limitations on federal power. Furthermore, when federal judges impose their preferred polices on state and local governments, instead of respecting the polices adopted by those elected by, and thus accountable to, the people, republican government is threatened. Article IV, section 4 of the Untied States Constitution guarantees each state a republican form of government. Thus, Congress must act when the executive or judicial branch threatens the republican governments of the individual states. Therefore, Congress has a responsibility to stop Federal judges from running roughshod over state and local laws. The Founders would certainly have supported congressional action to reign in Federal judges who tell citizens where they can and can’t place manger scenes at Christmas. Congress Introducing We The People 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 9:6 Unless Congress acts, a state’s authority to define and regulate marriage may be the next victim of activist judges. After all, such a decision would simply take the Supreme Court’s decision in the Lawrence case, which overturned all state sodomy laws, to its logical conclusion. Congress must launch a preemptive strike against any further federal usurpation of the states’ authority to regulate marriage by removing issues concerning the definition of marriage from the jurisdiction of federal courts. Congress Introducing We The People 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 9:7 Although marriage is licensed and otherwise regulated by the states, government did not create the institution of marriage. Government regulation of marriage is based on state recognition of the practices and customs formulated by private individuals interacting in civil institutions, such as churches and synagogues. Having federal officials, whether judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose a new definition of marriage on the people is an act of social engineering profoundly hostile to liberty. Congress Introducing We The People 5 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 9:8 It is long past time that Congress exercises its authority to protect the republican government of the states from out-of-control federal judges. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the We the People Act. Congress Against Raising The Minimum Wage 10 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 10:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, the announced purpose of H.R. 2 is to raise living standards for all Americans. This is certainly an admirable goal, however, to believe that Congress can raise the standard of living for working Americans by simply forcing employers to pay their employees a higher wage is equivalent to claiming that Congress can repeal gravity by passing a law saying humans shall have the ability to fly. Congress Against Raising The Minimum Wage 10 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 10:5 Mr. Speaker, I do not wish my opposition to this bill to be misconstrued as counseling inaction. Quite the contrary, Congress must enact an ambitious program of tax cuts and regulatory reform to remove government-created obstacles to job growth. However, Mr. Speaker, opponents of H.R. 2 should not fool themselves into believing that adding a package of tax cuts to the bill will compensate for the damage inflicted on small businesses and their employees by the minimum wage increase. Saying that an increase in the minimum wage is acceptable if combined with tax cuts assumes that Congress is omnipotent and thus can strike a perfect balance between tax cuts and regulations so that no firm, or worker, in the country is adversely affected by Federal policies. If the 20th Century taught us anything it was that any and all attempts to centrally plan an economy, especially one as large and diverse as America’s, are doomed to fail. Congress Against Raising The Minimum Wage 10 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 10:6 In conclusion, I would remind my colleagues that while it may make them feel good to raise the Federal minimum wage, the real life consequences of this bill will be vested upon those who can least afford to be deprived of work opportunities. Therefore, rather than pretend that Congress can repeal the economic principles, I urge my colleagues to reject this legislation and instead embrace a program of tax cuts and regulatory reform to strengthen the greatest producer of jobs and prosperity in human history: the free market. Congress Governmental Funding Of Embryonic Stem Cell Research 11 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 11:2 The main question that should concern Congress today is does the United States Government have the constitutional authority to fund any form of stem cell research. The clear answer to that question is no. A proper constitutional position would reject federal funding for stem cell research, while allowing the individual states and private citizens to decide whether to permit, ban, or fund this research. Congress Escalation Is Hardly The Answer 11 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 12:10 The talk of a troop surge and jobs program in Iraq only distracts Americans from the very real possibility of an attack on Iran. Our growing naval presence in the region and our harsh rhetoric towards Iran are unsettling. Securing the Horn of Africa and sending Ethiopian troops into Somalia do not bode well for world peace, yet these developments are almost totally ignored by Congress. Congress Reform Medicare To Give Seniors More Choice 12 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 14:5 Federal spending on Part D is expected to grow by $100 billion in 2007. It would be fiscally irresponsible for this Congress not to act to address those costs. I recognize that giving the Department of Health and Human Services the authority to engage in direct negotiations neither fixes the long-term problems with Medicare nor does empowers senior to control their own health care. However, we are not being given the opportunity to vote for a true pro-freedom, pro-senior alternative today. Instead, we are asked to choose between two flawed proposals — keeping Part D as it is or allowing the Department of Health and Human Services to negotiate prescription drug prices for the Part D program. Since I believe that direct negotiations will benefit taxpayers and Medicare beneficiaries by reducing the costs of prescription drugs, I intend to vote for this bill. Congress Introducing The Sunlight Rule 12 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 15:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously said, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” In order to shine sunlight on the practices of the House of Representatives, and thus restore public trust and integrity to this institution, I am introducing the sunlight rule, which amends House rules to ensure that members have adequate time to study a bill before being asked to vote on it. One of the chief causes of increasing public cynicism regarding Congress is the way major pieces of legislation are brought to the floor without members having an opportunity to read the bills. For example, concerns have been raised that in the opening days of the 110th Congress, legislation dealing with important topics such as national security are being brought to the floor before members have had an opportunity to adequately study the legislation. Congress Introducing The Sunlight Rule 12 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 15:2 In past Congresses, it was all-too-common to see large Appropriations bills rushed to the floor of the House in late-night sessions at the end of the year. For example, the House voted on the Fiscal Year 2006 Defense Appropriations Conference Report at approximately 4 a.m. — just four hours after the report was filed. Yet, the report contained language dealing with avian flu, including controversial language regarding immunity liability for vaccine manufacturers, that was added in the House- Senate conference on the bill. Considering legislation on important issues in this manner is a dereliction of our duty as the people’s elected representatives. Congress Introducing The Sunlight Rule 12 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 15:5 Madam Speaker, the practice of rushing bills to the floor before individual members have had a chance to study the bills is one of the major factors contributing to public distrust of Congress. Voting on bills before members have had time to study them makes a mockery of representative government and cheats the voters who sent us here to make informed decisions on public policy. Adopting the sunlight rule is one of, if not the, most important changes to the House rules this Congress could make to restore public trust in, and help preserve the integrity of, this institution. I hope my colleagues will support this change to the House rules. Congress Happy Birthday To Muhammad Ali 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 17:3 He is known, of course, for his athletic skills and his humanitarian concerns, and these are rightly mentioned in a resolution like this. But I do want to emphasize this because, to me, it was so important and had such impact, in reality, what Muhammad Ali did eventually led to getting rid of the draft, and yet we as a people and we as a Congress still do not have the conviction that Muhammad Ali had, because we still have the selective service; we say, let us not draft now, but when the conditions are right, we will bring back the draft and bring back those same problems that we had in the 1960s. Congress Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 18:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I would like to place the following article written by eminent conservative commentator Patrick Buchanan into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. In this fine op-ed, Mr. Buchanan makes reference to the recent efforts by my colleague and good friend, Rep. WALTER JONES, JR, to derail the march to war with Iran. I am very pleased to have been an original co-sponsor of the legislation referenced by Mr. Buchanan, H.J. Res. 14, which puts forth the very simple idea that if we are going to have a war with Iran we must follow the Constitution. The resolution clarifies the fact that the President shall consult with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant to law from Congress, prior to initiating any use of military force against Iran. I hope my colleagues will read this article closely and consider what Mr. Buchanan has written — and what Rep. JONES is trying to do. Congress Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 18:6 “If only we had known then what we know now,” they plead, “we would never have voted for the war.” They are thus confessing to dereliction in the highest duty the Founding Fathers gave Congress. They voted to cede to a president their power to take us to war. Congress Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 18:18 Bush’s contempt for Congress is manifest and, frankly, justified. Congress Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 18:19 Asked if Congress could stop him from surging 21,500 troops into Iraq, Bush on 60 Minutes brushed aside Congress as irrelevant. Congress Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 18:20 “I fully understand [the Congress] could try to stop me from doing it. But I’ve made my decision. And we’re going forward.” Asked if he had sole authority “to put the troops in there no matter what the Congress wants to do,” Bush replied, “In this situation I do, yeah.” Congress Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 18:21 Is Congress then impotent, if it does not want war on Iran? Congress Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 18:23 The day after Bush’s threat to Iran, Jones introduced a Joint Resolution, “Concerning the Use of Military Force by the United States Against Iran.” Under HJR 14, “Absent a national emergency created by attack by Iran, or a demonstrably imminent attack by Iran, upon the United States, its territories, possessions, or its armed forces, the President shall consult with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant to law from Congress, prior to initiating any use of force on Iran.” Congress Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 18:25 If we are going to war on Iran, Jones is saying, we must follow the Constitution and Congress must authorize it. Congress College Student Relief Act Of 2007 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 19:3 In addition to passing H.R. 5, Congress should also help more Americans afford college by passing my Make College Affordable Act, H.R. 193, that makes college tuition tax deductible. There has been talk of bringing legislation like H.R. 193 to the floor later this year. I hope all my colleagues — regardless of their positions on the bill before us today — can unite behind helping middle- and working- class Americans afford college by supporting my Make College Affordable Act or similar legislation. Congress Everyone Supports The Troops 18 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 20:3 Instead of questioning who has the best interest of our troops at heart, we should be debating which policy is best for our country. Defensive wars to preserve our liberties, fought only with proper congressional declarations are legitimate. Casualties under such circumstances still are heartbreaking, but they are understandable. Casualties that occur in undeclared, unnecessary wars, however, are bewildering. Why must so many Americans be killed or hurt in Iraq when our security and our liberty were never threatened? Congress Everyone Supports The Troops 18 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 20:8 Don’t believe for a minute that additional congressional funding is needed so our troops can defend themselves or extricate themselves from the war zone. That is nonsense. The DOD has hundreds of billions of dollars in the pipeline available to move troops anywhere on Earth, including home. Congress Everyone Supports The Troops 18 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 20:10 Those in Congress who claim they want the war ended, yet feel compelled to keep funding it, are badly misguided. They either are wrong in their assessment that cutting funds would hurt the troops, or they need to be more honest about supporting a policy destined to dramatically increase the size and the scope of this war. Rest assured, one can be patriotic and truly support the troops by denying funds to perpetuate and spread this ill-advised war. Congress Don’t Do It, Mr. President 6 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 21:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, if the President were to ask me for advice on foreign affairs, this is what I would say: Don’t do it, Mr. President. It is a bad idea. There is no need for it. There is great danger in doing it. America is against it, and Congress should be. The United Nations is against it. The Russians, the Chinese, the Indians, the Pakistanis are against it. The whole world is against it. Our allies are against it. Our enemies are against it. The Arabs are against it. The Europeans are against it. The Muslims are against it. Congress Does Anybody Care? Has Anybody Noticed? 7 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 23:31 Let us hope Congress comes to its senses soon and starts to defund our interventionist policies before we go broke. Time is short. Congress Introduction Of The Liberty Amendment 7 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 24:2 The 16th Amendment gives the federal government a direct claim on the lives of American citizens by enabling Congress to levy a direct income tax on individuals. Until the passage of the 16th amendment, the Supreme Court had consistently held that Congress had no power to impose an income tax. Congress Introduction Of The Industrial Hemp Farming Act 13 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 25:4 The United States is the only industrialized nation that prohibits industrial hemp cultivation. The Congressional Research Service has noted that hemp is grown as an established agricultural commodity in over 30 nations in Europe, Asia, and North America. My Industrial Hemp Farming Act will relieve this unique restriction on American farmers and allow them to grow industrial hemp in accord with State law. Congress Introducing The Teacher Tax Cut Act And The Professional Educators Tax Relief Act 14 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 27:2 Quality education is impossible without quality teaching. If we continue to undervalue educators, it will become harder to attract, and keep, good people in the education profession. While educators’ pay is primarily a local issue, Congress can, and should, help raise educators’ take home pay by reducing educators’ taxes. Congress Introducing The Teacher Tax Cut Act And The Professional Educators Tax Relief Act 14 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 27:4 The Teacher Tax Cut Act and the Professional Educators Tax Relief Act increase the salaries of teachers and other education professionals without raising federal expenditures. By raising the take-home pay of professional educators, these bills encourage highly qualified people to enter, and remain in, education. These bills also let America’s professional educators know that the American people and the Congress respect their work. Congress Introduction Of The Family Education Freedom Act 14 february 2007    2007 Ron Paul 29:4 According to a poll by McLaughlin and Associates, two-thirds of Americans believe education tax credits would have a positive effect on American education. This poll also found strong support for education tax credits among liberals, moderates, conservatives, low-income individuals, and African-Americans. This is just one of numerous studies and public opinion polls showing that Americans want Congress to get the federal bureaucracy out of the schoolroom and give parents more control over their children’s education. Congress Introduction Of The Family Education Freedom Act 14 february 2007    2007 Ron Paul 29:5 Today, Congress can fulfill the wishes of the American people for greater control over their children’s education by simply allowing parents to keep more of their hard-earned money to spend on education rather than force them to send it to Washington to support education programs reflective only of the values and priorities of Congress and the federal bureaucracy. Congress Introduction Of The Family Education Freedom Act 14 february 2007    2007 Ron Paul 29:9 Clearly, enactment of the Family Education Freedom Act is the best thing this Congress could do to improve public education. Furthermore, a greater reliance on parental expenditures rather than government tax dollars will help make the public schools into true community schools that reflect the wishes of parents and the interests of the students. Congress Introducing The Education Improvement Tax Cut Act 14 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 30:5 Children in some communities may benefit most from the opportunity to attend private, parochial, or other religious schools. One of the most encouraging trends in education has been the establishment of private scholarship programs. These scholarship funds use voluntary contributions to open the doors of quality private schools to low-income children. By providing a tax credit for donations to these programs, Congress can widen the educational opportunities and increase the quality of education for all children. Congress Introducing The Sanctity Of Life Act And The Taxpayer Freedom Of Conscience Act 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 31:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce two bills relating to abortion. These bills stop the federal government from promoting abortion. My bills accomplish this goal by prohibiting federal funds from being used for population control or “family planning” through exercising Congress’s constitutional power to restrict federal court’s jurisdiction by restoring each state’s authority to protect unborn life. Congress Introducing The Sanctity Of Life Act And The Taxpayer Freedom Of Conscience Act 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 31:3 One of the bills I am introducing today, the Sanctity of Life Act of 2005, reverses some of the damage done by Roe v. Wade. The Sanctity of Life Act provides that the federal courts of the United States, up to and including the Supreme Court, do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases. Congress must use the authority granted to it in Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution to rein in rogue federal judges from interfering with a state’s ability to protect unborn life. Congress Introducing The Sanctity Of Life Act And The Taxpayer Freedom Of Conscience Act 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 31:4 In addition to restricting federal court jurisdiction over abortion, Congress must stop the unconstitutional practice of forcing Americans to subsidize abortion providers. It is not enough to say that “family planning” groups may not use federal funds to perform or promote abortion. After all, since money is fungible, federal funding of any activities of these organizations forces taxpayers to underwrite the organizations abortion activities. This is why I am also introducing the Taxpayer Freedom of Conscience Act. The Taxpayer Freedom of Conscience Act prohibits any federal official from expending any federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, it is “sinful and tyrannical” to force the American taxpayers to subsidize programs and practices they find morally abhorrent. Congress Introducing The Sanctity Of Life Act And The Taxpayer Freedom Of Conscience Act 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 31:5 Madam Speaker, it is my hope that my colleagues will join me in support of these two bills. By following the Constitution and using the power granted to the Congress by the Constitution, we can restore respect for freedom of conscience and the sanctity of human life. Congress Statement for Hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, “Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy” 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 32:1 Transparency in monetary policy is a goal we should all support. I’ve often wondered why Congress so willingly has given up its prerogative over monetary policy. Astonishingly, Congress in essence has ceded total control over the value of our money to a secretive central bank. Congress created the Federal Reserve, yet it had no constitutional authority to do so. We forget that those powers not explicitly granted to Congress by the Constitution are inherently denied to Congress-- and thus the authority to establish a central bank never was given. Of course Jefferson and Hamilton had that debate early on, a debate seemingly settled in 1913. Congress Statement for Hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, “Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy” 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 32:2 But transparency and oversight are something else, and they’re worth considering. Congress, although not by law, essentially has given up all its oversight responsibility over the Federal Reserve. There are no true audits, and Congress knows nothing of the conversations, plans, and actions taken in concert with other central banks. We get less and less information regarding the money supply each year, especially now that M3 is no longer reported. Congress Statement for Hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, “Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy” 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 32:3 The role the Fed plays in the President’s secretive Working Group on Financial Markets goes unnoticed by members of Congress. The Federal Reserve shows no willingness to inform Congress voluntarily about how often the Working Group meets, what actions it takes that affect the financial markets, or why it takes those actions. But these actions, directed by the Federal Reserve, alter the purchasing power of our money. And that purchasing power is always reduced. The dollar today is worth only four cents compared to the dollar in 1913, when the Federal Reserve started. This has profound consequences for our economy and our political stability. All paper currencies are vulnerable to collapse, and history is replete with examples of great suffering caused by such collapses, especially to a nation’s poor and middle class. This leads to political turmoil. Congress Statement for Hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, “Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy” 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 32:10 In 2006 dollars, the minimum wage was $9.50 before the 1971 breakdown of Bretton Woods. Today that dollar is worth $5.15. Congress congratulates itself for raising the minimum wage by mandate, but in reality it has lowered the minimum wage by allowing the Fed to devalue the dollar. We must consider how the growing inequalities created by our monetary system will lead to social discord. Congress Statement for Hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, “Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy” 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 32:12 But since our fiat dollar system is not going away anytime soon, it would benefit Congress and the American people to bring more transparency to how and why Fed monetary policy functions. Congress Statement for Hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, “Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy” 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 32:16 Explain how interest rates are set. Conservatives profess to support free markets, without wage and price controls. Yet the most important price of all, the price of money as determined by interest rates, is set arbitrarily in secret by the Fed rather than by markets! Why is this policy written in stone? Why is there no congressional input at least? Congress The Scandal At Walter Reed 7 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 34:10 Now Congress holds hearings. Congress The Scandal At Walter Reed 7 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 34:13 Voters spoke very clearly in November: They want the war to end. Yet Congress has taken no steps to defund or end a war it never should have condoned in the first place. Congress The Scandal At Walter Reed 7 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 34:14 On the contrary, Congress plans to spend another $100 billion or more in an upcoming Iraq funding bill, more than even the administration has requested. The 2007 military budget, $700 billion, apparently is not enough. All of this is done under the slogan of supporting the troops, even though our policy guarantees more Americans will die and Walter Reed will continue to receive tens of thousands of casualties. Congress The Scandal At Walter Reed 7 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 34:15 Every problem Congress and the administration creates requires more money to fix. The mantra remains the same: Spend more money even though we don’t have it; borrow from the Chinese, or just print it. This policy of interventionism is folly, and it cannot continue forever. It will end, either because we wake up or because we go broke. Congress In Honor Of Hazel Johnson 7 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 35:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, this Saturday, March 10th, the Happy Hairston Youth Foundation, Inc. of Bay City, Texas, in my congressional district, will honor Ms. Hazel Johnson, the Executive Director of the Economic Action Committee of the Gulf Coast. I am pleased to join the Happy Hairston Youth Foundation, Inc. in honoring this remarkable woman. Congress The Real Reason To Oppose The Supplemental Appropriation 20 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 36:3 Voting “no” also makes the legitimate point that the Constitution does not authorize Congress to direct the management of any military operation. The President clearly enjoys this authority as Commander in Chief. Congress The Real Reason To Oppose The Supplemental Appropriation 20 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 36:4 But Congress, just as clearly, is responsible for making policy, by debating and declaring war, raising and equipping armies, funding military operations, and ending conflicts that do not serve our national interests. Congress The Real Reason To Oppose The Supplemental Appropriation 20 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 36:5 Congress failed to meet its responsibilities 4 years ago, unconstitutionally transferring its explicit war power to the executive branch. Even though the administration started the subsequent preemptive war in Iraq, Congress bears the greatest responsibility for its lack of courage in fulfilling its duties. Since then Congress has obediently provided the funds and troops required to pursue this illegitimate war. Congress The Real Reason To Oppose The Supplemental Appropriation 20 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 36:7 Here is a new approach: Congress should admit its mistake and repeal the authority wrongfully given to the executive branch in 2002. Repeal the congressional sanction and disavow Presidential discretion in starting wars. Then start bringing the troops home. Congress The Real Reason To Oppose The Supplemental Appropriation 20 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 36:9 The constant refrain that bringing our troops home would demonstrate a lack of support for them must be one of the most amazing distortions ever foisted on the American public. We are so concerned about saving face, but whose face are we saving? A sensible policy would save American lives and follow the rules laid out for Congress in the Constitution, and avoid wars that have no purpose. Congress The Real Reason To Oppose The Supplemental Appropriation 20 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 36:10 The claim that it is unpatriotic to oppose spending more money in Iraq must be laid to rest as fraudulent. We should pass a resolution that expresses congressional opposition to any more undeclared, unconstitutional, unnecessary, preemptive wars. We should be building a consensus for the future that makes it easier to end our current troubles in Iraq. Congress The Real Reason To Oppose The Supplemental Appropriation 20 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 36:11 It is amazing to me that this Congress is more intimidated by political propagandists and special interests than the American electorate, who sent a loud, clear message about the war in November. The large majority of Americans now want us out of Iraq. Congress The Real Reason To Oppose The Supplemental Appropriation 20 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 36:17 Only with the complicity of Congress have we become a Nation of preemptive war, secret military tribunals, torture, rejection of habeas corpus, warrantless searches, undue government secrecy, extraordinary renditions, and uncontrollable spying on the American people. Congress Introducing The Agriculture Education Freedom Act 27 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 37:2 Think about this for a moment. These kids are trying to better themselves, earn some money, save some money and what does Congress do? We pick on these kids by taxing them. It is truly amazing that with all the hand- wringing in Congress over the alleged need to further restrict liberty and grow the size of govemment “for the children” we would continue to tax young people who are trying to lead responsible lives and prepare for the future. Even if the serious social problems today’s youth face could be solved by new federal bureaucracies and programs, it is still unfair to pick on those kids who are trying to do the right thing. Congress Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Is Excessive 29 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 38:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, the FY 2008 budget is a monument to irresponsibility and profligacy. It shows that Congress remains oblivious to the economic troubles facing the Nation, and that political expediency trumps all common sense in Washington. To the extent that proponents and supporters of these unsustainable budget increases continue to win reelection, it also shows that many Americans unfortunately continue to believe government can provide them with a free lunch. Congress Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Is Excessive 29 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 38:2 To summarize, Congress proposes spending roughly $3 trillion in 2008. When I first came to Congress in 1976, the Federal Government spent only about $300 billion. So spending has increased tenfold in 30 years, and tripled just since 1990. Congress Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Is Excessive 29 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 38:5 For those who thought a Democratic Congress would end the war in Iraq, think again: their new budget proposes supplemental funds totaling about $150 billion in 2008 and $50 billion in 2009 for Iraq. This is in addition to the ordinary Department of Defense budget of more than $500 billion, which the Democrats propose increasing each year just like the Republicans. Congress Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Is Excessive 29 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 38:7 My message to my colleagues is simple: If you claim to support smaller government, don’t introduce budgets that increase spending over the previous year. Can any fiscal conservative in Congress honestly believe that overall federal spending cannot be cut 25 percent? We could cut spending by two-thirds and still have a Federal Government as large as it was in 1990. Congress Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Is Excessive 29 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 38:8 Congressional budgets essentially are meaningless documents, with no force of law beyond the coming fiscal year. Thus budget projections are nothing more than political posturing, designed to justify deficit spending in the near term by promising fiscal restraint in the future. But the time for thrift never seems to arrive: there is always some new domestic or foreign emergency that requires more spending than projected. Congress Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Is Excessive 29 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 38:9 Nobody in Washington will look back 5 years from now and exclaim, “Gee whiz, back in 2007 we promised to balance the budget by 2012, so I guess we better stick to that pledge and stop spending so much this year.” The only certainty when it comes to Federal budgets is that Congress will spend every penny budgeted and more during the fiscal year in question. All projections about revenues, tax rates, and spending in the future are nothing more than empty promises. Congress will pay no attention whatsoever to the 2008 budget in coming years. Congress Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Is Excessive 29 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 38:10 We should not let the debate over numbers distract us from the fundamental yet unspoken issues inherent in any budget proposal: What is the proper role for government in our society? Are the programs, agencies, and departments funded in the budget proposal constitutional? Are they effective? Could they operate with a smaller budget? Would the public even notice if certain items were eliminated altogether? These are the kinds of questions the American people should ask, even if Congress lacks the courage to apply any principles whatsoever to the budget process. Congress Remembering The 1947 Texas City Disaster 29 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 39:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, in recognition of the sixtieth anniversary of the explosion of the Grand Camp ship in the Texas City harbor on April 16, residents of Texas City, in my congressional district, will come together to honor those who lost their lives in the 1947 explosions. I am honored to join my constituents in commemorating those who lost their lives in this tragedy. Congress We Just Marched In (So We Can Just March Out) 17 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 40:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, all the reasons given to justify a preemptive strike against Iraq were wrong. Congress and the American people were misled. Congress We Just Marched In (So We Can Just March Out) 17 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 40:2 Support for the war came from various special interests that had agitated for an invasion of Iraq since 1998. The Iraq Liberation Act passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton stated that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was official U.S. policy. This policy was carried out in 2003. Congress We Just Marched In (So We Can Just March Out) 17 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 40:3 Congress failed miserably in meeting its crucial obligations as the branch of government charged with deciding whether to declare war. It wrongly and unconstitutionally transferred this power to the President, and the President did not hesitate to use it. Congress We Just Marched In (So We Can Just March Out) 17 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 40:5 Congress bears the greater blame for this fiasco. It reneged on its responsibility to declare or not declare war. It transferred this decision-making power to the executive branch and gave open sanction to anything the President did. In fact, the Founders diligently tried to prevent the executive from possessing this power, granting it to Congress alone in article I, section 8, of the Constitution. Congress Introducing The Enhanced Options For Rural Health Care Act 17 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 41:3 My colleagues may be interested to know that the idea for this bill comes from Marcella Henke, an administrator of Jackson County Hospital, a critical access hospital in my congressional district. Ms. Henke conceived of this idea as a way to meet the increasing demand for assisted living services in rural areas and provide hospitals with a profitable way to use beds not being used for critical access purposes. I urge my colleagues to embrace this practical way of strengthening rural health care without increasing federal expenditures by cosponsoring the Enhanced Options for Rural Health Care Act. Congress Introducing The Child Health Care Affordability Act 17 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 42:3 As an OB–GYN who has had the privilege of delivering more than four thousand babies, I know how important it is that parents have the resources to provide adequate health care for their children. The inability of many working Americans to provide health care for their children is rooted in one of the great inequities of the tax code — Congress’ failure to allow individuals the same ability to deduct health care costs that it grants to businesses. As a direct result of Congress’ refusal to provide individuals with health care related tax credits, parents whose employers do not provide health insurance have to struggle to provide health care for their children. Many of these parents work in low-income jobs; oftentimes, their only recourse for health care is the local emergency room. Congress Introducing The Child Health Care Affordability Act 17 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 42:7 Madam Speaker, this Congress has a moral responsibility to provide tax relief so that loncome parents struggling to care for a sick child can better meet their child’s medical expenses. Some may say that we cannot enact the Child Health Care Affordability Act because it would cause the government to lose revenue. But, who is more deserving of this money, Congress or the working parents of a sick child? Congress Shareholder Vote On Executive Compensation Act 18 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 43:7 Some shareholders may not care about CEO compensation packages. Instead, they may want to devote time at shareholder meetings to reviewing corporate environmental policies and ensuring the corporation has family- friendly workforce policies. If H.R. 1257 becomes law, the concerns of those shareholders will take a back seat to corporations attempting to meet the demands of Congress. Congress Shareholder Vote On Executive Compensation Act 18 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 43:8 It is ironic to me that Congress would concern itself with high salaries in the private sector when, according to data collected by the CATO Institute, Federal employees on average make twice as much as their private sector counterparts. One of the examples of excessive compensation cited by the supporters of the bill is the multi-million dollar package paid to the former CEO of Freddie Mac. As a government- sponsored enterprise that, along with its counterpart Fannie Mae, received almost $20 billion worth of indirect Federal subsidies in fiscal year 2004 alone, Freddie Mac is hardly a poster child for the free market. Congress Shareholder Vote On Executive Compensation Act 18 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 43:12 In addition to repealing laws that prevent shareholders from exercising control over corporations, Congress should also examine United States monetary policy’s effects on income inequality. When the Federal Reserve Board injects credit into the economy, the result is at least a temporary rise in incomes. However, those incomes do not rise equally. People who first receive the new credit — who in most instances are those already at the top of the economic pyramid — receive the most benefit from the Fed’s inflationist polices. By the time those at the lower end of the income scale experience a nominal rise in incomes, they must also contend with price inflation that has eroded their standard of living. Except for the lucky few who take advantage of the new credit first, the negative effects of inflation likely more than outweigh any temporary gains in nominal income from the Federal Reserve’s expansionist polices. Congress Shareholder Vote On Executive Compensation Act 18 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 43:15 Instead of imposing new laws on private companies, Congress should repeal the laws that have weakened the ability of shareholders to discipline CEOs and boards of directors that do not run corporations according to the shareholders’ wishes. Congress should also examine how fiat money contributes to income inequality. I therefore request that my colleagues join me in opposing H.R. 1257 and instead embrace a pro-freedom, pro-shareholder, and pro-worker agenda of free markets and sound money. Congress Genetic Information Non-discrimination Act 25 April 2007    2007 Ron Paul 44:2 Because of the Federal Government’s poor record in protecting privacy, I do not believe the best way to address concerns about the misuse of genetic information is through intrusive Federal legislation. Uniform Federal mandates are a clumsy and ineffective way to deal with problems such as employers making hiring decisions on the basis of a potential employee’s genetic profile. Imposing Federal mandates on private businesses merely raises the costs of doing business and thus reduces the employment opportunities for all citizens. A much better way to eliminate irrational discrimination is to rely on state and local regulation. Unlike the Federal Government, states and localities are able to tailor their regulations to fit the needs of their particular populaces. I would remind my colleagues that 34 states currently ban genetic discrimination in employment, while 46 states forbid health insurers from engaging in genetic discrimination. Clearly, the states are capable of addressing this issue without interference from Washington. My colleagues should also remember that Congress has no constitutional authority to forbid private sector employers from making hiring or other employment decisions on the basis of genetic information. Congress Introduction Of The Freedom To Bank Act 1 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 47:2 These regulations exceed Congress’s constitutional powers and violate individual property and contract rights. Furthermore, these regulations insult Americans by treating them as children who are unable to manage their own affairs without Federal control. I urge my colleagues to show their respect for the Constitution and the American people by cosponsoring this legislation. Congress Introduction Of The health Freedom Protection Act 2 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 49:2 The American people have made it clear they do not want the Federal government to interfere with their access to dietary supplements, yet the FDA and the FTC continue to engage in heavy-handed attempts to restrict such access. The FDA continues to frustrate consumers’ efforts to learn how they can improve their health even after Congress, responding to a record number of constituents’ comments, passed the Dietary Supplement and Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA). FDA bureaucrats are so determined to frustrate consumers’ access to truthful information that they are even evading their duty to comply with four Federal court decisions vindicating consumers’ First Amendment rights to discover the health benefits of foods and dietary supplements. Congress Introduction Of The health Freedom Protection Act 2 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 49:6 The Health Freedom Protection Act will force the FDA to at last comply with the commands of Congress, the First Amendment, and the American people by codifying the First Amendment standards adopted by the Federal courts. Specifically, the Health Freedom Protection Act stops the FDA from censoring truthful claims about the curative, mitigative, or preventative effects of dietary supplements, and adopts the Federal court’s suggested use of disclaimers as an alternative to censorship. The Health Freedom Protection Act also stops the FDA from prohibiting the distribution of scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against disease. Congress Statement On Chinese Currency 9 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 50:12 Eventually it will be necessary to consider commodity-based money to solve the trade imbalances that concern so many here in the Congress. Congress Introducting The Parental Consent Act 17 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 51:6 Madam Speaker, universal or mandatory mental health screening threatens to undermine parents’ right to raise their children as the parents see fit. Forced mental health screening could also endanger the health of children by leading to more children being improperly placed on psychotropic drugs, such as Ritalin, or stigmatized as “mentally ill” or a risk of causing violence because they adhere to traditional values. Congress has a responsibility to the Nation’s parents and children to stop this from happening. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Parental Consent Act. Congress Federal Housing Finance Reform Act Of 2007 17 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 52:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1427 fails to address the core problems with the Government Sponsored Enterprises, GSEs. Furthermore, since this legislation creates new government programs that will further artificially increase the demand for housing, H.R. 1427 increases the economic damage that will occur from the bursting of the housing bubble. The main problem with the GSEs is the special privileges the Federal Government gives the GSEs. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received almost 20 billion dollars worth of indirect Federal subsidies in fiscal year 2004 alone, while Wayne Passmore of the Federal Reserve estimates the value of the GSE’s Federal subsides to be between $122 and $182 billion dollars. Congress Federal Housing Finance Reform Act Of 2007 17 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 52:6 Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1427 compounds these problems by further insulating the GSEs from market discipline. By creating a “world-class” regulator, Congress would send a signal to investors that investors need not concern themselves with investigating the financial health and stability of Fannie and Freddie since a “world-class” regulator is performing that function. Congress Federal Housing Finance Reform Act Of 2007 17 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 52:11 Thus, these independent regulators have a concentration of powers of all three branches and lack direct accountability to any of the democratically chosen branches of government. This flies in the face of the Founders’ opposition to concentrations of power and government bureaucracies that lack accountability. These concerns are especially relevant considering the remarkable degree of power and autonomy this bill gives to the regulator. For example, in the scheme established by H.R. 1427 the regulator’s budget is not subject to appropriations. This removes a powerful mechanism for holding the regulator accountable to Congress. While the regulator is accountable to a board of directors, this board may conduct all deliberations in private because it is not subject to the Sunshine Act. Congress Federal Housing Finance Reform Act Of 2007 17 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 52:17 In conclusion, H.R. 1427 compounds the problems with the GSEs and may increase the damage that will be inflicted by a bursting of the housing bubble. This is because this bill creates a new unaccountable regulator and introduces further distortions into the housing market via increased regulatory power. H.R. 1427 also violates the Constitution by creating yet another unaccountable regulator with quasi-executive, judicial, and legislative powers. Instead of expanding unconstitutional and market distorting government bureaucracies, Congress should act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bailout investors who were misled by foolish Government interference in the market. Congress The Affordable Gas Price Act 21 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 54:4 Instead of expanding government, Congress should repeal federal laws and polices that raise the price of gas, either directly through taxes or indirectly though regulations that. discourage the development of new fuel sources. This is why my legislation repeals the federal moratorium on offshore drilling and allows oil exploration in the ANWR reserve in Alaska. My bill also ensures that the National Environmental Policy Act’s environmental impact statement requirement will no longer be used as a tool to force refiners to waste valuable time and capital on nuisance litigation. The Affordable Gas Price Act also provides tax incentives to encourage investment in new refineries. Congress In The Name Of Patriotism (Who Are The Patriots?) 22 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 55:28 The problem is that the Iraq war continues to drag on, and a real danger of it spreading exists. There is no evidence that a truce will soon be signed in Iraq or in the war on terror or the war on drugs. Victory is not even definable. If Congress is incapable of declaring an official war, it is impossible to know when it will end. We have been fully forewarned that the world conflict in which we are now engaged will last a long, long time. Congress In The Name Of Patriotism (Who Are The Patriots?) 22 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 55:38 The accelerated attacks on liberty started quickly after 9/11. Within weeks, the PATRIOT Act was overwhelmingly passed by Congress. Though the final version was unavailable up to a few hours before the vote, no Member had sufficient time. Political fear of not doing something, even something harmful, drove the Members of Congress to not question the contents, and just voted for it. A little less freedom for a little more perceived safety was considered a fair trade-off, and the majority of Americans applauded. Congress In The Name Of Patriotism (Who Are The Patriots?) 22 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 55:45 Some of the least noticed and least discussed changes in the law were the changes made to the Insurrection Act of 1807 and to posse comitatus by the Defense Authorization Act of 2007. These changes pose a threat to the survival of our Republic by giving the President the power to declare martial law for as little reason as to restore public order. The 1807 act severely restricted the President in his use of the military within the United States borders, and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 strengthened these restrictions with strict oversight by Congress. The new law allows the President to circumvent the restrictions of both laws. The Insurrection Act has now become the “Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.” This is hardly a title that suggests that the authors cared about or understood the nature of a constitutional Republic. Congress In The Name Of Patriotism (Who Are The Patriots?) 22 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 55:46 Now, martial law can be declared not just for insurrection, but also for natural disasters, public health reasons, terrorist attacks or incidents, or for the vague reason called “other conditions.” The President can call up the National Guard without congressional approval or the Governors’ approval, and even send these State Guard troops into other States. Congress In The Name Of Patriotism (Who Are The Patriots?) 22 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 55:47 The American Republic is in remnant status. The stage is set for our country eventually devolving into a military dictatorship, and few seem to care. These precedent-setting changes in the law are extremely dangerous and will change American jurisprudence forever if not revised. The beneficial results of our revolt against the King’s abuses are about to be eliminated, and few Members of Congress and few Americans are aware of the seriousness of the situation. Complacency and fear drive our legislation without any serious objection by our elected leaders. Sadly, though, those few who do object to this self-evident trend away from personal liberty and empire building overseas are portrayed as unpatriotic and uncaring. Congress Unanticipated Good results (When We leave) 6 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 57:4 Those who want a total military victory, which no one has yet defined, don’t have the troops, the money, the equipment, or the support of a large majority of the American people to do so. Those in Congress who have heard the cry of the electorate to end the war refuse to do so out of fear the demagogues will challenge their patriotism and their support for the troops. So nothing happens except more of the same. The result is continued stalemate with the current policy and the daily sacrifice of American lives. Congress Introducing The Sanctity Of Life Act 6 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 58:2 Abortion on demand is no doubt the most serious sociopolitical problem of our age. The lack of respect for life that permits abortion significantly contributes to our violent culture and our careless attitude toward liberty. Whether a civilized society treats human life with dignity or contempt determines the outcome of that civilization. Reaffirming the importance of the sanctity of life is crucial for the continuation of a civilized society. There is already strong evidence that we are on the slippery slope toward euthanasia and non-consensual human experimentation. Although the real problem lies within people’s hearts and minds, the legal problems of protecting life stem from the ill-advised Roe v. Wade ruling, where the court usurped the State’s authority over abortion. Congress can, and should, take a major step toward restoring respect for all life by using the authority granted to it in Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution to rein in rogue Federal judges from interfering with a State’s ability to protect unborn life. Congress Introducing The Sanctity Of Life Act 6 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 58:3 Madam Speaker, it is my hope that my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. By following the Constitution and using the power granted to the Congress by the Constitution, we can restore respect for the sanctity of human life. Congress Introducing A Bill To establish A Sunset For The Authorization For The Use Of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution Of 2002 (Public Law 107-243) 7 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 60:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a bill to establish a sunset for the 2002 Authorization for the Use of Force Against Iraq (P.L. 107–243). There are several active pieces of legislation that would rescind the authorization to use force against Iraq, but the approach of this legislation is quite different. This legislation would sunset the original authorization 6 months after it is enacted, which would give Congress plenty of time to consider anew the authority for Iraq. Congress Introducing A Bill To establish A Sunset For The Authorization For The Use Of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution Of 2002 (Public Law 107-243) 7 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 60:4 With both objectives of the original authorization completely satisfied, Congress has a constitutional obligation to revisit this issue and provide needed oversight and policy guidance. We ignore this obligation at risk to the United States and, very importantly, to our soldiers in harm’s way in Iraq. Congress Introducing A Bill To establish A Sunset For The Authorization For The Use Of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution Of 2002 (Public Law 107-243) 7 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 60:5 Unlike other proposals, this bill does not criticize the President’s handling of the war. It does not cut off funds for the troops. Nor does this bill set a timetable for our withdrawal. I strongly believe that this legislation will enjoy broad support among both those in favor of our action in Iraq and those who favor ending the war, and I am encouraged by the bipartisan support I have received when seeking original cosponsors. Congress is obligated to consider anew the authority for Iraq sooner rather than later and I hope more of my colleagues will join me as cosponsors of this legislation. Congress Introduction Of The Honest Money Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 64:7 The drafters of the Constitution were well aware of how a government armed with legal tender powers could ravage the people’s liberty and prosperity. This is why the Constitution does not grant legal tender powers to the federal government. Instead, Congress was given powers to establish standards regarding the value of money. In other words, in monetary matters the Congress was to follow the lead of the market. When Alexander Hamilton wrote the coinage act of 1792, he simply adopted the market-definition of a dollar as equaling the value of the Spanish milled silver coin. Congress Introduction Of The Honest Money Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 64:8 Legal tender laws have reversed that order to where the market follows the lead of Congress. Beginning in the 19th century, Federal politicians sought to enhance their power and enrich their cronies, by using legal tender powers to change the definition of a dollar from a silver-or-gold-backed unit whose value is determined by the market, to a piece of paper produced by the State. The “value” of this paper may be normally backed in part by gold or silver, but its ultimate backing is the power of the State, and its value is determined by the political needs of the State and the powerful special interests who influence monetary policy. Congress Introduction Of The Honest Money Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 64:9 Unfortunately, the Supreme Court failed to protect the American people from Congress’ unconstitutional legal tender laws. Supreme Court Justice, and Lincoln Treasury Secretary, Salmon Chase, writing in dissent in the legal tender cases, summed up the main reason why the Founders did not grant Congress the authority to pass legal tender laws: “The legal tender quality [of money] is only valuable for the purposes of dishonesty.” Justice Chase might have added dishonesty is perpetrated by State-favored interests on the average American. Congress Introduction Of The Honest Money Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 64:10 Another prescient Justice was Stephen Field, the only justice to dissent in every one of the legal tender cases to come before the Court. Justice Field accurately described the dangers to the constitutional republic posed by legal tender laws: “The arguments in favor of the constitutionality of legal tender paper currency tend directly to break down the barriers which separate a government of limited powers from a government resting in the unrestrained will of Congress. Those limitations must be preserved, or our government will inevitably drift from the system established by our Fathers into a vast, centralized and consolidated government.” Congress Introduction Of The Honest Money Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 64:11 Considering the growth of government since the Supreme Court joined Congress in disregarding the constitutional barriers to legal tender laws, can anyone doubt the accuracy of Justice Field’s words? Repeal of legal tender laws would restore constitutional government and protect the people’s right to use a currency chosen by the market because it serves the needs of the people, instead of having to use a currency chosen by the State because it serves the needs of power hungry politicians and special interests. Therefore, I urge my colleges to cosponsor the Honest Money Act. Congress Introduction Of The Federal reserve Board Abolition Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 65:4 Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government. Congress Introduction Of The Federal reserve Board Abolition Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 65:5 Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the Federal Government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy. Congress Introduction Of The Federal reserve Board Abolition Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 65:6 In fact, Congress’ constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our Nation’s founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true free-market economy. Congress Introduction Of The Sunshine In Monetary Policy Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 66:2 The Federal Reserve Board ceased reporting M3 on March 22, 2006, thus depriving Congress and the American people of the most comprehensive measure of the money supply. The cessation of the Federal Reserve’s weekly M3 report will make it more difficult for policymakers, economists, investors, and the general public to learn the true rate of inflation. As Nobel laureate Milton Friedman famously said, “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.” Therefore, having access to a comprehensive measure of the money supply like M3 is a vital tool for those seeking to track inflation. Thorsten Polleit, honorary professor at HfB-Business School of Finance and Management, in his article “Why Money Supply Matters” posted on the Ludwig von Mises Institute’s Web site mises.org, examined the relationship between changes in the money supply and inflation and concluded that “money supply signals might actually be far more important for inflation — even in the short-term — than current central bank practice suggests,” thus demonstrating the importance of the M3 aggregate. Congress Introduction Of The Sunshine In Monetary Policy Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 66:5 Economists and others who are following M3 have become increasingly concerned about inflation because in 2005 the rate of M3 rose almost twice as fast as other monetary aggregates. This suggests that the inflation picture is not as rosy as the Federal Reserve would like Congress and the American people to believe. Discontinuing reporting the monetary aggregate that provides the best evidence that the Federal Reserve Board has not conquered inflation suggested to many people that the government was trying to conceal information about the true state of the economy from the American people. Brad Conrad, a professor of investing who has also worked with IBM, CDC, and Amdahl, spoke for many when he said, “It [the discontinuance of M3] is unsettling. It detracts from the transparency the Fed preaches and adds to the suspicion that the Fed wants to hide anything showing money growth high enough to fuel inflation . . .” Congress Introduction Of The Sunshine In Monetary Policy Act 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 66:6 Discontinuing reporting M3 was only expected to save 0.00000699 percent of the Federal Reserve Board’s yearly budget. This savings hardly seems to justify depriving the American people of an important measurement of money supply, especially since Congress has tasked the Federal Reserve Board with reporting on monetary aggregates. Discontinuing reporting M3 may not be a violation of the letter of the Federal Reserve Board’s statutory duty, but it is a violation of the spirit of the congressional command that the Federal Reserve Board ensure the American public is fully informed about the effects of monetary policy. Congress A Man Of Principle 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 67:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to enter into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD a letter to the editor of the Carteret County News-Times by General John Batiste titled, “A Man of Principle.” General Batiste commanded the 1st Infantry Division in Iraq and in this letter he rightfully praises one of the most courageous Members of Congress, my friend Rep. WALTER JONES of North Carolina. Rep. JONES, correctly observes General Batiste, is a man of principle and well understands the dilemma we face in Iraq. It is very encouraging for me to read the words of the highly experienced General Batiste affirming the correctness of Congressman JONES’ position on Iraq, because I share Rep. JONES views about this very difficult situation we find ourselves. I also salute Rep. JONES for his courage and his determination to seek the truth. Congress A Man Of Principle 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 67:2 [From the Carteret County News-Times, May 25, 2007] A MAN OF PRINCIPLE ROCHESTER, N.Y., May 22, 2007 TO THE EDITOR: Congressman Walter Jones of North Carolina’s 3rd District deserves our unqualified support. He is a man of principle and well understands the dilemma we face in Iraq to include the fatally flawed strategy that took us to war in March 2003; the failure to modify the same strategy over time; the administration’s continued reliance on the military without the necessary diplomatic, political, and economic components fundamental to a successful strategy; the administration’s failure to mobilize the nation to deal with global Islamic extremism; and the dire straights our great soldiers and Marines find themselves in today. Congress A Man Of Principle 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 67:6 I met Congressman Jones in his office in the Rayburn Office Building some eight months ago. I was impressed then with his grasp of the situation in Iraq and his unqualified love of country and support for our military. Indeed, for the last five years, he is one of only several congressional Republicans who have embraced their constitutional responsibilities to overwatch and hold accountable our executive branch of government. He asks the tough questions and never backs down. The vast majority of our party has long since abrogated this incredibly important aspect of their duty. He well represents his constituents and the best interests of both our country and our military. As President Gerald Ford once said, “Truth is the glue that holds our government together.” Since our first meeting eight months ago, my respect of Walter Jones has multiplied tenfold. Congress A Man Of Principle 15 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 67:7 People often ask me to describe how they can help get the country back on track. The answer almost invariably boils down to exercising the right to vote and casting one’s vote for the candidate who understands the issues and has the moral courage to do the right thing. I have now expanded that answer to elect more public servants like Congressman Walter Jones of North Carolina. Our nation desperately needs members of Congress with his character, commitment, and resolve. I salute Walter Jones as a man of principle with the courage of his convictions. JOHN BATISTE, Maj. Gen. USA (Ret.) Congress Opening Statement – Committee on Financial Services – Subcommittee: Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology – Remittance Hearing 17 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 68:3 Heavy-handed government intrusion into the operation and regulation of money services businesses would also have the effect of raising the costs of doing business. Money service businesses have done a good job of identifying and serving their customers' needs. Healthy competition has led to a reduction in fees over the years so that money services businesses are accessible to more and more consumers. As some of our witnesses will attest, even the threat of regulation can have a chilling effect on the operation of money services businesses. The money services market has done an admirable job of self-regulation so far. The worst thing Congress could do is intervene in an overly forceful manner and undo all the good things that have been done so far. Congress Opening Statement Committee on Financial Services Paulson Hearing 20 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 71:14 Congress, and especially the Financial Services Committee, must insist on total transparency and accuracy of all government financial statistics. Any market interference by government agencies must be done in full public view. Congress Remembering Dr. Hans Sennholz 27 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 72:6 Dr. Sennholz passed away on Saturday, June 23, 2007 at the age of 85, having lived a full and rewarding life. Generations of free- market economists are indebted to him, his spirited teaching, and his lucid writing for keeping free-market economic teaching alive during trying times. Congress would do well to heed his advice on the importance of free markets and the folly of fiat currency. Congress University And College Union Of The United Kingdom Boycott Against Israeli Academia 11 July 2007    2007 Ron Paul 74:2 My concerns are about this particular piece of legislation, however. I simply do not understand why it is the business of the United States Congress — particularly considering the many problems we have at home and with U.S. policy abroad — to bring the weight of the U.S. government down on an academic disagreement half a world away. Do we really believe that the U.S. Government should be sticking its nose into a dispute between British and Israeli academics? Is there no dispute in no remote corner of the globe in which we don’t feel the need to become involved? Congress Statement on HR 2956, the Responsible Redeployment From Iraq 12 July 2007    2007 Ron Paul 75:3 Mr. Speaker, this is precisely the debate we should have had four years ago, before Congress voted to abrogate its Constitutional obligation to declare war and transfer that authority to the president. Some in this body were rather glib in declaring the constitution antiquated while voting to cede the ability to initiate hostilities to the President. Now we see the result of ignoring the Constitution, and we are bringing even more mayhem to the process with this legislation. Congress Statement on HR 2956, the Responsible Redeployment From Iraq 12 July 2007    2007 Ron Paul 75:8 Congress’ job is to change the policy on Iraq, not to tell the military leaders how many troops they should have. I have attempted to do this with H.R. 2605, a bill to sunset after a six month period the authorization for military activity in Iraq. During this period a new plan for Iraq could be discussed and agreed. Plan first, authorization next, execution afterward. That is what we should be doing in Iraq. Congress Statement before the Financial Services Committee – Humphrey Hawkins Prequel Hearing 17 July 2007    2007 Ron Paul 76:1 During the 30 th year of the Humphrey-Hawkins hearings, it would be helpful for Congress to reassess the usefulness of the Humphrey-Hawkins mandate. The dual mandate calls for full employment and stable prices. Humphrey-Hawkins assumes that the Federal Reserve has unique insights into the United States economy that no one else possesses, that the Federal Reserve knows what prices should be and how much unemployment there should be. Full employment which is brought about through rising inflation will eventually lead to a stagnant economy which will lead to more unemployment. 30+ years after the stagflation era, I would hope that Phillips curves are one of those barbarous relics of the past that have been sent to their graves, along with wage and price controls and bans on the private ownership of gold. Congress Statement before the Financial Services Committee – Humphrey Hawkins Prequel Hearing 17 July 2007    2007 Ron Paul 76:6 Until the Congress realizes that the economy cannot be managed by a group of economists, no matter how large or how brilliant the group may be, the result will be the same. Inflation will continue to rise, and the American people will continue to grow poorer. We would be far better off if the Congress were to reassert its Constitutional authority over the monetary system, establish a sound currency, and eliminate its meddling in the free market. Congress Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act 30 July 2007    2007 Ron Paul 77:3 H.R. 180 is an interventionist piece of legislation which will extend the power of the Federal Government over American businesses, force this country into yet another foreign policy debacle, and do nothing to alleviate the suffering of the residents of Darfur. By allowing State and local governments to label pension and retirement funds as State assets, the Federal Government is giving the go-ahead for State and local governments to play politics with the savings upon which millions of Americans depend for security in their old age. The safe harbor provision opens another dangerous loophole, allowing fund managers to escape responsibility for any potential financial mismanagement, and it sets a dangerous precedent. Would the Congress offer the same safe harbor provision to fund managers who wish to divest from firms offering fatty foods, growing tobacco, or doing business in Europe? Congress Opposing Further Sanctions On Iran 30 July 2007    2007 Ron Paul 78:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose any move to initiate further sanctions on Iran. Sanctions are acts of war, and expanding sanctions on Iran serves no purpose other than preparing the American people for an eventual attack on Iran. This is the same pattern we saw in the run up to the war on Iraq: Congress passes legislation calling for regime change, sanctions are imposed, and eventually we are told that only an attack will solve the problem. We should expect the same tragic result if we continue down this path. I urge my colleagues to reconsider. Congress Opposing Further Sanctions On Iran 30 July 2007    2007 Ron Paul 78:3 Second, sanctions simply hurt American industries, particularly agriculture. Every market we close to our nation’s farmers is a market exploited by foreign farmers. China, Russia, the Middle East, North Korea, and Cuba all represent huge markets for our farm products, yet many in Congress favor current or proposed trade restrictions that prevent our farmers from selling to the billions of people in these areas. Congress Public Safety Tax Cut Act 1 August 2007    2007 Ron Paul 80:6 President George Bush has called on Americans to volunteer their time and energy to enhancing public safety. Shouldn’t Congress do its part by reducing taxes that discourage public safety volunteerism? Shouldn’t Congress also show its appreciation to police officers and fire fighters by reducing their taxes? I believe the answer to both of these questions is a resounding “Yes” and therefore I am proud to introduce the Public Safety Tax Cut Act. I request that my fellow Members join in support of this key legislation. Congress Police Security Protection Act 1 August 2007    2007 Ron Paul 81:2 Professional law enforcement officers put their lives on the line each and every day. Reducing the tax liability of law enforcement officers so they can afford armored vests is one of the best ways Congress can help and encourage these brave men and women. After all, an armored vest could literally make the difference between life or death for a police officer. I hope my colleagues will join me in helping our Nation’s law enforcement officers by cosponsoring the Police Security Protection Act. Congress Introduction Of The Congressional Responsibility And Accountability Act    2007 Ron Paul 82:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Congressional Responsibility and Accountability Act. This bill requires Congress to specifically authorize via legislation any proposed federal regulation that will impose costs on any individual of at least $5,000, impose costs on a business or other private organization of at least $25,000, or impose aggregate costs on the American people of at least $250,000, or cause any American to lose his or her job. Congress Introduction Of The Congressional Responsibility And Accountability Act    2007 Ron Paul 82:2 According to some legal experts, at least three-quarters of all federal laws consist of regulations promulgated by federal agencies without the consent, or even the review of, Congress. Allowing unelected, and thus unaccountable, executive agencies to make law undermines democracy. Law-making by executive agencies also violates the intent of the drafters of the Constitution to separate legislative and executive powers. The drafters of the Constitution correctly viewed separation of powers as a cornerstone of republican government and a key to protecting individual liberty from excessive and arbitrary government power. Congress Introduction Of The Congressional Responsibility And Accountability Act    2007 Ron Paul 82:3 Congress’s delegation of lawmaking authority to unelected bureaucrats has created a system that seems to owe more to the writings of Franz Kafka than to the writings of James Madison. The volume of regulations promulgated by federal agencies and the constant introduction of new rules makes it impossible for most Americans to know with any certainty the federal laws, regulations, and rules they are required to obey. Thus, almost all Americans live with the danger that they may be hauled before a federal agency for an infraction they have no reasonable way of knowing is against the law. Congress Introduction Of The Congressional Responsibility And Accountability Act    2007 Ron Paul 82:4 While it is easy for Members of Congress to complain about out of control federal bureaucrats, it was Congress that gave these agencies the ability to create laws. Since Congress created the problem of lawmaking by regulatory agencies, it is up to Congress to fix the problem and make certain that all federal laws are passed by the people’s elected representatives. Therefore, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Congressional Responsibility and Accountability Act. Congress Statement on HR 3159, the Ensuring Military Readiness through Stability and Predictability Deployment Policy Act 2 August 2007    2007 Ron Paul 83:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation to provide some Congressional oversight over the deployment and maintenance of our troops stationed overseas. As the Constitution states in Article I Section 8., Congress has the power “to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces,” and therefore Congress has an obligation to speak on such matters. I have been and remain extremely concerned about the deployment extensions and stop-loss programs that have kept our troops deployed and engaged for increasingly extended periods of time. My constituents who are affected by this policy have contacted me with their concerns as well. Congress Statement on HR 3159, the Ensuring Military Readiness through Stability and Predictability Deployment Policy Act 2 August 2007    2007 Ron Paul 83:3 Although I am voting for this bill, I am increasingly concerned about Congress’s approach to the issue of our continued involvement in Iraq. Rather than a substantive move to end the US military presence in Iraq, this bill and others that have passed recently seem to be merely symbolic moves to further politicize the war in Iraq. Clearly the American public is overwhelmingly in favor of a withdrawal from Iraq, but Congress is not listening. At best, the House seems willing to consider only such half-measures as so-called re-deployment. We need a real solution that puts the safety of our troops above politics. We need to simply bring them home. As I said recently on the Floor of the House, we just marched in so we can just march out. Congress Statement on HR 3159, the Ensuring Military Readiness through Stability and Predictability Deployment Policy Act 2 August 2007    2007 Ron Paul 83:4 The proper method for ending the war is for Congress to meet its responsibility to deauthorize and defend the war. Micromanaging a troop deployment is not the answer since it overstays the bounds of Congressional authority. Congress Introducing The Quality Health Care Coalition Act 2 August 2007    2007 Ron Paul 84:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Quality Health Care Coalition Act, which takes a first step towards restoring a true free market in health care by restoring the rights of freedom of contract and association to health care professionals. Over the past few years, we have had much debate in Congress about the difficulties medical professionals and patients are having with Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs). HMOs are devices used by insurance industries to ration health care. While it is politically popular for members of Congress to bash the HMOs and the insurance industry, the growth of the HMOs are rooted in past government interventions in the health care market though the tax code, the Employment Retirement Security Act (ERSIA), and the federal anti-trust laws. These interventions took control of the health care dollar away from individual patients and providers, thus making it inevitable that something like the HMOs would emerge as a means to control costs. Congress Introducing The Quality Health Care Coalition Act 2 August 2007    2007 Ron Paul 84:6 By restoring the freedom of medical professionals to voluntarily come together to negotiate as a group with HMOs and insurance companies, this bill removes a government-imposed barrier to a true free market in health care. Of course, this bill does not infringe on the rights of health care professionals by forcing them to join a bargaining organization against their will. While Congress should protect the rights of all Americans to join organizations for the purpose of bargaining collectively, Congress also has a moral responsibility to ensure that no worker is forced by law to join or financially support such an organization. Congress Introducing The Quality Health Care Coalition Act 2 August 2007    2007 Ron Paul 84:7 Madam Speaker, it is my hope that Congress will not only remove the restraints on medical professionals’ freedom of contract, but will also empower patients to control their health care by passing my Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act. The Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act puts individuals back in charge of their own health care by providing Americans with large tax credits and tax deductions for their health care expenses, including a deduction for premiums for a high-deductible insurance policy purchased in combination with a Health Savings Account. Putting individuals back in charge of their own health care decisions will enable patients to work with providers to ensure they receive the best possible health care at the lowest possible price. If providers and patients have the ability to form the contractual arrangements that they find most beneficial to them, the HMO monster will wither on the vine without the imposition of new federal regulations on the insurance industry. Congress Introduction Of The Treat Physicians Fairly Act 2 August 2007    2007 Ron Paul 85:3 The professional skills with which one earns a living are property. Therefore, the clear language of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment prevents Congress from mandating that physicians and hospitals bear the entire costs of providing health care to any group. Congress Introducing The Comprehensive Health Care Act 2 August 2007    2007 Ron Paul 86:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, America faces a crisis in health care. Health care costs continue to rise, leaving many Americans unable to afford health insurance, while those with health care coverage, and their physicians, struggle under the control of managed-care “gatekeepers.” Obviously, fundamental health care reform should be one of Congress’ top priorities. Congress Terrorism Insurance 19 september 2007    2007 Ron Paul 89:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, six years ago, when the Congress considered the bill creating the terrorism insurance program, I urged my colleagues to reject it. One of the reasons I opposed the bill was my concern that, contrary to the claims of the bill’s supporters, terrorism insurance would not be allowed to sunset. As I said then: Congress Terrorism Insurance 19 september 2007    2007 Ron Paul 89:2 “The drafters of H.R. 3210 claim that this creates a ‘temporary’ government program. However, Mr. Speaker, what happens in three years if industry lobbyists come to Capitol Hill to explain that there is still a need for this program because of the continuing threat of terrorist attacks. Does anyone seriously believe that Congress will refuse to reauthorize this ‘temporary’ insurance program or provide some other form of taxpayer help to the insurance industry? I would like to remind my colleagues that the federal budget is full of expenditures for long-lasting programs that were originally intended to be ‘temporary.’ ” Congress Terrorism Insurance 19 september 2007    2007 Ron Paul 89:3 I am disappointed to be proven correct. I am also skeptical that, having renewed the program twice, this time for fifteen years, Congress will ever allow it to expire. Congress Terrorism Insurance 19 september 2007    2007 Ron Paul 89:4 As Congress considers extending this program, I renew my opposition to it for substantially the same reasons I stated six years ago. However, I do have a suggestion on how to improve the program. Since one claimed problem with allowing the private market to provide terrorism insurance is the difficulty of quantifying the risk of an attack, the taxpayers’ liability under the terrorism reinsurance program should be reduced for an attack occurring when the country is under orange or red alert. After all, because the point of the alert system is to let Americans know when there is an increased likelihood of an attack it is reasonable to expect insurance companies to demand that their clients take extra precautionary measures during periods of high alert. Reducing taxpayer subsidies will provide an incentive to ensure private parties take every possible precaution to minimize the potential damage from possible terrorists attack. Congress Terrorism Insurance 19 september 2007    2007 Ron Paul 89:5 Since my fundamental objections to the program remain the same as six years ago, I am attaching my statement regarding H.R. 3210, which created the terrorist insurance program in the 107th Congress: Congress Terrorism Insurance 19 september 2007    2007 Ron Paul 89:6 Mr. Chairman, no one doubts that the government has a role to play in compensating American citizens who are victimized by terrorist attacks. However, Congress should not lose sight of fundamental economic and constitutional principles when considering how best to provide the victims of terrorist attacks just compensation. I am afraid that H.R. 3210, the Terrorism Risk Protection Act, violates several of those principles and therefore passage of this bill is not in the best interests of the American people. Congress Terrorism Insurance 19 september 2007    2007 Ron Paul 89:8 The drafters of H.R. 3210 claim that this creates a “temporary” government program. However, Mr. Speaker, what happens in three years if industry lobbyists come to Capitol Hill to explain that there is still a need for this program because of the continuing threat of terrorist attacks. Does anyone seriously believe that Congress will refuse to reauthorize this “temporary” insurance program or provide some other form of taxpayer help to the insurance industry? I would like to remind my colleagues that the federal budget is full of expenditures for long-lasting programs that were originally intended to be “temporary.” Congress Terrorism Insurance 19 september 2007    2007 Ron Paul 89:11 Instead of forcing taxpayers to subsidize the costs of terrorism insurance, Congress should consider creating a tax credit or deduction for premiums paid for terrorism insurance, as well as a deduction for claims and other costs borne by the insurance industry connected with offering terrorism insurance. A tax credit approach reduces government’s control over the insurance market. Furthermore, since a tax credit approach encourages people to devote more of their own resources to terrorism insurance, the moral hazard problems associated with federally funded insurance is avoided. Congress Introduction Of The Voter Protection Act 19 september 2007    2007 Ron Paul 90:2 I want to make 4 points about this bill. First, it is constitutional. Article I, section 4, explicitly authorizes the U.S. Congress to, “At any time by law make or alter such regulations regarding the manner of holding elections.” This is the authority that was used for the Voter Rights Act of 1965. Congress Introducing The Television Consumer Freedom Act 19 September 2007    2007 Ron Paul 91:2 My office has received numerous calls from rural satellite and cable TV customers who are upset because their satellite or cable service providers have informed them that they will lose access to certain network and cable programming. The reason my constituents cannot obtain their desired satellite and cable services is that the satellite and cable “marketplace” is fraught with government interventionism at every level. Local governments have historically granted cable companies franchises of monopoly privilege. Government has previously intervened to invalidate “exclusive dealings” contracts between private parties, namely cable service providers and program creators, and has most recently imposed price controls. The Library of Congress has even been delegated the power to determine prices at which program suppliers must make their programs available to cable and satellite programming service providers. Congress Introducing The Television Consumer Freedom Act 19 September 2007    2007 Ron Paul 91:3 It is, of course, within the constitutionally enumerated powers of Congress to “promote the progress of Science and Useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the Exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” However, operating a clearing-house for the subsequent transfer of such property rights in the name of setting a just price or “instilling competition” via “central planning” seems to be neither economically prudent nor justifiable under this enumerated power. This process is one best reserved to the competitive marketplace. Congress Opposing Legislation To Provoke Iran 25 September 2007    2007 Ron Paul 94:2 The House has obviously learned nothing at all from the Iraq debacle. In 2002, Congress voted to abrogate its Constitutional obligation to declare war and instead transfer that authority to the President. Many of my colleagues have expressed regrets over their decision to transfer this authority to the President, yet this legislation is Iraq all over again. Some have plausibly claimed that the move in this legislation to designate the Iranian military as a foreign terrorist organization is an attempt to signal to the President that he already has authority under previous resolutions to initiate force against Iran. We should recall that language specifically requiring the President to return to Congress before initiating any strike on Iran was removed from legislation by House leadership this year. Congress Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act 27 September 2007    2007 Ron Paul 96:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, Madam Speaker, I am pleased to lend my support to two amendments to H.R. 3121, the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act, that will help those Americans, including many in my congressional district, at risk of increased flood insurance premiums because of actions of the Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA). FEMA is demanding that many towns and communities spend thousands of dollars in taxpayer money to certify levies and other mitigation devices. If the levies are not certified to FEMA’s satisfaction, the residents of those communities will face higher flood insurance premiums. Many local governments are struggling to raise the funds to complete the certification in time to meet the FEMA-imposed certification deadlines. Congress Resolution On Situation In Burma 2 October 2007    2007 Ron Paul 97:2 More importantly, perhaps, I am concerned that while going around the world criticizing admittedly abhorrent governmental actions abroad we are ignoring the very dangerous erosions of our own civil liberties and way of life at home. Certainly it is objectionable that the Burmese government holds its own citizens in jails without trial. But what about the secret prisons that our own CIA operates around the globe that hold thousands of individuals indefinitely and without trial? Certainly it is objectionable that the government of Burma can declare Aung San Suu Kyi a political prisoner to be held in confinement. But what about the power that Congress has given the president to declare anyone around the world, including American citizens, “enemy combatants” subject to indefinite detention without trial? What about the “military commissions act” that may well subject Americans to military trial with secret evidence permitted and habeas corpus suspended? Congress Statement Introducing American Freedom Agenda Act Of 2007 15 October 2007    2007 Ron Paul 98:3 The legislation clarifies that no information shall be admitted as evidence if it is obtained from the defendant through the use of torture or coercion. It codifies the FISA process as the means by which foreign intelligence may be obtained and it gives members of the Senate and the House of Representatives standing in court to challenge presidential signing statements that declares the president’s intent to disregard certain aspects of a law passed in the U.S. Congress. It prohibits kidnapping and extraordinary rendition of prisoners to foreign countries on the president’s unilateral determination that the suspect is an enemy combatant. It defends the first amendment by clarifying that journalists are not to be prevented from publishing information received from the legislative or executive branch unless such publication would cause immediate, direct, and irreparable harm to the United States. Congress Congratulations To LaVace Stewart Elementary 5 November 2007    2007 Ron Paul 100:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to congratulate LaVace Stewart Elementary School in Kemah, Texas, in my congressional district, for being awarded a No Child Left Behind- Blue Ribbon award. LaVace Stewart Elementary School earned this award by going from acceptable to exemplary in State accountability ratings in less than 4 years. Congress Question Of The Privileges Of The House 6 November 2007    2007 Ron Paul 102:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise, reluctantly, in favor of the motion to table House Resolution 799, Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors, and in favor of referring that resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for full consideration. I voted to table this resolution not because I do not share the gentleman from Ohio’s desire to hold those responsible for the Iraqi debacle accountable; but rather, because I strongly believe that we must follow established protocol in matters of such importance. During my entire time in Congress, I have been outspoken in my opposition to war with Iraq and Iran. I have warned my colleagues and the administration against marching toward war in numerous speeches over the years, and I have voted against every appropriation to continue the war on Iraq. Congress Question Of The Privileges Of The House 6 November 2007    2007 Ron Paul 102:2 I have always been strongly in favor of vigorous congressional oversight of the executive branch, and I have lamented our abrogation of these Constitutional obligations in recent times. I do believe, however, that this legislation should proceed through the House of Representatives following regular order, which would require investigation and hearings in the House Judiciary Committee before the resolution proceeds to the floor for a vote. This time- tested manner of moving impeachment legislation may slow the process, but in the long run it preserves liberty by ensuring that the House thoroughly deliberates on such weighty matters. In past impeachments of high officials, including those of Presidents Nixon and Clinton, the legislation had always gone through the proper committee with full investigation and accompanying committee report. Congress Introduction Of The Make No Cents Until It Makes Sense Act 8 November 2007    2007 Ron Paul 104:3 In the event of a shortage I would urge my colleagues to consider Mr. ROSKAM’s H.R. 4036, which addresses the cost issue by changing the composition of pennies while maintaining the Congressional control and oversight mandated by the Constitution. Congress Violent Radicalization And Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act 5 December 2007    2007 Ron Paul 106:2 I would like to note that this legislation was brought to the floor for a vote under suspension of regular order. These so-called “suspension” bills are meant to be non-controversial, thereby negating the need for the more complete and open debate allowed under regular order. It is difficult for me to believe that none of my colleagues in Congress view H.R. 1955, with its troubling civil liberties implications, as “non-controversial.” Congress Introducing The Cancer And Terminal Illness Patient Health Care Act 13 December 2007    2007 Ron Paul 109:5 It is hard to think of a more compassionate tax policy this Congress could enact than to stop taking the resources away from working Americans that could help them treat cancer, AIDS, or other terrible health problems. I hope all my colleagues will help people suffering from terminal illnesses, and their caregivers, by cosponsoring the Cancer and Terminal Illness Patent Health Care Act. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on H.R. 5140 29 January 2008    2008 Ron Paul 2:4 In addition, I am concerned that the 50% bonus depreciation and the increase in the amount of qualifying purchases that small businesses can expense in the year they bought their equipment will be of limited effectiveness because they are limited to one year. A more effective way to stimulate the economy would be to make the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent. I also hope Congress considers the long-term tax cuts contained in HR 5109, the Economic Growth Act. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on H.R. 5140 29 January 2008    2008 Ron Paul 2:5 Congress should also pass my Tax Free Tips Act (HR 3664), which makes tips exempt from federal income and payroll taxes. Making tips tax-free will strengthen American families and the American economy by allowing millions of hard-working Americans to devote more resources to their children’s, or their own, education, or to save for a home, retirement, or to start their own businesses. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on H.R. 5140 29 January 2008    2008 Ron Paul 2:6 Another disturbing feature of HR 5140 is that, instead of taking the fiscally responsible course and pairing the tax cuts with spending cuts, this bill simply adds to the national deficit. Madame Speaker, unless Congress acts soon to reign in its excessive spending the American people will face confiscatory tax rates or skyrocketing inflation. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on H.R. 5140 29 January 2008    2008 Ron Paul 2:7 Tax cuts by themselves will not restore long-term economic health unless and until this body finally addresses the fundamental cause of our economic instability, which is monetary policy. The inflationary policies of the Federal Reserve are the root of the boom-and-bust cycle that has plagued the American economy for almost 75 years. The Federal Reserve’s inflationary polices are also at the root of the steady decline in the American people’s standard of living. A good step toward monetary reform would be for Congress to pass my HR 2576, which repeals the federal legal tender laws. This would allow people to use alternatives to government-issued fiat money and thus protect themselves from Federal Reserve-created inflation. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on H.R. 5140 29 January 2008    2008 Ron Paul 2:8 One of the best things Congress could do for the American economy is to repeal, or at least reform, the misguided Sarbanes-Oxley law, particularly Section 404. Rushed through Congress in the wake of the Enron and WorldCom scandals in order to show that Congress was “getting tough” on corporate crime, Sarbanes-Oxley imposes unreasonable costs on small businesses and entrepreneurs. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on H.R. 5140 29 January 2008    2008 Ron Paul 2:10 In conclusion, Madame Speaker, HR 5140 does not provide the kind of permanent, deep tax relief that will protect long-term economic growth, and will actually compound the damage Congress has already done to the housing market. Instead of pretending that we are addressing America’s economic problems via temporary tax cuts, Congress should address the fundamental problems of the American economy by pursing serious monetary reform, spending cuts, and regulatory reform. Congress should also provide real long-term tax relief to the American people by passing legislation such as HR 5109 and HR 3664. Congress Statement of Ron Paul on H.R. 5104 30 January 2008    2008 Ron Paul 3:7 While I would not oppose technical changes in FISA that the intelligence community has indicated are necessary, Congress should not use this opportunity to chip away at even more of our constitutional protections and civil liberties. I urge my colleagues to oppose this and any legislation that violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. Congress Statement on Competing Currencies February 13, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 4:5 At this country’s founding, there was no government controlled national currency. While the Constitution established the Congressional power of minting coins, it was not until 1792 that the US Mint was formally established. In the meantime, Americans made do with foreign silver and gold coins. Even after the Mint’s operations got underway, foreign coins continued to circulate within the United States, and did so for several decades. Congress Statement on Competing Currencies February 13, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 4:7 The first step consists of eliminating legal tender laws. Article I Section 10 of the Constitution forbids the States from making anything but gold and silver a legal tender in payment of debts. States are not required to enact legal tender laws, but should they choose to, the only acceptable legal tender is gold and silver, the two precious metals that individuals throughout history and across cultures have used as currency. However, there is nothing in the Constitution that grants the Congress the power to enact legal tender laws. We, the Congress, have the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, but not to declare a legal tender. Yet, there is a section of US Code, 31 USC 5103, that purports to establish US coins and currency, including Federal Reserve notes, as legal tender. Congress “Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy” February 27, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 9:4 Some drastic proposals have called for the federal government to purchase existing mortgages and take upon itself the process of rewriting these and guaranteeing the resulting new mortgages. Aside from exposing the government to tens of billions of dollars of potentially defaulting mortgages, the burden of which will ultimately fall on the taxpayers, this type of plan would embed the federal government even deeper into the housing market and perpetuate instability. The Congress has, over the past decades, relentlessly pushed for increased rates of homeownership among people who have always been viewed by the market as poor credit risks. Various means and incentives have been used by the government, but behind all the actions of lenders has been an implicit belief in a federal bailout in the event of a crisis. Congress Statement on Coinage March 11, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 12:1 Mr. Chairman, I oppose HR 5512 because it is unconstitutional to delegate the determination of the metal content of our coinage to the Secretary of the Treasury. Under Article I Section 8 of the Constitution, the Congress is given the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof. It is a shame that Congress has already unconstitutionally delegated its coinage authority to the Treasury Department, but that is no reason to further delegate our power and essentially abdicate Congressional oversight as the passing of HR 5512 would do. Congress Statement on Coinage March 11, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 12:2 Oversight by members of Congress, who have an incentive to listen to their constituents, ensures openness and transparency. This bill would eliminate that process and delegate it to unelected bureaucrats. The Secretary of the Treasury would be given sole discretion to alter the metal content of coins, or even to create non-metal coins. Given the history of Congressional delegation and subsequent lax oversight on issues as important as the conflict in Iraq, it would be naïve to believe that Congress would exercise any more oversight over an issue as unimportant to most members as the composition of coins. Congress Statement on Coinage March 11, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 12:4 Congress’ unconstitutional delegation of monetary policy to the Federal Reserve and its reluctance to exercise oversight in that arena have led to a massive devaluation of the dollar. If we fail to end this devaluation, we will undoubtedly hold future hearings as the metal value of our coins continues to outstrip the face value. Congress The Intelligence Authorization Act of 2008 11 March 2008    2008 Ron Paul 13:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in somewhat reluctant support of this vote to override the President’s veto of H.R. 2062, the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2008. Although I voted against this authorization when it first came to the floor, the main issue has now become whether we as a Congress are to condone torture as official U.S. policy or whether we will speak out against it. This bill was vetoed by the President because of a measure added extending the prohibition of the use of any interrogation treatment or technique not authorized by the United States Army Field Manual on Human Intelligence Collector Operations to the U.S. intelligence community. Opposing this prohibition is tantamount to endorsing the use of torture against those in United States Government custody. Congress Expressing concern over Russian involvement in Alexander Litvinenko’s murder 1 April 2008    2008 Ron Paul 17:4 Mr. Speaker, I would like to enter into the Congressional Record a very thought-provoking article by Edward Jay Epstein published recently in the New York Sun, which convincingly calls into question many of the assumptions and accusations made in this legislation. I would encourage my colleagues to read this article and carefully consider the wisdom of what we are doing. Congress Opening Statement, Petraeus and Crocker Testimony April 9 2008    2008 Ron Paul 22:8 Mr. Chairman, I would like to conclude by again stating my concern that the real purpose of today’s testimony is to further set the stage for an attack on Iran. Congress should make it very clear that there is no authority under current law for an attack on Iran. It is in our best interest to talk with Iran and to work with Iran to help stabilize the situation in Iraq. It is also in our immediate interest to remove US forces from Iraq as quickly as it is safe to do so. Congress Statement on Earmark Reform April 9, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 23:1 Madame Speaker, abuses of the earmark process by members of both parties demonstrate the need for reform. However earmarks are hardly the most serious problem facing this country. In fact, many, if not most of the problems with earmarks can be fixed by taking simple steps to bring greater transparency to the appropriations process. While I support reforms designed to shine greater sunlight on the process by which members seek earmarks, I fear that some of my colleagues have forgotten that the abuses of the earmarking process are a symptom of the problems with Washington, not the cause. The root of the problem is an out-of-control federal budget. I am also concerned that some reforms proposed by critics of earmarking undermine the separation of powers by eroding the constitutional role Congress plays in determining how federal funds are spent. Congress Statement on Earmark Reform April 9, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 23:2 Contrary to popular belief, adding earmarks to a bill does not increase federal spending by even one penny. Spending levels for the appropriation bills are set before Congress adds a single earmark to a bill. The question of whether or not the way the money is spent is determined by earmarks or by another means does not effect the total amount of spending. Congress Statement on Earmark Reform April 9, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 23:3 Since reforming, limiting, or even eliminating earmarks does nothing to reduce federal spending, I have regarded the battle over earmarks as a distraction from the real issue — the need to reduce the size of government. Recently, opponents of earmarks have embraced an approach to earmark reform that undermines the constitutional separation of powers by encouraging the president to issue an executive order authorizing federal agencies to disregard congressional earmarks placed in committee reports. Congress Statement on Earmark Reform April 9, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 23:4 Since the president’s executive order would not reduce federal spending, the practical result of such an executive order would be to transfer power over the determination of how federal funds are spent from Congress to unelected federal bureaucrats. Since most earmarks are generated by requests from our constituents, including local elected officials, such as mayors, this executive order has the practical effect of limiting taxpayers’ ability to influence the ways the federal government spends tax dollars. Congress Statement on Earmark Reform April 9, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 23:5 Madame Speaker, the drafters of the Constitution gave Congress the powers of the purse because the drafters feared that allowing the branch of government charged with executing the laws to also write the federal budget would concentrate too much power in one branch of government. The founders correctly viewed the separation of law-making and law-enforcement powers as a vital safeguard of liberty. Whenever the president blatantly disregards orders from Congress as to how federal funds should be spent, he is undermining the constitutional separation of powers. Congress Statement on Earmark Reform April 9, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 23:6 Congress has already all but ceded its authority to declare war to the executive branch. Now we are giving away our power of the purse. Madame Speaker, the logical conclusion of the arguments that it is somehow illegitimate for members of Congress to control the distribution of federal funds in their district is that Congress should only meet one week a year to appropriate a lump sum to be given to the president for him to allocate to the federal government as he sees fit. Congress PROTECTING THE MEDICAID SAFETY NET ACT OF 2008 22 April 2008    2008 Ron Paul 25:3 According to some estimates, failure to implement the proposed regulations could cost the already financially fragile Medicaid system as much as 10 billion over the next several years. Yet, the sponsors of this bill refuse to make a serious effort to address these costs. Mr. Speaker, instead of rushing H.R. 5613 into law, we should be looking for ways to shore up Medicaid by making cuts in other, lower priority programs, using those savings to ensure the short-term fiscal stability of federal entitlement programs while transitioning to a more stable means of providing health care for low-income Americans. I have been outspoken on the areas I believe should be subject to deep cuts in order to finance serious entitlement reform that protects those relying on these programs. I will not go into detail on these cuts, although I will observe that in recent weeks this Congress has authorized billions of new foreign aid spending, yet today we are told we cannot find the money to address Medicaid’s long-term financial imbalances. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE TAX RELIEF FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKERS ACT 7 May 2008    2008 Ron Paul 27:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Tax Relief for Transportation Workers Act. This legislation helps those who work in the port industry cope with the costs of complying with Congress’s mandate that all those working on a port obtain a Transportation Worker Identity Card (TWIC). The Tax Relief for Transportation Workers Act provides a tax credit to workers who pay the costs of obtaining TWICs. The credit is refundable against both income and payroll tax liabilities. This legislation also provides a tax deduction for businesses that pay for their employees to obtain a TWIC. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE TAX RELIEF FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKERS ACT 7 May 2008    2008 Ron Paul 27:2 When Congress created the TWIC requirement, it placed the burden of paying the cost of obtaining the card on individual workers. Imposing the costs of obtaining TWICs on port workers has several negative economic impacts that Congress should help mitigate by making the cost associated with obtaining a TWIC tax deductible. According to the Department of Homeland Security, a port worker will have to pay between $100 and $132 dollars to obtain a card. The worker will also have to pay a $60 fee for every card that is lost or damaged. Even those employers whose employers pay the substantial costs of obtaining TWICs for their workforce are adversely affected by the TWIC requirement, as the money employers pay for TWICs is money that cannot go into increasing their workers’ salaries. The costs of the TWIC requirement may also cause some employers to refrain from hiring new employees. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE TAX RELIEF FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKERS ACT 7 May 2008    2008 Ron Paul 27:4 Unless Congress acts to relieve some of the economic burden the TWIC requirement places on those who work in the port industry, the damage done could reach beyond the port employers and employees to harm businesses that depend on a strong American port industry. This could be very harmful to both interstate and international trade. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE TAX RELIEF FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKERS ACT 7 May 2008    2008 Ron Paul 27:5 Regardless of what one thinks of the merits of the TWIC card, it is simply not right for Congress to make the port industry bear all the costs of TWIC. I therefore urge my colleagues to stand up for those who perform vital tasks at America’s ports by cosponsoring the Tax Relief for Transportation Workers Act. Congress CONGRATULATIONS TO CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL CLASS OF 1958 20 May 2008    2008 Ron Paul 29:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to extend my congratulations and best wishes to the Central High School Class of 1958 as they prepare to celebrate their 50th class reunion on May 30, 2008. Central High is located in Galveston, Texas, which is in my Congressional district. Constructed in 1895 to ensure that the segregation laws then in effect did not deny Galveston’s African-American children the opportunity to obtain an education, Central High is the oldest high school in Texas built to serve African-Americans. Congress CONGRATULATIONS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON-VICTORIA JAGUARS May 22, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 31:7 Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to formally congratulate the women of the Jaguars on their accomplishments, both on and off the softball field, in their historic first season. I would also like to insert the Jaguars roster into the of the team into the Congressional Record: Jessica Salas, Erin Litvik, Samantha Campagna, Kristen Lindley, Curby Ryan, Lindsey Ferguson, Lauren Garza, Chelsi Fitzgerald, Kasey Voyles, Cayla Dluhos, Ashley Falco, Stephanie Lavey, Amber Scott, Whitney Damborsky, Brittany Faas. Congress RECOGNIZING THE 100-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ST. MARY’S COOPERATIVE CREDIT ASSOCIATION 11 June 2008    2008 Ron Paul 33:4 I hope that Congress will follow-up today’s legislation by soon considering H.R. 5519, the Credit Union Regulatory Relief Act of 2008, which repeals Federal regulations that hinder credit unions from improving their services. Congress CONGRESS MUST ACT TO HELP SHRIMPERS 19 June 2008    2008 Ron Paul 36:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, the American shrimp industry is a textbook example of a great American business crippled by foolish government policies. Congress and the federal bureaucracy have burdened shirmpers with needless regulations and laws that dramatically raise shrimpers’ cost of doing business while subsidizing American shrimpers’ overseas competitors. Unless Congress soon reverses course and repeals these destructive government policies, many shrimpers will be forced out of business. Congress CONGRESS MUST ACT TO HELP SHRIMPERS 19 June 2008    2008 Ron Paul 36:2 Congress’s refusal to take any constructive action to address skyrocketing fuel costs has, in particular, hurt shrimpers. Some shrimpers are so desperate to lower their fuel costs that they are going to Mexico in search of affordable fuel. Think about this, Madam Speaker it is cheaper for shrimpers to travel to Mexico to buy gas than to obtain gas in the USA. Yet, Congress still refuses to take reasonable actions, such as expanding offshore drilling or repealing federal laws that delay the production of refineries, to expand oil supply and thus reduce the price of fuel. Congress CONGRESS MUST ACT TO HELP SHRIMPERS 19 June 2008    2008 Ron Paul 36:5 In order to stop the federal government from punishing shrimpers with unfair regulations and forcing them to subsidize their major competitors, I introduced the Shrimp Importation Financing Fairness Act. This legislation would place a moratorium on any restrictive regulations negatively impacting the shrimp industry and prevent any taxpayer money from going to any country that exported more than 20 million pounds of shrimp to the Untied States in the previous six months. However, Congress chose not to even take these simple steps to help the American shrimp industry. Congress CONGRESS MUST ACT TO HELP SHRIMPERS 19 June 2008    2008 Ron Paul 36:6 Of course, American shrimpers, like all American businesses that compete in the global marketplace, also suffers from the weak U.S. dollar. Congress’s fiscal irresponsibility is a major cause of the weakening U.S. dollar. Congress CONGRESS MUST ACT TO HELP SHRIMPERS 19 June 2008    2008 Ron Paul 36:7 Madam Speaker, it is still not too late or Congress to help the shrimp industry. Congress should immediately end subsidies to American shrimpers’ foreign competitors, place a moratorium on harmful regulations imposed on the shrimp industry, and take action to reduce fuel prices by expanding the supply of oil. I urge my colleagues to join me in working to fix the misguided government policies that are harming America shrimpers. Congress CONGRATULATIONS TO THE ALVIN LADY JACKETS 19 June 2008    2008 Ron Paul 37:5 All graduating seniors on the Lady Jackets team are planning to continue their involvement in organized softball at the collegiate level. Madam Speaker, I again extend my congratulations to the players and coaches of the Lady Jackets and insert the Lady Jackets championship roster into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 2008 ALVIN LADY JACKETS Jessica Savage, Amber Anderson, Vanessa Eng, Alexis Joseph, Tiffany Denham, Britni Wells, Kelsey Nichols, Megan Potts, Natalie Farias, Kelsi Kettler. Megan Knippa, Meghan Gomez, Megan Garza, Amber Brooks, Adela Gomez, Maci Meyer, Nicole Powers, Lauren Denny, Alicia Smith. Head Coach: Carla Newsom; varsity assistant: Kelly Bembry; assistant coaches: Jennifer Dominguez, Paula Tafelski; trainer: Eric Nuncio; manager: Brady Hudson. Athletic Director: Mike Bass; Alvin High School Principal: Kevon Wells; Superintendent: Dr. Robby McGowen. Congress MEDICARE IMPROVEMENTS FOR PATIENTS AND PROVIDERS ACT OF 2008 24 June 2008    2008 Ron Paul 39:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Congress is once again forsaking an opportunity to begin addressing Medicare’s long-term fiscal problems. Instead, the legislation before us today, while not without its merits, exacerbates the problems facing Medicare by giving new authority to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), even though CMS’s excessive power is a major reason why so many physicians and patients are dissatisfied with the current Medicare system. Congress MEDICARE IMPROVEMENTS FOR PATIENTS AND PROVIDERS ACT OF 2008 24 June 2008    2008 Ron Paul 39:3 I certainly recognize the need to make adjustments in physicians’ payments. Many physicians are already losing money treating Medicare patients, thanks to CMS’s low reimbursements and the cost of having to comply with CMS’s numerous rules and regulations. Unless Congress acts, many physicians will simply refuse to see Medicare patients. I think we all agree that driving physicians out of the Medicare program is not the proper way to reform the system. Congress MEDICARE IMPROVEMENTS FOR PATIENTS AND PROVIDERS ACT OF 2008 24 June 2008    2008 Ron Paul 39:6 Congress should also reform the Medicare system by providing Medicare patients more control over their health care than is available under either traditional Medicare or the Medicare Advantage program. Congress Statement Introducing the Energy Efficient and Environmentally Friendly Automobile Tax Credit Act 8 July 2008    2008 Ron Paul 41:2 This legislation will help Americans cope with high gas prices by making it easier for them to obtain more fuel-efficient cars. I hope my colleagues would agree that Congress should provide free market incentives to make it easier for Americans to exchange their current cars for cars that create less pollution. Congress Statement: “Something Big is Happening” 9 July 2008    2008 Ron Paul 42:18 This bubble is different and bigger for another reason. The central banks of the world secretly collude to centrally plan the world economy. I’m convinced that agreements among central banks to “monetize” U.S. debt these past 15 years have existed, although secretly and out of the reach of any oversight of anyone — especially the U.S. Congress that doesn’t care, or just flat doesn’t understand. As this “gift” to us comes to an end, our problems worsen. The central banks and the various governments are very powerful, but eventually the markets overwhelm when the people who get stuck holding the bag (of bad dollars) catch on and spend the dollars into the economy with emotional zeal, thus igniting inflationary fever. Congress BLOCKADE OF IRAN 10 July 2008    2008 Ron Paul 43:1 Mr. PAUL. A couple of weeks ago, there was a resolution introduced in the Congress, H. Con. Res. 362, that quickly got 220 cosponsors. I want to talk a little bit more about that resolution because there are some Members of Congress now having second thoughts about invoking a blockade on Iran. Congress BLOCKADE OF IRAN 10 July 2008    2008 Ron Paul 43:2 Take, for instance, here’s a quote from Congressman ROBERT WEXLER of Florida. He says, “Given my growing concerns regarding this resolution, including its failure to advocate for direct American engagement with Tehran and open language that could lead to a U.S. blockade of Iran, I will lead an effort to make changes to this resolution before it comes to the Foreign Affairs Committee for a vote.” Congress BLOCKADE OF IRAN 10 July 2008    2008 Ron Paul 43:4 I would like all Members of Congress to reconsider, because this I consider a very dangerous sense of congress resolution and that it is going to lead to trouble. Congress CONGRATULATIONS TO BASF FREEPORT ON THEIR 50TH ANNIVERSARY 10 July 2008    2008 Ron Paul 44:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, 2008 marks the 50th anniversary of the opening of the BASF Corporation’s Freeport, Texas facility. Freeport is located in Brazoria County in my congressional district. I am pleased to take this opportunity to congratulate the management and employees of BASF Freeport on 50 great years, and thank the people of BASF Freeport for their contributions to Freeport’s economy. Congress Statement on HR 3221 July 24, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 48:1 Madam Speaker, For several years, followers of the Austrian school of economics have warned that unless Congress moved to end the implicit government guarantee of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and took other steps to disengage the US Government from the housing market, America would face a crisis in housing. This crisis would force Congress to chose between authorizing a taxpayer bailout of Fannie and Freddie, and other measures increasing government’s involvement in housing, or restoring a free-market in housing by ending government support for Fannie and Freddie and repealing all laws that interfere in housing. The bursting of the housing bubble, and the recent near-collapse in investor support for Fannie and Freddie has proven my fellow Austrians correct. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, instead of ending the prior interventions in the housing market that are responsible for the current crisis, Congress is increasing the level of government intervention in the housing market. This is the equivalent of giving a drug addict another fix, which will only make the necessary withdrawal more painful. Congress Statement on HR 3221 July 24, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 48:2 The provision giving the Treasury Secretary a blank check to purchase Fannie and Freddie stock not only makes the implicit government guarantee of Fannie and Freddie explicit, it represents another unconstitutional delegation of Congress’ Constitutional authority to control the allocation of taxpayer dollars. While the Treasury Secretary has to file a report with Congress, the lack of any effective standards for the expenditure of funds makes it impossible for Congress to perform effective oversight on Treasury’s expenditures. Congress HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008 25 July 2008    2008 Ron Paul 52:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, for several years, followers of the Austrian school of economics have warned that unless Congress moved to end the implicit Government guarantee of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and took other steps to disengage the U.S. Government from the housing market, America would face a crisis in housing. This crisis would force Congress to chose between authorizing a taxpayer bailout of Fannie and Freddie, and other measures increasing Government’s involvement in housing, or restoring a free market in housing by ending Government support for Fannie and Freddie and repealing all laws that interfere in housing. The bursting of the housing bubble, and the recent near-collapse in investor support for Fannie and Freddie has proven my fellow Austrians correct. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, instead of ending the prior interventions in the housing market that are responsible for the current crisis, Congress is increasing the level of Government intervention in the housing market. This is the equivalent of giving a drug addict another fix, which will only make the necessary withdrawal more painful. Congress HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008 25 July 2008    2008 Ron Paul 52:2 The provision giving the Treasury Secretary a blank check to purchase Fannie and Freddie stock not only makes the implicit Government guarantee of Fannie and Freddie explicit, it represents another unconstitutional delegation of Congress’ constitutional authority to control the allocation of taxpayer dollars. While the Treasury Secretary has to file a report with Congress, the lack of any effective standards for the expenditure of funds makes it impossible for Congress to perform effective oversight on Treasury’s expenditures. Congress Statement on HR 4137 August 1, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 56:1 Madame Speaker, anyone in need of proof that federal control follows federal funding need only examine HR 4137, the Higher Education Opportunity Act. HR 4137 imposes several new mandates on colleges, and extends numerous mandates that previous Congress imposed on colleges. HR 4137 proves the prophetic soundness of people who warned that federal higher education programs would lead to federal control of higher education. Congress Statement on HR 4137 August 1, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 56:2 Opponents of increasing federal control over higher education should be especially concerned about HR 4137’s “Academic Bill of Rights.” This provision takes a step toward complete federal control of college curriculum, grading, and teaching practices. While this provision is worded as a “sense of Congress,” the clear intent of the “bill of rights” is to intimidate college administrators into ensuring professors’ lectures and lesson plans meet with federal approval. Congress Statement on HR 4137 August 1, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 56:3 The “Academic Bill of Rights” is a response to concerns that federally-funded institutions of higher learner are refusing to allow students to express, or even be exposed to, points of view that differ from those held by their professors. Ironically, the proliferation of “political correctness” on college campuses is largely a direct result of increased government funding of colleges and universities. Federal funding has isolated institutions of higher education from market discipline, thus freeing professors to promulgate their “politically correct” views regardless of whether this type of instruction benefits their students (who are, after all, the professors’ customers). Now, in a perfect illustration of how politicians use the problems created by previous interventions in the market as a justification for further interventions, Congress proposes to use the problem of “political correctness” to justify more federal control over college classrooms. Congress “The Future of Financial Services: Exploring Solutions for the Market Crisis” September 24, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 59:1 Mr. Chairman, It is truly a shame that, less than two decades after the fall of communism, the lessons of price control are completely lost on most Washington power-brokers. The Treasury proposal before Congress is nothing more than a form of price control, an attempt to keep asset prices artificially elevated. The root of our recent economic boom, as in any other business cycle, was government intervention into the market under the guise of lowering the interest rate, which is itself a price. The function that prices play in the market in equalizing supply and demand, and the distortions that necessarily accompany each government effort at price-fixing, are forgotten by too many in Washington. Congress “The Future of Financial Services: Exploring Solutions for the Market Crisis” September 24, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 59:4 Many here in Congress are asking where the money for this bailout will come from, and indeed it is a good question. $700 billion does not just materialize out of the ether, but then again neither do the hundreds of billions of dollars that we spend every year to fund our imperial war machine. We must the face the fact that our country is dead broke, and not just that, we are facing over $10 trillion in debt, and tens of trillions more in unfunded liabilities. This $700 billion bailout will only increase that debt, and increase the amount of money we pay merely to service the interest on that debt. The end result of this is higher taxes on our children and grandchildren, and the full-scale destruction of the dollar. Congress “The Future of Financial Services: Exploring Solutions for the Market Crisis” September 24, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 59:5 The only viable solution to this financial crisis is to keep the government from intervening any further. The Federal Reserve has already loaned hundreds of billions of dollars through its numerous lending facilities, and the Congress has passed legislation authorizing further hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out Fannie and Freddie, yet each successive crisis event seems to be advertised as larger and more severe than the previous one. It is time that this Congress put its foot down, reject the administration’s proposal, and allow the bust to work itself out so that our economic hangover is not as severe as it might otherwise be. Congress “The Economic Outlook” September 24, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 60:3 This bailout is a slipshod proposal, slapped together haphazardly and forced on an unwilling Congress with the threat that not passing it will lead to the collapse of the financial system. Some of the proposed alternatives are no better, for instance those which propose a government equity share in bailed-out companies. That we have come to a point where outright purchases of private sector companies is not only proposed but accepted by many who claim to be defenders of free markets bodes ill for the future of American society. Congress CONSOLIDATED SECURITY, DISASTER ASSISTANCE, AND CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2009 24 September 2008    2008 Ron Paul 63:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, this is a bad week for those of us concerned over Congress’ refusal to reign in federal spending. Not only are we preparing to deal with at least a multi-billion dollar bailout of the financial services sector, Congress today stands ready to add billions to the national debt by passing H.R. 2638. Congress CONSOLIDATED SECURITY, DISASTER ASSISTANCE, AND CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2009 24 September 2008    2008 Ron Paul 63:4 Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2638 represents another missed opportunity for Congress to exercise fiscal discipline by funding the American people’s priorities, such as disaster relief, by reducing spending on non-priority items, such as overseas spending. Therefore, I must oppose this bill. I hope that in the future Congress will fund items such as disaster relief by reducing spending in other areas instead of burdening future generations with more debt. Congress Earmark Declaration 27 September 2008    2008 Ron Paul 64:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information for publication in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD regarding an earmark I received as part of H.R. 2638: Congress “The Bailout” September 29, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 65:7 The process of this bailout reminds me of a panic-stricken swimmer thrashing in the water only making his situation worse. Even a “bipartisan deal”—whatever that is supposed to mean—will not stop the Congress from thrashing about. Congress “The Bailout” September 29, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 65:15 But what politicians are willing to say that the financial “skyscraper”—the global financial and monetary system-is a house of cards. It is not going to happen at this juncture. They’re not even talking about this. They talk only of bailouts, more monetary inflation, more special interest spending, more debt, and more regulations. There is almost no talk of the relationship of the Community Reinvestment Act, HUD, and government assisted loans to the housing bubble. And there is no talk of the oversight that is desperately needed for the Federal Reserve, the Exchange Stabilization Fund, and all the activities of the President’s Working Group on financial markets. When these actions are taken we will at last know that Congress is serious about the reforms that are really needed. Congress “The Bailout” September 29, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 65:16 In conclusion, there are three good reasons why Congress should reject this legislation: Congress “The Bailout” September 29, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 65:20 Monetary reform will eventually come, but, unfortunately, Congress’ actions this week make it more likely the reform will come under dire circumstances, such as the midst of a worldwide collapse of the dollar. The question then will be how much of our liberties will be sacrificed in the process. Just remember what we lost in the aftermath of 9–11. Congress Statement on HR 1424 October 3, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 67:3 One of the most dangerous effects of this bailout is the incredibly elevated risk of moral hazard in the future. The worst performing financial services firms, even those who have been taken over by the government or have filed for bankruptcy, will find all of their poor decision-making rewarded. What incentive do Wall Street firms or any other large concerns have to make sound financial decisions, now that they see the federal government bailing out private companies to the tune of trillions of dollars? As Congress did with the legislation authorizing the Fannie and Freddie bailout, it proposes a solution that exacerbates and encourages the problematic behavior that led to this crisis in the first place. Congress Statement on HR 1424 October 3, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 67:6 As usual, Congress has show itself to be reactive rather than proactive. For years, many people have been warning about the housing bubble and the inevitable bust. Congress ignored the impending storm, and responded to this crisis with a poorly thought-out piece of legislation that will only further harm the economy. We ought to be ashamed. Congress The Austrians Are Right November 20, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 71:1 Madame Speaker, many Americans are hoping the new administration will solve the economic problems we face. That’s not likely to happen, because the economic advisors to the new President have no more understanding of how to get us out of this mess than previous administrations and Congresses understood how the crisis was brought about in the first place. Congress The Austrians Are Right November 20, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 71:2 Except for a rare few, Members of Congress are unaware of Austrian Free Market economics. For the last 80 years, the legislative, judiciary and executive branches of our government have been totally influenced by Keynesian economics. If they had had any understanding of the Austrian economic explanation of the business cycle, they would have never permitted the dangerous bubbles that always lead to painful corrections. Congress The Austrians Are Right November 20, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 71:4 At least 90% of the cause for the financial crisis can be laid at the doorstep of the Federal Reserve. It is the manipulation of credit, the money supply, and interest rates that caused the various bubbles to form. Congress added fuel to the fire by various programs and institutions like the Community Reinvestment Act, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, FDIC, and HUD mandates, which were all backed up by aggressive court rulings. Congress The Austrians Are Right November 20, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 71:6 It is unimaginable that Congress could be so derelict in its duty. It does nothing but condone the arrogance of the Fed in its refusal to tell us where the $2 trillion has gone. All Members of Congress and all Americans should be outraged that conditions could deteriorate to this degree. It’s no wonder that a large and growing number of Americans are now demanding an end to the Fed. Congress UNTITLED 10 December 2008    2008 Ron Paul 72:6 There is no real talk about it. I mean, we’ve essentially nationalized the insurance companies, the mortgage companies, the banks, and medical care is moving in that direction, and now the car companies are going to be run by a car czar from this Congress. I mean, it is such an embarrassment. It is such an insult to us who believe in freedom, who believe in sound money and who believe in limited government. It is such an insult to the whole idea of what made America great, and this is what it has come to—bailout after bailout after bailout—and nobody even calls it what it really is. It is the nationalization of our industries. Congress UNTITLED 10 December 2008    2008 Ron Paul 73:4 The Federal Reserve has literally created over $2 trillion here in the last several months, at least in obligations, and that is outside the realm of the Congress. We don’t even audit the Federal Reserve. They create this money, and when the Fed Chairman comes before our committee and we ask, well, where did you dispose of this $2 trillion that you have created recently, he says well, it is not your business. That is not necessary. Under the law, he doesn’t even have to tell us. Congress UNTITLED 10 December 2008    2008 Ron Paul 73:7 Mr. Speaker, no one can deny that Congress bears much culpability for the current condition of the United States auto industry, and therefore Congress should act to help that industry. We should be repealing costly regulations we have imposed on domestic auto manufactures. Congress should also be considering legislation like H.R. 7273 and H.R. 7278, which reduces taxes on American consumers to make it easier for them to purchase American automobiles. Congress UNTITLED 10 December 2008    2008 Ron Paul 73:8 Unfortunately, instead of repealing regulations and cutting taxes, Congress is nationalizing the automakers by giving them access to $14 billion of taxpayer funds in return for giving the federal government control over the management of these firms. Mr. Speaker, the federal government has neither the competence nor the constitutional authority to tell private companies, such as automakers, how to run their businesses. Yet, the bailout proposal forces automobile manufacturers to submit their business plans for the approval of a federal “car czar.” This czar will not only have the authority to approve the automakers’ restructuring plan, but will also monitor implementation of the plans. The czar will also be able to stop transactions that are “inconsistent with the companies’ long-term viability.” Of course, the czar has the sole authority to determine what transactions are “inconsistent with the companies’ long-term viability.” Congress INTRODUCING THE SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFICIARY TAX REDUCTION ACT AND THE SENIOR CITIZENS’ TAX ELIMINATION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 1:2 Since Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another example of double taxation. Furthermore, “taxing” benefits paid by the government is merely an accounting trick, a shell game which allows members of Congress to reduce benefits by subterfuge. This allows Congress to continue using the Social Security trust fund as a means of financing other government programs, and masks the true size of the federal deficit. Congress INTRODUCING THE SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFICIARY TAX REDUCTION ACT AND THE SENIOR CITIZENS’ TAX ELIMINATION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 1:3 Instead of imposing ridiculous taxes on senior citizens, Congress should ensure the integrity of the Social Security trust fund by ending the practice of using trust fund monies for other programs. This is why I am also introducing the Social Security Preservation Act, which ensures that all money in the Social Security trust fund is spent solely on Social Security. At a time when Congress’ inability to control spending continues to threaten the Social Security trust fund, the need for this legislation has never been greater. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY PRESERVATION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 2:2 The Social Security Preservation Act ensures that the government will keep its promises to America’s seniors that taxes collected for Social Security will be used for Social Security. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY PRESERVATION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 2:3 With federal deficits reaching historic levels, and with new demands being made on the U.S. Treasury on an almost weekly basis, the pressure from special interests for massive new raids on the trust fund is greater than ever. Thus it is vital that Congress act now to protect the trust fund from big spending, pork- barrel politics. As a medical doctor, I know the first step in treatment is to stop the bleeding, and the Social Security Preservation Act stops the bleeding of the Social Security trust fund. I therefore call upon all my colleagues, regardless of which proposal for long-term Social Security reform they support, to stand up for America’s seniors by cosponsoring the Social Security Preservation Act. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE PRESCRIPTION DRUG AFFORDABILITY ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 3:2 The first provision of my legislation provides seniors a tax credit equal to 80 percent of their prescription drug costs. While Congress did add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare in 2003, many seniors still have difficulty affording the prescription drugs they need in order to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle. One reason is because the new program creates a “doughnut hole,” where seniors lose coverage once their prescription expenses reach a certain amount and must pay for their prescriptions above a certain amount out of their own pockets until their expenses reach a level where Medicare coverage resumes. This tax credit will help seniors cover the expenses provided by the doughnut hole. This bill will also help seniors obtain prescription medicines that may not be covered by the Medicare prescription drug program. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE PRESCRIPTION DRUG AFFORDABILITY ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 3:4 I need not remind my colleagues that many senior citizens and other Americans impacted by the high costs of prescription medicine have demanded Congress reduce the barriers which prevent American consumers from purchasing imported pharmaceuticals. Congress has responded to these demands by repeatedly passing legislation liberalizing the rules governing the importation of pharmaceuticals. However, implementation of this provision has been blocked by the federal bureaucracy. It is time Congress stood up for the American consumer and removed all unnecessary regulations on importing pharmaceuticals. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 4:2 Madam Speaker, Congress has a moral responsibility to address this problem because it was Congress that transformed the Social Security number into a national identifier. Thanks to Congress, today no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get a driver’s license without presenting his Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license! Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 4:3 One of the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the congressionally- authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim the children as dependents. Forcing parents to register their children with the state is more like something out of the nightmares of George Orwell than the dreams of a free republic that inspired this Nation’s founders. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 4:4 Congressionally-mandated use of the Social Security number as an identifier facilitates the horrendous crime of identity theft. Thanks to Congress, an unscrupulous person may simply obtain someone’s Social Security number in order to access that person’s bank accounts, credit cards, and other financial assets. Many Americans have lost their life savings and had their credit destroyed as a result of identity theft. Yet the federal government continues to encourage such crimes by mandating use of the Social Security number as a uniform ID! Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 4:9 Madam Speaker, no wonder there is a groundswell of opposition to this mandate. Several State legislatures have even passed laws forbidding their States from complying with this mandate! The Identity Theft Prevention Act not only repeals those sections of the federal law creating a national ID, it forbids the federal government from using federal funds to blackmail States into adopting uniform federal identifiers. Passing the Identity Theft Prevention Act is thus an excellent way for this Congress to show renewed commitment to federalism and opposition to imposing unfunded mandates on the States. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 4:12 Some members of Congress will claim that the federal government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that, in a constitutional republic, the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the jobs of government officials easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 4:13 Madam Speaker, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure that citizens’ rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the only effective privacy protection is to forbid the federal government from mandating national identifiers. Legislative “privacy protections” are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for a couple of reasons. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 4:18 Any action short of repealing laws authorizing privacy violations is insufficient primarily because the federal government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution.” Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE IDENTITY THEFT PREVENTION ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 4:19 Madam Speaker, those members who are not persuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Identity Theft Prevention Act should consider the American people’s opposition to national identifiers. The numerous complaints over the ever-growing uses of the Social Security number show that Americans want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Furthermore, according to a survey by the Gallup company, 91 percent of the American people oppose forcing Americans to obtain a universal health ID. Congress INTRODUCING THE SOCIAL SECURITY FOR AMERICAN CITIZENS ONLY ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 5:4 Despite a major public outcry against extending Social Security benefits to those who entered this country illegally, a version of this proposal actually passed the other body in the 109th Congress. That the executive branch would propose, and part of the legislative branch would endorse, using social security monies to reward to those who have willingly and knowingly violated our own immigration laws is an insult to the millions of Americans who pay their entire working lives into the system and now face the possibility that there may be nothing left when it is their turn to retire. Congress INTRODUCING THE SOCIAL SECURITY FOR AMERICAN CITIZENS ONLY ACT January 6, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 5:5 While the new administration has yet to take a public position on totalization, and hopefully will be more reasonable on this issue than its predecessor, it is still imperative that Congress act. Even if the new administration repudiates all proposals to allow those who entered the county illegally to receive social security benefits, the only way to guarantee a future administration will not revive this scheme is for Congress to put an end to totalization once and for all. I therefore call upon my colleagues to stop the use of the Social Security Trust Fund as yet another vehicle for foreign aid by cosponsoring the Social Security for American Citizens Only Act. Congress Statement on H Res 34, Recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza, Reaffirming the United States strong support for Israel, and supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process January 9, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 7:11 There are now an estimated 700 dead Palestinians, most of whom are civilians. Many innocent children are among the dead. While the shooting of rockets into Israel is inexcusable, the violent actions of some people in Gaza does not justify killing Palestinians on this scale. Such collective punishment is immoral. At the very least, the U.S. Congress should not be loudly proclaiming its support for the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza. Congress Statement on H Res 34, Recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza, Reaffirming the United States strong support for Israel, and supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process January 9, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 7:12 Madam Speaker, this resolution will do nothing to reduce the fighting and bloodshed in the Middle East. The resolution in fact will lead the U.S. to become further involved in this conflict, promising “vigorous support and unwavering commitment to the welfare, security, and survival of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.” Is it really in the interest of the United States to guarantee the survival of any foreign country? I believe it would be better to focus on the security and survival of the United States, the Constitution of which my colleagues and I swore to defend just this week at the beginning of the 111th Congress. I urge my colleagues to reject this resolution. Congress Bailout January 14, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 8:2 There has been a lot of money involved and a lot of money spent. There have been appropriations that we’ve made here in the Congress as well as the trillions of dollars the Federal Reserve has used to try to bail out the financial industry, and nothing seems to be working. Congress INTRODUCING WE THE PEOPLE January 14, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 9:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning State laws and polices relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold Federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the President, according to rules established by the Congress. Congress INTRODUCING WE THE PEOPLE January 14, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 9:2 The United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to establish and limit the jurisdiction of the lower Federal courts and limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Founders intended Congress to use this authority to correct abuses of power by the Federal judiciary. Congress INTRODUCING WE THE PEOPLE January 14, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 9:4 In recent years, we have seen numerous abuses of power by Federal courts. Federal judges regularly strike down State and local laws on subjects such as religious liberty, sexual orientation, family relations, education, and abortion. This government by Federal judiciary causes a virtual nullification of the Tenth Amendment’s limitations on Federal power. Furthermore, when Federal judges impose their preferred polices on State and local governments, instead of respecting the polices adopted by those elected by, and thus accountable to, the people, republican government is threatened. Article IV, section 4 of the United States Constitution guarantees each State a republican form of government. Thus, Congress must act when the executive or judicial branch threatens the republican governments of the individual States. Therefore, Congress has a responsibility to stop Federal judges from running roughshod over State and local laws. The Founders would certainly have supported congressional action to reign in Federal judges who tell citizens where they can and can’t place manger scenes at Christmas. Congress INTRODUCING WE THE PEOPLE January 14, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 9:6 Unless Congress acts, a State’s authority to define and regulate marriage may be the next victim of activist judges. After all, such a decision would simply take the Supreme Court’s decision in the Lawrence case, which overturned all State sodomy laws, to its logical conclusion. Congress must launch a preemptive strike against any further Federal usurpation of the States’ authority to regulate marriage by removing issues concerning the definition of marriage from the jurisdiction of Federal courts. Congress INTRODUCING WE THE PEOPLE January 14, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 9:7 Although marriage is licensed and otherwise regulated by the States, government did not create the institution of marriage. Government regulation of marriage is based on State recognition of the practices and customs formulated by private individuals interacting in civil institutions, such as churches and synagogues. Having Federal officials, whether judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose a new definition of marriage on the people is an act of social engineering profoundly hostile to liberty. Congress INTRODUCING WE THE PEOPLE January 14, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 9:8 It is long past time that Congress exercises its authority to protect the republican government of the States from out-of-control Federal judges. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the We the People Act. Congress LIVING BENEATH OUR MEANS January 21, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 10:5 Today’s middle class and poor are suffering and the elite are being bailed out, and all the while the Federal Reserve refuses to tell the Congress exactly who has benefitted by its largesse. The beneficial corrections that come with a recession, of debt liquidation and removing the malinvestment, are delayed by government bailouts. This strategy proved in the late 1930s to transform a recession into a Great Depression and will surely do so again. Congress FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD ABOLITION ACT February 3, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 14:4 Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government. Congress FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD ABOLITION ACT February 3, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 14:5 Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy. Congress FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD ABOLITION ACT February 3, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 14:6 In fact, Congress’ constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our nation’s founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true free-market economy. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE TAX RELIEF FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKERS ACT February 13, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 16:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Tax Relief for Transportation Workers Act. This legislation helps those who work in the port industry cope with the costs of complying with Congress’s mandate that all those working on a port obtain a Transportation Worker Identity Card, TWIC. The Tax Relief for Transportation Workers Act provides a tax credit to workers who pay the costs of obtaining TWICs. The credit is refundable against both income and payroll tax liabilities. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE TAX RELIEF FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKERS ACT February 13, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 16:2 When Congress created the TWIC requirement, it placed the burden of paying the cost of obtaining the card on individual workers. Imposing the costs of obtaining TWICs on port workers has several negative economic impacts that Congress should help mitigate by making the cost associated with obtaining a TWIC tax deductible. According to the Department of Homeland Security, a port worker will have to pay between $100 and $132 to obtain a card. The worker will also have to pay a $60 fee for every card that is lost or damaged. Even those employers whose employers pay the substantial costs of obtaining TWICs for their workforce are adversely affected by the TWIC requirement, as the money employers pay for TWICs is money that cannot go into increasing their workers’ salaries. The costs of the TWIC requirement may also cause some employers to refrain from hiring new employees. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE TAX RELIEF FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKERS ACT February 13, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 16:4 Unless Congress acts to relieve some of the economic burden the TWIC requirement places on those who work in the port industry, the damage done could reach beyond the port employers and employees to harm businesses that depend on a strong American port industry. This could be very harmful to both interstate and international trade. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE TAX RELIEF FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKERS ACT February 13, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 16:5 Regardless of what one thinks of the merits of the TWIC card, it is simply not right for Congress to make the port industry bear all the costs of TWIC. I therefore urge my colleagues to stand up for those who perform vital tasks at America’s ports by cosponsoring the Tax Relief for Transportation Workers Act. Congress FEDERAL RESERVE IS THE CULPRIT February 25, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 17:6 The Congress, by conceding this authority, conveys extraordinary economic powers to the elite few. This is a power that has been abused throughout history. Only the Federal Reserve can inflate the currency, creating new money and credit out of thin area, in secrecy, without oversight or supervision. Congress The Federal Reserve Transparency Act February 26, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 20:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Federal Reserve Transparency Act. Throughout its nearly 100-year history, the Federal Reserve has presided over the near- complete destruction of the United States dollar. Since 1913 the dollar has lost over 95% of its purchasing power, aided and abetted by the Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy. How long will we as a Congress stand idly by while hard-working Americans see their savings eaten away by inflation? Only big-spending politicians and politically favored bankers benefit from inflation. Congress The Federal Reserve Transparency Act February 26, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 20:2 Serious discussion of proposals to oversee the Federal Reserve is long overdue. I have been a longtime proponent of more effective oversight and auditing of the Fed, but I was far from the first Congressman to advocate these types of proposals. Esteemed former members of the Banking Committee such as Chairmen Wright Patman and Henry B. Gonzales were outspoken critics of the Fed and its lack of transparency. Congress The Federal Reserve Transparency Act February 26, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 20:5 More importantly, the Fed’s funding facilities and its agreements with the Treasury should be reviewed. The Treasury’s supplementary financing accounts that fund Fed facilities allow the Treasury to funnel money to Wall Street without GAO or Congressional oversight. Additional funding facilities, such as the Primary Dealer Credit Facility and the Term Securities Lending Facility, allow the Fed to keep financial asset prices artificially inflated and subsidize poorly performing financial firms. Congress STATEMENT ON INTRODUCING THE SUNLIGHT RULE March 5, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 23:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously said, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” In order to shine sunlight on the practices of the House of Representatives, and thus restore public trust and integrity to this institution, I am introducing the sunlight rule, which amends House rules to ensure that members have adequate time to study a bill before being asked to vote on it. One of the chief causes of increasing public cynicism regarding Congress is the way major pieces of legislation are brought to the floor without members having an opportunity to read the bills. For example, the over-one-thousand page economic stimulus bill was first posted on the Internet at 12:30 a.m. the night before the vote. Obviously, this did not give individual members of Congress adequate time to review what is certainly one of, if not the, most significant pieces of legislation that Congress will consider this year. Congress STATEMENT ON INTRODUCING THE SUNLIGHT RULE March 5, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 23:3 The sunlight rule provides the people the opportunity to be involved in enforcing the rule by allowing a citizen to petition for an Office of Congressional Ethics investigation into any House Member who votes for a bill brought to the floor in violation of this act. The sunlight rule can never be waived by the Committee on Rules or House leadership. If an attempt is made to bring a bill to the floor in violation of this rule, any member could raise a point of order requiring the bill to be immediately pulled from the House calendar until it can be brought to the floor in a manner consistent with this rule. Congress STATEMENT ON INTRODUCING THE SUNLIGHT RULE March 5, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 23:4 Madam Speaker, the practice of rushing bills to the floor before individual members have had a chance to study the bills is one of the major factors contributing to public distrust of Congress. Voting on bills before members have had time to study them makes a mockery of representative government and cheats the voters who sent us here to make informed decisions on public policy. Adopting the sunlight rule is one of, if not the, most important changes to the House rules this Congress could make to restore public trust in, and help preserve the integrity of, this institution. I hope my colleagues will support this change to the House rules. Congress EARMARKS March 10, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 24:3 What is done is, those earmarks are removed, and some of them are very wasteful and unnecessary, but that money then goes to the executive branch. So, in many ways, what we are doing here in the Congress is reneging on our responsibilities, because it is the responsibility of the Congress to earmark. That is our job. We are supposed to tell the people how we are spending the money, not to just deliver it in a lump sum to the executive branch and let them deal with it, and then it’s dealt with behind the scenes. Congress EARMARKS March 10, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 24:5 The big issue is the spending. If you don’t like the spending, vote against the bill. But the principle of earmarking is something that we have to think about, because we are just further undermining the responsibilities that we have here in the Congress. Congress EARMARKS March 10, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 24:14 I have introduced a bill, it’s called H.R. 1207, and this would remove the restriction on us to find out what the Federal Reserve is doing. Today, the Federal Reserve under the law is not required to tell us anything. So all my bill does is remove this restriction and say, Look, Federal Reserve, you have a lot of power. You have too much power. You’re spending a lot of money. You’re taking care of people that we have no idea what you’re doing. We, in the Congress, have a responsibility to know exactly what you’re doing. Congress EARMARKS March 10, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 24:17 So, the sooner we in the Congress wake up to our responsibilities, understand what earmarks are all about, and understand why we need a lot more earmarks, then we will come to our senses, because we might then have a more sensible monetary and banking system, the system that has brought us to this calamity. So, the sooner we realize that, I think it would be better for the taxpayer. Congress THRIFT SAVINGS FUND IMPROVEMENT ACT March 10, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 25:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Thrift Savings Fund Improvement Act. This legislation expands the investment options available to congressional and other federal employees by creating a precious metals investment fund in the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). Adding a precious metals fund to the TSP will enhance the plan’s ability to offer congressional employees a wide range of investment options that can provide financial security even during difficult economic conditions. Congress THRIFT SAVINGS FUND IMPROVEMENT ACT March 10, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 25:2 The Thrift Savings Plan is one of the most important benefits offered to congressional employees. A strong TSP can obviously play a key role in attracting and retaining talented individuals to serve in the legislative branch. Adding a precious metals option will strengthen the TSP. In the last year, the price of gold rose by 5.5 percent while the Dow Jones experienced one of its worst years ever, falling by 33.8 percent, while the NASDQ declined by 40.5 percent! Congress THE FREEDOM TO BANK ACT March 10, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 26:2 These regulations exceed Congress’s constitutional powers and violate individual property and contract rights. Furthermore, these regulations insult Americans by treating them as children who are unable to manage their own affairs without federal control. I urge my colleagues to show their respect for the Constitution and the American people by cosponsoring the Freedom to Bank Act. Congress INTRODUCING THE CHILD HEALTH CARE AFFORDABILITY ACT March 12, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 27:3 As an OB–GYN who has had the privilege of delivering more than four thousand babies, I know how important it is that parents have the resources to provide adequate health care for their children. The inability of many working Americans to provide health care for their children is rooted in one of the great inequities of the tax code – Congress’s failure to allow individuals the same ability to deduct health care costs that it grants to businesses. As a direct result of Congress’s refusal to provide individuals with health care related tax credits, parents whose employers do not provide health insurance have to struggle to provide health care for their children. Many of these parents work in low-income jobs; oftentimes, their only recourse for health care is the local emergency room. Congress INTRODUCING THE CHILD HEALTH CARE AFFORDABILITY ACT March 12, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 27:7 Madam Speaker, this Congress has a moral responsibility to provide tax relief so that low- income parents struggling to care for a sick child can better meet their child’s medical expenses. Some may say that we cannot enact the Child Health Care Affordability Act because it would cause the government to lose revenue. But, who is more deserving of this money, Congress or the working parents of a sick child? Congress COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CARE REFORM ACT March 12, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 28:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, America faces a crisis in health care. Health care costs continue to rise while physicians and patients struggle under the control of managed-care “gatekeepers.” Obviously, fundamental health care reform should be one of Congress’ top priorities. Congress INTRODUCING THE QUALITY HEALTH CARE COALITION ACT March 12, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 29:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Quality Health Care Coalition Act which takes a first step towards restoring a true free market in health care by restoring the rights of freedom of contract and association to health care professionals. For over a decade, we have had much debate in Congress about the difficulties medical professionals and patients are having with Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs). HMOs are devices used by insurance industries to ration health care. While it is politically popular for members of Congress to bash the HMOs and the insurance industry, the growth of the HMOs are rooted in past government interventions in the health care market though the tax code, the Employment Retirement Security Act (ERSIA), and the federal anti-trust laws. These interventions took control of the health care dollar away from individual patients and providers, thus making it inevitable that something like the HMOs would emerge as a means to control costs. Congress INTRODUCING THE QUALITY HEALTH CARE COALITION ACT March 12, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 29:6 By restoring the freedom of medical professionals to voluntarily come together to negotiate as a group with HMOs and insurance companies, this bill removes a government-imposed barrier to a true free market in health care. Of course, this bill does not infringe on the rights of health care professionals by forcing them to join a bargaining organization against their will. While Congress should protect the rights of all Americans to join organizations for the purpose of bargaining collectively, Congress also has a moral responsibility to ensure that no worker is forced by law to join or financially support such an organization. Congress INTRODUCING THE QUALITY HEALTH CARE COALITION ACT March 12, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 29:7 Madam Speaker, it is my hope that Congress will not only remove the restraints on medical professionals’ freedom of contract, but will also empower patients to control their health care by passing my Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act. The Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act puts individuals back in charge of their own health care by providing Americans with large tax credits and tax deductions for their health care expenses, including a deduction for premiums for a high-deductible insurance policy purchased in combination with a Health Savings Account. Putting individuals back in charge of their own health care decisions will enable patients to work with providers to ensure they receive the best possible health care at the lowest possible price. If providers and patients have the ability to form the contractual arrangements that they find most beneficial to them, the HMO monster will wither on the vine without the imposition of new federal regulations on the insurance industry. Congress TREAT PHYSICIANS FAIRLY ACT March 12, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 30:3 Forcing physicians to offer their services without providing any form of compensation is a blatant violation of the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment. After all, the professional skills with which one earns a living are a form of property. Therefore, legislation, such as EMTALA, which forces individuals to use their professional skills without compensation is a taking of private property. Regardless of whether the federal government has the constitutional authority to establish programs providing free-or-reduced health care for the indignant, the clear language of the takings clause prevents Congress from placing the entire burden of these programs on the medical profession. Congress Blame Congress For Results March 19, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 34:3 Yesterday, for instance, the Federal Reserve met and they came out and announced that they would create new money to the tune of $1.25 trillion. The dollar promptly went down 3 percent, and today it went down another 1.5 percent. And today on emergency legislation, we’re going to deal with $165 million worth of bonuses, which obviously should have never been given. But who’s responsible for this? It’s the Congress and the President, who signed this. Congress Blame Congress For Bonuses March 19, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 35:3 I don’t believe that this resolution really addresses the real problem that we have. It looks like it’s giving the administration an excuse by saying that he is only doing what we have asked him to do, and the administration. And in many ways this is true. The real fault, I think, falls within the Congress ever giving this money and allowing this to happen. But to excuse the administration and then complain about these bonuses and think that that can solve our problems, it just won’t do that. Congress Blame Congress For Bonuses March 19, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 35:5 This is politically driven, I happen to believe. I think people would like to express their outrage, and they do. And it’s an easy target, picking on AIG, but we create these problems; we create them by doing things that are unconstitutional. We come up with these schemes and these expressions and excuses, and at the same time, we don’t address the subject of why do we spend money, and why do we allow a monetary system to operate without any supervision by the Congress? That’s where our real problem is. And someday we will address that and deal with this rather than doing it in the political way of saying, well, it’s not our fault, it’s their fault. Congress INTRODUCING THE ENERGY EFFICIENT AND ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY AUTOMOBILE TAX CREDIT ACT March 26, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 38:2 This legislation will help Americans reduce the amount they pay to fill up their cars by making it easier for them to obtain more fuel- efficient cars. I hope my colleagues would agree that Congress should provide free market incentives to make it easier for Americans to exchange their current cars for cars that create less pollution. Congress Statement on Comprehensive Healthcare Reform Act March 26, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 39:1 Madame Speaker, America faces a crisis in health care. Health care costs continue to rise while physicians and patients struggle under the control of managed-care “gatekeepers.” Obviously, fundamental health care reform should be one of Congress’ top priorities. Congress Federal Reserve Monetizes Debt April 1, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 41:6 Matter of fact, I think the problem we face today is not so much a budgetary problem. It’s much different. I think we talk a lot about the budget. Just think about how many hours we talked about it today. But the budget and the deficit is a symptom of something much more serious. And that is, what have we allowed our government to become? I think it has been the loss of respect by us here in the Congress to understand and take seriously article I, section A. If we did that, we wouldn’t be doing all of these things that we’re doing. Congress Federal Reserve Monetizes Debt April 1, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 41:9 We have endorsed, as a Congress and as a people, a welfare/warfare State. And that is not part of what America is supposed to be. And it encourages the spending and the borrowing and the deficits and all of the inflation. Congress INTRODUCING THE TEACHER TAX CUT ACT AND THE PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS TAX RELIEF ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 42:2 Quality education is impossible without quality teaching. If we continue to undervalue educators, it will become harder to attract, and keep, good people in the education profession. While educators’ pay is primarily a local issue, Congress can, and should, help raise educators’ take home pay by reducing educators’ taxes. Congress INTRODUCING THE TEACHER TAX CUT ACT AND THE PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS TAX RELIEF ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 42:4 The Teacher Tax Cut Act and the Professional Educators Tax Relief Act increase the salaries of teachers and other education professionals without raising federal expenditures. By raising the take-home pay of professional educators, these bills encourage highly qualified people to enter, and remain in, education. These bills also let America’s professional educators know that the American people and the Congress respect their work. Congress FAMILY EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 43:4 According to a survey conducted by Education Next/Harvard PEPG, the majority of Americans support education tax credits. This poll also found strong support for education tax credits among liberals, moderates, conservatives, low-income individuals, African- Americans, and public-school employees. This is just one of numerous studies and public opinion polls showing that Americans want Congress to get the federal bureaucracy out of the schoolroom and give parents more control over their children’s education. Congress FAMILY EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 43:5 Today, Congress can fulfill the wishes of the American people for greater control over their children’s education by simply allowing parents to keep more of their hard-earned money to spend on education rather than force them to send it to Washington to support education programs reflective only of the values and priorities of Congress and the federal bureaucracy. Congress FAMILY EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 43:9 Clearly, enactment of the Family Education Freedom Act is the best thing this Congress could do to improve public education. Furthermore, a greater reliance on parental expenditures rather than government tax dollars will help make the public schools into true community schools that reflect the wishes of parents and the interests of the students. Congress INDUSTRIAL HEMP FARMING ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 44:4 The Congressional Research Service has noted that hemp is grown as an established agricultural commodity in over 30 nations in Europe, Asia, North America, and South America. The Industrial Hemp Farming Act will relieve this unique restriction on American farmers and allow them to grow industrial hemp in accord with State law. Congress INTRODUCING THE MAKE COLLEGE AFFORDABLE ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 46:4 Helping the American people use their own money to ensure every qualified American can receive a college education is one of the best investments this Congress can make in the future. I therefore urge my colleagues to help strengthen America by ensuring more Americans can obtain college educations by cosponsoring the Make College Affordable Act. Congress INTRODUCING THE AGRICULTURE EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 47:2 Think about this for a moment. These kids are trying to better themselves, earn some money, save some money and what does Congress do? We pick on these kids by taxing them. It is truly amazing that with all the hand- wringing in Congress over the alleged need to further restrict liberty and grow the size of government “for the children” we would continue to tax young people who are trying to lead responsible lives and prepare for the future. Even if the serious social problems today’s youth face could be solved by new federal bureaucracies and programs, it is still unfair to pick on those kids who are trying to do the right thing. Congress INTRODUCING THE EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT TAX CUT ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 48:2 I need not remind my colleagues that education is one of the top priorities of the American people. After all, many members of Congress have proposed education reforms and a great deal of time is spent debating these proposals. However, most of these proposals expand federal control over education. Many proposals that claim to increase local control over education actually extend federal power by holding schools “accountable” to federal bureaucrats and politicians. Of course, schools should be held accountable for their results, but they should be held accountable to parents and school boards not to federal officials. Therefore, I propose we move in a different direction and embrace true federalism by returning control over the education dollar to the American people. Congress INTRODUCING THE EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT TAX CUT ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 48:5 Children in some communities may benefit most from the opportunity to attend private, parochial, or other religious schools. One of the most encouraging trends in education has been the establishment of private scholarship programs. These scholarship funds use voluntary contributions to open the doors of quality private schools to low-income children. By providing a tax credit for donations to these programs, Congress can widen the educational opportunities and increase the quality of education for all children. Furthermore, privately- funded scholarships raise none of the concerns of state entanglement raised by publicly- funded vouchers. Congress TRIBUTE TO BURT BLUMERT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 49:3 After I stepped down from Congress in 1984, I partnered with Burt in the coin business, a partnership which lasted until I returned to Congress in 1996. Our partnership was based on nothing more than our words. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE LIBERTY AMENDMENT April 30, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 50:2 The 16th Amendment gives the Federal government a direct claim on the lives of American citizens by enabling Congress to levy a direct income tax on individuals. Until the passage of the 16th amendment, the Supreme Court had consistently held that Congress had no power to impose an income tax. Congress INTRODUCING THE PARENTAL CONSENT ACT April 30, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 51:6 Madam Speaker, universal or mandatory mental-health screening threatens to undermine parents’ right to raise their children as the parents see fit. Forced mental-health screening could also endanger the health of children by leading to more children being improperly placed on psychotropic drugs, such as Ritalin, or stigmatized as “mentally ill” or a risk of causing violence because they adhere to traditional values. Congress has a responsibility to the nation’s parents and children to stop this from happening. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Parental Consent Act. Congress BIRTHDAY GREETINGS TO MALINDA WRIGHT May 4, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 52:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, Malinda Smith Wright will turn 100 on May 17, 2009. Malinda was born and raised in Brazoria County, TX, which is in my congressional district, and has spent all of her life there. Congress INTRODUCING THE SANCTITY OF LIFE ACT May 20, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 57:2 However, the federal courts have no legitimate authority to tell states and local communities what restrictions can and cannot be placed on abortion. Even some intellectually honest supporters of legalized abortion acknowledge that Roe v. Wade was incorrectly decided. Congress must use the authority granted to it in Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution to rein in rogue federal judges from interfering with a state’s ability to protect unborn life. Congress INTRODUCING THE SANCTITY OF LIFE ACT May 20, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 57:3 Madam Speaker, it is my hope that my colleagues will join me in support of using the power granted to the Congress by the Constitution to protect the ability of individual states and the people to restore respect for the sanctity of human life. Congress INTRODUCTION OF COERCION IS NOT HEALTH CARE May 21, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 58:3 If Congress requires individuals to purchase insurance, Congress must define what insurance policies satisfy the government mandate. Thus, Congress will decide what is and is not covered in the mandatory insurance policy. Does anyone seriously doubt that what conditions and treatments are covered will be determined by who has the most effective lobby. Or that Congress will be incapable of writing a mandatory insurance policy that will fit the unique needs of every individual in the United States? Congress INTRODUCTION OF COERCION IS NOT HEALTH CARE May 21, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 58:4 The experience of States that allow their legislatures to mandate what benefits health insurance plans must cover has shown that politicizing health insurance inevitably makes health insurance more expensive. As the cost of government-mandated health insurance rises, Congress will likely create yet another fiscally unsustainable entitlement program to help cover the cost of insurance. Congress INTRODUCTION OF COERCION IS NOT HEALTH CARE May 21, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 58:5 When the cost of government-mandated insurance proves to be an unsustainable burden on individuals and small employers, and the government, Congress will likely impose price controls on medical treatments, and even go so far as to limit what procedures and treatments will be reimbursed by the mandatory insurance. The result will be an increasing number of providers turning to “cash only” practices, thus making it difficult for those relying on the government-mandated insurance to find health care. Anyone who doubts that result should consider the increasing number of physicians who are withdrawing from the Medicare program because of the low reimbursement and constant bureaucratic harassment from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Congress INTRODUCTION OF COERCION IS NOT HEALTH CARE May 21, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 58:6 Madam Speaker, the key to effective health care reform lies not in increasing government control, but in increasing the American people’s ability to make their own health care decisions. Thus, instead of forcing Americans to purchase government-approved health insurance, Congress should put the American people back in charge of health care by expanding health care tax credits and deductions, as well as increasing access to Health Savings Accounts. Therefore, I have introduced legislation, the Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act (H.R. 1495), which provides a series of health care tax credits and deductions designed to empower patients. I urge my colleagues to reject the big government-knows- best approach to health care by cosponsoring my Coercion is Not Health Care Act and Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act. Congress INTRODUCING THE PROTECT PATIENTS’ AND PHYSICIANS’ PRIVACY ACT May 21, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 59:2 Congress has refused to fund the development of a unique health identifier every year since 1998. Clearly, the majority of my colleagues recognize the threat this scheme poses to medical privacy. It is past time for Congress to repeal the section of law authorizing the Federal unique health identifier. Congress INTRODUCING THE PROTECT PATIENTS’ AND PHYSICIANS’ PRIVACY ACT May 21, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 59:3 Among the numerous provisions jammed into the stimulus bill, which was rushed through Congress earlier this year, was funding for electronic medical records. Medicare providers have until 2015 to “voluntarily” adopt the system of electronic medical records, or face financial penalties. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE AFFORDABLE GAS PRICE ACT May 21, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 60:4 Instead of expanding government, Congress should repeal Federal laws and polices that raise the price of gas, either directly through taxes or indirectly though regulations that discourage the development of new fuel sources. This is why my legislation repeals the Federal moratorium on offshore drilling and allows oil exploration in the ANWR reserve in Alaska. My bill also ensures that the National Environmental Policy Act’s environmental impact statement requirement will no longer be used as a tool to force refiners to waste valuable time and capital on nuisance litigation. The Affordable Gas Price Act also provides tax incentives to encourage investment in new refineries. Congress COMMEMORATING 20TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE TIANANMEN SQUARE SUPPRESSION June 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 61:5 While we certainly do not condone government suppression of individual rights and liberties wherever they may occur, why are we not investigating these abuses closer to home and within our jurisdiction? It seems the House is not interested in investigating allegations that U.S. government officials and employees approved and practiced torture against detainees. Where is the Congressional investigation of the U.S.-operated “secret prisons” overseas? What about the administration’s assertion of the right to detain individuals indefinitely without trial? It may be easier to point out the abuses and shortcomings of governments overseas than to address government abuses here at home, but we have the constitutional obligation to exercise our oversight authority in such matters. I strongly believe that addressing these current issues would be a better use of our time than once again condemning China for an event that took place some 20 years ago. Congress MISTAKES: JUST A FEW! June 3, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 63:4 A massive single-year debt increase of $2 trillion and a $9 trillion stimulus by Congress and the Federal Reserve verges on madness. Congress Rep. Paul Opposes Bill June 10, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 65:3 The President has now asked us here in the Congress to follow the PAYGO rules. Well, that might be a good idea if we had set aside the idea that we would raise taxes, but we’re not going to cut any domestic spending for this foreign spending, so the odds of this following the PAYGO rule are essentially nil. Congress Statement on War Supplemental Appropriations June 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 67:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this conference report on the War Supplemental Appropriations. I wonder what happened to all of my colleagues who said they were opposed to the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder what happened to my colleagues who voted with me as I opposed every war supplemental request under the previous administration. It seems, with very few exceptions, they have changed their position on the war now that the White House has changed hands. I find this troubling. As I have said while opposing previous war funding requests, a vote to fund the war is a vote in favor of the war. Congress exercises its constitutional prerogatives through the power of the purse. Congress Statement on War Supplemental Appropriations June 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 67:2 This conference report, being a Washington- style compromise, reflects one thing Congress agrees on: spending money we do not have. So this “compromise” bill spends 15 percent more than the president requested, which is $9 billion more than in the original House bill and $14.6 billion more than the original Senate version. Included in this final version – in addition to the $106 billion to continue the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq – is a $108 billion loan guarantee to the International Monetary Fund, allowing that destructive organization to continue spending taxpayer money to prop up corrupt elites and promote harmful economic policies overseas. Congress EARMARK DECLARATION June 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 68:2 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION June 17, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 69:2 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress CONGRATULATING STEVE LEBLANC, CITY MANAGER OF GALVESTON, TEXAS June 18, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 70:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to congratulate Mr. Steve LeBlanc, City Manager of Galveston Texas, on being named Administrator of the Year by the Texas City Management Association (TCMA). Steve received this award because of the leadership he provided to Galveston in the aftermath of Hurricane Ike. Since my congressional district includes Galveston, my office has had the opportunity to work closely with Steve. I have always been impressed with his dedication to the people of Galveston, a dedication best exemplified by his tireless efforts to help Galveston rebuild, following the devastation of Hurricane Ike. Congress Impeachment Of Judge Samuel Kent June 19, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 73:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, as the House of Representatives Member for Galveston, Texas, I have followed the case of Judge Samuel Kent with great interest. My study of the facts of this case has convinced me that the House Committee on the Judiciary made the correct decision in recommending that Judge Kent be impeached. Unfortunately, because of a commitment in my congressional district, I was only able to be on the House floor for the vote on the first count. Had I been on the House floor for the vote, I would have voted for all four counts of impeachment. I hope the Senate expeditiously acts on this matter. Congress EARMARK DECLARATION June 24, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 75:2 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION June 24, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 75:8 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress HONORING FROST, HOMETOWN, MOODY NATIONAL AND TEXAS FIRST BANKS July 14, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 76:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, at a time when the financial headlines are dominated by stories of financial institutions seeking taxpayer funds and other special privileges, I am pleased to call my colleagues’ attention to a story from the Galveston Daily News about how four community banks came together to help their friends, neighbors and customers begin to recover and rebuild from Hurricane Ike. I ask for unanimous consent to insert this story into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Congress HONORING FROST, HOMETOWN, MOODY NATIONAL AND TEXAS FIRST BANKS July 14, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 76:2 Last fall, as the people of Galveston were assessing the damage from Hurricane Ike and Congress was beginning debate on spending billions of taxpayer funds to bail out irresponsible financial institutions, representatives of Frost, HomeTown, Moody National and Texas First banks met to discuss how these banks could help jumpstart hurricane recovery efforts. The four banks agreed to make unsecured bridge loans to Galveston businesses to ensure these businesses had access to capital while they waited for federal assistance and insurance payments. Congress COMMUNITIES REBUILD AFTER HURRICANE IKE July 15, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 79:2 Last fall, as the people of Galveston were assessing the damage from Hurricane Ike and Congress was beginning debate on spending billions of taxpayer funds to bail out irresponsible financial institutions, representatives of Frost, HomeTown, Moody National and Texas First banks meet to discuss how these banks could help jumpstart hurricane recovery efforts. The four banks agreed to make unsecured bridge loans to Galveston businesses to ensure these businesses had access to capital while they waited for federal assistance and insurance payments. Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:2 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:8 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:14 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:20 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:26 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:32 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:38 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:44 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:50 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:56 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:62 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:68 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 16, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 80:74 Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress Statement at Financial Services Committee Hearing July 21, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 82:5 The fact that the Fed had to buy $38.5 billion of government securities last week indicates that it will continue its complicity with Congress to monetize the rapidly expanding deficit. This policy is used to pay for the socialization of America and for the maintenance of an unwise American empire overseas, and to make up for the diminished appetite of foreigners for our debt. Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 23, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 84:2 1) Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 23, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 84:8 2) Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 23, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 84:14 3) Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 23, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 84:20 4) Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 23, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 84:26 5) Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress EARMARK DECLARATION July 28, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 85:2 (1) Requesting Member: Congressman RON PAUL Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE CONGRESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT July 29, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 86:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Congressional Responsibility and Accountability Act. This bill requires Congress to specifically authorize via legislation any proposed federal regulation that will impose costs on any individual of at least $5,000, impose costs on a business or other private organization of at least $10,000, or impose aggregate costs on the American people of at least $25,000, or cause any American to lose his or her job. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE CONGRESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT July 29, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 86:2 According to some legal experts, at least three-quarters of all federal laws consist of regulations promulgated by federal agencies without the consent, or even the review of, Congress. Allowing unelected, and thus unaccountable, executive agencies to make law undermines democracy and violates the intent of the drafters of the Constitution to separate legislative and executive powers. The drafters of the Constitution correctly viewed separation of powers as a cornerstone of republican government and a key to protecting individual liberty from excessive and arbitrary government power. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE CONGRESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT July 29, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 86:3 Congress’s delegation of law-making authority to unelected bureaucrats has created a system that seems to owe more to the writings of Franz Kafka than to the writings of James Madison. The volume of regulations promulgated by federal agencies and the constant introduction of new rules makes it impossible for most Americans to know with any certainty the federal laws, regulations, and rules they are required to obey. Thus, almost all Americans live with the danger that they may be hauled before a federal agency for an infraction they have no reasonable way of knowing is against the law. Congress INTRODUCTION OF THE CONGRESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT July 29, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 86:4 While it is easy for members of Congress to complain about out of control federal bureaucrats, it was Congress that gave these agencies the ability to create laws. Since Congress created the problem of lawmaking by regulatory agencies, it is up to Congress to fix the problem and make certain that all federal laws are passed by the people’s elected representatives. Therefore, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Congressional Responsibility and Accountability Act. Congress INTRODUCING HEALTH FREEDOM LEGISLATION July 29, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 87:2 The American people have made it clear they do not want the federal government to interfere with their access to dietary supplements, yet the FDA and the FTC continue to engage in heavy-handed attempts to restrict such access. The FDA continues to frustrate consumers’ efforts to learn how they can improve their health even after Congress, responding to a record number of constituents’ comments, passed the Dietary Supplement and Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA). FDA bureaucrats are so determined to frustrate consumers’ access to truthful information that they are even evading their duty to comply with four federal court decisions vindicating consumers’ First Amendment rights to discover the health benefits of foods and dietary supplements. Congress INTRODUCING HEALTH FREEDOM LEGISLATION July 29, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 87:6 The Health Freedom Act will force the FDA to at last comply with the commands of Congress, the First Amendment, numerous federal courts, and the American people by codifying the First Amendment prohibition on prior restraint. Specifically, the Health Freedom Act stops the FDA from censoring truthful claims about the curative, mitigative, or preventative effects of dietary supplements. The Health Freedom Act also stops the FDA from prohibiting the distribution of scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against disease. The FDA has proven that it cannot be trusted to protect consumers’ rights to make informed choices. It is time for Congress to stop the FDA from censoring truthful health information. Congress THE BIG GUNS HAVE LINED UP AGAINST H.R. 1207 July 30, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 88:4 He claims that H.R. 1207 would give power to Congress to affect monetary policy. He dreamt this up to instill fear, an old statist trick to justify government power. H.R. 1207 does nothing of the sort. He suggested that the day after an FOMC meeting, Congress could send in the GAO to demand an audit of everything said and done. This is hardly the case. The FOMC function, under 1207, would not change. The detailed transcripts of the FOMC meetings are released every 5 years, so why would this be so different, and what is it that they don’t want the American people to know? Is there something about the transcripts that need to be kept secret, or are the transcripts actually not verbatim? Congress THE BIG GUNS HAVE LINED UP AGAINST H.R. 1207 July 30, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 88:6 They also argue that an audit would hurt the value of the U.S. dollar. In fact, the Fed, in less than 100 years of its existence, has reduced the value of the 1914 dollar by 96 percent. They claim H.R. 1207 would raise interest rates. How could it? The Fed sets interest rates and the bill doesn’t interfere with monetary policy. Congress would have no say in the matter; and besides, Congress likes low interest rates. It is argued that the Fed wouldn’t be free to raise interest rates if they thought it necessary. But Bernanke has already assured the Congress that rates are going to stay low for the foreseeable future, and, again, this bill does nothing to allow Congress to interfere with interest rate setting. Congress H.R. 3269 July 31, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 89:2 This is not the first time that Congress has meddled in matters of executive compensation, and unfortunately it will not be the last. Just like Congress’ meddling with the economy, each intervention creates unseen problems which, when they crop up, are again addressed by legislation that creates further unseen problems, thus continuing the cycle ad infinitum. Problems with executive compensation cannot be addressed by further burdensome legislation. Congress Foreign Policy September 30, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 92:2 Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. Sometimes I wonder how we can, with a straight face, bring a bill up like this with the conditions of this country, especially financially. I oppose this bill for two reasons. One, we don’t have the money. That would be a pretty good reason not to support it. And the other reason is I do not believe it’s in our national security interests. I know this is being promoted as benefiting our national security, but I do not believe it helps us one bit. This bill was essentially voted on in June, and the vote was 234–185, which means that it is assumed at least 56 or more individuals in the Congress have switched their votes. Congress BIRTHDAY GREETINGS TO BERTHA RICHARDSON November 4, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 94:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, on November 2, the family and friends of Mrs. Bertha Richardson gathered together to celebrate Mrs. Richardson’s 100th birthday. I am pleased to extend belated birthday greetings to Mrs. Richardson. Mrs. Richardson is a life-long resident of Rosharon, Texas, which is in my congressional district. As the matriarch of her extended family, Mrs. Richardson continues to her relatives, and all members of her community, with the gifts of her faith and wisdom. I urge all my colleagues to join me in sending our best wishes to Bertha Richardson on the occasion of her 100th birthday. Congress Afghanistam Part 3 November 18, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 98:2 I opened my remarks talking about Barbara Tuchman’s “The March of Folly.” We are on the same course. I would say it’s time to march home. I’m not for sending any more troops. It is very clear in my mind that if the job isn’t getting done and we don’t know what we’re there for, I would say, you know, it’s time to come home, because I fear – and it’s been brought up. Congressman MCGOVERN has brought it up, and everybody’s talked about the finances of this because it is known that all great nations, when they spread themselves too thinly around the world, they go bankrupt. And that is essentially what’s happened to the Soviet system. They fell apart for economic reasons. Congress INTRODUCING THE FREE COMPETITION IN CURRENCY ACT December 9, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 102:4 At this country’s founding, there was no government controlled national currency. While the Constitution established the congressional power of minting coins, it was not until 1792 that the U.S. Mint was formally established. In the meantime, Americans made do with foreign silver and gold coins. Even after the Mint’s operations got underway, foreign coins continued to circulate within the United States, and did so for several decades. Congress INTRODUCING THE FREE COMPETITION IN CURRENCY ACT December 9, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 102:6 The first step consists of eliminating legal tender laws. Article I Section 10 of the Constitution forbids the States from making anything but gold and silver a legal tender in payment of debts. States are not required to enact legal tender laws, but should they choose to, the only acceptable legal tender is gold and silver, the two precious metals that individuals throughout history and across cultures have used as currency. However, there is nothing in the Constitution that grants the Congress the power to enact legal tender laws. We, the Congress, have the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, but not to declare a legal tender. Yet, there is a section of U.S. Code, 31 U.S.C. 5103, that purports to establish U.S. coins and currency, including Federal Reserve notes, as legal tender. Texas Straight Talk Congress - Offices will provide service to all parts of district 20 December 1996    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1996 verse 3 ... Cached Mobile office will increase contact with congressional staff Congress - Offices will provide service to all parts of district 20 December 1996    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1996 verse 5 ... Cached This column will be offered not only to this newspaper, but also over the World Wide Web and through fax and e-mail. Each month this column will address various pieces of legislation and issues facing the Congress. To access the congressional web site, for now use the address http://www.tgn.net/RonPaul/. That address will change in the coming months. Congress - Offices will provide service to all parts of district 20 December 1996    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1996 verse 6 ... Cached But this month I want to take the opportunity to update the district on the status of the Congressional Offices around the district. Congress - Offices will provide service to all parts of district 20 December 1996    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1996 verse 9 ... Cached An innovative change, though, will come from the use of a "mobile" office. This office - a modified RV - will travel the district on a set schedule, opening for business at the smaller, more remote sections of the district to give individuals greater direct contact with the congressional staff than ever before. The mobile office will be able to process all the questions and inquiries the traditional offices handle, including helping people secure their Social Security and Veterans' benefits. Watch your paper for more details. Congress - Offices will provide service to all parts of district 20 December 1996    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1996 verse 12 ... Cached I truly appreciate the honor you have given me, and the trust you have placed in me as your elected representative in the Congress. Congress - Fiscal Responsibility: Balance the budget but don't raise taxes or cook the books 20 January 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 January 1997 verse 4 ... Cached February of 1997 may well go down in history as one of the most important months in the history of the 20th Century. Important because it is very likely that both Houses of the Congress of the United States will pass an amendment to the Constitution, which is significant unto itself; but this particular amendment could have an impact which reaches far into the future. Congress - Fiscal Responsibility: Balance the budget but don't raise taxes or cook the books 20 January 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 January 1997 verse 6 ... Cached But we must be very careful, for it is critically important that the Balanced Budget Amendment the Congress passes contains strict provisions which prohibit tax increases to accomplish the stated goal. Congress - Fiscal Responsibility: Balance the budget but don't raise taxes or cook the books 20 January 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 January 1997 verse 11 ... Cached The other concern which must be carefully addressed is preventing the Congress from simply taking items "off budget." Already expenses like Social Security and Medicare are not stated as part of the National Debt. And it is a very easy process for the Congress to just begin moving more and more items off the budget, sidestepping a "balanced budget amendment" and causing the debt to increase. (Even without a balanced budget amendment, this practice should be abolished immediately.) Congress - Fiscal Responsibility: Balance the budget but don't raise taxes or cook the books 20 January 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 January 1997 verse 12 ... Cached I am committed to doing everything possible to balance the budget and cut taxes. The truth of the matter is that we will only balance the budget when we address the level of spending which takes place at the federal level. The US budget is ripe with targets for cuts which would hurt no one (except, of course, those who get rich and powerful from the big government programs). If the politicians in both parties were serious about balancing the budget - without cooking the books or increasing our taxes - they could do so right now by making cuts in the unconstitutional programs they continue to fund year after year. The only way to get our fiscal house in order is for Congress to exercise its responsibility and begin making the relatively simple choices about which programs are necessary for running our constitutional government, and which simply have no business operating at the federal level. Congress - Trust funds are being robbed, hundreds of billions at stake 20 February 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 February 1997 verse 14 ... Cached Recently, with all the talk of a Balanced Budget Amendment, President Clinton has been edging toward a plan to take Social Security, and possibly other programs, "off-budget." He says he wants Social Security completely off-budget to protect the funds. A ridiculous claim! By allowing the president to off-budget Social Security or anything else, we will see those funds - and indeed our nation - quickly forced into insolvency as the money is used for more and more "non-trust" uses. It is simply unconscionable to allow the president, or a gang of big-spenders in Congress, to take items "off-budget" to artificially lower the publicized cost of government, or hide ill-advised financial fiascoes. And undoubtedly lead to more and more problems in the trust funds fulfilling their missions. Congress - Trust funds are being robbed, hundreds of billions at stake 20 February 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 February 1997 verse 15 ... Cached Restoring the integrity of the trust system is of critical importance, especially if Congress passes a weak Balanced Budget Amendment. Billions of dollars are being diverted from their intended purposes (and a weak BBA could make it even worse). So when we hear that a local airport cannot get all the runways fixed this year, or when we're told a new highway project is still sitting on the drawing board, or we have to worry about whether senior citizens' Social Security checks will be secure, remember it is the federal government that is robbing our trust funds to pay for big-spending habits. Congress - Trust funds are being robbed, hundreds of billions at stake 20 February 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 February 1997 verse 16 ... Cached It must be a top priority for this new Congress to restore the integrity of the trust system and end the practice of robbing these funds. Congress - The worst day of the year 20 March 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 March 1997 verse 13 ... Cached A third piece of legislation I am going to be supporting may not at first glance appear to be related to tax reduction, but in fact it is intimately tied to the issue. The legislation is called the "Enumerated Powers Act," which will require that every bill brought before the Congress must contain the exact section of the Constitution which allows for that measure's existence. If a bill fails to include that citation, the bill will not be considered. The importance is this: If we followed the Constitution in the legislation presented, taxes would be only a fraction of their current level. By requiring that every bill brought before the Congress specifically cite the Constitution, it will at least force Members of Congress to consider exactly what it is they are doing. Right now, very few ever think about what gives them the power to regulate, spend and tax. Congress - Fear of IRS misplaced, real problem is the system 20 April 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 April 1997 verse 10 ... Cached In recently released White House recordings, former President Nixon made it abundantly clear that he wanted the IRS to be cracking down on groups (like "the Jews," he said) and individuals who were contributing to the Democrats. It has recently been revealed that Mr. Nixon was planning on having the IRS investigate every member of Congress because "it worries the (expletive) out of the thieves… It really does. Even if a person isn't a thief…" Congress - Fear of IRS misplaced, real problem is the system 20 April 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 April 1997 verse 24 ... Cached We need not only a simpler, fairer system to eliminate the second problem I described, but also a smaller, more inexpensive agency responsible for collecting the taxes to solve the first. Finally, by making Congress directly responsible for the levy and collection of taxes - as constitutionally prescribed - the third problem vanishes by placing legal questions squarely in the hands of the legitimate federal court system. And best of all, Congressmen - the direct representatives of the people - become more accountable. Congress - Parents must have control of education 20 July 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 July 1997 verse 11 ... Cached Even though many people across the nation are tired of what they see the federal government doing in education, there are too many entrenched congressmen, senators and federal employees who are unwilling to eliminate this unconstitutional waste of tax dollars. Therefore it is unlikely we see the Department of Education abolished, as it needs to be, any time soon, nor will we see the myriad of education-related federal rules and regulations discarded. Congress - Line-Item Veto violates separation of powers, threatens America's constitutional form of government 18 August 1997    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 1997 verse 4 ... Cached While Congress is not in session for the month of August, important business does continue in Washington. Even though I'm in Texas for the month, I am intrigued by an historic event of the past week: Bill Clinton became the first US President to wield the line-item veto -- a power which I believe is a major stain on the legacy of the so-called conservative revolution of the 104th Congress, two years ago. Congress - Line-Item Veto violates separation of powers, threatens America's constitutional form of government 18 August 1997    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 1997 verse 6 ... Cached According to the Constitution, the president must review legislation brought to him as an all-or-nothing deal. He is not free to create or change legislation passed through the two Houses of Congress. Under the Constitution, if the president doesn't like a portion of legislation, he may freely veto the entire measure and then work to convince Members of Congress to remove or change the portion he finds objectionable. This is completely constitutional. Congress - Line-Item Veto violates separation of powers, threatens America's constitutional form of government 18 August 1997    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 1997 verse 7 ... Cached But under the Constitution-circumventing power given the executive branch by Congress two years ago, a president can (at least according to legislative edict) strike single lines or portions of legislation and set the revised law into effect without the consent of Congress. If two-thirds of Congress does not object -- and it is almost impossible to imagine finding two-thirds of the Congressional members who agree on anything of substance -- the president's version of the law stands. This line-item veto process is the kind of absolute power our founders sought to escape, not embrace. Congress - Line-Item Veto violates separation of powers, threatens America's constitutional form of government 18 August 1997    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 1997 verse 9 ... Cached The line-item veto gives the president a whole new way to pressure members of congress and senators. It gives the president the opportunity to lobby for his particular piece of legislation with the threat that if the member does not vote for what he wants, the president will line-item veto something important to that member. Congress - Line-Item Veto violates separation of powers, threatens America's constitutional form of government 18 August 1997    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 1997 verse 10 ... Cached On April 15 of this year, I addressed the House of Representatives to oppose the line-item veto. As I told my colleagues, I was pleased to have been able to serve in Congress for four terms in the '70s and early 80s. During that time I was lobbied on a few occasions by presidents regarded as much more conservative than the current holder of that office. Congress - Line-Item Veto violates separation of powers, threatens America's constitutional form of government 18 August 1997    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 1997 verse 11 ... Cached The only time either of these presidents ever called me was when asking me to vote for more spending or taxation. Never have I experienced or heard of a president actually calling Congressmen and asking them to vote for less spending or less taxation. So I see the line-item veto as something a president can actually use to enhance or increase spending, not to reduce spending. Increasing spending and taxation was not, the stated intent behind passing the law in the first place, in fact, it was the opposite. Congress - Line-Item Veto violates separation of powers, threatens America's constitutional form of government 18 August 1997    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 1997 verse 14 ... Cached Congress acted improperly during the 104th Congress when giving this power to the presidency. Under the Constitution, it is Congress which has the responsibility to craft legislation, not this president, not a Republican president, not any president. Like the creation of administrative agencies, it is a means by which members of Congress have chosen to evade their responsibility as lawmakers and created scapegoats for the seemingly never-ending growth of liberty-oppressive government. Congress - Paul's legislation focuses on individual liberty 25 August 1997    Texas Straight Talk 25 August 1997 verse 4 ... Cached Congress has not been in session during the month of August and I have absolutely enjoyed being able to spend so much time in Texas. I've been pleased to discuss not only what Congress as a whole has been doing but also what I specifically am working on. I have introduced eight pieces of legislation, and am cosponsoring 87 others. Congress - Constitution must always be considered 01 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 September 1997 verse 3 ... Cached When Congress ignores law, it encourages lawlessness Congress - Constitution must always be considered 01 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 September 1997 verse 5 ... Cached Congress was in recess the entire month of August, but is returning to session this week to tackle two pieces of legislation, including an amendment I am introducing. Congress - Constitution must always be considered 01 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 September 1997 verse 6 ... Cached The first bill to be considered will be the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act for 1998. Congress began work on this measure back in July, but tabled it until now to avoid some partisan wrangling. This measure includes funding for such unconstitutional programs as overseas corporate welfare for big US corporations, funding for Bosnia activities, the UN's so-called peace-keeping missions in Sinai and Cyprus, and a wide variety of direct foreign aide packages. I introduced an amendment in July, which was voted down, to abolish some of the corporate welfare included in the measure. That amendment alone would have saved taxpayers more than $700 million dollars. Congress - Constitution must always be considered 01 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 September 1997 verse 14 ... Cached I swore an oath to uphold and follow the Constitution. It's an oath I take seriously because when a congressman violates the Constitution and spends money on programs not authorized, a great deal of harm is done. In the first place, harm is done directly to the individual taxpayer because the fruit of his labor is wrongly taken from him. Second, harm is done by the way the money is spent, almost always violating the rights of states and the liberties of people. Finally, harm is done to our society as we hypocritically throw to the wind the notion that Congress is bound by any law. How can Congress expect individuals to follow the laws created on Capitol Hill, when Congress doesn't follow the law as embodied in the Constitution? Congress - Constitution must always be considered 01 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 September 1997 verse 15 ... Cached The real challenge before Congress as we come out of this August recess is not to be found in the specifics of each piece of legislation, but rather by addressing the issues before the nation in the light of the Constitution. Congress - Congress to tackle Education budget this week 08 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 08 September 1997 verse 2 ... Cached Congress to tackle Education budget this week Congress - Congress to tackle Education budget this week 08 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 08 September 1997 verse 4 ... Cached Congress is back in session, having met last week and all this week, as well. For at least the next month Congress will be taking up the various appropriations measures, which are the individual pieces of legislation funding the various aspects of the federal government. Congress - Congress to tackle Education budget this week 08 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 08 September 1997 verse 5 ... Cached My amendment to the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act finally came to the House floor for debate and a vote last week. My amendment would have ended the federal government's use of our tax dollars to subsidize overseas abortions and "population control" programs, including related family planning services. Nowhere in the Constitution is Congress authorized to take your money and spend it in such a manner, whether here or abroad. Congress - Congress to tackle Education budget this week 08 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 08 September 1997 verse 6 ... Cached I was pleased that 146 of my fellow congressmen voted for the constitutionally and morally correct position, but our side of the issue did not have enough to win. But I'm not discouraged because we were able to change the debate and make people think about whether they wanted to vote for morality, constitutional government and less spending, or for more big spending on unconstitutional programs. Maybe next time we will have more support. Congress - Congress to tackle Education budget this week 08 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 08 September 1997 verse 8 ... Cached This week the Congress will continue debate on the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Act. This is perhaps, next to foreign aid, one of the easiest appropriation to vote against this "budget season." This appropriation has absolutely no legitimate basis. None. It pumps more and more money into the tired liberal mantra of "national education standards" which have done exactly what the liberals wanted: standardized education. Unfortunately, it has standardized education down. Since the federal government and the advocates of anti-constitutional education programs began creeping into the scholastic picture, we have seen all measures of academic achievement drop. Congress - Congress to tackle Education budget this week 08 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 08 September 1997 verse 9 ... Cached According to the Constitution - and common sense - education is not something for which the federal government should involve itself. Only parents know what's best for their child's educational needs, not federal bureaucrats. The teachers and school boards in the cities and towns of the 14th District know the standards appropriate for their students, not congress, the president and educational bureaucrats' unions. The way for the federal government to help improve education in our country, is to get out of the way. Those who advocate more federal involvement in education have failed our children, and failed miserably. Congress - Congress to tackle Education budget this week 08 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 08 September 1997 verse 11 ... Cached Regardless of what one thinks about abortion, sex education or even the distribution of birth control devices to children, the real issue is that the Constitution simply does not allow Congress to spend tax dollars in this way. If we are serious about wanting to balance the budget, cut taxes and restore personal liberty, Congress does not need to pass new laws, new taxes or new spending. Congress - Congress to tackle Education budget this week 08 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 08 September 1997 verse 12 ... Cached Balancing the budget, cutting taxes and restoring personal liberty is easy: Congress just needs to follow the Constitution. Congress - If someone accepts federal cash, then they must follow rules taxpayers set and deserve 15 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 15 September 1997 verse 4 ... Cached Last week, Congress met and debated the Labor-Health-Education Appropriations legislation. That debate will continue through this week. Congress - If someone accepts federal cash, then they must follow rules taxpayers set and deserve 15 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 15 September 1997 verse 5 ... Cached During debate last week an amendment was offered to prohibit the use of federal funds to perform abortions or offer various contraceptive devices to minors, if parents are not notified. The real debate on this point is not one of the rights of children versus the rights of parents, or even the question of whether federal money being spent this way -which constitutionality it obviously should not. The real debate is to what extent strings may be attached to federal funds. If the government is going to fund an unconstitutional program which should not exist anyway, then at the very least Congress should add sensible requirements for the sake of accountability. Doctors and nurses cannot even give out even an aspirin to a child without parental consent, mainly for fear of liability. And the government should do no less. If parents want their children to have ready access to birth control devices, then the parents should pay for it. But if the government is going to force us, the taxpayers, to subsidize these programs, then at the very least we should have a reasonable expectation that we - as taxpayers - are not going to be held accountable for any problems which may result from a child being given unlimited, uncontrolled access to various items paid for by the government. At the same time, it is unreasonable to expect parents to assume liability for complications resulting from actions over which they are no allowed no control. Congress - If someone accepts federal cash, then they must follow rules taxpayers set and deserve 15 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 15 September 1997 verse 9 ... Cached The two items I will be introducing on Tuesday embrace rather than disgrace the first amendment. The first is called the Voter Freedom Act of 1997. It will prohibit states from erecting excessive ballot access barriers to candidates for federal office. The Constitution gives Congress the authority to control federal elections, and I firmly believe that the more voices participating, the more likely it is that the entrenched, out-of-touch, Washington establishment will be swept to the side. Congress - Out-of-touch Congress needs to abolish IRS, not increase it 22 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 September 1997 verse 2 ... Cached Out-of-touch Congress needs to abolish IRS, not increase it Congress - Out-of-touch Congress needs to abolish IRS, not increase it 22 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 September 1997 verse 4 ... Cached The headlines around the nation last week served to further indicate the extent to which the Congress is truly out-of- touch with the people. Congress - Out-of-touch Congress needs to abolish IRS, not increase it 22 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 September 1997 verse 5 ... Cached In addition to passing the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations Act, the Congress voted to pass the Treasury and Postal Operations Appropriations Act. This bill appropriated $1.3 billion more than the respective appropriation for the most recent fiscal year. In addition to funding the IRS at $7.6 billion, (that's an 8% increase over last year's funding), the bill also included 97 million dollars for the Treasury Department's "Violent Crime Reduction Programs" despite the fact that criminal law enforcement is a matter reserved to state and local governments by the ninth and 10th amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Needless to say, this is a bill I opposed for constitutional reasons. Additionally, I want the IRS eliminated, not given more taxpayer money with which to further harass taxpayers. Congress - Out-of-touch Congress needs to abolish IRS, not increase it 22 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 September 1997 verse 6 ... Cached It wasn't, however, the IRS budget increase which caught the fancy of newspaper editors and American citizens. Rather, it was the failure by Congress to follow its recent trend of invalidating its automatic cost-of-living pay-raise increase of 2.3 percent. Congress - Out-of-touch Congress needs to abolish IRS, not increase it 22 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 September 1997 verse 7 ... Cached Under reforms passed by Congress in 1989, Congress was automatically given a cost-of-living adjustment, at a rate ½ of one percent below all other federal employees. Every year since 1989, Congress has voted to disallow its COLA pay increase. This year, the leadership of both parties evidently decided Congress should get this pay raise so the appropriation came to the House floor for a vote under a rule forbidding an amendment to stop the "automatic" increase could be offered. This situation further strengthened my justifications for voting against the entire measure in the first place. Congressmen currently are paid $133,600 annually with a massive, lucrative taxpayer funded pension program, in which I do not participate. Congress - Out-of-touch Congress needs to abolish IRS, not increase it 22 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 September 1997 verse 8 ... Cached Unfortunately for the taxpayer, many members of Congress evidently believed the IRS was deserving of even more of your money and the House passed this appropriations bill. The bill will also be considered by the Senate where there is some opposition to the de facto pay raise. Congress - Out-of-touch Congress needs to abolish IRS, not increase it 22 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 September 1997 verse 9 ... Cached Sadly, though, there seems to be no real opposition in the Senate to increasing the IRS budget. There is a lot of talk about IRS reform, yet Congress increases its budget while the media diverts our attention. Unfortunately we are not on the verge of true IRS reform. Congress - Out-of-touch Congress needs to abolish IRS, not increase it 22 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 September 1997 verse 10 ... Cached This week Congress will be considering several pieces of legislation, including HR 901, a measure I have co-sponsored. Entitled "The American Land Sovereignty Protection Act," HR 901 takes a laudable step toward reaffirmation of the constitutional tenet that only Congress has the authority to make rules and regulations regarding federally-owned land, and not the powerful independent agencies. And now we even have to be concerned about the international government bodies like the UN. Congress - Out-of-touch Congress needs to abolish IRS, not increase it 22 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 September 1997 verse 12 ... Cached A lot of politicians in Washington worry about the public's perception of their performance. The politicians need to realize that only by cutting agencies like the IRS, not giving themselves sneaky pay raises, and actually passing constitutional legislation, will the public ever do more than shake their heads in disgust at the day-to-day operations of Congress. Congress - Congress continues to ignore Constitution in the appropriations process 29 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 29 September 1997 verse 4 ... Cached Congress continues to ignore Constitution in the appropriations process Congress - Congress continues to ignore Constitution in the appropriations process 29 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 29 September 1997 verse 5 ... Cached Last week Congress continued to consider the various appropriations bills to fund the agencies and departments of the federal government. Congress - Congress continues to ignore Constitution in the appropriations process 29 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 29 September 1997 verse 10 ... Cached This week the Congress has a full plate, including legislation re-authorizing the Export-Import Bank, or Ex-Im. The Ex-Im is one of the mechanisms by which politicians are able to use your tax money to subsidize the actions of big, multinational corporations. Besides being unconstitutional, the Ex-Im Bank runs contrary to free market economics. It is unreasonable that taxpayers should be forced to foot the bill for funding risky ventures by big business. The Ex-Im Bank is the welfare engine for corporate America, paid for on the backs of the American taxpayer. The supporters of Ex-Im readily admit taxpayers have subsidized more than $100 billion of big-business deals in this decade alone. Congress - Congress continues to ignore Constitution in the appropriations process 29 September 1997    Texas Straight Talk 29 September 1997 verse 13 ... Cached Whether the issue is subsidizing the socialists at the United Nations and their stupid wars, or covering the tail of corporate America, the US Congress needs to stop using your federal tax money on programs and activities - no matter how well intentioned or how long they have been in effect - which are not authorized by the Constitution. Just as sending our troops to fight in the undeclared wars of the UN is unconstitutional, so is forcing you to work hard to pay taxes that go to pad the pockets of corporate America as they ships jobs overseas. Congress - US shouldn't cast stones with Religious Persecution 06 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 06 October 1997 verse 5 ... Cached So I suppose I could say I have good news and bad news this week. The good news is, the Ex-Im Bank no longer exists. The bad news is, Congress just changed its name - but the unconstitutional functions remain, despite the fact the bank is now technically out of "authorization." According to the legislation which created the corporate welfare mechanism we know as the Ex-Im Bank, the organization had to be re-authorized by midnight, September 30. But because of partisan wrangling over who is the bigger violator of campaign finance laws, the re-authorizing legislation was not considered. So while Congress will likely vote the bank back into official existence this week, for at least a couple days we are technically without Ex-Im. Congress - US shouldn't cast stones with Religious Persecution 06 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 06 October 1997 verse 6 ... Cached The Congress did vote, as an amendment to the Export-Import re-authorization, to rename the organization the "United States Export Bank," or USEX. Subsidizing big corporations is unconstitutional and violative of the laws of free-market economics, no matter what Congress calls the mechanism. Those who are addicted to corporate welfare have no need to worry; USEX will be doing the same thing as Ex-Im. Congress - US shouldn't cast stones with Religious Persecution 06 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 06 October 1997 verse 8 ... Cached The legislation cites for its justification not the Constitution, but various international agreements. It then authorizes the president to take action, without the approval of Congress, against countries he thinks are violating rights to religious freedom. Congress - US shouldn't cast stones with Religious Persecution 06 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 06 October 1997 verse 11 ... Cached Neither, of course, does the Constitution allow us to subsidize foreign governments through such taxpayer-supported entities as the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, OPIC, Ex-Im/USEX or any number of other vehicles through which the U.S. Congress sends foreign aid to a large number of countries (including those who engage in religious persecution). It is time we stopped both policing the world, and funding the totalitarian thugs of planet. Congress - FDA bill no reform: proves Congress still the same 13 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 13 October 1997 verse 3 ... Cached Proves that while faces, parties change, Congress stays the same By US Representative Ron Paul Congress - FDA bill no reform: proves Congress still the same 13 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 13 October 1997 verse 4 ... Cached A lot of people ask me if I believe Congress has overcome the late-night, no-warning legislative maneuverings which for so long characterized both the House and the Senate. I would really like to say it has, but events of the past week prove otherwise. Congress - FDA bill no reform: proves Congress still the same 13 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 13 October 1997 verse 6 ... Cached According to its supporters, this FDA-strengthening bill was more than three years in the making -- a so-called compromise between industry, the Clinton Administration, and a bipartisan coalition in Congress, we are told. Yet, despite the fact the legislation encompassed 177 pages of text, making broad changes to an administrative agency and its powers, the House leadership did not see fit to warn Members of Congress that this bill was coming to the House Floor for a vote. Congress - FDA bill no reform: proves Congress still the same 13 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 13 October 1997 verse 7 ... Cached When I decided to try to draw attention to the broad-sweeping nature of the bill - and the process by which it had come up for consideration - I was told by the bill's proponents that "there is no time available to speak about the bill." Instead, Congress and C-SPAN viewers were treated to a "love-fest" during which each of the bill's drafters and advocates commended one another for doing a fine job of bestowing on the American citizenry yet one more blow to liberty in favor of corporatism and internationalism. Congress - FDA bill no reform: proves Congress still the same 13 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 13 October 1997 verse 15 ... Cached Unfortunately, the names and faces of the leadership may have changed in Congress, but there is no reason to think the way Congress operates has really changed at all. Until we have Members of Congress dedicated to preserving liberty and following the Constitution, we can expect more of these shenanigans to occur. Congress - Gun Control? Disarm The Bureaucrats! 20 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 October 1997 verse 3 ... Cached Proves that while faces, parties change, Congress stays the same By US Representative Ron Paul Congress - By Any Other Name, A Tax Is Still A Tax 27 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 1997 verse 4 ... Cached Taxes took the forefront last week on Capitol Hill, as Congress again voted to increase them, while I introduced legislation to cut taxes and signed a pledge to abolish the IRS. Congress - By Any Other Name, A Tax Is Still A Tax 27 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 1997 verse 5 ... Cached A short time watching Congress makes it clear that the favorite scam on Capitol Hill is "bait-and-switch." Last week, they baited America with meager education reform, and switched it out with a tax increase. Congress - By Any Other Name, A Tax Is Still A Tax 27 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 1997 verse 10 ... Cached When I found out about this scam, I immediately took to the House floor to decry the measure and the process. When I finished speaking, another congressman, without blinking, proclaimed that this was "not a tax increase" but rather an increase in "government revenue." Calling a tax increase a method of increasing government revenue may be soothing to the politicians, but it does nothing to help the taxpayer who shoulder the burden no matter what it is called. To borrow a phrase from Shakespeare, a tax, by any other name, still costs the taxpayers their living. Congress - By Any Other Name, A Tax Is Still A Tax 27 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 1997 verse 11 ... Cached Sadly, the revised measure passed, and while there might be a few people who benefit from the barely-positive portion of the bill, Congress managed to raise taxes by over a billion dollars over the next two years. And that will hurt us all. Congress - By Any Other Name, A Tax Is Still A Tax 27 October 1997    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 1997 verse 12 ... Cached While Congress was voting to increase taxes, I took it upon myself to draft and introduce legislation to repeal the Clinton tax increase on Social Security benefits. Back in 1993, President Clinton and his willing allies in Congress increased the taxes senior citizens pay on Social Security benefits. Republicans correctly balked and even made repealing this measure a popular part of their 1994 Contract with America. But the repeal never got off the ground. Congress - IRS reform is big news, but "fast-track" bill attacks the Constitution 03 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 03 November 1997 verse 4 ... Cached When Congress convenes this week, two items are sure to get a lot of attention. One represents a further blow to our constitutional government, while the second is a token, symbolic wave at the IRS. Congress - IRS reform is big news, but "fast-track" bill attacks the Constitution 03 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 03 November 1997 verse 6 ... Cached Under "fast-track," the president still negotiates measures with foreign governments, then, if he has declared it necessary for trade, the agreement goes before the entire Congress, both the House and Senate. However, there are strict limits on debate -- and therefore opposition -- and there is no opportunity for Congress to make any changes. Further, this legislation forces the trade agreements to be placed as the highest priority on Congress’ schedule. Congress - IRS reform is big news, but "fast-track" bill attacks the Constitution 03 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 03 November 1997 verse 14 ... Cached Until Congress addresses the problem of how much money they are taking from us -- and therefore addressing how much money the federal government is spending -- any tinkering with the structure of the IRS, or adjustments to the way taxes are collected, are just window-dressing. Congress - Communist China shouldn't be financed by US 10 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 10 November 1997 verse 3 ... Cached Congress takes steps towards implementing Paul's China policy By US Representative Ron Paul Congress - Communist China shouldn't be financed by US 10 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 10 November 1997 verse 5 ... Cached Very few people realize that China is one of the biggest beneficiaries of American subsidization. Thanks to the largess of the Congress and the President, China enjoys subsidized trade and the flow of US taxpayers cash into Beijing's coffers. Congress - Communist China shouldn't be financed by US 10 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 10 November 1997 verse 6 ... Cached I was pleased to introduce a piece of legislation several months ago which would have ended the $4 billion subsidy our nation quietly gives China through the US government's Export-Import Bank. The bank underwrites the purchases of goods and services by the Chinese government and others around the world. Unfortunately, only 37 Republicans and three Democrats supported my measure. Apparently, the Congress just wasn't willing to take that big of a step in ending US support of the Communist reign of terror. Congress - Communist China shouldn't be financed by US 10 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 10 November 1997 verse 7 ... Cached But this past week, Congress took a few, very small, baby-steps in the direction I have long advocated. Congress - Communist China shouldn't be financed by US 10 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 10 November 1997 verse 8 ... Cached Of the numerous measures which came before the House of Representatives late in the week, perhaps the best was one discussed and voted upon Thursday night. While it was not as strong as the measure I introduced, by passing overwhelmingly, it signals a changing attitude in Congress. Simply, the measure calls on the United States' representatives on the World Bank and other international governmental bodies to begin voting against giving China loans and subsidies. At present, China receives more than $4 billion from those organizations, which are themselves financed heavily by the United States. Congress - Communist China shouldn't be financed by US 10 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 10 November 1997 verse 13 ... Cached And, who knows, maybe next year - when I will again have the opportunity to introduce my amendment to end US subsidy of China - we will see more Members of Congress willing to stop handing the monster of Asia a $4 billion check. Ron Paul represents the 14th District of Texas. His office may be contacted at 203 Cannon, Washington, DC 20515. Congress - Congress has finished for the year, but fast-track is not dead 17 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 1997 verse 2 ... Cached Congress has finished for the year, but fast-track is not dead Congress - Congress has finished for the year, but fast-track is not dead 17 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 1997 verse 4 ... Cached An American wit once said that every man's life or property is in danger when Congress is in session. If that's true, then America is safe at least until the end of January because Congress finished its legislative business for the year last week. But all is not closed on the issue of trade. Congress - Congress has finished for the year, but fast-track is not dead 17 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 1997 verse 6 ... Cached This 25-year-old process is ingrained in the political process and will not soon disappear. The imperial presidency is alive and well as Congress continues the process of ceding power to the executive branch through such processes as the Line Item Veto, administrative law, the War Powers Act, executive orders and trade negotiations. As Congress - and especially the House - reneges on its responsibilities under the concept of separation of powers, the people suffer by loosing their most important conduit to the federal government. Congress - Congress has finished for the year, but fast-track is not dead 17 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 1997 verse 7 ... Cached Members of Congress opposed Fast-Track for various reasons: some sensible, some less so. Serious proponents of fast-track claimed their support came from a dedication to free trade. Less serious supporters were swayed by political deals, threats and even pressure from financial supporters. This process is nothing new, but record offers were made to persuade Members of Congress to change their vote and support the fast-track authority - regardless of party affiliation. Making up the bulk of opposition to the authority were congressmen supporting the unions and the protectionists, really concerned only about their particular niches. Congress - Congress has finished for the year, but fast-track is not dead 17 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 1997 verse 13 ... Cached Fast-track is the solution to a non-existent problem. There is no reason why free trade - if that is really the desired goal - cannot be accomplished without existing structure. Agreements can be easily drawn up between nations in a simple, efficient fashion - with Congress' full participation. Low tariffs and free trade with any country can be accomplished with an agreement less than one page in length, it's only when protections for various industries, bonuses for certain corporations, are added in fine print that the agreements turn into novels. Congress - Congress has finished for the year, but fast-track is not dead 17 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 1997 verse 15 ... Cached The fast-track deliberation has had the effect, either by design or by consequence, to obscure the real need and processes for freedom in trade. While it is fortunate that for the many, varied reasons, fast-track was placed on the political shelf for the season, the set-back to those who would limit trade is only temporary. Expect them, and their rhetoric, to be back in full-force when Congress resumes legislative activity in 1998. Congress - Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government 01 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 1997 verse 2 ... Cached Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government Congress - Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government 01 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 1997 verse 4 ... Cached With Congress' 1997 legislative year behind us, I sat down to compile a list of the achievements of this Congress. The results were not encouraging. Congress - Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government 01 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 1997 verse 6 ... Cached When I last served in Congress, more than 10 years ago, it was as a member of the Republican minority. Back then we spoke passionately about cutting taxes and ending the federal stranglehold on our schools, economy and property. When I was re-elected to the House in November 1996, I looked forward to serving in a House controlled by the party which has at least paid lip service to the important issues of cutting taxes and limiting the size of the federal government to those areas outlined by the Constitution. Congress - Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government 01 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 1997 verse 7 ... Cached Like many Americans, of course, I have been disappointed by politicians who can talk the tax-cutting talk, but who walk the big-government walk. Perhaps a little too optimistically, I hoped 1997 would be different. I actually looked forward to being able to report to the people of the 14th District that Congress has finally come around to doing what the American people have wanted for a long time: cutting taxes, cutting spending, cutting the size of government. Congress - Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government 01 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 1997 verse 8 ... Cached But what mark has this Republican Congress of 1997 left on history? The answer was to be found very early on, just after the new Congress convened in January. The very first "domestic" action made by Congress was to raise taxes. Over the opposition of only a handful of us, Congress voted to increase taxes on the sales of airline tickets. Congress - Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government 01 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 1997 verse 9 ... Cached If it had stopped there, maybe it would not have been so bad. But at every turn, this Congress has voted, directly or indirectly, to increase taxes. Of course, it was often sold - if mentioned at all - as "revenue generation" for government, or, as "closing a loophole." But the bottom line is this: Americans are going to be paying more taxes this year than last year, to finance a bigger government with more unconstitutional programs. Congress - Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government 01 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 1997 verse 10 ... Cached Has this Congress, in 1997 - three years after the so-called "Conservative revolution" - done anything to cut the spending and cut the number of unconstitutional agencies? No, not a one. Perhaps it would not have been so bad if Congress only had moved to stop the growth of these agencies, if it was not going to all-out abolish them. But this Congress has increased the funding for almost all of the federal boondoggles; the pornographic National Endowment for the Arts, the Department of (mis)Education, and the bureaucrats at the EPA, all saw budget increases. Congress - Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government 01 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 1997 verse 11 ... Cached Even worse, Congress gave more money to the IRS - the most corrupt and hated of the federal agencies - than that organization has ever received. Americans say they want to get rid of the IRS, but the Republican Congress has given the IRS money to do more of their same old tricks. In fact, the Congress gave the IRS more than $700 million over last year! Sure, there have been some gentle slaps at the agency with legislation, but nothing extraordinary. Congress - Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government 01 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 1997 verse 12 ... Cached If that were not bad enough, Congress has seen fit to not just escalate the funding of already-existing unconstitutional programs, but to actually add new agencies and programs which serve to benefit special interests at the expense of hard-working Americans. Congress - Congress '97: more taxes, more spending, more big-government 01 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 1997 verse 17 ... Cached History will unfortunately record that 1997 was the year Congress passed the biggest-spending budget ever. But if we work hard and wisely, then perhaps 1998 will be recorded as the first time in history the level of federal taxes and spending actually began to shrink. Congress - President must withdraw troops from Bosnia 22 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 December 1997 verse 4 ... Cached Congress must bring American troops home Congress - President must withdraw troops from Bosnia 22 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 December 1997 verse 9 ... Cached It was in November 1995 when President Clinton ordered US troops into the region to police it and force everyone to get along. While there was, correctly, strong opposition to this foreign imperialism in the Congress and among the people, the President moved forward, promising that at the most, the troops would remain twelve months, and not a day longer, he promised. But in a sober address, he told the American people a few months later that the troops would need to remain in place until mid-1997, and no longer. Congress - President must withdraw troops from Bosnia 22 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 December 1997 verse 17 ... Cached To counter the threat of foreign policy being dictated by special interests, the Constitution gives Congress, not the president, power to engage our nation in war. Only after a congressional declaration of war is the president authorized to place troops in battle. Yet presidents of the later half of this century have felt no need to follow the Constitution as they have sent our troops into senseless battles without congressional approval; remember Vietnam? Congress - President must withdraw troops from Bosnia 22 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 December 1997 verse 18 ... Cached Yet Congress refuses to act in opposition, for fear of being labeled the politically-deadly "anti-troop." Sadly, it is anything but "anti-troop" to want our soldiers out of harms way when the situation does not involve us. In fact, those who put our troops in the line of fire for the sake of modern imperialism are the ones who are "anti-troop." They are the ones who are getting our soldiers injured, maimed and killed. By removing our troops from the situation - or, better yet, not putting them there in the first place - we are protecting their lives. Congress - President must withdraw troops from Bosnia 22 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 December 1997 verse 20 ... Cached Now the ball is squarely in the court of Congress, with the question being a simple one: Will we allow the President to permanently place US troops in harms way in a region where no US interests or security is threatened for the sake of playing the role of global cops? When Congress returns to session in January, we will doubtless have the opportunity to cut funding for this latest maneuver by the president. Until now Congress has merely acquiesced and let the president continue placing our soldiers in a perilous, ridiculous situation. But the time has come for Congress to act. We must reign in the president and bring our troops home before the situation deteriorates. Congress - President must withdraw troops from Bosnia 22 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 22 December 1997 verse 21 ... Cached American involvement in Bosnia is a dangerous policy, which defies both logic and the Constitution. Our president may be eager for a war record, but getting it at the expense of endless involvement in Bosnia is a price which must not be borne by our soldiers' blood, or the taxpayers' money. The time has come to end this presidential charade, to call his bluff, and prove that this Congress is pro-troop and pro-Constitution. Congress - President opts to use taxpayer fund to bailout wealthy investors 29 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 29 December 1997 verse 3 ... Cached Latest move done without congressional approval, gives Korea a free ride Congress - President opts to use taxpayer fund to bailout wealthy investors 29 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 29 December 1997 verse 7 ... Cached Further, the same section of the Constitution requires that Congress allocate taxpayer funds for expenditure, not the President, the Secretary of the Treasury or the Prime Minister of South Korea. Congress - President opts to use taxpayer fund to bailout wealthy investors 29 December 1997    Texas Straight Talk 29 December 1997 verse 13 ... Cached This bailout policy flies in the face of sound economics, of constitutional principles, and even old-fashioned common sense. But even worse, this policy immorally exposes the taxpayers to a tremendous risk. If Korea doesn't pay back the cash, then the only way for the government to make up the shortfall is to come knocking on your door again and reaching further into your pocket. After all, neither this president nor a majority of the Congress has any desire to cut spending to cover their improper uses of your money. Congress 1998 is a new chance to change government for better 05 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 05 January 1998 verse 5 ... Cached Having already been blessed with a wonderful, expanding family of children and grandchildren, a beautiful wife of more than 40 years, and good health, I knew my resolution for 1998 should focus on the office with which I have been entrusted by the people of the 14th District of Texas. My focus in Congress for 1998 will be on providing an alternative to the Washington status quo, and remaining true to my Oath of Office. That Oath was administered a year ago this week and stated: Congress 1998 is a new chance to change government for better 05 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 05 January 1998 verse 7 ... Cached This Oath clearly that as a Member of Congress, I can only do those things outlined in the Constitution. And so I must "bear true allegiance" to the law of the land, and support only the special interest of constitutional government and individual liberty, not the failed ideologies of big-government, command economics and central control. Congress 1998 is a new chance to change government for better 05 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 05 January 1998 verse 11 ... Cached I will also continue my work in promoting the popular HR 1146, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act. This measure represents a step toward halting the cessation of power from the federal government to international bodies such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization and the World Bank, by withdrawing the US from the UN. Under our Constitution, the federal government - including the President, the Congress and the courts - is not allowed to give away power and responsibility to these bodies, simply because the power is not theirs to give: Only the people have the power in our nation. Under the auspices of these international bodies, American boys have died in battle not for American interests, or in wars declared by Congress as the Constitution requires. With each of these senseless deaths - from Korea and Vietnam to Haiti and Bosnia - our national security is inherently and irreparably weakened. Congress Emotion should never dictate policy 12 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 12 January 1998 verse 6 ... Cached Accidents happen and cannot be foreseen. That is, perhaps, the single most true statement one can make. By the very definition of an accident, it is an unforeseen, undesired incident in an otherwise routine activity. It is incumbent upon us to take precautions against accidents, whether it is driving a motor vehicle, working around the house, riding a bicycle or skiing. But how does the government "outlaw" accidents, which is what some obviously propose Congress do when they ask for legislation to "stop" accidents from happening. Congress Emotion should never dictate policy 12 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 12 January 1998 verse 9 ... Cached We can think back no further than July of 1996, when a plane carrying several hundred people suddenly and mysteriously crashed off the coast of Long Island. Within days, Congress had passed emergency legislation calling for costly new security measures, including a controversial "screening" method which calls for airlines to arbitrarily detain passengers just because the person meets certain criteria which border on racist and xenophobic. Congress Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 4 ... Cached Recently, there have been attempts to tie the bare-minimum pro-life "Mexico City" Policy to the issues of funding for the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund. But those attempts are now coming back to haunt those of us who believe in both the sanctity of human life and the inviolability of US sovereignty. I expect that very early in this second session of the 105th Congress, which begins Tuesday, January 27, we will see a "grand deal" struck which will see liberals "back down" from their opposition to a revised Mexico City Policy in exchange for conservative members voting to support funding of the United Nations and IMF. Congress Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 5 ... Cached The Mexico City Policy was drafted in the Reagan years as an attempt to put some limitations on US foreign aide being used for abortions overseas. While I believe that those who put this policy forward were well-motivated, I believe that time has shown this policy to have little real effect. I have continued to vote for this policy when it came up as a stand alone issue in this Congress because it is a bare minimum requirement, although, as I say, I consider it ineffective in stopping tax money from funding abortions. Congress Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 9 ... Cached Currently, the most pressing battle is to stop the US from paying phony "back dues" which we supposedly "owe" this organization. Congressman Roscoe Bartlett put forward a bill to stop any payment of this phony UN debt and I proudly cosponsored Mr. Bartlett's legislation. I expect that these funding issues will be rushed to the forefront by Congressional Leaders within the next several weeks. Congress Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 10 ... Cached We were able to put the breaks to the funding of the false UN debt and the IMF at the end of the last session of Congress by linking these items with the Mexico City Policy. For political reasons President Clinton has steadfastly refused to sign any legislation which contains any anti-abortion language at all. Congress Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 12 ... Cached The plan which is now being discussed has the Republican Congress voting to approve both new IMF funding and the payment of the phony UN debt, with the President agreeing to watered-down Mexico City language. This is no bargain at all. Obviously, the Mexico City policy is riddled with holes in the first place. Moreover, it is morally repugnant to undermine our nation's integrity by trading votes in this fashion Congress Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 13 ... Cached Worse still, it now appears that conservative congressmen are willing to water the Mexico City policy down still further in order to get President Clinton to sign legislation which shouldn't exist in the first place. Thus we have Congressional leadership again backing down from President Clinton, giving in to his demand for unrestricted public funding of abortion even while compromising America's sovereignty by providing further taxpayer funds to organizations such as IMF and the United Nations. Congress Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 14 ... Cached Fortunately many conservative pro-life and pro-sovereignty groups are making it known that they do not support this so-called "compromise." I will vocally oppose any effort to pay even one more penny of US taxpayer dollars to the United Nations or IMF. Although I believe that this "grand deal" has already been struck between the leadership of Congress and the White House I believe it is incumbent upon men and women of conscience to contact their representatives and speak out against this scheme. Congress Bombing Iraq lacks support, common sense and constitutional base 02 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 02 February 1998 verse 6 ... Cached There was a time in our history that bombing foreign countries was considered an act of war, done only with a declaration by the Congress. War is something to be feared, and thoughts of which should never be entertained lightly. It is for this reason that our Constitution specifically states that declarations of war, the initial commitment of military personal in armed situations, is to be made only by Congress. Congress Bombing Iraq lacks support, common sense and constitutional base 02 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 02 February 1998 verse 7 ... Cached Today, tragically, decisions to place our troops in harm's way are done at the whim of the presidents, though often at the urging of some congressional leaders without a vote of the entire Congress. As repugnant as it may be to our sensibilities, the UN Security Council and the leaders of our "ally" countries often have more say in whether or not our troops go to battle than the elected representative constitutionally charged with this decision. Congress Bombing Iraq lacks support, common sense and constitutional base 02 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 02 February 1998 verse 8 ... Cached Trying to appease the military industrial complex and appear tough for campaign ads, many congressmen will make strong public statements goading the president to battle, going so far as to draft meaningless resolutions supporting bombings and military action. But they refuse to claim their proper constitutional role and take responsibility for sending America's youth to die in the sands of a foreign desert. Congress National testing averted, but education woes still unresolved 09 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 09 February 1998 verse 11 ... Cached So when legislation came up to prevent the Clinton Administration from implementing these national tests, I was ready to cast a vote for the Constitution and for American education. But as the process advanced it became abundantly clear that the real motivation of those pushing the legislation had less to do with a philosophic opposition to the federal stranglehold on education and testing, but rather a partisan desire to oppose a test created by this president. The legislation which passed Congress prevents a president from arbitrarily instituting a national standards test. The president can get a national test if he really wants one, he just has to get the approval of Congress first. Congress US must not trample Constitution to attack Iraq 16 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 February 1998 verse 3 ... Cached It has been the accepted political notion in this half-century that war is a Presidential matter in which Congress may not meddle, and certainly never offer dissent. Congress US must not trample Constitution to attack Iraq 16 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 February 1998 verse 4 ... Cached Yet no place in the Constitution do we find a presidential fiat power to conduct war. To the contrary, we find strict prohibitions placed on the President when it comes to dealing with foreign nations. The Constitution is clear: No war may be fought without a specific declaration by the Congress. Congress US must not trample Constitution to attack Iraq 16 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 February 1998 verse 5 ... Cached The president has been beating the drums of war, and many congressional leaders have been goading him along. However, there has been no serious discussion of the Congress claiming its constitutional role in these matters. Congress US must not trample Constitution to attack Iraq 16 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 February 1998 verse 6 ... Cached One example speaks loudly. As the legislative week came to close on Thursday, February 12, the Congress was told the day would conclude early. The final debate was heard in early afternoon and congressmen began to leave town. But I and my staff noticed something was up. Sure enough, a few minutes after 4 pm, we inquired and learned that the House Leadership, Democrats and Republicans, were taking the floor to show uniform and complete support for any decision the president may make - and especially for sending our troops to battle. I managed to get time to oppose this one-sided maneuver, and as I took up the time, other Members of Congress of both parties who still happened to be around, came to the floor in a rush, ready to make the case I was making: That full debate was constitutionally mandated, and that Congress, not the president, should commit our troops to battle. Congress US must not trample Constitution to attack Iraq 16 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 February 1998 verse 14 ... Cached According to the US Constitution, only Congress has the power to declare war. My legislation prohibits Defense Department funds from being used for offensive actions against Iraq without Congress legally declaring a war. Congress US must not trample Constitution to attack Iraq 16 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 February 1998 verse 15 ... Cached It is a sad indictment of our government that it takes legislation is required to force the President and the Congress to follow the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, especially when dealing with issues of life and death for our troops and our people. Congress Fighting for liberty takes place in Washington and in the district 23 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 23 February 1998 verse 10 ... Cached Daily my offices in the district are flooded with calls from people who have reached their wit's end in dealing with the vast myriad of agencies and bureaucrats, running in to the brick walls erected by the advocates of government intervention. To date the staff has been very successful. I think of the gentleman in the southern part of the district who recently attended a town hall meeting and told me how the IRS had been hounding his family for years over perceived mistakes. He had reached the end of his rope when he came to our attention, but my staff - using the bully position of the congressional office - was able to fight the red tape and the bureaucrats. His voice was strained as he told me that without my staff's intervention, he and his wife "would have been kicked out of our house and living under a bridge." His story is too commonplace for this statement to have been an emotional exaggeration. Daily we see similar situations with people of all backgrounds from all over the district. Congress Fighting for liberty takes place in Washington and in the district 23 February 1998    Texas Straight Talk 23 February 1998 verse 11 ... Cached But there are those who either refuse to acknowledge the suffering brought on by the failed ideology of government intervention, or they think it is justifiable. And they want more of it. Just this past year, in the midst of the major hearings on abuses by the Internal Revenue Service, that Gestapo of American life, Congress sneaked in over $700 million dollar budget increase for the IRS. I caught wind of the increase and voted against it. We need less of the IRS, much less. Congress Never sacrifice liberty for "campaign reform" 02 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 02 March 1998 verse 5 ... Cached Despite the rhetoric, the proposed "campaign finance reforms" have little to do with liberty, freedom and democracy, and much to do with narrowing the choices available to the American people and limiting their ability to participate in the free exchange of ideas. And above all else, these "reforms" are designed to preserve the status quo and protect those in power. To maintain their authority, many in Congress are willing to limit the choices of Americans and trample First Amendment rights. Congress Never sacrifice liberty for "campaign reform" 02 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 02 March 1998 verse 6 ... Cached I recently asked to come before the House Oversight Committee to discuss campaign finance reform as part of a panel. Congressman after congressman presented their ideas to restrict the American people and limit participation in the political process. They offered proposals requiring that the American taxpayer bear the burden of funding the campaigns of all federal candidates (of course, not all candidates would be federally funded, it was quickly added, only those who are deemed "viable" by the government). Congress Never sacrifice liberty for "campaign reform" 02 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 02 March 1998 verse 7 ... Cached The problem, according to these congressmen, is the big-money interests trying to influence the outcomes of elections. But none wanted to address the root of the problem, of why groups are willing to spend so much money trying to affect an election. Groups do so because of the overwhelming power the federal government has over every aspect of life. Congress Block grants are not the answer 09 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 09 March 1998 verse 13 ... Cached At the same time these token efforts were made in welfare, education and human resources reform, Congress gave the federal government massive new influence over adoption and juvenile crime, education and medicine. Block grants to States for specific purposes after collecting the revenues at the Federal level is foreign to the concept that once was understood as States rights. Congress US should stop meddling in foreign wars 16 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 March 1998 verse 5 ... Cached Every week we must find a foreign infidel to slay; and, of course, keep the military-industrial complex humming. It is telling that while Congress cannot find a way to make serious tax cuts or reforms to the IRS, reduce spending or erase the bureaucratic red tape, our national leaders can daily find new hot-spots around the world send our military and our money. Congress US should stop meddling in foreign wars 16 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 March 1998 verse 10 ... Cached But we cannot maintain two loyalties, one to a world government under the United Nations and the other to U.S. sovereignty protected by an American Congress. If we try, only chaos can result and we are moving rapidly in that direction. Congress US should stop meddling in foreign wars 16 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 March 1998 verse 11 ... Cached Instead of bringing our troops home from Bosnia, as many Members of Congress have expressed an interest in doing, over the President's objection, we are rapidly preparing for sending more troops into Kosova. This obsession with worldwide military occupation by U.S. troops is occurring at the very time our troops lack adequate training and preparation. Congress US should stop meddling in foreign wars 16 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 March 1998 verse 15 ... Cached Concern for American security is a proper and necessary function of the U.S. Congress. The current policy, and one pursued for decades, threatens our security, drains our wallets, and worst of all, threatens the lives of young Americans to stand tall for Americans' defense, but not for Kofi Annan and the United Nations. Congress Security of the people's liberty at risk 23 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 23 March 1998 verse 4 ... Cached It's not often that Members of Congress have the opportunity to take a vote which clearly states the intent of the Congress to either follow or not follow the Constitution. A vote which is not tethered to pork-barrel spending, special-interest giveaways or political land mines. Such a vote came up last week. Congress Security of the people's liberty at risk 23 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 23 March 1998 verse 9 ... Cached And so last week there came before Congress legislation stating that Congress and Congress alone has the power to declare war and commit troops into situations of hostility - as defined and clearly stated in the Constitution. It further stated that if troops are to remain in Bosnia, then Congress should take a vote declaring a state of war. Absent a declaration of war, according to this legislation if it had passed, the troops should be home in 60 days. Congress Security of the people's liberty at risk 23 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 23 March 1998 verse 10 ... Cached This was a vote on whether or not this Congress, was going to vote in support of what the Constitution specifically mandates on the issue of military action and commit of American troops to hostile environments. No policies would change, just a statement of principle upholding the Constitution. Congress Security of the people's liberty at risk 23 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 23 March 1998 verse 12 ... Cached At the core, every vote is a constitutional vote. US Representative and, later, Texas Alamo hero David Crockett, once quoted a constituent, saying, "The Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions… The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution… It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people." Congress Security of the people's liberty at risk 23 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 23 March 1998 verse 13 ... Cached Sadly, 225 Members of Congress chose to ignore the Constitution and forfeit their constitutional-required role in foreign affairs. They had the opportunity to vote in accordance with the most basic, most clearly defined section of the Constitution to which they pledged an oath to uphold, and yet 225 of the 435 representatives chose to not follow the rule of law, but to allow the whims of man to prevail. Congress Security of the people's liberty at risk 23 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 23 March 1998 verse 14 ... Cached When Congress so clearly votes against the Constitution a dangerous precedent is indeed set, and as Mr. Crockett warned, nothing is safe from the grasp of the politicians. Congress Methods employed by Congress as bad as the legislation 30 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 30 March 1998 verse 1 ... Cached Methods employed by Congress as bad as the legislation Congress Methods employed by Congress as bad as the legislation 30 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 30 March 1998 verse 3 ... Cached Often, the methods by which Congress operates is as bad as the legislation it passes. Take, for example, last week, when the $14 billion Foreign Affairs appropriations bill was unfortunately passed without a recorded vote. This legislation was the result of work by a conference committee of congressmen and senators to resolve the difference between legislation passed by the two Houses of Congress. Congress Methods employed by Congress as bad as the legislation 30 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 30 March 1998 verse 5 ... Cached With very little warning, however, the legislation came up on the House floor, and the measure was allowed to pass on a "voice vote," without a record of who supported or opposed it. This surprised some of us who wanted to be on-record against this monstrosity, and it pleased many who preferred not to be recorded on this crucial issue. There were many in Congress - and in Washington - who wanted this measure passed into law, but did not want to be held accountable, on the record, for actually supporting it when the extent of damage it causes is later revealed. Congress Methods employed by Congress as bad as the legislation 30 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 30 March 1998 verse 8 ... Cached The way Washington works is as if everything is merely a game; a game of who has power, and a game of once one posses any degree of power to hold on it by trying to fool as many people as possible. And the passage of this legislation is only one more move in this "game." Sadly, sincere groups were willingly played like a fiddle, in the hopes that by supporting what is actually very bad legislation, they would have the honor of being "Washington insiders." But it is that very "insider" status which breeds the distrust of the American people, who have to foot the bill for this dangerous game. And it is a process which unfortunately only adds to the cynicism many Americans already hold for the US Congress. Congress Methods employed by Congress as bad as the legislation 30 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 30 March 1998 verse 9 ... Cached The events surrounding the passage of the Foreign Affairs appropriations should not make any of in Congress proud, for it certainly shames America. The process, as well as the legislation, stinks. Congress Congressional action weakens national defense 06 April 1998    Texas Straight Talk 06 April 1998 verse 2 ... Cached Congressional action weakens national defense Congress Congressional action weakens national defense 06 April 1998    Texas Straight Talk 06 April 1998 verse 4 ... Cached Last week Congress passed more legislation which weakens our national defense and further funds the unconstitutional, fiscally irresponsible and dangerous practice of policing the world. And it was all done at the expense of America's airports and public housing. Congress Congressional action weakens national defense 06 April 1998    Texas Straight Talk 06 April 1998 verse 6 ... Cached One of the truly positive aspects of HR 3579 was Section 3002, stating that "none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be made available for the conduct of offensive operations by United States Armed Forces against Iraq for the purpose of obtaining compliance by Iraq with United Nations Security Council Resolutions relating to inspection and destruction of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq unless such operations are specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act." This language is virtually identical to HR 3208, a bill I introduced in February of this year to require Congressional consent prior to any offensive attack by the United States on the Republic of Iraq. Congress Congressional action weakens national defense 06 April 1998    Texas Straight Talk 06 April 1998 verse 8 ... Cached Unfortunately, Congress has refused to acknowledge anytime recently that the proper and constitutional role of the U.S. military is to provide for the national defense and not the security of all foreign entities against attacks by all other foreign entities. It was for this reason that I submitted amendments to defund the military appropriations in this so-called Emergency Appropriations Act. The proper amount of appropriations for unjustifiable United States peacekeeping missions around the world is zero. Instead, this bill rescinds funding from domestic programs such as airport maintenance and safety programs, to be spent on our "police-the-world" program. Congress Congressional action weakens national defense 06 April 1998    Texas Straight Talk 06 April 1998 verse 10 ... Cached It has become the accepted political notion in this century that war is a Presidential matter in which Congress may not meddle, and certainly never offer dissenting views. Yet, in the Constitution we find strict prohibitions placed on the President when it comes to dealing with foreign nations. The Constitution is clear: No war may be fought without a specific declaration by the Congress. Congress Congressional action weakens national defense 06 April 1998    Texas Straight Talk 06 April 1998 verse 12 ... Cached So as Congress robs from America's taxpayers and airports, I suppose we can all rest secure, knowing that our troops are being scattered around the world, placed in the way of needless harm. Congress Liberty must be our goal 04 May 1998    Texas Straight Talk 04 May 1998 verse 6 ... Cached That is disgraceful, which is why I wanted to come to Congress in the first place. For someone to work six months out of the year only to pay the tax-bill is ridiculous. Think about what you get for your money: EPA agents to grab your land if they think there are endangered weeds on it, OSHA inspectors to shut down your business for "improper" labeling of liquid paper, and IRS inspectors to seize your bank accounts if you use the wrong color of ink on the tax form. Congress Liberty must be our goal 04 May 1998    Texas Straight Talk 04 May 1998 verse 10 ... Cached Make no doubts about it, the income tax is horrible, aggressive and must go. At the same time, we must end the appetite the government has for the fruits of your labor. To this end I have introduced House Joint Resolution 116, an amendment to the Constitution, called the Liberty Amendment. The Liberty Amendment has a long history, dating back almost 40 years, with more than a dozen supporters in Congress of its various forms, including several current members. Congress Is it freedom from religious persecution? 11 May 1998    Texas Straight Talk 11 May 1998 verse 3 ... Cached In the name of making the world safe from religious persecution, Congress will consider legislation which the politicians hope will make the planet safe for religion around the globe, at the American taxpayer's expense. The legislation is the "Freedom From Religious Persecution Act of 1997." Congress Is it freedom from religious persecution? 11 May 1998    Texas Straight Talk 11 May 1998 verse 8 ... Cached One provision of the bill attempts to provide the President a kind of "Ultra-Fast-Track" authority to enter into multilateral international sanctions and legislative functions contrary to constitutionally-mandated processes. The Constitution, of course, requires treaties to be ratified by a two-thirds majority of the Senate and reserves legislative powers to the Congress. In recent history, Presidents have avoided the two-thirds Senate majority hurdle by semantically re-labeling Treaties as agreements and passing some of them by with narrower margins of approval through both houses of Congress. Congress Federalization of crime contrary to Constitution 18 May 1998    Texas Straight Talk 18 May 1998 verse 2 ... Cached Last week, Congress moved our nation closer to a national police state by further expanding the already-unconstitutional litany of federal crimes. Congress Federalization of crime contrary to Constitution 18 May 1998    Texas Straight Talk 18 May 1998 verse 4 ... Cached What Member of Congress, especially in an election year, wants to be portrayed as soft on crime or deadbeat parents, irrespective of the transgressions against individual liberties and a trampling of our Constitution? Congress Federalization of crime contrary to Constitution 18 May 1998    Texas Straight Talk 18 May 1998 verse 5 ... Cached The federal government was designed to be limited in power. In fact, there is a strict enumeration of the spheres in which Congress is allowed to act. For every other issue, only the state governments or the people, in their private market actions, enjoy constitutionally protected right to those powers. The tenth amendment is brutally clear: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. " Congress Federalization of crime contrary to Constitution 18 May 1998    Texas Straight Talk 18 May 1998 verse 6 ... Cached But rather than abide by our constitutional limits, Congress recently passed two pieces of legislation - neither containing a shred of constitutional authority - which, of course, were "non-controversial" despite moving us further from the notion of a limited government. One piece of legislation pledged that the Congress will "pass legislation that provides the weapons and tools necessary to protect our children and our communities from the dangers of drug addiction and violence." Setting aside for the moment the practicality of federal prohibition laws, an experiment which failed miserably with alcohol in the 1920s, the threshold question must be: "under what authority do we act?" Whether any governmental entity should be protecting individuals from themselves and their own stupidity is certainly debatable; whether the federal government is constitutionally empowered to do so is not. Being stupid or brilliant to one's sole disadvantage or advantage, respectively, is exactly what liberty is all about. Congress Asian economic crisis result of suppressed liberty 25 May 1998    Texas Straight Talk 25 May 1998 verse 12 ... Cached For the United States, the most important thing Congress can do is recognize that further taxing American workers to finance a bail-out is the worst policy of all for us to pursue. Congress Constituent service is most important function 01 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 01 June 1998 verse 2 ... Cached For many individuals, congressional services directly affect their lives Congress Constituent service is most important function 01 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 01 June 1998 verse 3 ... Cached No other responsibility of a congressman so directly affects the lives of the average person as that of "constituent service." Constituent services take on a wide variety of forms and this column is devoted to describing some of those activities and opportunities. Congress Constituent service is most important function 01 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 01 June 1998 verse 7 ... Cached But the three traditional offices are not the only means by which constituents can have access to my congressional staff, such as my Mobile Office. This office, a specially converted blue van, travels to the rural parts of the district, offering congressional services to people who might not be able to travel (for health or work reasons) to one of the three traditional offices, but want to meet with someone in person. The Mobile Office's schedule is published in local papers, and is parked in visible places in the community, with constituents actually meeting with my staff in the office itself. The Mobile Office can be contacted at (512) 753-5553. Congress Constituent service is most important function 01 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 01 June 1998 verse 11 ... Cached And for constituents visiting Washington, DC, there are even more services available. Perhaps the most popular are special VIP tours of the Capitol by my staff; constituents can be taken onto the Floor of the House and Senate when Congress is not in session, as well into other parts of the Capitol not generally accessible to the public. Further, with enough notice, my staff can obtain special passes for constituents to tour the White House, the FBI Headquarters and even the Treasury's printing operations. All of these tours are offered at no cost to the constituent. Congress Constituent service is most important function 01 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 01 June 1998 verse 12 ... Cached Finally, there are two important information services available to constituents of the 14th District. The first is my toll-free Legislative Update line. By calling (888) 322-1414, you can hear an update on legislation before Congress as well as information on items of general interest and debate. The second information service is my official congressional web site (www.house.gov/paul/). At this site visitors can find an archive of all my speeches, press releases and even the text of legislation I have sponsored, as well as leave electronic messages for me. Congress Constituent service is most important function 01 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 01 June 1998 verse 14 ... Cached No other responsibility of the congressional office is as important, or as rewarding, as the opportunity to assist constituents - whether dealing with federal agencies, providing commemorative flags, or making a trip to Washington more memorable. Congress Religious freedom found in following Constitution 08 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 08 June 1998 verse 8 ... Cached Our basic problem is not a lack of constitutional direction regarding the right of Americans to freely practice their religious beliefs; for the First Amendment is very clear. In reality, the problem has been that our courts are filled with judges who have no understanding, appreciation, or concern for the original intent of our Founding Fathers, or for the constitutional Doctrine of Enumerated Powers, or of property rights. And as long as this disgraceful condition exists, any new amendment to the Constitution will only be similarly abused. How can we expect judges, or even Members of Congress, to follow new constitutional amendments when they do not now follow anything currently existing in the Constitution? Congress Religious freedom found in following Constitution 08 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 08 June 1998 verse 13 ... Cached The only solution is to shrink the government and raise a new generation of judges and congressmen who understand the constitutional principles of original intent, enumerated powers, and property rights. If we do this, our existing First Amendment right to freedom of religious expression will be protected more strongly than any effort at federal meddling. Congress Religious freedom found in following Constitution 08 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 08 June 1998 verse 14 ... Cached Until our judges and our Congress embraces the Constitution, and willingly follows it, new Constitutional amendments will do little to help and will almost certainly make things worse by weakening the already-existing bill of rights. Congress Campaign reform should encourage choice 15 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 15 June 1998 verse 15 ... Cached Congress has strict constitutional authority to regulate, protect and promote the exercise of the voting rights, as well as set the specifications on how federal elections are to be conducted. Congress Trade, not aid or isolation, should be US foreign policy 22 June 1998    Texas Straight Talk 22 June 1998 verse 11 ... Cached In fact, as we have seen with embargoes on Iraq and Cuba, the dictator grows stronger when there are heavy sanctions, not weaker. But in our country, those sanctions are devastating. Mr. Warfield told a congressional panel recently that when the United States placed an embargo on US grain against the Soviet Union in the 1980s, $2.3 billion was lost in farm exports. Congress Respect for property rights necessary for freedom 06 July 1998    Texas Straight Talk 06 July 1998 verse 3 ... Cached Often Congress' laws are not about environment, but power and control Congress Paul legislation will stop national ID card 13 July 1998    Texas Straight Talk 13 July 1998 verse 4 ... Cached Just prior to my being elected to Congress, a piece of legislation was passed which was intended to stem the tide of illegal aliens coming into our nation. While the goals were laudable, even the best of legislative intentions can produce results which are reprehensible. Congress Paul legislation will stop national ID card 13 July 1998    Texas Straight Talk 13 July 1998 verse 5 ... Cached Such is the case with an obscure section of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. This section authorizes the federal Department of Transportation to establish national requirements for birth certificates and drivers' licenses. The provision, a small part of a major piece of legislation passed at the end of the 104th Congress, represents an unprecedented power grab by the federal government and a threat to the liberties of every American, for it would essentially transform state drivers' licenses into national ID cards. Congress Paul legislation will stop national ID card 13 July 1998    Texas Straight Talk 13 July 1998 verse 11 ... Cached But if the disapproval of the founders is not sufficient to cause Congress to repeal the requirements, then perhaps the reaction of the American people when they discover that they must produce a federally-approved ID in order to open a bank account or see the doctor will turn the tide. Already congressional offices are being flooded with complaints about the movement toward a national ID card; imagine the public's surprise when they realize that not only is a national ID movement underway, but will be a reality by October 1, 2000. Congress Integrity of Social Security Number must be maintained 20 July 1998    Texas Straight Talk 20 July 1998 verse 8 ... Cached Perhaps the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the Congressionally-authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim them as a dependent. Mr. Speaker, forcing parents to register their newborn children with the state is more like something out of the nightmare of George Orwell than the dreams of a free Republic that inspired the nation's founders. Congress Integrity of Social Security Number must be maintained 20 July 1998    Texas Straight Talk 20 July 1998 verse 9 ... Cached This is not an isolated incident; in fact, since the creation of the Social Security number in 1934, there have been almost 40 congressionally-authorized uses of the Social Security number as an identification number for non-Social Security programs! Abuse of the Social Security system also occurs at the state level. In many states - thanks to federal law - one cannot get a driver's license, apply for a job, or even receive a birth certificate for one's child, without presenting their Social Security number to a government official, and just a couple months ago weeks ago 210 of my colleagues voted to allow States to require citizens to show their Social Security number in order to vote. Since the Social Security number is part of a federal program created by Congress, it is Congress' responsibility to ensure it is not used to violate the privacy of America's citizens. Congress Right to work must be free of coercion 27 July 1998    Texas Straight Talk 27 July 1998 verse 4 ... Cached Unfortunately, this is not the case in the United States, thanks to the federal government. Under federal law, Congress has prevented employees from finding a job on their own, and then holding the job by their own merit. Instead, federal law has allowed labor unions to step in and dictate to both employers and employees everything including who can be hired, the terms of the contracts, the availability of promotions, and even the conditions that someone can be fired. Congress Right to work must be free of coercion 27 July 1998    Texas Straight Talk 27 July 1998 verse 6 ... Cached The National Right to Work Act simply repeals sections of federal law giving union officials the power to force workers to pay union dues as a condition of employment. Compulsory unionism violates employers' and employees' constitutional rights of freedom of contract and association. Further, Congress has no constitutional authority to force employees to pay union dues to a labor union as a condition of getting or keeping a job. Perhaps more importantly, though, Congress does not have the moral authority to grant a private third party the right to interfere in the employment agreements between two free people. Congress Washington 'solutions' to voter frustration are dangerous 03 August 1998    Texas Straight Talk 03 August 1998 verse 3 ... Cached Last week Congress began debate on what is referred to in Washington, DC, as "campaign reform." I find it amazing they can call what was proposed "reform" with a straight face. In reality, most of what was put forward has little to do with the real problem. Congress Washington 'solutions' to voter frustration are dangerous 03 August 1998    Texas Straight Talk 03 August 1998 verse 12 ... Cached Our system of elections will not dramatically change until our politicians attitude towards government is changed. As long as government has so much power over so much over lives, there will be people wanting to buy influence and create ways to keep others from doing the same. If our federal government did only those things authorized by the Constitution, there would be very little incentive for powerful "special interests" to try to influence congressmen. Congress Deceptive economic euphoria 17 August 1998    Texas Straight Talk 17 August 1998 verse 3 ... Cached Congressional leaders are squabbling like never before; not over how to cut spending, reduce government and balance the budget, but over how to spend the so-called $1 trillion budget surplus expected over the next ten years. Congress Deceptive economic euphoria 17 August 1998    Texas Straight Talk 17 August 1998 verse 9 ... Cached But among members of Congress and their staffs, there is unrestrained euphoria. Sadly, it has more to do with politics than reality. Congress Taxpayer cash flowing again to non-citizens 31 August 1998    Texas Straight Talk 31 August 1998 verse 3 ... Cached For years American citizens had complained to Congress about the policy of providing welfare and other benefits to non-citizens, so it was with great ceremony in 1996 that Congress passed the Welfare Reform Act. Among other things, this measure repealed the nonsensical programs giving taxpayer cash to non-citizens. Congress Taxpayer cash flowing again to non-citizens 31 August 1998    Texas Straight Talk 31 August 1998 verse 4 ... Cached Public support for the provision was so strong, even President Clinton had to bow to the pressure and sign the legislation into law. What we in the public missed was what had to be a big wink between Congress and the president, as both crossed their fingers knowing the arrangement was temporary. Congress Taxpayer cash flowing again to non-citizens 31 August 1998    Texas Straight Talk 31 August 1998 verse 5 ... Cached In fact, the law had barely taken effect when Congress this year took up legislation, the Agriculture Appropriations for 1999, which had buried in it a return to the old policy of handing out cash to aliens. Congress Taxpayer cash flowing again to non-citizens 31 August 1998    Texas Straight Talk 31 August 1998 verse 11 ... Cached Second, because of the nature of our system, those aggrieved by the spreading-thin of benefits from the pool they created with their taxes will rightly complain. The only option available to Congress - in their warped sense - is to increase taxes on those currently working and paying taxes so that all the beneficiaries get 100 percent of what they were expecting. Congress 'High crimes and misdemeanors' 07 September 1998    Texas Straight Talk 07 September 1998 verse 14 ... Cached For far too long, Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility to independent prosecutors. This Congress should begin proceedings to hear the facts behind these allegations, as the Inquiry legislation would require. Congress 'High crimes and misdemeanors' 07 September 1998    Texas Straight Talk 07 September 1998 verse 15 ... Cached Congress must move forward now to secure the integrity of our system of justice, protect the liberties of our people, and to ensure our national security. But Congress must move forward with hearings for the sake of this president and the office he holds. If this president has done nothing meriting impeachment, public hearings will vindicate him and the sordid allegations - and purveyors of the falsehoods - will be revealed. Congress The problem is the currency 21 September 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 September 1998 verse 9 ... Cached Our concerns in the Congress should be for the dollar. We should not use dollars to prop up other currencies or economies, as bail-outs compound the problems and encourage others to mismanage their economies while expecting more cash from Uncle Sam. But most importantly, it actually undermines the value of the dollar. Congress The problem is the currency 21 September 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 September 1998 verse 17 ... Cached Congress has an explicit responsibility in the area of money and finance and we must assume this responsibility. Manipulating the money supply with the pretense of helping ourselves is unacceptable and destructive. Before our economy is lost, we should work diligently to restore soundness to our monetary policy. Congress For sake of Rule of Law, Congress must proceed 28 September 1998    Texas Straight Talk 28 September 1998 verse 2 ... Cached For sake of Rule of Law, Congress must proceed Congress For sake of Rule of Law, Congress must proceed 28 September 1998    Texas Straight Talk 28 September 1998 verse 7 ... Cached Under our Constitution, the House of Representatives is charged with investigating allegations against a sitting president or judge. While some may talk about whether or not an offense is "impeachable," that is only so much political rhetoric. The Constitution only specifies that Congress can impeach a president for "high crimes" and "misdemeanors," but the definitions of those words are left to Congress to determine - anything a sufficient number of Members of Congress find offensive can be cause for impeachment. Congress For sake of Rule of Law, Congress must proceed 28 September 1998    Texas Straight Talk 28 September 1998 verse 14 ... Cached While one should never discount the importance of lying under oath, I am saddened that some congressional leaders have recently suggested hearings will not include these other, far more serious, allegations. Crimes against our Constitution must not be set aside for details of sexual escapades. I hope that after $40 million being spent on investigating these more serious charges of crimes against the Constitution, that the entirety of the hearings are not simply restricted to this matter of perjury. Congress Tax measure includes version of Paul legislation 05 October 1998    Texas Straight Talk 05 October 1998 verse 4 ... Cached With the passage of new tax legislation last week, Congress is proposing that the American people be able to keep more of what they earn by providing more than $80 billion in tax cuts over the next five years. Congress Tax measure provides income averaging 12 October 1998    Texas Straight Talk 12 October 1998 verse 12 ... Cached While Congress and the federal government cannot control the weather, they can ensure that hard working Americans are not unfairly punished under our tax law because the nature of their business is so tied with nature's cycles. Congress Economic crisis looms 19 October 1998    Texas Straight Talk 19 October 1998 verse 15 ... Cached Second, Congress should legalize the Constitutional principle that gold and silver be legal tender by prohibiting sales and capital gains taxes from being placed on all American legal tender coins. Congress The Ominous Budget Deal 26 October 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 October 1998 verse 4 ... Cached More than 8,000 pages of small print governmentese make up the Omnibus spending package recently approved by the US Congress, over the objections of myself and numerous other conservatives from Texas and around the country. The devilish details hidden in the package will remain obscured for weeks or months, until Americans have the chance to scour through the pages. Congress The Ominous Budget Deal 26 October 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 October 1998 verse 9 ... Cached At the same time this omnibus package was allowing foreign inspectors on to American soil, it provided more than $225 million to keep American soldiers stuck in the middle of the Bosnian conflict. While many of us in Congress want to see our troops brought home from the president’s little police action, this legislative monstrosity continues funding this relic of Vietnam-style interventionism. Congress Privacy tops agenda 09 November 1998    Texas Straight Talk 09 November 1998 verse 2 ... Cached Restoration of rights should lead in 106th Congress Congress Privacy tops agenda 09 November 1998    Texas Straight Talk 09 November 1998 verse 3 ... Cached With the 1998 election completed and there being several weeks before the start of the 106th Congress, this is a prime opportunity to examine what will be my legislative priorities for the coming session. To paraphrase a conservative activist of the 1960s, a priority should be erasing the bad laws, not creating new ones. Congress Privacy tops agenda 09 November 1998    Texas Straight Talk 09 November 1998 verse 5 ... Cached For a Republican Member of Congress like me, it would perhaps be more comforting to claim that these incidents were all being perpetrated by the "liberal Democrats." While accusing the Republicans of violating his privacy, President Clinton’s Administration has indeed been at the front of the charge to increase the government’s ability to pry into our personal affairs and monitor our movements, he has had many willing allies in the so-called "conservative" camp. Congress Privacy tops agenda 09 November 1998    Texas Straight Talk 09 November 1998 verse 17 ... Cached The restoration and protection of personal privacy is, and will remain, a key issue for 1999, for the 106th Congress, and for our nation. Congress Wrong debate in House 'leadership' race 16 November 1998    Texas Straight Talk 16 November 1998 verse 10 ... Cached The clashes are over big-government details: the welfare poor versus the welfare rich; a foreign policy of propping up right-wing dictators versus left-wing dictators; a war on poverty or a war on drugs; "protecting" the environment or bailing out the IMF. But in the Halls of Congress, little said and less is done about getting the government out of our lives, out of our wallets and off our land. Congress Schizophrenic foreign policy leads to problems 23 November 1998    Texas Straight Talk 23 November 1998 verse 9 ... Cached But the use of the military is a great way to divert attention from our foreign policy failures. For when our kids go off to battle, no one dare oppose the action, for that is seen as opposing them. The blood of our nation's youth, all too often, is spilt as if it can wipe away the policy sins of the Congress and the President. Congress Privacy Busters: Big Bank is watching 30 November 1998    Texas Straight Talk 30 November 1998 verse 11 ... Cached But at the expense of law-abiding citizen's privacy? And with the resources of private institutions? While such egregious violations of individual rights are common in totalitarian regimes (Hitler's National Socialists elevated such abuses to a perverse art), they cannot be tolerated in a free society. The regulators say these new banking rules are required under existing banking laws. If that is the case, I will gladly relieve them of that burden by introducing, at the beginning of the 106th Congress in January, legislation to repeal those laws. Somehow, though, I imagine such action will not stop them, only slow them down. Congress Medical costs can be cut with freedom 14 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 14 December 1998 verse 9 ... Cached Most obviously, there is the direct government meddling. Bureaucrats, under authority granted to them by years of irresponsible congressional action, now dictate how medical care is to be offered, in what timetables, quantities and situations. Of course, these directives have nothing to do with the realities of medicine or even the demands of the market, but are simply political directives issued for soundbite effectiveness. While sounding nice, these regulations increase costs by forcing the medical provider to expend greater resources to meet the regulations. Congress Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes 21 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 3 ... Cached Congress must reclaim from president power to declare war Congress Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes 21 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 7 ... Cached Despite the thousands of Americans who have died in Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf and other locales, there has not been a declared war since World War II. Each of those actions occurred without the constitutional requirement of a declaration of war. In reality many of our nation's young men died in the pitch of battle and war, but in the coldness of the law, they fell -- depending on the case -- in "police actions," "peacekeeping missions" or "support operations," with the authority usually coming from the United Nations, rather than the US Congress. Congress Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes 21 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 8 ... Cached In what should be regarded as the gravest of all crimes, these citizens were sent to their deaths unconstitutionally. And, it should be noted, for actions we lost. We lost those wars simply because they were not matters of urgency in protecting our national security, but political battles waged to appease one interest group or another. Without the full resolve of Congress and a declaration of war to protect our security, our military must deal with such vague politically correct objectives as "reducing the ability" of a foreign leader to potentially do something. How does one define a "reduced ability," let alone bring such an objective to fruition? Congress Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes 21 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 10 ... Cached Sadly, though, Congress has abdicated -- unconstitutionally -- its solemn responsibility in this matter. Members of Congress are eager to let presidents drop bombs on foreign nations for many reasons, though the underlying one is that it relieves them of personal responsibility while giving each a sense of strength and power. Congress Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes 21 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 11 ... Cached An attempt was made to rectify this situation in the early 1970s, with the introduction of the War Powers Act, following the Korea and Vietnam fiascoes. The legislation originally would have moved us closer to the Constitution. What passed, however, has made things far worse in the intervening 25 years. Now the law allows presidents to send troops into any battle, anywhere, for any reason, without Congress having any chance to voice even opposition until long after lives have been endangered. Congress Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes 21 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 13 ... Cached Often, of course, the military industrial complex and their allies in Congress push for meaningless resolutions supporting the action, even if the action is objectively wrong. Remember, these are not war declarations, but resolutions rubber stamping presidential actions. The rhetoric used, then , is that one must vote for these resolutions to "support the troops." Congress Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes 21 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 15 ... Cached Most recently, the Congress interrupted the important impeachment debate to pass a two-part resolution. The first half simply offered support for our troops, and was unobjectionable. The second half, though, encouraged the president, praised his unconstitutional actions, and recommended that he engage in further unconstitutional actions by trying to topple the leadership of Iraq and replace it with what would amount to a US taxpayer supported puppet regime. Of course, voting against the second part is depicted as the fans of unconstitutional war as opposing our troops. Nevertheless, I voted against the resolution because I cannot sanction abuses of our Constitution. Congress Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes 21 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 16 ... Cached Congress should support the troops by taking them out of senseless danger, not encouraging a soon-to-be impeached president to risk further the lives of enlisted men. Congress Unconstitutional wars gravest of crimes 21 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 21 December 1998 verse 17 ... Cached The gravest crime against our Constitution is the one never addressed: the senseless slaughter of our soldiers, our best and brightest. Perhaps one day Congress will reclaim its constitutionally mandated power of sole authority over matters of war. Until then, more young men will die senseless deaths. Congress Embargoes most destructive at home 28 December 1998    Texas Straight Talk 28 December 1998 verse 15 ... Cached If the policy of embargoes is to continue, then Congress should have final oversight of implementation and duration. But that is a big "if." Congress Federal government needs to step out of education 04 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 04 January 1999 verse 15 ... Cached With the seating of the new Congress, I plan on introducing legislation that would give significant tax breaks to classroom teachers of both public and private schools. Simply cutting federal taxes can amount to a significant increase in take-home pay and would go a long way in making the profession more attractive to a perspective teacher. Congress Protecting integrity of Social Security 11 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 January 1999 verse 5 ... Cached Almost immediately after being sworn in as a Member of the 106th Congress on January 6, 1999, I introduced the Social Security Preservation Act, legislation to provide real protection of the trust fund. This legislation is identical to a bill 94 other Members and I cosponsored during the last Congress. Congress Protecting integrity of Social Security 11 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 January 1999 verse 9 ... Cached The Social Security Trust Fund has for decades become a slush fund for the big-government programs of Congress and the President. In fact, close to a half-a-trillion dollars have been taken from the trust fund over the year. Congress Protecting integrity of Social Security 11 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 January 1999 verse 10 ... Cached In recent years, President Clinton and Congress have claimed to produce a balanced budget. This balancing act has only come as a result of numerous accounting shenanigans, including taking money out of the Social Security Trust Fund. Congress Protecting integrity of Social Security 11 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 January 1999 verse 12 ... Cached It must be a top priority for this new Congress to restore the integrity of the Social Security trust system. The Social Security Preservation Act will do this by making it illegal for the government to use the trust funds for any purpose except administering the Social Security system. Congress Protecting integrity of Social Security 11 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 January 1999 verse 13 ... Cached Restoring the integrity of the trust system is of critical importance. Billions of dollars are being diverted from their intended purposes, yet many in Washington chant the "save Social Security" mantra while taking more and more out of the fund. So when we hear that Congress might change the Social Security retirement age, or increase the Social Security tax, or we worry whether senior citizens' Social Security checks will be secure, remember it is the federal government that is robbing our trust funds to pay for big-spending habits. Congress Protecting integrity of Social Security 11 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 January 1999 verse 14 ... Cached It's time for political rhetoric to turn into realist policy. Quick passage of the Social Security Preservation Act must be a top priority of the new Congress. Congress Stopping the Surveillance State 18 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 18 January 1999 verse 6 ... Cached Perhaps the most important section of the legislation is the prohibition against using the Social Security number as an identifier. For all intents and purposes, the Social Security number is now a national ID. The use of the Social Security number has become so widespread that most Americans must produce a Social Security number to get a fishing license, and members of Congress must show their Social Security number in order to vote on the House floor. Congress Stopping the Surveillance State 18 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 18 January 1999 verse 10 ... Cached Many in Congress sincerely suggest that citizens' privacy could be protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, but the fact is that legislative "privacy protections" are inadequate. Recent history demonstrates that federal laws have not stopped unscrupulous officials from accessing supposedly protected information. Did laws stop the continuous violation of privacy by the IRS, or the FBI abuses by the Clinton and Nixon administrations? The Clinton Administration has even endorsed allowing law enforcement officials' access to health care information, in complete disregard of the Fifth Amendment. Congress Stopping the Surveillance State 18 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 18 January 1999 verse 12 ... Cached While most members of Congress are not persuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act, they will consider the overwhelming opposition of the American people toward the government's prying eyes. My office has been inundated with calls from around my district, state and, indeed, the nation, encouraging my efforts to thwart these attacks on our privacy. On the other hand, I have yet to meet a taxpayer who wants the government to further erode their privacy. Congress Stopping the Surveillance State 18 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 18 January 1999 verse 13 ... Cached Clearly, the American people want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Congress risks provoking a voter backlash if we fail to halt the growth of the surveillance state. National IDs and massive government databases are incompatible with a limited, constitutional government. Congress A New Pandora's Box 25 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 25 January 1999 verse 7 ... Cached As it is, Social Security is approaching bankruptcy and doesn't have any cash to invest. For decades congresses and presidents have raided the fund to bolster big-government programs. The president's shady investment plan hinges on investing cash that simply isn't there. Congress A New Pandora's Box 25 January 1999    Texas Straight Talk 25 January 1999 verse 8 ... Cached The president and congress have for several years been bragging about great budget surpluses, and, of course, the outlandish claim that the budget is balanced. The federal debt is continuing to rise, by more than $100 billion a year. It is impossible for the budget to be truly balanced while debt continues to rise unless the president has different understanding of the meaning of the word "balanced" than most Americans. Congress Orwellian rules face major opposition 01 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 01 February 1999 verse 12 ... Cached To combat this, I will be introducing three pieces of legislation. The first is the "Know Your Customer Sunset Act," which will immediately stop these rules from going into effect. The second is the "Bank Secrecy Sunset Act," which will force Congress to either rewrite the poorly written, abused Nixon-era program, or devolve that power to the states. The third is the "FinCEN Public Accountability Act." This legislation will require that agencies let Americans see their own "financial history" files created under current rules, much like what is required of the FBI and credit bureau reporting agencies. Congress Orwellian rules face major opposition 01 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 01 February 1999 verse 13 ... Cached Congressmen are signing on these measures due in large part to the growing chorus of Americans who are saying, to paraphrase our founding fathers' cry, "don't tread on my privacy rights!" Dozens of organizations, ranging from banking and technology groups to conservative family-values coalitions to the liberal ACLU, are joining in the fight to oppose these regulations. Congress A right to network TV? 08 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 08 February 1999 verse 5 ... Cached For the last several weeks, congressional offices have been flooded with calls from rural satellite TV customers. These Americans are upset because their satellite service providers have informed them that, absent actions by Congress, they will lose access to certain network television stations and programming. Congress A right to network TV? 08 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 08 February 1999 verse 10 ... Cached The Library of Congress, if you can imagine, has been delegated the power to determine prices at which program suppliers must make their programs available to cable and satellite programming service providers. Government's attempt to set the just price for satellite programming outside the market mechanism is inherently impossible. This has resulted in competition among service providers for government privilege rather than consumer-benefits inherent to the genuine free market. Currently, however, federal regulation does leave satellite programming service providers free to bypass the governmental royalty distribution scheme and negotiate directly with owners of programming for program rights. Congress A right to network TV? 08 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 08 February 1999 verse 11 ... Cached It is within the constitutionally enumerated powers of Congress to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." However, operating a clearinghouse for the subsequent transfer of such property rights in the name of setting a just price or "instilling competition" via "central planning" seems not to be an economically prudent nor justifiable action under this enumerated power. This process is one best reserved to the competitive marketplace. Congress Stopping the President's New Little War 15 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 February 1999 verse 4 ... Cached A common practice since World War II has been the presidential commitment of our troops to battle without congressional approval, despite constitutional requirement to the contrary. Continuing in this dubious tradition, President Clinton recently announced he would be sending American troops, under NATO command, into strife-ridden Kosovo. Congress Stopping the President's New Little War 15 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 February 1999 verse 6 ... Cached Last week I introduced House Resolution 647 to stop the president from involving us in Kosovo without first obtaining congressional approval. The measure immediately received more than a dozen cosponsors. Congress Stopping the President's New Little War 15 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 February 1999 verse 7 ... Cached Congress must restate its constitutional obligation to supervise the engagement of troops in hostile situations. Our Founding Fathers gave Congress the authority to determine what wars should be fought, as Congress is most directly responsible to the people. Congress Stopping the President's New Little War 15 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 February 1999 verse 10 ... Cached The fact previous administrations were unchallenged in scattering troops around the world was not due to legitimately granted power, but rather abdication by Congress of responsibility to supervise out-of-control spending and reckless warring. Congress Stopping the President's New Little War 15 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 February 1999 verse 14 ... Cached Adding to the recklessness of the mission is the near-certainty that our troops will serve under the direct command of a foreign military leader, someone not answerable to Congress or our laws. Congress Stopping the President's New Little War 15 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 February 1999 verse 17 ... Cached Congress must re-exert its constitutional authority and stop presidents from sending troops into harm's way. Most immediately, Congress must stop President Clinton's new little war in the Balkans. Congress Phase-in of tax cuts make code more complex 01 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 01 March 1999 verse 13 ... Cached In almost every case of "tax cuts," the reductions are minimal. Americans are still burdened by too many taxes and regulations (which are merely hidden taxes). While initiatives that allow even a few people to save even a few dollars should not be scoffed at, Congress needs to get serious about making deep, across-the-board tax cuts. Congress Phase-in of tax cuts make code more complex 01 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 01 March 1999 verse 14 ... Cached Americans should not be content with letting Congress make only small tax cuts targeted to small groups. If there is to be more than rhetorical lip-service paid to the phrase "doing the business of the people," then Congress should act immediately to scrap the Internal Revenue Service, scrap the current tax code, and replace it with something much simpler. Congress Victory should be call to action 08 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 08 March 1999 verse 10 ... Cached The real problem is not the specifics of this particular set of regulations, but the entire process that allows these regulations in the first place. Unfortunately, though, there are some in Congress who irrationally believe one can violate the Constitution's strict prohibition against federal crime laws, support a multitude of big-government programs like the failed "war on drugs," yet still respect individual privacy. The logical fallacy of such a belief would be almost laughable, were it not so dangerous and irresponsible. Congress Victory should be call to action 08 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 08 March 1999 verse 11 ... Cached Dangerous because those Members of Congress will now -- having witnessed a minor victory -- forget about the importance of this issue and move on to the next cause du jour. These members of Congress are content only to place inconvenient speed bumps in the way of regulators bent on undermining our form of government. Congress Contentious debate produces rubber-stamp of Kosovo 15 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 1999 verse 3 ... Cached If children of congress, president, were placed on frontlines, policies would be different Congress Contentious debate produces rubber-stamp of Kosovo 15 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 1999 verse 5 ... Cached President Clinton is planning on sending thousands of soldiers into harms' way for an unspecified amount of time to achieve unspecified goals and without a single shred of evidence that this internal conflict affects US interests or the safety of American citizens. The American public is outraged, military leaders says this deployment will further erode readiness, and yet Congress cannot muster the courage to tell this president "no." Congress Contentious debate produces rubber-stamp of Kosovo 15 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 1999 verse 6 ... Cached The problem, of course, is that for far too long Members of Congress have endorsed the unconstitutional principle of complete presidential prerogative in military affairs. It is Congress, not the president, which is empowered to declare war. For years, though, Congress has allowed presidents -- Republican and Democrat -- to recklessly scatter our troops around the world to play the ill-conceived role of international policemen. Congress Contentious debate produces rubber-stamp of Kosovo 15 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 1999 verse 8 ... Cached In an effort to appease the new federal religion of bipartisanship (I prefer non-partisanship), Republicans agreed to introduce a measure offering complete support to the president and any decision he may make regarding troops in Kosovo. Oddly, though, the measure had no binding legal effect, though it erroneously claimed to "authorize" such actions -- so much for even the notion of congressional oversight! Some Republicans -- including myself -- tried unsuccessfully to change the measure so that it would forbid, not approve, the use of troops. Congress Contentious debate produces rubber-stamp of Kosovo 15 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 1999 verse 12 ... Cached During a speech on the House floor, and in conversations with like-minded colleagues, I have suggested that perhaps Presidents and Members of Congress would be less eager to intervene in every little war if their kids -- their sons, daughter, grandchildren and family -- were to be sent immediately to the frontlines of the conflict. Congress Contentious debate produces rubber-stamp of Kosovo 15 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 1999 verse 14 ... Cached Some of those calling for war did have a military background, but I was especially glad to see heroes like former prisoner of war Sam Johnson and Randall "Duke ('Top Gun')" Cunningham, voting along with me to oppose this action. In fact, if only those congressmen who have truly seen combat had been allowed to vote, I dare say the outcome would have been greatly different. Congress Contentious debate produces rubber-stamp of Kosovo 15 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 1999 verse 15 ... Cached It's easy for Congresses and Presidents to be "generous" with other people's money. It's apparently just as easy for them to fight international injustice with other people's children. Congress Free trade rhetoric often obscures agenda 22 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 22 March 1999 verse 5 ... Cached Claiming to be watching out for the interests of everyone, Congress passed legislation that reduces the ability of Americans to purchase steel from foreign producers. The only interests being served, though, are the labor unions. Congress Free trade rhetoric often obscures agenda 22 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 22 March 1999 verse 7 ... Cached So rather than re-examine the market (which is unwilling to pay the high-prices brought on by government regulations and union-imposed wages), the advocates of big government and forced unionism demand that Congress close down what remains of the free market. Congress Free trade rhetoric often obscures agenda 22 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 22 March 1999 verse 13 ... Cached For while many in Washington call themselves "free-traders," but there is nothing free about their agendas. The so-called "free-trader" in Congress is often one who believes in subsidizing trade; that is, using taxpayer dollars to prop-up foreign governments on the condition that those governments then use the money to purchase goods from certain American companies (which in turn lobby for "protections," creating a vicious cycle). Congress Get to know your banker 12 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 12 April 1999 verse 6 ... Cached The reality, though, is that many banks succumbed a long time ago and adopted these rules very quietly and "voluntarily." That is to say, they started doing these things before it was required because they assumed the agencies would get the regulations. Imagine the surprise when these banks (not to mention the regulators) found that a quarter-million people sent protests to the agencies, demanding the rules be pulled. I led a groundswell movement in Congress to stop them, and the "Know Your Customer" program was 'pulled from the shelf.' Congress Rein-in the President 19 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 April 1999 verse 3 ... Cached Lack of congressional diligence has brought problems Congress Rein-in the President 19 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 April 1999 verse 4 ... Cached If Congress had been diligent, this president would not have been able to launch an unprovoked attack against a sovereign nation, putting the lives of our soldiers on the line while straining our relations with numerous foreign powers. Congress Rein-in the President 19 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 April 1999 verse 5 ... Cached Congress was not diligent these last several months, ignoring legislation I put forward at the beginning of this term to prevent any action in Kosovo. My legislation, HR 647, would prohibit the use of any Department of Defense funds from being used to bomb Yugoslavia without an Act of Congress authorizing such action. Congress Rein-in the President 19 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 April 1999 verse 6 ... Cached Congress has been less than diligent for much longer than three months. In fact, it's been decades. Congress Rein-in the President 19 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 April 1999 verse 7 ... Cached The US Constitution gives only Congress the authority to declare war. Presidents and their spin-doctors can talk all they want about "police actions" and "peace-keeping operations," but any one with common sense knows that when one country's government drops bombs on another sovereign nation, it is an act of war. Sadly, though, Congress has - over the last fifty years - ceded its war-making power to the executive branch. Today it is commonly, though erroneously, believed by a majority of Americans that presidents can send troops to war without even getting input from Congress. Congress Rein-in the President 19 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 April 1999 verse 8 ... Cached The reason for this is the War Powers Resolution of 1973. This legislation gives presidents broad authority to commit troops and military resources for up to 60 days without congressional oversight. Congress Rein-in the President 19 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 April 1999 verse 10 ... Cached The first measure is a declaration of war against Yugoslavia. While Mr. Campbell says he will vote against the measure, he wants to force our fellow Members of Congress to take a stand one way or the other - something no Congress has had to do with respect to war since December of 1941. Congress Rein-in the President 19 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 April 1999 verse 13 ... Cached This is a measure of which I am not only a (n original cosponsor), but will, of course, support. If Congress wants to show our troops we support them, then we need to get them out of this sickening mess before it is too late. Congress Rein-in the President 19 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 April 1999 verse 14 ... Cached Just as importantly, if members of this Congress wants to demonstrate to the American taxpayer they are responsible to our obligations under the Constitution, they will end this president's militaristic adventurism. It is time for presidents to understand that they are not above the law and that they are not kings who can arbitrarily decide to send troops to battle. Congress Rein-in the President 19 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 April 1999 verse 17 ... Cached It is ironic that a president who once wrote that he "loathed" the military, has engaged our nation in a situation that is potentially more dangerous than Vietnam. It is time Congress not only reins in this president, but the presidency itself. Congress 'Must-Carry' must be dropped 26 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 26 April 1999 verse 10 ... Cached Most recently the disease of government intervention has come in the role of price setter. The Library of Congress, strangely, has been delegated the power to determine prices at which program suppliers must make their product available to cable and satellite service providers. Congress 'Must-Carry' must be dropped 26 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 26 April 1999 verse 13 ... Cached Up until now must-carry rules have applied only to cable. Now, in a misguided effort to "level the playing field," rather than repeal the excessive regulation on cable service providers Congress will consider legislation to force "must-carry" regulation upon satellite providers. Of course, leave it to government to want more regulations, higher costs and less freedom for consumers Congress 'Must-Carry' must be dropped 26 April 1999    Texas Straight Talk 26 April 1999 verse 15 ... Cached To best serve consumers, and to more fully embrace the philosophy of the free market, Congress should act to remove the restrictive regulations placed on the services cable companies can provide, as well as the barriers that exist giving those companies monopolistic power. As technology expands, we must ensure outmoded notions like government intervention in the market goes the way of the black-and-white set and rabbit-ear antennas. Congress The war that isn't a war 03 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 03 May 1999 verse 4 ... Cached Congress has sent a strong, clear message opposing the president's unconstitutional war in the Balkans. At the same time, Congress has also sent a strong, clear message supporting the president's unconstitutional war in the Balkans. Congress The war that isn't a war 03 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 03 May 1999 verse 5 ... Cached If this seems something akin to the clinical definition of schizophrenia, perhaps that is because no other word as aptly describes US foreign policy and constitutional debate. To the casual observer, "Kosovo day" on the House floor had to appear to be chaotic, but I think it was chaotic for a precise reason. The House was, in essence, trying to operate within a flawed unconstitutional process which has been going on for more than 50 years -- not just with this President, but every President since World War II. We have in the Congress permitted our Presidents too much leeway in waging war. Congress The war that isn't a war 03 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 03 May 1999 verse 10 ... Cached The chaos and inconsistency, though, came with the other votes. I think there are too many congressmen who have enjoyed the fact that they have delivered the responsibility to the President. They do not want war, but they want war. They do not want a legal war, they want an illegal war. They do not want a war to win; they want a war that is a half of a war. They want the President to do the dirty work, and they certainly do not want Congress to stand up and decide one way or the other. Congress The war that isn't a war 03 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 03 May 1999 verse 11 ... Cached So it is not surprising that within just a couple of hours, the Congress voted: Congress The war that isn't a war 03 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 03 May 1999 verse 16 ... Cached So while Congress has now stood up to the president in opposing his air war and ground war, Congress has likewise voted against withdrawal of the troops! Congress The war that isn't a war 03 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 03 May 1999 verse 18 ... Cached What is not different, unfortunately, is the 50-years of constitutional "role reversal." Constitutionally, it is the role of Congress to declare war and for the president to subsequently implement the action. Now, presidents can declare war whenever and wherever they want, and Congress is all but powerless to stop him. Congress The war that isn't a war 03 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 03 May 1999 verse 19 ... Cached But the recent votes demonstrate a crack is forming in the unconstitutional wall that has been erected around our foreign policy. This should seen for what it is: an encouraging sign that changes are possible. It is now incumbent upon Congress and the American people to exploit that crack and restore constitutional principles to our dealings with foreign nations and, most especially, matters of war. Congress The war that isn't a war 03 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 03 May 1999 verse 21 ... Cached While not the best outcome, it is also significant that this president is now left to fight an immoral war, that is now officially not a war. And he is left to fight it without the unquestioning support of Congress. Congress Parents, teachers need freedom 10 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 10 May 1999 verse 6 ... Cached But it is a mistake for us to blame our kids' teachers for those obstacles. Indeed, the lion share of the blame should be placed at the feet of congresses, presidents and federal bureaucrats who for more than thirty years have improperly intervened in local educational issues. As the federal government has stepped into education, we have seen test scores decline, public confidence in education plummet, and incidents of violence on school grounds escalate. Congress Parents, teachers need freedom 10 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 10 May 1999 verse 17 ... Cached If we are serious about providing for the best education for our nation's children, it is incumbent on Congress to recognize that thirty years of federal meddling in education has failed. Parents, teachers and local administrators do not need more rules, regulations and taxes; they need more freedom and accountability. Congress Going from bad to worse 17 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 17 May 1999 verse 4 ... Cached When dealing with the federal government, one thing is certain: if a bad situation can be made worse, Congress will typically find a way to do so. Congress Going from bad to worse 17 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 17 May 1999 verse 8 ... Cached Now, though, Congress is stepping in to federalize contract and liability law. The process began in earnest just recently as the House took up legislation to limit the liability of corporations and government resulting from potential "y2k" computer glitch problems. While the government has worked hard to downplay the potential problems with "y2k," the House has dashed madly forward with this legislation to shield businesses against lawsuits resulting from their failing to adequately resolve their own "y2k" problems. Congress Going from bad to worse 17 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 17 May 1999 verse 15 ... Cached Leave it to Congress to make something bad, even worse. Congress Post Office stamps out privacy 24 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 24 May 1999 verse 8 ... Cached It should not escape notice that the Postal Service, under the Privacy Act of 1974, is prohibited from doing this itself. How ironic, and outrageous, that the Post office is mandating a private business do what Congress has explicitly forbidden the Post Office from doing. Congress Post Office stamps out privacy 24 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 24 May 1999 verse 14 ... Cached I have introduced House Joint Resolution 55, the Mailbox Privacy Protection Act, hoping that it will be considered under the expedited procedures to overturn onerous regulations as established in the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996. Congress cannot hide and blame these actions on the bureaucracy. Congress Post Office stamps out privacy 24 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 24 May 1999 verse 15 ... Cached This latest assault on privacy must be reversed. Congress must not allow the Post Office to force American citizens to divulge, as the price for receiving mail, personal information for inclusion in massive databases. Given this rule, and the recent series of postage stamps and paraphernalia, one can only conclude that the US Postal Service has gone loony. Congress China is only winner in scandals 31 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 31 May 1999 verse 13 ... Cached Almost two years ago, long before Monica Lewinsky and the national soap opera begun, several Members and I introduced an Inquiry into Impeachment because of the then-materializing allegations involving these serious breaches of national security, among other similar charges. Of course, this Congress -- and indeed much of the nation -- was disinterested in pursuing such an investigation, apparently because it is far less ribald than the obsession with sex, though arguably more dangerous. Congress China is only winner in scandals 31 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 31 May 1999 verse 14 ... Cached Congress has an obligation to safeguard our nation from foreign powers. The Constitution clearly defines protection of national security as one of the very few actual powers of the federal government. Congress China is only winner in scandals 31 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 31 May 1999 verse 15 ... Cached But as congress' and presidents have rushed to pursue the unconstitutional, we have neglected the constitutional. Congress China is only winner in scandals 31 May 1999    Texas Straight Talk 31 May 1999 verse 16 ... Cached This president has again proven himself to be many things, though certainly not a man of his word. And many Members of Congress have been asleep at the wheel. Congress Free trade makes sense 07 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 07 June 1999 verse 3 ... Cached Congress must resist raising taxes, limiting freedom Congress Free trade makes sense 07 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 07 June 1999 verse 4 ... Cached Once again the contentious debate over trade with China is before the Congress, but this time with the added twist of allegations of spying. Congress Free trade makes sense 07 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 07 June 1999 verse 16 ... Cached The correct solution to this seeming quagmire is one which few in (or for that matter, outside) Washington will promote. The US government should immediately end all taxpayer subsidization of China, including funds funneled through the Export-Import Bank and the World Bank. Congress should immediately require that when the government enters into contracts with companies to develop and manufacture goods critical to our national security, those companies agree to do no business with China. Congress Free trade makes sense 07 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 07 June 1999 verse 17 ... Cached Never, though, should Congress raise taxes or limit the ability of individual Americans to engage in honest trade with foreign manufacturers. While the market may demand - through boycotts and similar activities - that trade cease, that should be left entirely to the market, not bureaucrats in Washington. Congress Tragedy begets tragedy 14 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 14 June 1999 verse 9 ... Cached Lest anyone incorrectly assume assaults on our Constitution are limited to Democrats striking the Second Amendment, there is an equally strong move from some congressional Republicans to wipe away the First Amendment. Congress Tragedy begets tragedy 14 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 14 June 1999 verse 10 ... Cached Very soon, Congress will take up HR 1501, the Consequences for Juvenile Offenders Act. The measure not only continues the federalization of law enforcement, it undermines the Bill of Rights. While our founding fathers wisely left the enforcement of crime to local and state leaders, federal legislators assume they are wiser not only than George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and George Mason, but everyone not in DC. Congress Let liberty ring loudly 21 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 21 June 1999 verse 4 ... Cached A quiet sound rustled through the halls of Congress last week; it was that of the Constitution being casually tossed aside. Congress Let liberty ring loudly 21 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 21 June 1999 verse 5 ... Cached Usually, half of the Congress is quite capable and anxious to defend the First Amendment, and that is good. The First Amendment states plainly that "Congress shall make no laws" to limit free speech, the press, the practice of religion, or the ability of Americans to assemble in protest of their government. Congress Let liberty ring loudly 21 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 21 June 1999 verse 6 ... Cached The other half of the Congress, on average, is quite capable and anxious to defend the Second Amendment, and that is good. After all, our founding fathers envisioned a well-armed populace as the ultimate check on government tyranny. If some future legislators and presidents had designs on limiting our divinely endowed liberties, our founders believed the Second would hold such impulses in check. Congress Let liberty ring loudly 21 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 21 June 1999 verse 10 ... Cached As recently as the middle of this century, crime control was considered a local matter. For good reason: it is the way the Constitution is designed, and the way it should be. Yet every day Congress writes more criminal laws, taking more authority from our state and local governments, and moving closer to a national police state. Congress Let liberty ring loudly 21 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 21 June 1999 verse 12 ... Cached Before Congress passes more laws, and before individuals demand that Washington solve every problem, we should first seriously consider a simple question: "Does the Constitution allow the federal government to do this?" The question should never be, "Can I use this to get elected?", nor, "Is it easier to send the problem to Washington?", and certainly not, "Will it make people feel better if Congress does this?" Congress Flag Amendment is a reckless solution 28 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 1999 verse 7 ... Cached Since then Congress has twice tried to overturn more than 213 years of history and legal tradition by making flag desecration a federal crime. Just as surely as the Court was wrong in its disregard for the Tenth Amendment by improperly assigning the restrictions of the First Amendment to the states, so are attempts to federally restrict the odious (and very rare) practice of Americans desecrating the flag. Congress Flag Amendment is a reckless solution 28 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 1999 verse 8 ... Cached After all, the First Amendment clearly states that it is Congress that may "make no laws" and is prohibited from "abridging" the freedom of speech and expression. While some may not like it, under our Constitution state governments are free to restrict speech, expression, the press and even religious activities. The states are restrained, in our federal system, by their own constitutions and electorate. Congress Flag Amendment is a reckless solution 28 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 1999 verse 11 ... Cached Our nation would be far better served that if instead of loyalty to an object -- what Mr. Kruel calls the "golden calf" -- we had more Members of Congress who were loyal to the Constitution and principles of liberty. If more people demonstrated a strong conviction to the Tenth Amendment, rather than creating even more federal powers, this issue would be far better handled. Congress A new declaration: more liberty, fewer taxes 05 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 05 July 1999 verse 10 ... Cached It is often easy to simply blame faceless bureaucrats and politicians for our current state of affairs, and they do bear much of the blame. But a decent share rests with those of us who expect Washington, DC, to solve every problem under the sun. If the public demanded that Congress abide by the Constitution, pass only constitutional authorizations and spending while opposing the rest, politicians would be more responsive. Congress A new declaration: more liberty, fewer taxes 05 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 05 July 1999 verse 12 ... Cached Now is the time for Congress to pass the American Values Tax Savings Act of 1999, of which I am a cosponsor. This legislation will eliminate the marriage penalty tax, the death tax, the alternative minimum tax, reduce the capital gains tax, and increase the pre-tax contribution levels for IRAs. This measure would provide almost $800 billion in tax relief by 2009 if passed this year. Congress Campaign reform misses target 12 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 12 July 1999 verse 6 ... Cached There is a tremendous incentive for every special interest group to influence government. Every individual, bank or corporation that does business with government invests plenty in influencing government. Corporate lobbyists spend over $100 million per month trying to influence Congress, while taxpayers' dollars are used by bureaucrats in efforts to convince Congress to protect their "empires." Government has tremendous influence over the economy and financial markets through interest rate controls, contracts, regulations, loans and grants. Corporations and individuals alike are forced to participate in an out-of-control system essentially as a matter of self-defense. Congress Campaign reform misses target 12 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 12 July 1999 verse 7 ... Cached Those pushing finance reform argue the fault rests only with those who are trying to influence government; never is fault assigned, of course, to those congressmen who create the environment that pressures the system to generate abuse. Members of Congress thereby avoid assuming responsibility for their own acts and instead blame those who exert pressure on Congress through the political process, despite the fact that political participation is among the most basic of rights bestowed on all Americans. Congress Lavish pay and benefits have no merit 19 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 1999 verse 4 ... Cached Apparently the American people are so satisfied with increasing taxes and spending, continued abuse of civil liberties and ongoing unconstitutional programs, that they are willing to give Congress a four-percent pay raise and double the pay of the president. Congress Lavish pay and benefits have no merit 19 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 1999 verse 5 ... Cached Don't remember having been so generous? Don't worry, Congress is being generous, again, with your money -- it's really quite easy. Congress Lavish pay and benefits have no merit 19 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 1999 verse 6 ... Cached Never mind that as of May 7, 1992, with ratification of the 27th Amendment, Congress is specifically prevented by the Constitution from increasing pay without there being an election between the legislation passing and the raise going into effect. Congress Lavish pay and benefits have no merit 19 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 1999 verse 7 ... Cached Industrious congressmen have found a semantic loophole; the four-percent pay raise isn't a pay raise at all, but merely a "cost of living adjustment." A couple hundred dollars might constitute a COLA, but thousands is a pay-raise. Congress Lavish pay and benefits have no merit 19 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 1999 verse 8 ... Cached As the cynicism of Americans for their government grows, some congressmen will cast a vote for a big pay raise while expressing shock at the public mistrust. Congress Lavish pay and benefits have no merit 19 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 1999 verse 9 ... Cached A pay raise might be in order if Congress were doing its job. If taxes were on the way, if the doors to unconstitutional agencies and programs were being closed, perhaps a pay raise would be in order. Perhaps, but not likely. After all, that would mean Congress was simply doing its job, not doing anything extraordinary. Congress Lavish pay and benefits have no merit 19 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 1999 verse 10 ... Cached And then there is the doubling of the president's pay. It must be understood that this new presidential pay scale does not go into effect until the current occupant of the office departs in 2001. Currently, the president receives $200,000 in pay, but congressional action would see his pay top $400,000. The argument in support of such a lavish pay check goes like this: the president is the leader of the free world, and as such should be paid on par with the heads of large corporations. The argument continues that without the incentive of higher pay, we might not be getting the best and brightest. (Of course, there is no CEO of a corporation on the planet that has a $5.6 trillion debt.) Congress Lavish pay and benefits have no merit 19 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 1999 verse 12 ... Cached The problem with the presidency, the Congress, and everyone in between has not been a lack of pay and perks, but an overabundance. Let's face it: serving in Congress, and living in the White House, can be pretty good deals. In fact, for many people, these deals are so good they do not want to leave -- ever. There is tremendous incentive to stay: the power is the bait, the pay, perks and control are the hook. Congress Lavish pay and benefits have no merit 19 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 1999 verse 13 ... Cached The most effective term limits would be not a number of years, but a reduction in pay and benefits. I refuse the congressional pension because it is immoral that I could stay in office for only a few years, yet qualify for a lucrative pension the taxpayers must fund for the remainder of my days. Congress Lavish pay and benefits have no merit 19 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 1999 verse 15 ... Cached Today, though, those who labor in the private sector are viewed as pariahs, while congressmen increase the tax levy to further lavish "public servants" with generous pay and benefits. What surprises me is not that so many Americans are cynical of their elected officials, but that there are any who are not. Congress Reducing the tax reduction 26 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 26 July 1999 verse 8 ... Cached Unfortunately, for far too many years Members of Congress from both parties have come to view the public purse not as a sacred trust but rather a trough from which they can take all they want, whenever they want. Congress Reducing the tax reduction 26 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 26 July 1999 verse 11 ... Cached Instead of standing firm, congressional leadership bowed to statist pressure and made significant changes to the package. The income tax reduction was itself reduced. The marriage tax stays on the books for another year. The capital gains and death taxes are only slightly reduced. And the income tax reductions hinge on there being no increases in interest outlays for total US federal government debt. Given this provision, the tax cut is very unlikely. Congress Reducing the tax reduction 26 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 26 July 1999 verse 12 ... Cached Even under this "historic" tax-cut plan, Americans will still work more than half the year to pay the cost of government. Further, most of the tax cuts are only fully realized ten years from now. While some talk about benefits years down the fiscal road, Congress can only draft budgets for a single year; what is passed in one fiscal year can be erased in the next. And as one might imagine, the tax cuts for this fiscal year are puny. Congress Reducing the tax reduction 26 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 26 July 1999 verse 14 ... Cached The American public clamors for tax relief. I have never had a constituent or taxpayer ask me to vote to raise their taxes; in fact, I am hard-pressed to recall a meeting with taxpayers in which they did not, in some fashion or other, demand that Congress move expeditiously to reduce the burden. Congress Reducing the tax reduction 26 July 1999    Texas Straight Talk 26 July 1999 verse 15 ... Cached Members of Congress, and indeed politicians in general, are nothing if not pragmatic. Because they have never truly seen the effect of taking a truly firm stand in favor of cutting taxes, they do not want to risk seeing it when an election might be at stake. What they do know is that pork-barrel projects get them campaign donations to fund their coffers, and favorable newspaper editorials to drive their public relations. Congress Restricting the Executive Orders 02 August 1999    Texas Straight Talk 02 August 1999 verse 9 ... Cached It is a mistake, though, to place all blame with a single president in particular, or the office in general, for abuse of this power. After all, presidents have had many willing accomplices in Congress. A great number of congressmen and senators quietly appreciate the assumed presidential authority to create and enact legislation because it allows them to see their goal accomplished without having to assume a politically risky position. Congress Restricting the Executive Orders 02 August 1999    Texas Straight Talk 02 August 1999 verse 11 ... Cached I have introduced legislation, along with Rep. Jack Metcalf of Washington, that would bring our federal system into proper balance. The Separation of Powers Restoration Act (HR2655) prohibits a presidential order from having the effect of law by restricting the scope of the directives. In addition, it repeals the 1973 War Powers Act, which -- despite the constitutional prohibition -- granted broad war-making authority to the Office of the President. Further, the legislation suspends all of the "national emergencies" which have been declared since 1976, when Congress last canceled them. Still on the books are "emergencies" relating to Iraq and the Soviet bloc. These emergency declarations give presidents great authority, even if the situation no longer presents a threat to our national security. Congress Restricting the Executive Orders 02 August 1999    Texas Straight Talk 02 August 1999 verse 12 ... Cached Finally, and perhaps most significantly, my legislation grants legal standing to individual Members of Congress and Senators, state officials and, of course, private citizens who believe a president's Executive Order has overstepped constitutional bounds and negatively impacted them, their rights, their property or their business. Congress Legalized theft 09 August 1999    Texas Straight Talk 09 August 1999 verse 5 ... Cached The word "steal" might be a little strong, but not by much when one considers the actions of Congress, and especially votes taken this last week on the Foreign Operations Appropriations budget. This budget contains billions of dollars; nearly all of which are not just unconstitutional, but downright crazy. Congress Legalized theft 09 August 1999    Texas Straight Talk 09 August 1999 verse 7 ... Cached If an individual takes the money from your wallet to purchase something for himself, it is rightfully considered unlawful. Regardless of the excuse, no matter how good an item he is buying, the thief is still guilty of theft. But when a congressman does the same thing on behalf of a special interest group, it is called the law of the land. Congress Legalized theft 09 August 1999    Texas Straight Talk 09 August 1999 verse 11 ... Cached Several years ago I first proposed we stop this nonsense for it is simply unconscionable that Texas' family farmers are getting taxed to provide cover for multinational corporations' stupid decisions. Only a couple of my colleagues risked the wrath of the corporate interests back then. The first week in August, however, saw several dozen Members of Congress join me in protesting this egregious policy. Unfortunately, the bipartisan, pro-largess caucus still carried the day. However, I did notice that fewer Members of Congress seem as eager to defend corporate welfare. Congress A flood of bills of rights 16 August 1999    Texas Straight Talk 16 August 1999 verse 7 ... Cached Without fail, these new "Bill of Rights" programs are not just cute ploys to garner attention, they strike at the core of what is wrong with the way so many in Congress go about their business. One has to raise the question: What's wrong with the existing Bill of Rights, those original Ten Amendments to the Constitution, that a new one must be created to assuage every group, complaint or situation? Congress A flood of bills of rights 16 August 1999    Texas Straight Talk 16 August 1999 verse 9 ... Cached We should be suspicious when it is declared we need a new "Bill of Rights." If Congress were interested in protecting the rights of individuals (whether as taxpayers, patients or travelers), then it should adhere to the principles so clearly defined in the original Bill of Rights. Congress A flood of bills of rights 16 August 1999    Texas Straight Talk 16 August 1999 verse 13 ... Cached Contrary to the claims of advocates for increased government regulation of health care, the problems we face do not represent market failure, but rather the failure of government policies that have destroyed the health-care market. While it appears on the surface that the interest of the patient is in conflict with the insurance companies and the Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs), in a free market this cannot happen. But when one side is given a legislative advantage in an artificial system, as with managed care, merely making an effort to balance government dictated advantages between patients and HMOs is impossible. The differences cannot be reconciled by more government mandates; because we are trying to patch an unworkable system, the impasse in Congress over this -- or any such issue -- should not be a surprise. Congress A flood of bills of rights 16 August 1999    Texas Straight Talk 16 August 1999 verse 14 ... Cached And make no doubt about it: the veritable avalanche of "Bill of Rights" packages before Congress represent more mandates, more government control and fewer liberties for everyone. That they mask their agendas with the phrases of liberty is both deceitful and comforting. Deceitful for obvious reasons; comforting because it reflects an understanding that -- despite our many problems -- Americans remain rightly suspicious of government power and desirous of liberty. Congress Waco: The smoking gun 06 September 1999    Texas Straight Talk 06 September 1999 verse 4 ... Cached For years the Clinton Administration, with their willing allies in Congress and the mainstream press, have parroted the line that federal law enforcement officials did nothing wrong in the Branch Davidian stand-off at Waco. Anyone who questioned the government's official position was relegated to being either a far-right extremist, a militia kook, or a follower of the undeniably peculiar David Koresh. Congress Waco: The smoking gun 06 September 1999    Texas Straight Talk 06 September 1999 verse 5 ... Cached It was just weeks after coming to Congress in 1997, while on a national television program, that I was asked about the then-four-year-old case. I responded with the position that the evidence was overwhelmingly strong that everything was not as bureaucrats in the Clinton Administration claimed. I cited recent polling data that indicated that most Americans simply did not trust the government, and that a goodly number feared the increasingly commonplace occurrence of federal agents taking violent action against American citizens. Congress Waco: The smoking gun 06 September 1999    Texas Straight Talk 06 September 1999 verse 7 ... Cached The Attorney General and her minions in Congress maintained that the conflagration had been a rash act of mass suicide, ignoring that just hours before the raid those same people had requested their phone lines be reconnected. They also ignored the infrared evidence that government agents, as the fire was raging on one side of the house, were entering the home through the back, and that tanks were injecting gases banned under international treaties. Congress Waco: The smoking gun 06 September 1999    Texas Straight Talk 06 September 1999 verse 8 ... Cached Now, though, even the most blind followers of the administration and its policies are left stunned with revelations that high-ranking FBI officials and others lied to Congress, hid evidence, broke the law and knowingly subverted justice. Congress Regulating gridiron prayer 13 September 1999    Texas Straight Talk 13 September 1999 verse 4 ... Cached With the start of high school football season in the 14th Congressional District, many of my constituents are upset by the fact that a long-held tradition has been taken from them by the federal courts. Congress Punishing accidents, ignoring murder 20 September 1999    Texas Straight Talk 20 September 1999 verse 4 ... Cached Leave it to a zealous Congress to sweep away time-honored criminal law in an attempt to make a political constituency happy while actively ignoring the real issue. Congress Punishing accidents, ignoring murder 20 September 1999    Texas Straight Talk 20 September 1999 verse 6 ... Cached Setting aside those constitutional questions -- which Congress should never do, but regularly does -- it would seem to finally offer some recognition, at the federal level, that the child in the womb is indeed a human being worthy of protection. Backers of the bill say that it will offer legal protection to the fetus from those who attack it; that is, unless the attacker happens to be an abortionist or the mother. That's the part of the bill being kept quiet. Congress 'Say no to high taxes and spending' 27 September 1999    Texas Straight Talk 27 September 1999 verse 13 ... Cached No word better describes the problem in getting even a modest tax cut in place for taxpayers across the land than the five-letter, one-syllable word "spend." Whether it’s congressmen or presidents, bureaucrats or special interests, everyone with a hand in crafting the federal budget is committed to spending as much of your money as they can to fund pet projects and secure power bases. Congress 'Say no to high taxes and spending' 27 September 1999    Texas Straight Talk 27 September 1999 verse 16 ... Cached "Just say no to high taxes and high spending," that's what my constituents tell me when I go home every weekend. It's time the White House and all of Congress got that message loud and clear. Congress Dangerous to our health 11 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 October 1999 verse 3 ... Cached Congressional remedies like medicine from the Dark Ages Congress Dangerous to our health 11 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 October 1999 verse 4 ... Cached If Congress practiced medicine, they'd be using leaches on their patients and offering bullets for amputee candidates to bite before hacking off irreparable limbs. Congress Dangerous to our health 11 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 October 1999 verse 5 ... Cached Of course, this past week one would have thought the US House -- composed primarily of lawyers -- was instead a convention of the American Medical Association, with Members of Congress attempting to legislatively practice medicine. Yet what was completely ignored in the debate was that this was a clear case of malpractice. Congress Dangerous to our health 11 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 October 1999 verse 7 ... Cached What made last week's congressional action the equivalent of medical malpractice was that the people operating on the "patient" were the same ones responsible for injury. American health care became what it is today not as a result of too little government intervention, but rather too much. Contrary to the claims of many advocates of increased government regulation of health care, the problems with the health care system do not represent market failure. Rather, they represent the failure of government policies that have destroyed the health care market. Congress Dangerous to our health 11 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 October 1999 verse 10 ... Cached But the government intervention in health care pre-dates the 1974 Employee Retriement Income Security Act (ERISA), with Congress granting tax benefits to employers for providing health care, while not allowing similar incentives for individuals. As such, government removed the market incentive for health insurance companies to cater to the actual health-care consumer. As a greater amount of government and corporate money has been used to pay medical bills, the costs have artificially risen out of the range of most individuals. Congress Dangerous to our health 11 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 11 October 1999 verse 14 ... Cached If Congress is going to continue to meddle in medicine, then perhaps we should require new Members to take the Hippocratic Oath. But given their resistance to upholding the Constitution, it's doubtful they would pay much attention. Sadly, we can expect Congress to continue to apply leaches to our wallets and amputate whatever good remains in American health care. Congress Best medicine is liberty 18 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 18 October 1999 verse 9 ... Cached Yet rather than reverse the trend and liberate patients, physicians and the health care market, many in Congress would make the situation worse by adding new regulations and new fees, while eroding services and limiting choices. Congress Best medicine is liberty 18 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 18 October 1999 verse 14 ... Cached The most important thing Congress can do is to stop practicing medicine and allow market forces to operate by allowing Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs) for everyone. Patient motivation to save and shop would be a major force in reducing cost, as physicians would once again negotiate fees with patients. MSAs would help satisfy the American's people's desire to control their own health care and provide incentives for consumers to take more responsibility for their care. MSAs will also allow those consumers to do business with insurance provider of their choice, who will cover the needs and procedures for which that family is willing and able to pay. Congress In search of a cause 25 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 25 October 1999 verse 4 ... Cached Members of the United States Congress are often like crusaders in need of a cause. When a cause is not readily available, or those that are do not meet well-established standards of political correctness, congressmen are willing to create one to suit their needs. Congress In search of a cause 25 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 25 October 1999 verse 6 ... Cached According to the sponsors of the legislation, there is a rampant problem of animals being videotaped while dying cruel, unspeakable deaths. These videotapes are then allegedly sold to people with a penchant for watching such a repulsive activity. The legislation -- which passed the House -- would make it illegal, the Congress was told, to possess such a video if the intent of the maker was to appeal to such an odd fetish. Congress In search of a cause 25 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 25 October 1999 verse 9 ... Cached But doesn't Congress have more serious, more pressing, issues to address? America's educational system continues its downward spiral, our economy is staggering, the trust funds continue to be raided, and our taxes continue to rise. But rather than address issues that require principled votes and a devotion to liberty, Congress seems only interested in providing politically correct, feel-good legislation. Congress In search of a cause 25 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 25 October 1999 verse 11 ... Cached If Congress were eager to address the issue of "cruelty," then perhaps the ongoing trampling of the Constitution would be a good place to start. There certainly is a market for people eager to watch our liberties trashed. Or, if Congress is so concerned about brutality, why not finally address the brutal assault on privacy experienced daily by American citizens? Congress In search of a cause 25 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 25 October 1999 verse 12 ... Cached But those are real problems affecting many Americans, so the likelihood of Congress taking them seriously is abysmally small. Perhaps next week Congress will consider legislation to shield our borders from space invasion. Or maybe we will consider legislation to protect the dragon from over-eager slayers. Congress In search of a cause 25 October 1999    Texas Straight Talk 25 October 1999 verse 13 ... Cached We can be most certain, however, that when ready to address a cause, Congress can be counted upon to create one -- no matter how meaningless, unreasonable, or potentially disastrous, it might be. Congress History Repeats Itself, So Let's Repeat History 01 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 01 November 1999 verse 6 ... Cached In an effort to resurrect the ingenuity of our founders, I have introduced HR 2655. This act restores the constitutional separation of powers by returning law-making power to Congress ALONE. First, it terminates all existing states of national emergency and removes the executive branch power to declare national emergencies, restoring that power to Congress. It also restricts executive orders by denying to them force of law except as provided for by Congress. Executive orders issued must cite the specific Constitutional provision or Statutory authority… if not, the effect of law is denied. Finally, it repeals the 1973 War Powers Resolution which, despite the constitutional prohibition, granted broad war-making authority to the Office of President. Congress History Repeats Itself, So Let's Repeat History 01 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 01 November 1999 verse 7 ... Cached It is, of course, a mistake to place all blame with any single president or the presidency itself for abuse of power. After all, presidents have had many willing accomplices in Congress. A great number of congressmen and senators quietly appreciate the assumed presidential authority to create and enact legislation because it allows them to see their goals accomplished without having to assume political responsibility. Still, this administration seems bent on using this vehicle to usurp Congressional authority. Congress History Repeats Itself, So Let's Repeat History 01 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 01 November 1999 verse 9 ... Cached And, while there is a role for executive orders so that the president may faithfully execute laws passed by Congress, execute those powers specifically granted in Article II and, in so doing, direct executive branch employees, for far too many years, the illegitimate uses have overshadowed the legitimate. Presidents have issued executive orders that have mistakenly taken on the semblance of law. Kings may have the right to decree law, but Rule of Law is king in this country. By clearly defining the lines of power, my bill seeks to further secure the blessings of liberty upon our nation. Congress Time to Change Priorities 08 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 08 November 1999 verse 4 ... Cached Soon, the Congressional Leadership is expected to reach a so-called "compromise" with President Clinton on spending issues, and then exit for the year. But, this week Congress took up many frivolous "suspension bills." We're now in that stage when stacks of bad legislation get enacted as Congress lingers before adjourning for the year. Congress Time to Change Priorities 08 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 08 November 1999 verse 5 ... Cached Unfortunately, in this week's legislative package was a bill expressing support for continued US involvement in NATO. Although simply a "sense of Congress resolution," the fact that only 133 Representatives voted "no" says so much about the problem we face today. Congress Time to Change Priorities 08 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 08 November 1999 verse 6 ... Cached Members of Congress and the Administration have been unable to reach a consensus on critical issues like truly protecting the integrity of our trust funds such as Social Security. Moreover, Congress has been unable, particularly in light of the strong opposition from the President and Democrats in Congress, to reach agreement on cutting the taxes of all Americans. Congress Time to Change Priorities 08 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 08 November 1999 verse 8 ... Cached But, instead of working to end the estate tax, or keep our promises with Social Security, or insuring patient choice through medical savings accounts, we waste our time on low priority items. And, instead of looking to our nation's future, like giving parents a true choice in education by providing them with a battery of education-related tax credits, we have two thirds in Congress voting to support continued and expanded participation in a cold war relic. Congress Budget Standoff Continues 15 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 November 1999 verse 4 ... Cached Congress adjourned Wednesday but only temporarily as they will return Tuesday, November 16th in an attempt to complete the appropriations process. The target adjournment date was more than two weeks earlier on October 29th but due to presidential vetoes of five appropriations bills, the taxpayer-funded budget juggernaut rumbles onward. Spending levels do not appear to be at issue. In fact, the massive Labor-Health and Human Services appropriations bill authorized nearly twice as much spending as the last Democratic Congress in 1994. It, in fact, would spend $103.6 Billion dollars, which is $10.3 Billion dollars more than last year's appropriation. This is a figure that is, in fact, $1.2 Billion dollars more than Clinton requested in his proposed budget. What is at issue here is clearly not total spending but spending not directed to projects favored by the executive branch. It seems the President has found yet another way to legislate -- by Veto and threat of government shutdown. Congress Budget Standoff Continues 15 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 November 1999 verse 10 ... Cached In light of Congressional appropriations of more and more expenditures and the Administration's use of legislation and micro-management by veto threat, it seems that almost everyone in Washington has somehow forgotten that the era of big government is supposed to be over. Congress This Year's Successes 22 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 22 November 1999 verse 4 ... Cached As Congress adjourns for the year, now is an appropriate time to consider what we achieved in this session. This year we were able to achieve a number of successes in some of the areas upon which I put considerable focus. Congress This Year's Successes 22 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 22 November 1999 verse 8 ... Cached Fortunately, within this year's transportation appropriations bill we were indeed successful in stopping this plan dead in its tracks. With the help of Senator Shelby, Congressman Frank Wolf and others, we repealed the mandate and ended the National Identification Card. Congress This Year's Successes 22 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 22 November 1999 verse 10 ... Cached The basis of my bill was included in the committee report issued by Chairman Walsh's appropriations sub-committee, and when it came to a vote on the House Floor we were able to win with a convincing majority. Two-hundred thirty two Members of Congress voted to support my position. Unfortunately, the funds for the program were reinserted in the bill by the Senate and signed into law by the President. However, considering that when I first returned to Congress a couple of years ago we saw this agency attempting to grow and take on new responsibilities, it is no small victory that we won a vote on the House floor this year to actually eliminate the agency. Congress This Year's Successes 22 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 22 November 1999 verse 12 ... Cached On each of these items, intimately linked with personal freedom from federal government intervention, we were successful in moving the ball forward in this session of Congress. Next year, I will continue to be very active on these issues, as well as working to achieve success in bringing about our vision of a limited federal government in a number of other key policy areas. Congress Taking the Next Step 29 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 29 November 1999 verse 4 ... Cached This year I introduced a number of bills designed to address key concerns facing our country. With Congress now in recess I want to take this opportunity to share information with you regarding some of the bills I have introduced and the problems they seek to address. Congress Taking the Next Step 29 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 29 November 1999 verse 9 ... Cached I have also introduced the Separation of Powers Restoration Act. Again, based on reestablishing our Republic along the lines understood by our founding fathers, this bill is aimed at stopping Presidential usurpation of the constitutionally enumerated legislative powers. Through the vehicle of the executive order, various Presidents have encroached upon Congressional powers. Sadly, this has often occurred with the benign neglect, or even support of our legislative branch. This bill, which rapidly received a hearing in a key sub-committee of the House Judiciary committee, will continue to be a focal point for my activity in the next session of Congress. And, hopefully, it will continue to attract interest from a multitude of media outlets, as well as support from freedom loving Americans across our nation. Congress Taking the Next Step 29 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 29 November 1999 verse 10 ... Cached In addition to these important pieces of legislation I have introduced a number of bills designed to cut taxes on American families. Next week, I will spend more time outlining the importance of that body of legislation. Moreover, my first bill introduced this Congress was the "Social Security Preservation Act," designed to take all Social Security receipts out of the hands of the politicians and put them into a separate interest bearing account that could only be used for the purposes which those funds were taken from the taxpayers, namely the provision of public pensions through the Social Security system. This is something that everybody now claims, at least rhetorically, to support, yet still we see Social Security dollars being used to finance welfare and pork barrel spending as well as foreign aid and overseas deployment of troops in Kosovo, the Middle East and elsewhere. Congress Taking the Next Step 29 November 1999    Texas Straight Talk 29 November 1999 verse 11 ... Cached As the next session of Congress begins in early January, I will be working to get these important legislative initiatives through the committee process and to the House Floor. This will be a key part of my work in the year 2000. Congress Floor Votes Reviewed 06 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 06 December 1999 verse 4 ... Cached During the recently concluded session of Congress, I was able to get floor votes on a number of amendments that I proposed. The first amendment I introduced was to HR 1658, a bill introduced by Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde, aimed at overhauling the nation's civil asset forfeiture laws. Congress Floor Votes Reviewed 06 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 06 December 1999 verse 6 ... Cached Another amendment I introduced dealt with funding for the United Nations. Similar to an amendment I put forward in the last Congress that would have ended US participation in that international bureaucracy, this year my amendment garnered 74 votes in the House. This was a significant increase over the 54 vote total we achieved in the 105th Congress. Obviously, although we are not yet close to convincing the majority we need to enact this policy into law, we continue to build support and to see support in advancing this idea. Congress Floor Votes Reviewed 06 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 06 December 1999 verse 7 ... Cached In a fashion similar to that which I took in the 105th Congress, I introduced an amendment to stop all funding for so-called overseas family planning. This money is not only another form of foreign aid, it is also used to advocate the anti-life agenda of the most radical pro-abortion groups. Unfortunately, we lost ground on this issue in this Congress. This year we received 145 votes in favor of my amendment, whereas last Congress we had the support of 147 members. Congress Floor Votes Reviewed 06 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 06 December 1999 verse 9 ... Cached Of course, this amendment always draws the wrath of the rich and powerful insider crowd. However, we were able to get 58 votes in support of our amendment this year, again a significant improvement over the 40 votes we garnered for a similar amendment that I introduced in the 105th Congress. Congress International Protectionism 13 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 13 December 1999 verse 6 ... Cached As a representative of the people of the 14th district of Texas and a member of the United States Congress, sworn to uphold the Constitution of this country, it is not my business to tell other countries whether or not they should be in the WTO. They can toss their own sovereignty out the window if that is the choice they make. Thus, I cannot tell China or Britain or anybody else that they should not join the WTO. That is not my constitutional role. I can, however, say that the United States of America ought to withdraw its membership and funding from the WTO immediately. Congress Cosponsored Bills 20 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1999 verse 3 ... Cached 106th Congress, 1st Session Congress Cosponsored Bills 20 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1999 verse 4 ... Cached This past year I cosponsored 200 bills in Congress. This means that I have given my name support to legislative initiatives introduced by another member of Congress. As might be expected, nearly half of those bills deal in one way or another with reducing the tax burden faced by Americans. I cosponsored Congressman Kasich's bill to cut taxes across the board for all Americans, as well as dozens of bills calling for tax relief for educational purposes. Other bills target tax relief to American seniors and for all Americans who are seeking to improve their health care choices. Congress Cosponsored Bills 20 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1999 verse 5 ... Cached Some of the bills I have cosponsored deal with topics on which I have already introduced legislation. These include measures dealing with second amendment rights protection, restriction of funding to the United Nations and "Sense of Congress resolutions" regarding executive orders and privacy issues. Often times, I cosponsor a bill that is not necessarily drafted in such a fashion that I believe will really get at the heart of the problem it is intended to address. Nonetheless, I decide to cosponsor such measures, as long as they take steps in the right direction. Additionally, if the issue is something that I see as significant to maintaining our liberty and restoring our Republic, I will also craft a bill that I think more directly addresses the central problem. In this way, I can lend support to other Members who are moving in the right direction while also advocating a more specific, and often times more significant, remedy to the problem. Congress Cosponsored Bills 20 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1999 verse 6 ... Cached Four bills that I cosponsored this year have actually passed through the House. Two of them were "Sense of Congress" resolutions. One of these expressed the opinion that no federal funds should go to the sacrilegious displays at the Brooklyn Museum of Art, and the other one stated that prayers and invocations at public school sporting events ought to be considered constitutional. This latter issue has been very important in Texas where a federal court ruled that prayer before a school football game was unconstitutional. The founding fathers would turn over in their graves if they knew that the constitution they gave us was interpreted by liberal judges as prohibiting a prayer at a local high school. This travesty must not stand, and the real solution, of course, is for the federal courts to keep their noses out of the business of local school districts. Congress Cosponsored Bills 20 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1999 verse 8 ... Cached Also, I cosponsored Don Young's American Land Sovereignty Preservation Act, which passed the House earlier this year. This bill would give Congress say in the designation of natural and historic sites. The President has taken onto himself the designation of such sites. Congress Cosponsored Bills 20 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 1999 verse 10 ... Cached Next year I will continue to look for worthy bills to cosponsor even as I work, through signing and coordinating Dear Colleague letters and by otherwise working with key Members of Congress, to help move the bills I cosponsored this year through the process and hopefully on to passage. Congress Overall Review 27 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 27 December 1999 verse 3 ... Cached The First Session of the 106th Congress Congress Overall Review 27 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 27 December 1999 verse 4 ... Cached As we prepare to look forward to the next session of Congress, it is instructive to look back also. Over the past few weeks I have mentioned legislation I introduced and the successes enjoyed this year. Also, recalled the various bills I have cosponsored and some of the issues I was able to bring to the House floor for a vote by the entire Congress. Congress Overall Review 27 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 27 December 1999 verse 5 ... Cached Today, I want to focus on a more general overview of the last session of Congress before looking ahead next week to our plans for the new year. This last session of Congress was truly a mixed bag, but it is certain that we have not been able to reverse the trend toward bigger and more intrusive federal government. Congress Overall Review 27 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 27 December 1999 verse 7 ... Cached Unfortunately, the leadership of my own party has not been successful in attempts to curtail the President's plans for an ever-expanding federal leviathan. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office is constantly pointing out how they are appropriating more money even than the President asks for in his budget requests. This is a sad state of affairs. Congress Overall Review 27 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 27 December 1999 verse 8 ... Cached Nonetheless, our voice is being heard. On issues such as education, health care and personal privacy, we have begun to see the coming together of broad based coalitions that want only to see the federal government out of the day-to-day lives of the American people. While we do not yet have a majority in Congress, often because certain Republicans from the northeast tend to be every bit as liberal as House Democrats, there is a change afoot in the nation. The American people are largely waking up to the fact that further federal intrusion is not the answer. Congress Overall Review 27 December 1999    Texas Straight Talk 27 December 1999 verse 9 ... Cached Last year we won some victories, small though they may be, because the people spoke. People contacted their Members of Congress and US Senators, often saying, "Enough is enough! It is time for a change!" I know this because I hear from my colleagues who tell me that they have received calls and letters, e-mails and faxes. They tell me their constituents agree with our perspective and our agenda. Namely, my colleagues here know that there is a growing movement to get the federal government off the backs and out of the pocketbooks of the American people. Ideas like medical savings accounts, education tax credits and others are gaining momentum. Congress The Year Ahead 03 January 2000    Texas Straight Talk 03 January 2000 verse 3 ... Cached Looking towards the 2nd Session of the 106th Congress Congress The Year Ahead 03 January 2000    Texas Straight Talk 03 January 2000 verse 11 ... Cached I am convinced that the best way for us to reestablish a limited federal government is by restoring the spirit of our founding fathers. These brave men well understood that concentration and centralization of power leads to tyranny and despotism. For this reason we must do two things. First, we must recall that our nation was founded on the principle that the government that governs closest to home is the government best equipped to deal with social ills. That means powers of state and local governments must once again be given their proper respect. Next, we must make certain to restore the proper separation of powers in Washington. The 535 voting Members of both Houses of Congress must reassert their authority as opposed to that of the nine men and women who sit in black robes, or a Presidency that increasingly displays its arrogance by usurping power. By reestablishing this division of powers, we can once again check intrusive government action. This is the agenda I will continue to advocate in the upcoming session of Congress. Congress The New Year 10 January 2000    Texas Straight Talk 10 January 2000 verse 10 ... Cached Not long ago, realizing Congress was moving to permit the use of encryption and the sale of encryption technology overseas voluntarily, Clinton said he would accomplish this through a directive. It sounded good, but as is the case with all presidential directives and executive orders, we must remain skeptical. Now some experts are saying that the President's move to permit these sales of encryption technology may have actually made the problem worse. Congress Greenspan Nominated to a Fourth Term 17 January 2000    Texas Straight Talk 17 January 2000 verse 4 ... Cached President Clinton's nomination of Alan Greenspan to a fourth term as Federal Reserve Board Chairman has been met with nearly unanimous praise. From Congressional leaders to Wall Street gurus, the announcement brought a sigh of relief that good times will continue. The only reservation I noticed was written by economist Mark Weisbrot, who worried that Greenspan might not inflate the currency fast enough. Otherwise, everyone seemed delighted with the nomination. Congress Parental Control Key to Education Reform 24 January 2000    Texas Straight Talk 24 January 2000 verse 11 ... Cached Congress has no constitutional authority to control local education. Thirty years of centralized education have produced nothing but failure and frustrated parents. The bottom line is that politicians are holding our children's education hostage in Washington for political purposes, and with plans like that offered by Mr. Gore, they are also taking authority away from locally elected school boards and putting it in the hands of unelected bureaucrats. I will continue to use my position on the Education Committee to fight to improve education by giving dollars and authority back to parents, teachers and local school districts. Congress Medical Privacy Threatened 07 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 07 February 2000 verse 11 ... Cached Before implementing these rules, HHS must consider what will happen to the trust between patients and physicians when patients know that any and all information given their doctor may be placed in a government database, seen by medical researchers, or handed over to government agents without a warrant. For more information on how to submit comments to the Department of Health and Human Services, feel free to contact my congressional staff by email at rep.paul@mail.house.gov. Please use the words "HHS Regs" in the subject line, and make sure to include your email address in your message. You may also contact my office by phone at 202-225-2831. Congress Keeping Promises about Social Security 14 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 14 February 2000 verse 6 ... Cached That is why I was heartened when recently, the independent, nonpartisan National Taxpayers Union Foundation praised me as one of only seven members of the House of Representatives who voted not to spend one penny of the Social Security trust fund on other government programs last year. Right now nearly every politician is claiming to have saved Social Security, but according to this independent group, only seven Members Congress actually voted that way last year. Yes, this is exactly why I can sometimes vote with only a handful of others, because I pledged to not spend Social Security trust fund dollars on other programs. While many people in Washington say they agree, this non-partisan organization says only a handful really vote that way. Congress Keeping Promises about Social Security 14 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 14 February 2000 verse 8 ... Cached In recent years, President Clinton and Congress have claimed to produce a balanced budget, but this has only come as a result of taking money out of the Social Security trust fund. I believe that no funds should be spent out of the Social Security trust fund except to pay pensions to beneficiaries. My top priority this Congress is to protect senior's retirements. That is why the first bill I introduced this term was HR 219, the Social Security Preservation Act. This bill will make it illegal for politicians and bureaucrats in Washington to continuing dipping into the trust funds. Congress Keeping Promises about Social Security 14 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 14 February 2000 verse 9 ... Cached Each year the President and Congress take the money Americans pay into Social Security and use it for purposes other than paying pensions. Simply, they are stealing from our senior citizens. The Social Security Preservation Act will restore Americans' faith in their retirement. It should be illegal for the government to use the trust fund for any purpose except administering the Social Security system. Congress Keeping Promises about Social Security 14 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 14 February 2000 verse 10 ... Cached According to NTU Director of Congressional Analysis Jeff Dircksen, these seven Members are a rare example of Congressmen who have established a voting record of protecting the Social Security system, as opposed to dipping into it to pay for pork-barrel projects and other spending increases. Congress Keeping Promises about Social Security 14 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 14 February 2000 verse 11 ... Cached "Washington quickly adapted to the era of budget surpluses. The longer the surpluses stay in Washington, the greater the chance they will be spent," Dircksen said. "Taxpayers would be much better off if more members of Congress would vote like these seven. It's good to see someone taking a stand for the taxpayers and for their constituents." ' Congress Keeping Promises about Social Security 14 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 14 February 2000 verse 12 ... Cached I thank Mr. Dircksen and the NTU for their sentiments, and I wholeheartedly agree that it is high time the entire Congress took a real stand. I have offered a bill, HR 219, which will allow them to do just that - take a stand by joining us in saying "hands off Social Security" and also in doing something about it. Congress Repeal Earnings Limitation 21 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 21 February 2000 verse 4 ... Cached During a time when an increasing number of senior citizens are able to enjoy productive lives well past retirement age and businesses are in desperate need of experienced workers, it makes no sense to punish seniors for working. Yet the federal government does just that through Social Security "earnings limitations." Earnings limitations deduct a portion of seniors' monthly Social Security check should they continue to work and earn income above an arbitrary government-set limit. By providing a disincentive for seniors to remain in the workplace, this restriction damages the economy and punishes individuals for seeking gainful employment. It is simply un-American that the federal government would punish someone for continuing to contribute to the economy by reducing benefits that person has already paid for and been promised by Congress. Congress Repeal Earnings Limitation 21 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 21 February 2000 verse 5 ... Cached Eliminating the earnings penalty is one of my top priorities for this year. That is why I was an original cosponsor of Rep. Sam Johnson's legislation to repeal the earnings limitation for Social Security beneficiaries (HR 5). Fortunately, the Congressional leadership has promised to schedule a vote on repealing the earnings limitation and President Clinton has promised to sign it, so I am hopeful we may get rid of this penalty on hard-working seniors. Congress Repeal Earnings Limitation 21 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 21 February 2000 verse 8 ... Cached The underlying issue of the earning limitation goes back to the fact that money from the trust fund is being spent for things other than paying pensions to beneficiaries. This is why the first bill I introduced in the 106th Congress was the Social Security Preservation Act (HR 219), which forbids Congress from spending Social Security funds on anything other than paying Social Security pensions. Congress Repeal Earnings Limitation 21 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 21 February 2000 verse 9 ... Cached Stopping the raid on the Social Security trust fund would also make it easier for me to realize one of my other priorities, ending the absurd tax placed on Social Security beneficiaries. Since Social Security benefits are paid for from tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another means of "double taxation." This is why I am cosponsoring legislation to end the tax on Social Security benefits. Tax reduction for seniors is also a major plank in my Pharmaceutical Freedom Act (HR 3636) which provides senior citizens with a tax credit to help them cover the costs of prescription medicines. It is long past time that Congress chooses between raiding the Social Security trust fund and helping seniors afford prescription medicines. Congress Sound Money Needed More Than Ever 28 February 2000    Texas Straight Talk 28 February 2000 verse 4 ... Cached I have got to hand it to Alan Greenspan. Testifying last week before the House Banking Committee, he sounded so authoritative that my colleague Mel Watt from North Carolina said that he could not even understand the things Greenspan says. Mr. Watt attributed his lack of understanding not to some deficiency in Greenspan's communicative capabilities but rather to Watts' self-professed lack of understanding. Yes, it does seem that Greenspan can convince many, including some here in Congress, that up is down and vice versa. Congress How Americans are Subsidizing Organized Crime in Russia 06 March 2000    Texas Straight Talk 06 March 2000 verse 12 ... Cached Unfortunately, this bold move of an overseas FBI office will go unnoticed in Washington DC, and the politicians will not address the subject until a major crisis erupts. A constitutional approach to government would preclude this type of international adventurism. The president should have never ordered this project. And Congress, if it cared and assumed its responsibilities, would quickly de-fund it. The quicker the better. Congress The Big Lie 13 March 2000    Texas Straight Talk 13 March 2000 verse 10 ... Cached The sad trail of lies in Kosovo merely reinforces two facts. The first is that our republic depends upon a press that will question the claims of our leaders instead of just accepting them. The second is that Congress has shirked both its Constitutional responsibility to declare war before U.S. troops are sent into battle and its oversight responsibility to closely monitor the administration in its carrying out of foreign policy. Congress The World Trade Organization 20 March 2000    Texas Straight Talk 20 March 2000 verse 7 ... Cached Congressional approval for the WTO came in the lame duck special session in 1994 shortly after Republicans won the House and before the new Members were sworn in. Although it was actually a treaty that brought the WTO into existence it was called an "agreement" thus avoiding the required two-thirds votes in the Senate. A simple majority of both Houses would be enough to put the US in the WTO. Congress The World Trade Organization 20 March 2000    Texas Straight Talk 20 March 2000 verse 10 ... Cached This example clearly demonstrates that membership in the World Trade Organization is in conflict with our Constitution, undermining our legal system and our sovereignty. The message is clear. For us to be a responsible member of the WTO we must follow the rules, and, if we do, Congress must capitulate and raise taxes on our corporations by repealing the Foreign Sales Corporation program. As was explained by the CRS, members are "legally obligated to insure national laws do not conflict with World Trade Organization rules." Congress Answering the Middle Class Squeeze 27 March 2000    Texas Straight Talk 27 March 2000 verse 13 ... Cached I also mentioned taxes, and I'd like to briefly look at that as well. Our tax burden is at its highest peacetime levels. This means wage earners are being squeezed by the cost of government as well as the cost of living. Had Congress not stopped the Clinton-Gore tax on BTU's, (which they called an economic stimulus package), fuel prices would be significantly higher than they are right now. This points to why government is not the answer. Congress Electoral Follies 03 April 2000    Texas Straight Talk 03 April 2000 verse 10 ... Cached With those kinds of questions outstanding we can be certain of one thing, whatever the final details, some candidates would certainly be treated differently than others. It is an obvious breech of equal protection to suggest that only Democrats and Republicans would get funded. On the other hand, do we really want our taxpayer dollars going to fund candidates of, say, the Socialist and Communist parties? Perhaps the Vice President feels that funding the Socialist Party is fine with him. Based on his voting record in Congress, that would not surprise me. Congress Classroom Excellence Depends on Quality Teachers 10 April 2000    Texas Straight Talk 10 April 2000 verse 12 ... Cached In fact, I am hopeful that, with these issues now being placed "front and center" on the national agenda we will be able to move forward on them during this Congress. The idea of relying on recruiting and training great teachers as the means to educational success is mere common sense. And, the notion that we will best accomplish this by making it worth while for top candidates to enter these positions by increasing their take home pay and by providing them with the type of positive work environment that can best be assured by making the teacher responsible for the classroom, is exactly what is needed to reform education in this country. Congress Constitutional Rights Threatened 24 April 2000    Texas Straight Talk 24 April 2000 verse 4 ... Cached The constitutional rights of all Americans continue to be threatened. Unfortunately, this election year has shades of past years when the President and the anti-gun lobby were able to neutralize many key gun rights advocates and back-down the congressional leadership. Congress Helping Cancer Patients and the Terminally Ill is a Moral Imperative 15 May 2000    Texas Straight Talk 15 May 2000 verse 5 ... Cached "When workers are stricken with a grave illness, they need the love and support of their family and friends as well as the best health care they can get. As a doctor who has specialized in women's health issues for decades, and as a member of Congress, I know how truly critical it is that cancer patients as well as those who suffer from terminal illnesses have the resources available to them to combat these illnesses. Congress Privacy Takes Center Stage 22 May 2000    Texas Straight Talk 22 May 2000 verse 10 ... Cached Right now Congress is considering two very different solutions to the privacy problems that have arisen as the result of these extraneous uses of the Social Security number. My solution remains to strictly limit the government. This Congress I introduced two bills the very first day we met. HR 219 stops the government from using Social Security monies for other government programs and HR 220 stops the use of the Social Security number as a unique identifier. Congress Privacy Takes Center Stage 22 May 2000    Texas Straight Talk 22 May 2000 verse 11 ... Cached It will probably not surprise anybody to learn that there are a number of people in Congress who are actually suggesting that the best way to protect privacy is to make the government bigger and stronger. These people argue that the government should further regulate the information economy in an attempt to advance privacy. Any person familiar with the concept of negative and positive rights, and any student of history, will immediately realize the follies of trying to secure privacy rights by increasing government authority. Congress China Bill Is Not Free Trade 29 May 2000    Texas Straight Talk 29 May 2000 verse 7 ... Cached The people who elected us have criticized this Congress. Time and again I have heard it said that we are not doing the job we have been elected to do. We have given in to President Clinton and the liberal minority in the House. Enough is enough. These last minute changes left us a PNTR bill that created a new government commission and put taxpayers on the line for millions in so-called "technical aid" to Communist China. Apparently the administration believed left-wing members of Congress could be convinced to vote for freer trade and freer markets just so long as we give more foreign aid to our Communist Chinese adversaries. Congress China Bill Is Not Free Trade 29 May 2000    Texas Straight Talk 29 May 2000 verse 11 ... Cached Free trade is about free markets, which means limiting government interference in the marketplace. We face high hurdles for the philosophy of less government in the foreseeable future because the Congressional trade debate is now limited to the voices of outright protectionists and those who, in the name of free trade, promote a regime of managed trade which threatens the sovereignty upon which our fundamental liberties will always depend. Congress CARA: Environmental Protection or Destruction? 05 June 2000    Texas Straight Talk 05 June 2000 verse 7 ... Cached These funds are being separately dedicated and taken off budget so Congress will not have to do annual appropriations with them. This scheme is bad for two reasons. First, it allows the Executive Branch to have powers that are Constitutionally directed to Congress. So this bill not only diminishes private property, it also erodes the Constitutional separation of powers. Furthermore, this off-budget scheme will not amount to anything approaching a true trust fund. Time and again, we have seen government raid trust funds to pay for spending measures for which those funds were never intended. The most glaring example of this is the raiding of the Social Security trust fund. However, highway funds, airport funds and others are also regularly raided to pay for foreign aid giveaways and other pork. Congress CARA: Environmental Protection or Destruction? 05 June 2000    Texas Straight Talk 05 June 2000 verse 8 ... Cached CARA not only necessitates the creation of a trust fund to engage in activities which are not authorized by the Constitution, it also promises to have a negative impact on property rights in general and on the environment Congress is claiming to protect. If we are truly interested in providing better land management and environmental stewardship, we should get the federal government out of the land management business. As the recent uncontrolled burns of Los Alamos show, there is literally no end to the possible ways the federal government can mismanage environmentally sensitive lands. Congress A Big Win for Medical Privacy in Congress 19 June 2000    Texas Straight Talk 19 June 2000 verse 2 ... Cached A Big Win for Medical Privacy in Congress Congress A Big Win for Medical Privacy in Congress 19 June 2000    Texas Straight Talk 19 June 2000 verse 4 ... Cached As a doctor, I know how crucial it is to insure people's privacy when speaking to their physicians. Unless Congress permanently forbids the development of a medical ID, Americans may not be able to talk to their doctors about matters that are of an utmost private nature without fear of having this information accessed by government agencies! As an OB/GYN with more than 30 years experience in private practice, I know better than most the importance of preserving the sanctity of the physician-patient relationship. What happens to that trust when patients know any and all information given to their doctor will be placed in a database accessible by anyone who knows the patient's 'unique personal identifier? Congress A Big Win for Medical Privacy in Congress 19 June 2000    Texas Straight Talk 19 June 2000 verse 5 ... Cached "Some members of Congress will claim that the federal government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that, in a constitutional republic, the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the job of government officials a little bit easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient. Congress A Big Win for Medical Privacy in Congress 19 June 2000    Texas Straight Talk 19 June 2000 verse 6 ... Cached Millions of Americans are outraged over the increasing trend toward national ID cards, especially in light of the fact that the Social Security card has become mandatory in order to do business. In reality, the Social Security number has been transformed from an administrative device used to administer the Social Security program into a de facto national ID number. Today, most Americans cannot get a job, get married, open a bank account, or even get a fishing license without their Social Security numbers. Congress has been all too eager to expand the use of the Social Security number as a uniform identifier. This anger towards Washington would increase exponentially if Americans were informed that their doctors would not treat them until they produce their national health IDs. Congress EPA Regulations Threaten Texas 26 June 2000    Texas Straight Talk 26 June 2000 verse 3 ... Cached On Wednesday of this week, I voted in enthusiastic support of an amendment to an appropriations bill prohibiting the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from using any taxpayer funds to designate certain areas as "ozone nonattainment areas." The amendment, which was introduced by Representatives Linder and Collins of Georgia, is needed to prevent the EPA from acting without regard to federal court decisions. Without Congressional action, counties in the 14th district of Texas (and many areas across America) could be designated as "non-attainment" areas, with dire consequences. Affected areas face the very serious loss of federal highway funds, as well as restrictions on local industries, changes to land use regulations, and reformulated gasoline requirements. The people of Texas do not need federal regulators determining our air standards, and this vote represents another step in my ongoing fight against unconstitutional and unbridled federal agencies. Congress EPA Regulations Threaten Texas 26 June 2000    Texas Straight Talk 26 June 2000 verse 4 ... Cached The EPA, with typical bureaucratic arrogance, has acted without congressional authorization in creating its own standards for air quality. It created National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), rating counties for compliance. These standards have been challenged successfully by industry groups and three States in federal Court. The D.C. District Court of Appeals found that the EPA acted without congressional authorization when it created and applied its air standards. Because the standards were "arbitrary" and not based on "intelligible principles", the actions of the agency amount to sheer, unbridled policy judgments-expressions of bureaucratic willfulness rather than application of policies articulated in the Clean Air Act. This sound decision by the Court supported constitutional principles, as all legislative powers are assigned to Congress only. Congress True Free Trade Benefits Texas Farmers 03 July 2000    Texas Straight Talk 03 July 2000 verse 3 ... Cached Tuesday evening, House lawmakers reached a compromise agreement that will permit U.S. exports of food and medicine to Cuba for the first time in nearly 40 years. This partial repeal of the trade embargo was proposed by Representative George Nethercutt of Washington State,who has joined me in working to open trade with Cuba. The agreement allows U.S. businesses to sell food or medicine to Cuba, while prohibiting the federal government from financing or otherwise subsidizing such sales. The agreement also prohibits the President from imposing further restrictions on food or medicine sales to other countries without congressional approval. I applaud this compromise as a good step in the direction of true free trade- it allows more trade, while prohibiting government subsidization of trade. Congress True Free Trade Benefits Texas Farmers 03 July 2000    Texas Straight Talk 03 July 2000 verse 4 ... Cached "The usual politics have accompanied the agreement. The provisions have been added and removed from two different appropriations bills. The President opposes the agreement, as it threatens his "authority" to assess trade sanctions against countries at will. Of course, he has no such authority, as the power to regulate foreign trade is expressly delegated to Congress in the Constitution. Currently, House leaders plan to take the Nethercutt agreement into conference with the Senate on an agricultural bill. My hope is that free trade principles and restrictions on unconstitutional executive orders remain intact. Congress Last-Minute Supplemental Spending is Dangerous and Unnecessary 10 July 2000    Texas Straight Talk 10 July 2000 verse 4 ... Cached Recently, House members approved a fiscal year 2001 Military Construction appropriations bill that also contained an emergency supplemental spending package for fiscal year 2000. The bill provides a total of $20 billion in new federal spending, $11.2 billion of which is supplemental spending for fiscal year 2000. I voted against this massive new spending. Congress should be required to adhere to its existing fiscal year budget, just as families and businesses must operate within their own budgets. Congress Last-Minute Supplemental Spending is Dangerous and Unnecessary 10 July 2000    Texas Straight Talk 10 July 2000 verse 5 ... Cached The supplemental spending bill is dangerous, wasteful and unnecessary. Every year Congress decides midway through its fiscal year that it didn't budget enough money, so it creates an "emergency" to justify new spending. This year the "emergency" requires that we spend more on the failed drug war and more on sending our troops overseas. The big spenders in Congress made certain the supplemental bill was packaged with a Military Construction bill, which insured its passage during eleventh-hour voting. Congress already spends far too much money, and this additional $11 billion in spending cannot be justified. Congress 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. Congress Last-Minute Supplemental Spending is Dangerous and Unnecessary 10 July 2000    Texas Straight Talk 10 July 2000 verse 7 ... Cached I also oppose the $2 billion in spending authorized for the ongoing Kosovo military action. I consistently have decried our involvement in UN "peacekeeping" missions, which really are acts of war requiring congressional approval. Moreover, our national sovereignty is threatened when we place our troops under UN command. We don't need to spend more money on Kosovo or any other foreign war the UN deems deserving. Time and time again we have seen the disastrous consequences of meddling in wars which do not involve our national interests. We should get our troops out of Kosovo and stop trying to police the world. UN "peacekeeping" in Kosovo doesn't work, and we should not be spending billions of dollars in "emergency" funds perpetuating our involvement. The American people are tired of sending our troops abroad under UN command to interfere in conflicts unrelated to our national interest. Congress Last-Minute Supplemental Spending is Dangerous and Unnecessary 10 July 2000    Texas Straight Talk 10 July 2000 verse 8 ... Cached This bill contains the kind of massive foreign aid spending and political maneuvering that people in my district have had enough of. Farmers in Texas struggling with drought conditions have every reason to oppose our sending $25 million to Mozambique for disaster relief, as called for in the bill. U.S. taxpayers have every reason to oppose billions in new spending for fiscal year 2000 simply because Congress seems incapable of adhering to its budget. We cannot throw our tax dollars at every global problem, and we should not let special interests and back room deals dictate our appropriations process. Congress High Taxes Cause High Gas Prices 17 July 2000    Texas Straight Talk 17 July 2000 verse 7 ... Cached Fortunately some of my colleagues in Congress agree, and have joined me in co-sponsoring legislation that reduces or places a moratorium on federal gas taxes. H.R. 3844, which I co-sponsored back in March, calls for a total repeal of federal gas tax increases imposed in 1993. H.R. 4111, which I also co-sponsored in March, mandates a six-month suspension of federal gas taxes while maintaining the repeal of the 1993 tax increases. A new bill I support, H.R. 4776, suspends federal gas taxes through March 2001, and requires the Secretary of Energy to report on the economic feasibility of maintaining the reformulated gas mandate imposed by the Clean Air Act. All of these bills would provide immediate relief to consumers at the pump, especially during summer months when many families drive long distances on vacation. Beneficial effects would be felt throughout the economy, as retail costs are directly affected by fuel costs borne by the trucking and air freight industries in shipping retail goods. Congress The Disturbing Trend Toward Federal Police 31 July 2000    Texas Straight Talk 31 July 2000 verse 5 ... Cached The American public gradually has become aware of the disturbing trend toward federal policing of our nation. Many Americans do not support ATF, especially after the disastrous events at Waco. I was widely attacked in the media and by members of Congress for questioning the government's actions at Waco, and for merely suggesting that many Americans were concerned by the possibility of federal agents taking violent action against American citizens. Now we have Congress spending more money to increase the budget for ATF, despite its highly questionable actions and the resulting public mistrust of the agency. Congress The Disturbing Trend Toward Federal Police 31 July 2000    Texas Straight Talk 31 July 2000 verse 6 ... Cached It is important to recognize that our federal constitution lists only three federal crimes, namely counterfeiting, treason, and piracy on the high seas. The founding fathers never envisioned a federal police force, knowing that such a force would trample on the right of each state to enact and enforce its own criminal laws. Hence there is no provision for the creation of a general federal police force in the enumeration of congressional powers. Furthermore, the 10th amendment explicitly reserves the general police power to the states individually. Washington politicians, however, have no interest in constitutional limitations when they seek to expand and consolidate their power by federalizing whole areas of criminal activity. They have consistently expanded federal criminal laws, particularly in the areas of drugs and firearms. The result of this expansion is the inevitable call for more federal police to enforce the new laws. We are told we need more ATF agents to monitor firearms, and more DEA agents to wage the "war on drugs." Congress is not concerned with its lack of constitutional authority to create, much less expand a national police force. Congress Long and Short Term Solutions to the Rising Cost of Prescription Drugs 07 August 2000    Texas Straight Talk 07 August 2000 verse 4 ... Cached Congress recently has considered different ways to help seniors struggling to pay their prescription drug bills. Unfortunately, nearly every proposal that comes out of Washington involves a new federal program that continues taxing Social Security benefits and misusing the Social Security trust fund, or attempts to lower costs through price-fixing measures which will result in rationing of drugs. Other proposals create government subsidies to insurance or pharmaceutical companies. These plans take control of health care away from the individual and place it in the hands of bureaucrats. Congress Long and Short Term Solutions to the Rising Cost of Prescription Drugs 07 August 2000    Texas Straight Talk 07 August 2000 verse 10 ... Cached I believe the combination of the "Pharmaceutical Freedom Act" and my new "Free and Low-Cost Prescription Drug" program will give seniors the short-term relief they need as well as a long-term solution to the serious problem of astronomical prescription drug prices. I am proud to lead the effort in Congress by working to ensure affordable prescription drugs. Congress Right to Privacy Too Often Overlooked 14 August 2000    Texas Straight Talk 14 August 2000 verse 4 ... Cached With that in mind, I have introduced two key pieces of legislation aimed at curtailing governmental privacy invasions. The first is the "Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act" (HR 220). This bill forbids federal or state governments from using your Social Security number for purposes not directly related to administering the Social Security system. When Social Security was introduced, the American people were told that their number would never become a form of national identifier. In fact, until the 1970’s all Social Security cards stated on the back that the card was not an ID card. Unfortunately, cards issued today do not contain that same phrase, and Congress has been all too eager to expand the use of Social Security numbers. Congress Right to Privacy Too Often Overlooked 14 August 2000    Texas Straight Talk 14 August 2000 verse 5 ... Cached For example, in 1998 over 200 members of Congress voted to allow states to force citizens to produce a Social Security number before they could exercise their right to vote. Also, day-to-day private business dealings are becoming increasingly difficult without a Social Security number. You cannot open a bank account, get married, or even obtain a fishing license without disclosing your Social Security number. My bill will restore privacy to Americans who currently are being abused by overreaching government. Congress Right to Privacy Too Often Overlooked 14 August 2000    Texas Straight Talk 14 August 2000 verse 6 ... Cached The other piece of legislation I have introduced is the "Census Privacy Act" (HR 4085). This bill will prohibit the Census Bureau from collecting any information from citizens except for their name, address and the number of people per residence. That is all Congress needs for a head count of the population in order to re-draw congressional districts every ten years as is required by the Constitution. Congress Help for Those with Terminal Illnesses 21 August 2000    Texas Straight Talk 21 August 2000 verse 8 ... Cached Both of these bills allow individuals who are suffering to keep more of their resources, rather than sending needed dollars to Washington. In my medical practice, I have spoken to patients suffering from terminal illnesses. Even when they have health coverage (and many do not), their disease puts a tremendous financial strain on them and their loved ones. The list of expenses they incur is nearly endless, ranging from transportation to care centers and hiring babysitters to watch their children to paying out-of-pocket costs for expensive drugs which are not fully covered. Family and friends can offer compassion and support, but Congress owes it to terminally ill persons to stop taking away the resources they need to fight cancer, AIDS, heart disease, and other terrible health problems. My hope is that citizens in my district (and my fellow legislators) who are truly interested in helping those with terminal illnesses will join me and support my legislation. Congress Reforming Social Security to Protect Present and Future Senior Citizens 28 August 2000    Texas Straight Talk 28 August 2000 verse 6 ... Cached The second reform we must make is to stop taxing Social Security benefits. Seniors already have paid income and payroll taxes throughout their working lives. Social Security benefits are financed by tax dollars, so any tax imposed on benefits is simply another form of double taxation. Furthermore, "taxing" benefits is merely an accounting trick, which allows Congress to reduce benefits without honestly announcing its intentions. Prior to 1984, Social Security benefits were exempt from federal income taxes. In 1993, the current administration successfully passed legislation allowing up to 85% of benefits to be taxed (up from 50%). I introduced legislation to repeal this increase in 1997, and earlier this year I voted for the "Social Security Benefits Tax Relief Act" to repeal the increase, which was successful in the House. More importantly, I cosponsored H.R. 761, which would eliminate all taxes on Social Security benefits. I intend to continue my efforts to convince my colleagues and the administration to end this very unfair tax. Congress Reforming Social Security to Protect Present and Future Senior Citizens 28 August 2000    Texas Straight Talk 28 August 2000 verse 7 ... Cached Other positive reforms have support in Congress. Earlier this year, Congress passed legislation I cosponsored ending the earnings limitation on seniors. This legislation was needed to encourage our seniors to seek productive employment without suffering the loss of Social Security benefits. Overwhelming public support for the change prompted the President to sign the bill into law. These reforms are needed to protect not only today's senior citizens, but also today's younger working people who deserve a solvent Social Security system. Congress Local Control is the Key to Education Reform 04 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 04 September 2000 verse 7 ... Cached I also introduced the "Education Improvement Tax Cut Act" (H.R. 936) in an effort to give parents more control over improving their local schools. The Act allows individuals to claim a tax credit of up to $3,000 per year for cash or other donations to a school or scholarship program. This approach encourages parents to spend money to improve the school their child attends, rather than pay more in federal taxes to support distant education programs that reflect only the values and priorities of Congress and the federal bureaucracy. Congress 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. Congress 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." Congress Congress Must Work for Seniors 18 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 September 2000 verse 2 ... Cached Congress Must Work for Seniors Congress Congress Must Work for Seniors 18 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 September 2000 verse 3 ... Cached Last week, I received an award for my support of "senior friendly" legislation in this Congress from the 60 Plus Association, a non-partisan group that focuses on issues important to seniors. While I am pleased to have earned this distinction, it is important to recognize the tremendous amount of work yet to be done in Congress for older Americans. Congress Congress Must Work for Seniors 18 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 September 2000 verse 4 ... Cached Seniors represent the fastest growing demographic group in our nation. More Americans are living longer, often for several decades after retirement. While many enjoy good health and financial security during their later years, millions have limited means. These seniors survived the Depression, fought World War II, and created the prosperity and freedom we enjoy today. Congress needs to honor our nation’s commitments to them. Congress Congress Must Work for Seniors 18 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 September 2000 verse 5 ... Cached First, Congress needs to protect the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds. Our seniors funded Social Security and Medicare throughout their working lives, and they deserve to know that their funds will be spent only to pay benefits. Unfortunately, revenue-hungry politicians have not hesitated to raid the Trust Funds to pay for pork-barrel projects. Last year alone, Congress took $21 billion from Medicare to fund other programs. Accordingly, I supported the "Social Security and Medicare Safe Deposit Box Act" earlier this year, which mandates that additional revenues from the two programs can be used only for benefits payments. I also introduced the "Social Security Preservation Act" during this Congress. The Act mandates that Social Security funds can be used only to pay benefits, making it illegal to use them for any other purpose. Congress and the administration must support both these bills so Americans can have faith that their retirement funds are secure. Congress Congress Must Work for Seniors 18 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 September 2000 verse 6 ... Cached Next, Congress must work to lower the cost of prescription drugs. Many seniors, especially those on fixed incomes, are unable to afford the expensive medications they need every month. Unfortunately, nearly every proposal coming out of Washington attempts to lower drug costs through price-fixing (which inevitably leads to rationing of drugs), or through subsidies to insurance or pharmaceutical companies. My legislation, the "Pharmaceutical Freedom Act," makes prescription drugs more affordable by providing seniors with a tax credit for drug expenses so they can spend their resources on needed medications. Also, my legislation eliminates needless government regulations and barriers to competition which drive up drug prices. Congress must remove bureaucratic regulations that prevent America’s seniors from enjoying lower prices available from Internet and foreign pharmacies. The key to lowering drug prices is to create a true, competitive free market for prescription drugs. Additionally, my legislation returns control of health care dollars to our seniors and their doctors, rather than federal bureaucrats. Congress Congress Must Work for Seniors 18 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 September 2000 verse 7 ... Cached Finally, Congress must pass real tax relief for seniors. Earlier this year, I supported the successful repeal of the Social Security earnings limitation, which frees older Americans to continue to work without endangering their eligibility for benefits. We should go a step further, however, and stop taxing older Americans' income. I voted to repeal the 1993 tax increase on Social Security benefits. More importantly I have introduced legislation to end Social Security taxes altogether. We never taxed Social Security benefits before 1984. Why are we taking taxes out of a widow’s monthly $600 benefits check now? Such double taxation is unconscionable, especially considering that many seniors rely on Social Security to provide all or most of their monthly income. Congress Congress Must Work for Seniors 18 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 September 2000 verse 8 ... Cached Finally, Congress must support seniors by eliminating the death tax. Although this tax accounts for only a tiny portion of federal revenues (about 1.5%), it has a devastating impact on many seniors and their families. When Congress ends the death tax, seniors no longer will worry about losing their farms, small businesses, and savings to the government. Congress Spending, Tax Cuts, or Debt Reduction? 25 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 25 September 2000 verse 4 ... Cached Last week I voted to support the "Debt Relief Lockbox Reconciliation Act," legislation designed to insure that any 2001 Social Security and Medicare surpluses are not spent on unrelated federal programs. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the Social Security and Medicare programs will have a combined surplus of approximately $198 billion in the coming year. Until Congress passes tax reform legislation that returns any surplus dollars to taxpayers, I will support efforts to prevent revenue-hungry politician and bureaucrats from spending your retirement and health care surplus dollars on pork-barrel projects. Congress Spending, Tax Cuts, or Debt Reduction? 25 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 25 September 2000 verse 6 ... Cached First and foremost, we cannot forget that our nation remains nearly $6 trillion in debt. This debt is the result of one very simple but enormous problem: over the years, Congress has spent more than the Treasury has collected in taxes. Note that Congress, rather than any particular administration, is responsible for creating this debt. Congress alone determines how much is spent when it passes appropriations bills each year. When Congress spends more than it has, it must (like any family or business) borrow money. Eventually we all pay for this fiscal irresponsibility, as more and more of the government's annual budget is spent on interest payments. Even worse, this debt has caused the Federal Reserve to authorize the printing of more and more money during past decades, creating price inflation and making your dollars worth less. Congress Spending, Tax Cuts, or Debt Reduction? 25 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 25 September 2000 verse 7 ... Cached Accordingly, any surplus that exists must be understood as a surplus for the current budget year only. Politicians and the media have termed these funds a "budget surplus" or "government surplus." These terms are widely accepted, and the self-congratulatory debate in Congress centers around what the government ought to do with the money. The truth, however, is that these funds represent a tax surplus. The federal government did not create a surplus, nor did the congressional budget process create a surplus. No politician created the surplus. You created the surplus with your tax dollars. It is your money! I urge you not to permit Washington politicians to claim any credit for overcharging you on April 15th. Congress Spending, Tax Cuts, or Debt Reduction? 25 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 25 September 2000 verse 8 ... Cached Obviously, taxpayers should decide what is done with any surplus funds. Rest assured many in Congress are eager to spend the surplus on a variety of wasteful federal programs. This is a golden opportunity for Congress, because it can go on a spending spree without raising taxes! I supported the "lockbox" legislation because it prevents any spending of surplus dollars, instead requiring that funds be applied to debt reduction (I also have introduced legislation that prevents non-surplus Social Security and Medicare trust funds from being spent on unrelated programs). Reduction of the national debt certainly is preferable to new spending. My preference, however, would be to return any surplus directly to taxpayers. American families are taxed far too much now, and they never should be required to overfund the government. A surplus refund check would be a step in the right direction. The most important point, however, is that Congress should not be permitted to find new ways to spend your surplus dollars. Congress Spending, Tax Cuts, or Debt Reduction? 25 September 2000    Texas Straight Talk 25 September 2000 verse 9 ... Cached The key to true budget reform is very simple: Congress must drastically reduce spending. A fiscally responsible federal government that adhered to limits set forth in the Constitution could easily operate on a dramatically smaller budget. Our government operated on a mere fraction of its current budget even when we were fighting the Korean War! Despite what you hear this fall, debt reduction and tax relief are not mutually exclusive. Government is far too large, and it performs far too many unconstitutional functions. A constitutionally proper limited government could function without debt and with much lower taxes. Congress "Privatization" of Social Security Poses Risks 02 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 02 October 2000 verse 5 ... Cached Social Security, when instituted in the 1930's, represented a promise by the federal government to working Americans. In exchange for their participation in a retirement savings program (via payroll taxes), Americans would be guaranteed monthly payments when they retired. 65 years later, when the majority of America's families own stocks or mutual funds, it is easy for some to forget that many retired Americans continue to rely on a monthly Social Security check for all or most of their income. These Americans funded the system throughout their working lives, and they deserve to know that their retirement funds are secure- after all, it's their money. I believe Congress must work to insure that the federal government meets its promise to our seniors. Congress "Privatization" of Social Security Poses Risks 02 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 02 October 2000 verse 7 ... Cached I certainly support policies that encourage individuals to invest for their retirement. I believe Congress should lower taxes, allowing workers to keep more of their paychecks to invest. I also support legislation increasing the amounts individuals may put into tax-deductible or tax-deferred IRA, 401(k), and similar pension plans. Furthermore, I have cosponsored legislation that would end the terrible income tax on Social Security benefits. Congress "Privatization" of Social Security Poses Risks 02 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 02 October 2000 verse 8 ... Cached However, I believe government-managed investment of Social Security funds poses undue risks for our nation's seniors. Although the stock market has done well in recent years, market investments never are completely safe (especially with the Federal Reserve's risky inflationary policies). Our nation's seniors could lose their benefits if the U.S. stock market (or markets worldwide) experience a severe downturn. Remember that Social Security payments were promised to our seniors, and they paid for them during their working lives. Congress cannot risk breaking the Social Security promise, because it cannot risk the well being of millions of our nation's seniors. Congress "Privatization" of Social Security Poses Risks 02 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 02 October 2000 verse 9 ... Cached Furthermore, government involvement in the private stock market would have dangerous consequences. Who would decide what stocks, bonds, mutual funds, or other investment vehicles were approved? Which politicians would you trust to create an investment portfolio with your taxes? The federal government has proven itself incapable of good money management, and permitting politicians and bureaucrats to make investment decisions would result in unscrupulous lobbying for venture capital. Large campaign contributors and private interests of every conceivable type would seek to have their favored investments approved by the government. In a free market, an underperforming or troubled company suffers a decrease in its stock price, forcing it either to improve or lose value. Wary investors hesitate to buy its stock after the price falls. If the company successfully lobbied Congress, however, it would enjoy a large investment of your tax dollars. This investment would cause an artificial increase in its stock price, deceiving private investors and unfairly harming the company's honest competition. Government-managed investment of tax dollars in the private market is a recipe for corruption and fiscal irresponsibility. Congress Drug Re-Importation Will Lower Prescription Drug Costs 09 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 09 October 2000 verse 4 ... Cached This week, members of a joint House and Senate committee reached an agreement on proposed legislation which would allow the re-importation of prescription drugs into the U.S. The proposal, part of a fiscal year 2000 appropriations bill scheduled for a House vote next week, faces some opposition from both Congress and the administration. However, I believe widespread public concern over the high cost of prescription drugs will convince lawmakers and the President to support this needed reform. Congress Drug Re-Importation Will Lower Prescription Drug Costs 09 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 09 October 2000 verse 5 ... Cached Many widely used drugs made by American companies sell for far less in Europe, Canada, and Mexico. Undoubtedly you have seen news reports featuring seniors taking bus trips across the Mexican or Canadian borders to buy their needed drugs. As a physician and member of Congress, this greatly disturbs me. U.S. citizens never should be forced to leave their own country simply to obtain affordable prescription drugs. Congress Drug Re-Importation Will Lower Prescription Drug Costs 09 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 09 October 2000 verse 10 ... Cached The proposed crackdown on online pharmacies simply serves the existing entrenched pharmaceutical interests at the expense of price competition. As a result, you and I end up paying more for our prescriptions. However, the re-importation agreement reached this week encourages me that others in Congress are beginning to favor the free-market approach. Undoubtedly many are responding to polls showing that a large majority of Americans support drug re-importation. I applaud my colleagues who support the measure, and I plan to use this momentum to seek passage of the "Pharmaceutical Freedom Act." Congress must allow all Americans to benefit from worldwide price competition for prescription drugs. Congress Real Tax Reform Still Needed for Texas Families 16 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 16 October 2000 verse 3 ... Cached Earlier this week I received a "Tax Fighter Award" from the nonpartisan National Tax Limitation Committee, based on my pro-taxpayer voting record during the 106th Congress. While I was pleased to receive the award, I realize the tax burden facing Texas families remains far too high. This Congress has proven itself unwilling to make real reforms to our overly complex and burdensome tax system. Congress Real Tax Reform Still Needed for Texas Families 16 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 16 October 2000 verse 5 ... Cached Tax reduction is my first priority as your Congressman. The reality is that most working Americans lose about half of their incomes to federal, state, and local taxes. "Tax Freedom Day" (representing the portion of the year you work just to pay taxes) for the majority of Americans is around June 1st. Imagine all of your hard work this year between January and June going to the government! Clearly, the status quo is not acceptable. Texas families cannot continue to work more and more simply to keep pace with their tax bill. Congress Government Poses the Greatest Threat to our Privacy 23 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 23 October 2000 verse 5 ... Cached Unfortunately, identity theft is a growing trend in America. While we must blame and adequately punish the criminals involved, we also must demand that Congress do more to maintain the confidentiality of Social Security numbers (which is the key to identity theft). Congress Government Poses the Greatest Threat to our Privacy 23 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 23 October 2000 verse 7 ... Cached Concerns about personal privacy are not new. When the Social Security program began in the 1930s, people objected to the idea of being assigned a number that could be widely used as an identifier. Franklin Roosevelt spoke to those concerns, promising Americans that only they and the Social Security administration would ever know their number. Sadly, 65 years later we see how utterly this promise has been broken. The mission of Congress should be to reverse this dangerous trend and restore privacy before America truly becomes a "surveillance society." Congress U.S. Congress Bows to WTO Mandate 30 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2000 verse 2 ... Cached U.S. Congress Bows to WTO Mandate Congress U.S. Congress Bows to WTO Mandate 30 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2000 verse 4 ... Cached An extraordinary event occurred this week in Washington during the final days of the 106th Congress, an event that did not receive comment in either the media or the halls of Congress, save for my office. This event had been termed "unthinkable" only a few months earlier. It occurred despite clear constitutional prohibitions and at the expense of our precious national sovereignty. For the first time in the history of our country, Congress voted to change our domestic laws because an international body told us to do so. The World Trade Organization (WTO) has begun to dictate American laws. Congress U.S. Congress Bows to WTO Mandate 30 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2000 verse 5 ... Cached More specifically, Congress voted to change our tax laws relating to Foreign Sales Corporations (FSCs), solely because the WTO appellate panel deemed that our FSC tax rules constituted a "subsidy" - the EU contingent in the WTO had brought a complaint to the panel. Our FSC rules simply allow U.S. corporations to exempt a small portion of income earned abroad from taxes. No "subsidy" is involved; no tax dollars are given to FSCs. Moreover, most EU countries do not tax their corporations on any income earned abroad. Still, the appellate panel agreed with the EU and gave the U.S an October 1st deadline to change our tax laws. Congress U.S. Congress Bows to WTO Mandate 30 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2000 verse 6 ... Cached I have opposed our membership in the WTO throughout my tenure in Congress. I strongly support true free trade, which occurs in the absence of government tariffs. The WTO, however, represents the worst form of government-managed trade. Congress U.S. Congress Bows to WTO Mandate 30 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2000 verse 7 ... Cached More importantly, however, our involvement in the WTO threatens national sovereignty. The Constitution clearly vests the power to regulate trade solely with Congress, and Congress cannot cede with mandates in areas such as environmental protections, worker rights, and trade policy. Congress either blindly or willfully chose to ignore this very serious constitutional conflict when it voted in favor of WTO membership. However, a Congressional Research Service report was quite clear about the consequences of our membership: "As a member of the WTO, the United States does commit to act in accordance with the rules of the multi-lateral body. It is legally obligated to insure that national laws do not conflict with WTO rules," (emphasis added). Congress U.S. Congress Bows to WTO Mandate 30 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2000 verse 8 ... Cached Earlier this year I sought to address this terrible threat to our sovereignty by introducing a resolution withdrawing us from the WTO. I explained my concerns in a brief to the House Ways and Means trade subcommittee, pointing out the unconstitutionality of our involvement. I warned that the WTO could begin dictating our environmental, labor, and tax laws. These arguments were met with hostility and condescension. Subcommittee members stated that we need the WTO to avoid "trade wars," and that the U.S. Congress would never change our domestic laws to satisfy the WTO. "Unthinkable" was how one member put it. Judging by this week's vote, the "unthinkable" has become reality. Congress U.S. Congress Bows to WTO Mandate 30 October 2000    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2000 verse 9 ... Cached We should never change our national laws at the behest of any international organization. Congress simply has ceded its legislative authority to the WTO, and it is shameful that this action likely will go unnoticed by the American people. If we want to help American businesses, we should simply stop taxing their foreign income. The FSC measure will not appease the Europeans; the EU already has indicated that the changes are unsatisfactory to them. We stand on the brink of a retaliatory trade war with the EU, even though we were told that the WTO was needed to avoid such conflicts. So the WTO has given us the worst of all worlds. Congress The Appropriations Process Poses a Risk to American Taxpayers 06 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 06 November 2000 verse 3 ... Cached Congress has nearly completed the controversial appropriations process for fiscal year 2001. The 13 appropriations bills that will be passed this year represent "discretionary" spending, which funds thousands of federal programs and agencies. By contrast, permanent law, funding Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest on the national debt sets "mandatory" spending. The appropriations process is critically important to taxpayers, because Congress is deciding how to spend YOUR money. As usual, the discretionary portion of the 2001 federal budget contains a staggering amount of special-interest pork. Spending levels for federal programs, foreign aid, and wasteful agencies have been increasing steadily throughout the 1990s. Unfortunately, this Congress has not demonstrated a willingness to change its reckless spending habits. Recent partisan posturing aside, taxpayers once again will pay for record amounts of needless federal spending. Congress The Appropriations Process Poses a Risk to American Taxpayers 06 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 06 November 2000 verse 4 ... Cached The 2001 budget submitted by the President calls for federal spending approaching 2 trillion dollars. Requested discretionary spending amounts to approximately 630 billion dollars. These figures obviously are very high, but the greatest outrage is that Congress is prepared to authorize spending above the levels requested by the President! The emerging year-end appropriations bills contain $35 to $45 billion in extra discretionary spending. In other words, American taxpayers would have been better off if Congress simply had rubber-stamped the President’s proposed budget! Congress has not only surrendered to the President’s demands, it has rewarded him with tens of billions in funding beyond his requests. Remember, this is the same President who told America that we could not "afford" to eliminate the marriage tax penalty or the estate tax. Congress The Appropriations Process Poses a Risk to American Taxpayers 06 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 06 November 2000 verse 5 ... Cached Taxpayers should know that Congress passed a budget resolution earlier this year that limited 2001 discretionary spending to $600 billion (H. Con. Res. 290). Furthermore, when Congress passed the 1997 Balanced Budget Act, it authorized only $541 billion for 2001. These commitments simply have been abandoned in the spending frenzy spurred by the rosy "surplus" projections touted by both parties. Congress should be mindful that continued spending increases will quickly devour any one-year tax surplus, and that debt reduction should take precedent over any new spending. Congress The Appropriations Process Poses a Risk to American Taxpayers 06 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 06 November 2000 verse 6 ... Cached Some statistics help put congressional spending habits in perspective. In the past three years alone, discretionary spending has increased by almost 16%. In those same three years, spending for the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education has grown by nearly 30 percent. In just two years, spending for the department of Agriculture has increased by a whopping 47 percent! These discouraging trends reflect the longstanding obstacle to real budget reform: year-end pork spending for special interests to protect congressional seats. Congress The Appropriations Process Poses a Risk to American Taxpayers 06 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 06 November 2000 verse 7 ... Cached A terrible example of pork-barrel spending is evident in the 2001 Military Construction appropriations bill. Several South American countries receive more than 1.3 billion taxpayer dollars to purchase helicopters and other military hardware to help them fight the "drug war." While this spending certainly is objectionable to any American opposed to foreign aid and meddling in foreign affairs, the truth is American companies that provide the helicopters directly benefit from the spending. The rhetoric in Congress about fighting drugs obscures the true goal of satisfying special interests. This represents exactly the type of unjustifiable spending that must be eliminated from the discretionary budget. Congress The Appropriations Process Poses a Risk to American Taxpayers 06 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 06 November 2000 verse 8 ... Cached Taxpayers must demand fiscal accountability from Congress. Many members talk about fiscal conservatism, but the reckless year-end spending spree demonstrates a willingness to squander taxpayer dollars. Congress is now rushing headlong into authorizing unprecedented spending levels for 2001. Once again, taxpayers will be forced to pay the bill. Congress The Electoral College Serves to Protect Liberty and Statehood 13 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 13 November 2000 verse 3 ... Cached As this column is written, America still does not know the final results of the 2000 presidential election. After a long and bitter campaign fight, neither party is ready to accept defeat gracefully. The margin of victory for either candidate will be exceedingly narrow, and challenges to the validity of the results surely will follow. Both campaigns may bring legal actions which could take months to resolve. Should Governor Bush prevail despite having lost the popular vote, we may see proposals in Congress to eliminate the electoral college. Angry calls to obey "the will of the people" will be heard in Washington and the popular media. The pundits will argue that it is not fair to deny the presidency to the man who received the most total votes. After all, to do so would be "undemocratic." Congress The Electoral College Serves to Protect Liberty and Statehood 13 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 13 November 2000 verse 4 ... Cached This argument ignores the fundamental nature of our constitutional system. The Founding Fathers sought to create a loose confederacy of states, joined together by a federal government with very little power. They created a constitutionally limited republic, not a direct democracy. They did so to protect fundamental liberties against the whims of the masses. The electoral college likewise was created in the Constitution to guard against majority tyranny in federal elections. The President was to be elected by the states rather than the citizenry as a whole, with votes apportioned to states according to their representation in Congress. The will of the people was to be tempered by the wisdom of the electoral college. Congress The Electoral College Serves to Protect Liberty and Statehood 13 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 13 November 2000 verse 7 ... Cached With the presidential election still undecided, America is at an historic crossroads. Neither candidate will enjoy a public mandate or the usual honeymoon period in the White House. The partisan rancor is likely to increase in Congress. The already narrow Republican majority in the House has diminished, while the Senate may well be evenly divided between the parties. A lame duck congressional session is scheduled to complete the unfinished appropriations bills for 2001, which could not be finalized in the poisoned atmosphere before the elections. Relations between Congressional Republicans and the administration have deteriorated in the aftermath of presidential vetoes of hard fought legislation. This divisiveness underscores the larger issue facing the nation in the electoral college debate, which is the conflict between collectivism and freedom. Perhaps the uncertainty of the recent elections will cause Americans to rethink the role of the federal government in their lives. Congress Our Foolish War in the Middle East 20 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 20 November 2000 verse 9 ... Cached Our many failures in the last fifty years should prompt us to reassess our entire foreign policy of interventionism. We must end our efforts to police the world. Our failures in Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, and the Middle East, and our failures yet come to in Bosnia and Kosovo should alert all Americans to this great danger. Instead we continue to expand our military adventurism into more sovereign nations (this time it's the 30-year civil conflict in Columbia). Congress and the administration must understand that the greatest threat to our national security is our own bad policy. Congress The Conflict Between Collectivism and Liberty is Reflected in the Presidential Election 27 November 2000    Texas Straight Talk 27 November 2000 verse 6 ... Cached As with communism and socialism, the interventionist-welfare system increasingly endorsed by our politicians and popular media is unworkable. Even before the current election fiasco, signs of an impasse within our system have been evident. Inevitably, a system which decides almost everything through pure democracy will sharply alienate two groups: the producers, and the recipients of the goods distributed by the popularly elected Congress. Congress Activist Courts Threaten Our Liberty 04 December 2000    Texas Straight Talk 04 December 2000 verse 7 ... Cached The real victim, of course, is the Constitution and our liberty. The Founding Fathers created three coequal branches of government so that federal power never could grow unchecked. Their goal was to safeguard liberty. The judiciary was charged with preserving liberty by overturning laws which violated the Constitution; otherwise its role was to effectuate the intent of Congress. Over the past century, however, the unconstitutional notion of judicial supremacy has emerged in American politics. We have come to view courts as omnipotent superlegislatures which can substitute their wisdom rather than follow the law. Congress A Republic, Not a Democracy 12 December 2000    Texas Straight Talk 12 December 2000 verse 6 ... Cached Our Founders instituted a republican system to protect individual rights and property rights from tyranny, regardless of whether the tyrant was a king, a monarchy, a congress, or an unelected mob. They believed that a representative government, restrained by the Bill of Rights and divided into three power sharing branches, would balance the competing interests of the population. They also knew that unbridled democracy would lead to the same kind of tyranny suffered by the colonies under King George. In other words, the Founders had no illusions about democracy. Democracy represented unlimited rule by an omnipotent majority, while a constitutionally limited republic was seen as the best system to preserve liberty. Inalienable individual liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights would be threatened by the "excesses of democracy." Congress A Republic, Not a Democracy 12 December 2000    Texas Straight Talk 12 December 2000 verse 7 ... Cached Last week I introduced a resolution in Congress which reaffirms our nation's republican form of government. H.Con Res 443 serves as a response to recent calls for the abolition of the electoral college. The collectivist liberals want popular national elections (rather than the electoral college system) because they know their constituencies are concentrated in certain heavily populated states. They want to nullify the voting power of the smaller, pro-liberty states. Supporters of my resolution in Congress can send a strong message that every state still matters, and that liberty is more important than shifting majority sentiment. Congress The Bush Administration Must Honor its Commitment to Smaller Government 18 December 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 December 2000 verse 4 ... Cached Texas Governor George W. Bush officially became our president-elect last week, following a series of legal challenges to the exceedingly close certified election results. The election seems to have exposed a deep political division in the country: support for the two candidates is decidedly even, mirroring the 50-50 party split in the Senate and an almost evenly divided Congress. The highly criticized 5-4 final Supreme Court decision shows how equally divided the nation really is. Congress The Bush Administration Must Honor its Commitment to Smaller Government 18 December 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 December 2000 verse 8 ... Cached Specifically, he must honor his pledge to end the estate tax and eliminate the marriage tax penalty. It is far more important, politically and morally, for Bush to keep his campaign promises than it is for him to appease his opponents in Congress. He should be prepared to ignore the chorus of voices, including some Republicans, urging him to abandon tax cuts. Tax relief is the primary reason why many Americans vote Republican. Bush knows this, but the pressure to surrender will become intense. Abandoning tax cuts may make the president-elect more popular with the liberal establishment, but it also would offend his conservative base. Congress The Bush Administration Must Honor its Commitment to Smaller Government 18 December 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 December 2000 verse 9 ... Cached Finally, it should be noted that many Democrats have indicated a willingness to support a tax cut package. Bush should remind everyone of these promises. Liberals and the media will attempt to characterize tax cuts as "too expensive" or a threat to the "surplus." The new administration must promote spending reductions as the key to fiscally responsible government. Government spending has reached mind-boggling levels; sane reductions easily could allow for tax relief without deficit spending by Congress. Congress The Blessings of Liberty at Christmas 25 December 2000    Texas Straight Talk 25 December 2000 verse 3 ... Cached As a strong believer in liberty and constitutionally limited government, I often find myself opposing Congress and the administration on a wide variety of legislative and policy matters. The fight to preserve and restore liberty seems endless, and it is tempting for liberty-minded Americans to feel overwhelmed by the battle. Oftentimes the outlook from Washington appears bleak; new threats to freedom arise constantly. Yet while freedom indeed requires eternal vigilance, we also must remember to take time to reflect upon and celebrate our great fortune as American citizens. The Christmas holiday provides us an opportunity to turn our attention away from the political landscape, and focus on our families and loved ones. It is very important that we appreciate the blessings of liberty we all enjoy as Americans, blessings which are easy to overlook when we are caught up in our daily lives. Our freedom is our greatest national treasure and resource. Countless thousands have died protecting it in wars; countless others have risked everything to reach American soil. As you celebrate the holidays with your families, I urge you to celebrate our freedoms as well. Congress A Legislative Agenda for 2001 01 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 01 January 2001 verse 2 ... Cached The year 2001 has arrived, bringing an end to the period termed by historians as the "American century." The continued preeminence of America as a world power in the new millennium is not guaranteed. The actions of the new 107th Congress will play an important role in setting the tone for the new decade. The incoming Bush administration has the opportunity to advocate sweeping changes in Washington, rather than simply embracing the political status quo with a new cast of political players. Congress 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. Congress A Legislative Agenda for 2001 01 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 01 January 2001 verse 4 ... Cached Tax relief remains critical to our future prosperity. The Clinton administration was able to thwart legislation that would have ended the estate tax and the marriage tax penalty, despite bipartisan support for both measures. The new Congress should act quickly to reintroduce such legislation in the wake of endorsements by president-elect Bush. No person should be taxed simply because he saved throughout his lifetime to have something to pass on to heirs, nor should anyone pay higher taxes because of their marital status. Congress A Legislative Agenda for 2001 01 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 01 January 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Congress also must address education reform in 2001. The answer is not more government spending on more failed federal programs. Federal involvement in education must be limited, returning control over schools to parents and local education boards. Federal tax dollars must be returned to parents through tax credits and deductions for tuition and other education-related expenses. No longer can we ask parents to send so much of their paychecks to Washington while their local schools deteriorate. Education standards in this country were much higher when local school boards controlled their own curricula, teacher standards, and discipline. Congress should understand this and focus on legislation which returns control and tax dollars back to parents, teachers, and local administrators. The era of micromanagement of our schools by federal education bureaucrats must end if we are to stop the decline in education standards. Congress A Legislative Agenda for 2001 01 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 01 January 2001 verse 6 ... Cached Health care also will be a defining issue for Congress this year. Again, the answer to concerns about health care costs and quality is not a massive federal program. Schemes for "free" national health care will only result in shortages of drugs and doctors, waiting lists for procedures, and rationing of treatments and pharmaceuticals. Our emphasis should be on restoring market incentives to the health care and pharmaceutical industries. Our current FDA system reduces incentives for the development of new drugs and restricts competition for existing drugs, which results in the very high drug prices borne by consumers. Congress should undo the regulatory burdens that drive prices up, while providing tax credits and deductions for health care and prescription drug costs. Congress A Legislative Agenda for 2001 01 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 01 January 2001 verse 7 ... Cached 2001 undoubtedly will be a pivotal year in Washington. The incoming administration and Congress can choose between expanding the size and role of the federal government, with increased spending and taxes as a result, or acknowledging that government is not the solution to every issue. Congress International Criminal Court is the Latest U.N. Outrage 08 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 08 January 2001 verse 6 ... Cached The Clinton administration has set a terrible new precedent. Even if the Rome treaty ultimately is not ratified by the U.S., Clinton's signing it further demonstrates our acquiescence to the global-government planners. Many Americans, rightfully concerned by this trend, have begun to question our participation in the U.N. They have begun to question the influence of global elites. The Clinton administration has used secrecy, stealth, and misinformation to thwart the will of the majority of Americans, who still wish to live in a free sovereign nation. In response, I will reintroduce the American Sovereignty Restoration Act in the new 107th Congress. This bill will end U.S. taxpayer support of the U.N., remove the organization from U.S. soil, and guarantee that no U.S. soldier ever serves under U.N. command. I urge all Americans opposed to world government to ask their Representatives to support my bill, while also asking their Senators to vote against ratification of the U.N. Rome treaty. Congress The Ashcroft Controversy Exposes Disdain for Conservative Principles 22 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 22 January 2001 verse 4 ... Cached The real question for Mr. Ashcroft or any federal official is simple: will you abide by your oath to uphold the Constitution? The rhetoric from the Senate and the media leads the public to believe the Attorney General has a duty to Congress directly, that he must enforce any law passed by Congress without regard to the Constitution or legal precedents. In truth, however, the Attorney General is counsel for the American people, not Congress or the President. He is sworn to uphold the highest law in the land, the Constitution. Under no circumstances may he enforce a law that clearly contravenes the Constitution, regardless of whether Congress or the President demands it. Would we expect Mr. Ashcroft to enforce a law passed by Congress today suspending First Amendment assembly and speech rights at this weekend's inauguration? Of course not. The possibility of an independent-minded conservative Attorney General threatens the left, however, because they want a federal administration which will rubber stamp the laws they support, many of which are unconstitutional. Congress Education Freedom Legislation Will Provide Meaningful Reform 29 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 29 January 2001 verse 3 ... Cached One of my main goals in the 107th Congress is to return control over our children's education to parents and teachers in Texas and across America. Unfortunately, as the federal government continues to increase its influence over education, the role of parents and teachers becomes more and more limited. Over the last 30 years, this increased federal control has proven harmful to education standards while wasting taxpayer dollars. Congress Education Freedom Legislation Will Provide Meaningful Reform 29 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 29 January 2001 verse 7 ... Cached Finally, I will introduce the "Teacher Tax Cut Act." This measure grants all teachers a $1,000 tax credit, effectively raising their salary by $1,000 annually without increasing local or federal education spending. Last year, new teachers made an average of $10,000 less than other college graduates. With teachers often ranking at the bottom tier of professional pay, the federal government must recognize that teaching our youth is an honorable and important profession. Many others in Congress agree that teachers deserve this tax credit: the "Teacher Tax Cut Act" already has received bipartisan support from Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-North Carolina), Rep. Dan Miller (R-Florida), Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Georgia), Rep. Richard Baker (R-Louisiana), and Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Maryland). Congress Education Freedom Legislation Will Provide Meaningful Reform 29 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 29 January 2001 verse 9 ... Cached My agenda of returning control over education dollars to the American people is the best way to strengthen public education. These bills represent a common sense, pro-family approach that says "no" to more federal involvement in local education and "yes" to more parental and teacher involvement. I thank my colleagues for cosponsoring these important pieces of legislation, and I call on every member of Congress to support meaningful education reform which once again will make American education the envy of the world. Congress Faith-Based Initiative Plan Poses Risks to Religious Organizations 05 February 2001    Texas Straight Talk 05 February 2001 verse 5 ... Cached The proposal has risks, however. First, the federal welfare state simply may expand in size and scope. Congress seemingly is incapable of reducing spending, instead adding billions to the budget every year. This excessive spending may expand to fund private organizations in addition to current funding for federal agencies. I doubt seriously that savings created by the substitution of efficient private organizations for inefficient federal agencies will ever be reflected in the federal budget. The more likely scenario is that government spending will grow more than ever. Congress "Buy American," Unless... 12 February 2001    Texas Straight Talk 12 February 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Members of Congress often encourage us to "buy American" during their speeches on the House floor. Some members regularly place a "buy American" clause in various trade-related bills, seeking to protect domestic jobs by encouraging the purchase of American goods. Ironically, however, many of these same legislators vote to prohibit American companies from gaining access to new markets overseas. They do so by supporting our senseless embargo policies, which simply help our foreign trading competitors at the expense of American companies. Congress "Buy American," Unless... 12 February 2001    Texas Straight Talk 12 February 2001 verse 6 ... Cached The ultimate result of our embargo policies is obvious: when our government prevents American companies from selling their goods abroad, it creates an economic hardship for those companies and their employees. Similarly, when the government prevents American consumers from buying the goods or services they want from certain countries, it simply diminishes the living standards of those Americans. Washington intervention in international trade only benefits certain special interests for a short time. In the long run, the vast majority of American citizens and businesses would benefit from unfettered access to all foreign markets. An example is the relatively unregulated software industry, where American companies absolutely dominate the global marketplace. Americans don't need help competing, but they do need a government which does not hinder their access to foreign markets. By following the current policy of government-managed trade and special interest favoritism, Congress is harming the constituents it was elected to represent. The sooner we adopt policies which promote free exchange with all nations, the better off our nation and its people will be. Congress Tax Cuts Benefit All Americans 19 February 2001    Texas Straight Talk 19 February 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Last week, several prominent members of Congress held a press conference outside the Capitol to criticize President Bush's new tax proposal. The usual class warfare rhetoric was marshaled against the President, even though his plan proposes an exceedingly modest tax cut. The tired arguments against tax relief, even in the face of growing single-year tax surpluses, are not only wrong but also inherently deceitful. We've heard it all before: tax cuts favor the rich, who ought to pay more so the government can save us with wonderful federal programs. This emotionalist approach should have zero credibility with an informed public, particularly in light of decades of evidence that the economic benefits of lower taxes help far more Americans than any government "benevolence." Congress Tax Cuts Benefit All Americans 19 February 2001    Texas Straight Talk 19 February 2001 verse 4 ... Cached Beyond the deceit, however, is the unmistakable Washington mentality so clearly exhibited by the assembled politicians. One Member told the audience with a straight face that the Bush proposal needed further study to "see who gets what." In the surreal world of Congress, your income presumptively belongs to the government, which decides what members of society deserve federal largesse. Any income you get to keep is generously "given" to you by the federal government. Tax cut proposals are studied to determine the "cost" to government, and opposition is rallied with the cry "we can't afford it." Perversely, this mentality is touted by politicians who claim that tax cuts are fiscally irresponsible. They endlessly repeat the lie that Reagan-era tax cuts caused deficits, when in truth it was the inability of Congress to control spending which ballooned our national debt. In fact, 1980s tax cuts increased federal revenues, because economic output expands when government takes less. To hear big spending, pro-tax politicians claim they represent fiscal responsibility strains the limits of believability. Congress Spy Scandal Reveals Deeper Problems with Federal Police Agencies 05 March 2001    Texas Straight Talk 05 March 2001 verse 6 ... Cached It is important to understand that the Constitution contains no express authorization for federal police agencies. Article I section 8 sets out the only federal crimes, namely counterfeiting, piracy, and treason. The Founders intended all other criminal matters to be policed by the states themselves, not by federal agencies. The unconstitutional federalization of purely state criminal matters has enabled the FBI and other federal police agencies to operate far beyond constitutional limits. Apparently the FBI now considers foreign espionage part of its mission, which mirrors the unfortunate expansion of unconstitutional foreign aid and global interventionism by Congress. Congress Spy Scandal Reveals Deeper Problems with Federal Police Agencies 05 March 2001    Texas Straight Talk 05 March 2001 verse 7 ... Cached Just as Congress abandoned the Constitution to create the domestic welfare state, so too has Congress sacrificed constitutional principles to advance the global warfare state. The use of domestic agencies to engage in international espionage demonstrates clearly the mentality of our federal politicians and bureaucrats. To them federal power is limitless, to be used without regard to constitutional restrictions. The media plays along by focusing on the lurid details of the accused agent's activities, rather than the larger constitutional issues. In short, we should expect the federal government to continue intervening in the internal affairs of other countries. We are likely to see more spy scandals. The current news will be forgotten quickly, but similar abuses inevitably will result from our arrogant and misguided foreign policy. Congress Economic Woes and the Federal Reserve 19 March 2001    Texas Straight Talk 19 March 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Amazingly, some in Washington and the popular media want to blame President Bush and his administration for our current economic predicament. Never mind that growth began slowing fully one year before he took office. Apparently, certain politicians believe that the President is causing a recession merely by talking about the economic data. One prominent Congressman fretted that "we've been talking ourselves into this. Now it's happening." In other words, Mr. Bush is "talking down the economy," making a recession more likely simply by discussing reality. Congress Uncontrolled Spending Threatens Our Liberty 02 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Last week Congress began its annual budget debate. As usual, big-spending members from both parties took every opportunity to lobby for huge increases in their pet programs. I'm always amazed by the arrogance with which Congress proposes to spend taxpayer funds, but this year is even worse because of the tax overcharge (also known as the "surplus"). The overcharge presents Congress with an obvious opportunity to significantly cut taxes, but the spending frenzy threatens to swallow the tax relief debate. The big spenders are doing their best to confuse America into believing that the government cannot "afford" to cut taxes. In truth, they simply don't want Congress to face even the slightest spending constraints. Congress Uncontrolled Spending Threatens Our Liberty 02 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2001 verse 4 ... Cached The tax cut debate is wholly separate from the budget debate. I promised the voters in my district that I would uphold the Constitution and fight to make the federal government smaller. This promise compels me to vote for all tax cuts and against all spending increases. My voting record in Congress shows that I consistently vote to reduce the size of government. Congress Uncontrolled Spending Threatens Our Liberty 02 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2001 verse 5 ... Cached I certainly support President Bush's tax cut initiatives, and I will vote (or have voted) for each plank in his tax cut plan. Lowering marginal rates, eliminating the marriage penalty, abolishing the death tax- these are worthy goals for any administration. I also applaud the President for living up to his campaign promises by making these tax cuts a priority. Congress already approved marginal rate reductions and elimination of the marriage penalty; estate tax repeal legislation likely will reach the House floor in April. At this rate the President may enact his tax cut proposals by the end of the year, which would be a great accomplishment for a new administration. Certainly my own legislation would reduce taxes more drastically, but I always support any tax cut proposals as a step in the right direction. Voters in my district know that I am committed to reducing the size of the federal government, and tax reduction is an important step in returning the federal government to its proper constitutional role. Congress Uncontrolled Spending Threatens Our Liberty 02 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2001 verse 6 ... Cached However, the single greatest threat to our liberty in America is uncontrolled spending by Congress. Americans need to understand the stark reality behind the often boring and confusing budget rhetoric: Congress will spend nearly $2 trillion in 2002. This amount represents almost 11% more than Congress will spend in 2001. This massive spending funds an unbelievable number of federal departments, agencies, programs, and personnel. Most Americans understand that the federal government is far too large, yet most of their representatives in Congress continue to vote for spending increases every year. As a result, the same unconstitutional agencies grow, the same counterproductive programs are perpetuated, and the same military adventurism expands around the globe. In short, this spending insures that the federal government has more and more power over our lives, power never dreamed of nor intended by the authors of our Constitution. The more Congress spends, the less liberty we have. Congress Uncontrolled Spending Threatens Our Liberty 02 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2001 verse 7 ... Cached I particularly object to proposals to add billions to the federal Education department budget. Every year Congress spends more on education, yet our public schools continue to decline. Now Congress wants to expand the education budget by about 11%, meaning taxpayers will spend nearly $50 billion next year on more failed federal education programs. Those dollars should remain at the local level, where parents and teachers make better decisions than federal education bureaucrats. Congress Uncontrolled Spending Threatens Our Liberty 02 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2001 verse 8 ... Cached We hear Congress talk about smaller government, but the size of the federal budget increases each year. Huge amounts of federal spending could be eliminated if Congress adhered to the limited enumerated powers listed in the Constitution. I plan to continue my efforts during the summer appropriations process to fight for needed cuts in the bloated federal budget. Congress "Campaign Finance Reform" Serves Entrenched Interests in Washington 09 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 09 April 2001 verse 4 ... Cached We cannot forget that the Constitution grants Congress only limited enumerated powers, and no authority to regulate campaigns is provided. In fact, Article II expressly authorizes the regulation of elections, so the omission of any mention of campaigns is glaring. Questions have been raised about the constitutionality of campaign finance legislation based on the First amendment, but few seem to realize that Congress clearly lacks the constitutional power to enact such legislation. Congress Tax Day- A National Nightmare 16 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 16 April 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Yet tax reform was not a key issue in the 2000 elections. Why no push for a massive overhaul of the tax system? Why trim the edges of the tax code, when so many Americans want the whole system thrown out? Given the tremendous amount of popular support for real reform, why is Congress not clamoring for radical changes? Congress Tax Day- A National Nightmare 16 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 16 April 2001 verse 6 ... Cached The short answer, painful as it may be, is that Congress and the American people do not share the same goals. The real enemy of tax reform is the spending culture in Washington. Let me repeat: we will never have tax reform in this country until Congress changes its spending habits. The reform rhetoric, regardless of which party it comes from, never changes the reality that federal spending grows every year. Congress spent $1.7 trillion in the last Clinton budget; the new budget proposes to spend $2 trillion. The same unconstitutional agencies are funded, the same unwise programs are perpetuated, but at higher levels than last year. The previous budget serves merely as a baseline; the only question in any given year is how much spending will increase. Once created, no spending program is ever eliminated. The cycle goes on and on, with different administrations and different people in Congress. Congress Tax Day- A National Nightmare 16 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 16 April 2001 verse 7 ... Cached It is useless to discuss tax reform without spending reform. Who wants a 40% flat tax? Who wants a national sales tax if it adds 50% to the retail price of everything we buy? In other words, why change the tax structure if spending stays the same? Once we accept that Congress needs $2 trillion from us, the only question is how it will be collected. The current answer is the labyrinthine tax code, which pits taxpayers against each other in a political scramble to make sure the other guy pays. The truth is that Congress does not need $2 trillion, and it is obscene that such a sum is even considered. When the federal government is held to its proper constitutionally limited functions, tax reform will take care of itself. Congress Respect for Life begins with Respect for the Constitutional Rule of Law 30 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 30 April 2001 verse 4 ... Cached Thirty years later, the pro-life fight goes on. Well-intentioned pro-life advocates supported a bill in Congress last week called the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, believing it represented a step toward restoring respect for unborn life. Unfortunately, the bill does not accord any human or legal status to fetuses, but rather creates a new federal penalty for harming the mother of a fetus. The reasoning is deeply flawed: if there is to be a greater penalty for harming a pregnant woman than an ordinary woman, it must be based on the harm to the unborn child. In other words, the enhanced penalty must be for the second offense to the second human life. Yet the legislation evades this fundamental truth by refusing to recognize the fetus as a human person. So the Act is seriously flawed and will not engender new respect for unborn life. Congress Respect for Life begins with Respect for the Constitutional Rule of Law 30 April 2001    Texas Straight Talk 30 April 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Worse yet, the Act serves to legitimize and further entrench the Roe v. Wade decision. Like Roe, the Act federalizes law which the Constitution properly leaves to the states. Constitutionally, virtually all crimes are state matters. The only true federal crimes are those listed in Article I (treason, piracy, and counterfeiting); all other crimes are left to the jurisdiction of the states under the 10th Amendment. Yet Congress finds it much easier to federalize every human evil rather than uphold the Constitution and respect states' rights. Impassioned pro-life Americans might want a federal criminal law protecting fetuses, but in truth the federal government is more likely to pass laws favoring abortion rather than outlawing it. Once we allow federal control over abortion, we lose the opportunity for states to enact pro-life legislation. Numerous states already have laws that punish the act of murder against a fetus. Our focus should be on overturning Roe and getting the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters. All abortion foes must understand that the real battle should be fought at the state level, where grassroots respect for life can influence state legislatures. Congress The Case Against the Income Tax 07 May 2001    Texas Straight Talk 07 May 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Could America exist without an income tax? The idea seems radical, yet in truth America did just fine without a federal income tax for the first 126 years of its history. Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker's paycheck. In the late 1800s, when Congress first attempted to impose an income tax, the notion of taxing a citizen's hard work was considered radical! Public outcry ensued; more importantly, the Supreme Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional. Only with passage of the 16th Amendment did Congress gain the ability to tax the productive endeavors of its citizens. Congress The Case Against the Income Tax 07 May 2001    Texas Straight Talk 07 May 2001 verse 6 ... Cached America without an income tax would be far more prosperous and far more free, but we must be prepared to fight to regain the liberty we have lost incrementally over the past century. I recently introduced "The Liberty Amendment," legislation which would repeal the 16th Amendment and effectively abolish the income tax. I truly believe that real tax reform, reform that so many frustrated Americans desperately want, requires bold legislation that challenges the Washington mind set. Congress talks about reform, but the current tax debate really involves nothing of substance. Both parties are content to continue tinkering with the edges of the tax code to please various special interests. The Liberty Amendment is an attempt to eliminate the system altogether, forcing Congress to find a simple and fair way to collect limited federal revenues. Most of all, the Liberty Amendment is an initiative aimed at reducing the size and scope of the federal government. Congress The Case Against the Income Tax 07 May 2001    Texas Straight Talk 07 May 2001 verse 7 ... Cached Is it impossible to end the income tax? I don't believe so. In fact, I believe a serious groundswell movement of disaffected taxpayers is growing in this country. Millions of Americans are fed up with the current tax system, and they will bring pressure on Congress. Some sidestep Congress completely, bringing legal challenges questioning the validity of the tax code and the 16th Amendment itself. Ultimately, the Liberty Amendment could serve as a flashpoint for these millions of voices. Congress The Deepening United Nations Quagmire 14 May 2001    Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2001 verse 4 ... Cached The Congressional response to these most recent expressions of anti-American sentiment took the form of amendments to a State Department spending bill. One amendment, which passed in the House with my support, requires reinstatement of the US on the Human Rights commission before Congress pays part of nearly one billion dollars in back dues "owed" to the UN. I certainly support any measure that suspends or delays payments to the UN- I don't want one more penny of taxpayer funds going to the global bureaucrats who hold such disdain for America. Unfortunately, the measure is largely symbolic, as it is unlikely to survive in the Senate. Congress The Deepening United Nations Quagmire 14 May 2001    Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2001 verse 5 ... Cached I proposed two substantive amendments to the State Department bill, both of which were rejected without debate and without a vote. One would have eliminated US funding for UN "peacekeeping" missions; the other would have eliminated US funding for worldwide abortion and family planning. These proposals were ignored because Congress does not want to address the real issue of whether we should continue to participate in an organization that serves no national interest and threatens our national sovereignty. Congress The Deepening United Nations Quagmire 14 May 2001    Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2001 verse 6 ... Cached A sovereign nation cannot wage war at the behest of an international body, and our Constitution expressly reserves warmaking authority to Congress. This most serious power cannot be delegated, as no treaty can supersede the legislative function of Congress. Regardless of the Orwellian doublespeak, UN "peacekeeping actions" are indeed wars. The UN sends our young soldiers to fight under its command in wars that don't involve us. It uses our young soldiers to fight for causes deemed legitimate by international bureaucrats. It escalates deadly conflicts in places like Kosovo and Somalia by inevitably favoring one warring faction over another. More than anything, the UN violates our sovereignty by using our military might in undeclared, unconstitutional wars. My amendment could have eliminated UN war funding and restored proper command over our armed forces. Yet Congress refuses to recognize the problem and end our participation in UN military adventurism. Congress The Deepening United Nations Quagmire 14 May 2001    Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2001 verse 7 ... Cached Undeclared wars are only one of many threats to our sovereignty posed by the UN. The recently proposed International Criminal Court seeks to subject U.S. citizens to the jurisdiction of an unconstitutional world tribunal. Our soldiers are especially at risk, as wartime actions later could be prosecuted as "crimes of aggression" or "crimes against humanity." One amendment to the State Department bill makes a weak attempt to protect soldiers from prosecution, but the validity of the tribunal itself is not challenged. What about rights guaranteed to American citizens under the Constitution, such as due process, jury trials, the right against self-incrimination, and the prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures? The conflict between our national laws and a global court is clear. I introduced legislation earlier this year that would rescind U.S. approval of the ICC treaty (signed by a Clinton administration official), yet again Congress sidesteps the issue rather than address the central question of whether the Constitution permits American citizens to be brought before an international court. Congress The Deepening United Nations Quagmire 14 May 2001    Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2001 verse 8 ... Cached The UN unquestionably intends to exert more and more control over both our foreign and domestic policy. The UN wants to tax us, involve us in wars, determine our labor, environmental, and gun policies, and subject us to the jurisdiction of its courts. We cannot ignore this threat to our national sovereignty any longer. Congress must be held accountable whenever it unconstitutionally cedes more of its authority and our freedom to global bureaucrats. Congress The Federal Education Morass 28 May 2001    Texas Straight Talk 28 May 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Yet while the need for new policies in Washington has never been greater, the approach unfortunately remains the same: more federal spending and more federal control. Last week Congress passed legislation that massively increases funding for failed Education department programs. Although the bill was widely hailed as bipartisan, the truth is that it contained mostly liberal measures promoted by Democratic members of Congress. Key Republican provisions such as school vouchers and unconditional flexibility for local school districts were not included. Regardless of the party stamp, the bill clearly represents a big-spending, big government plan that will only serve to further entrench the wasteful federal education monopoly. Congress The Federal Education Morass 28 May 2001    Texas Straight Talk 28 May 2001 verse 8 ... Cached Congress never seems to learn that Washington does not know what is best for kids. While both parties claim to stand for education, their bureaucratic approach should no longer be tolerated by American education consumers. American parents will spend generously on their children's education, but Congress must be willing to lower tax burdens and ease the federal stranglehold on education that has destroyed our public schools. Congress Religious Liberty Thwarted by the Supreme Court 04 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 04 June 2001 verse 4 ... Cached The First amendment (or any other constitutional provision) must be strictly construed to reflect the intent of the Founding Fathers. The language is clear- Congress simply is prohibited from passing laws establishing religion or prohibiting the free exercise of religion. There certainly is no mention of any "separation of church and state", although Supreme Court jurisprudence over the decades constantly asserts this mystical doctrine. Sadly, the application of this faulty doctrine by judges and lawmakers consistently results in violations of the free exercise clause. Rulings and laws separating citizens from their religious beliefs in all public settings simply restrict religious practices. Our Founders clearly never intended an America where citizens nonsensically are forced to disregard their deeply held beliefs in public life. The religious freedom required by the Constitution should not end the moment one enters a school, courtroom, or city hall. Congress Religious Liberty Thwarted by the Supreme Court 04 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 04 June 2001 verse 6 ... Cached The Supreme Court also has ignored the obvious point that the amendment applies only to Congress, and not to the states. This means that while the federal government cannot pass laws restricting religion or use federal funds to give preference to one religion over another, state and local governments retain the right under the 10th Amendment to set their own policies regarding religious expression. The Elkhart case is a classic example of the courts ignoring this fundamental distinction between federal and local action. Bluntly, the use of Elkhart city government property is none of the federal government's business. Yet respect for state rights and enumerated powers, not to mention the property rights of the citizens of Elkhart, is nonexistent in our federal courts. The unchallenged assumption is that the federal courts have jurisdiction over all religious matters. Congress The Bush Tax Cut 11 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 11 June 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Last week President Bush signed into law the tax cut bill that ultimately emerged as a compromise between competing political interests in the House and Senate. I voted for and fully support the tax reductions contained in the bill, and I appreciate the President's efforts in making tax relief the first priority in his new administration. However, I am disappointed that Congress was unable to pass far more significant and immediate tax relief. Unfortunately, big spenders from both parties worked hard to characterize the tax cut as a "gift" from government to American taxpayers, as though the money belongs to Congress! These pro-tax politicians believe every penny of the bloated $2 trillion federal budget is essential to their beloved pork programs, hence they always argue that "we" cannot afford a tax cut. Millions of American families, however, certainly can afford a tax cut that leaves more money in their paychecks. So while the final bill passed last week represents a political compromise, I believe there is broad public support outside Washington for much larger tax reductions. Congress should not allow the wasteful spenders to prevent passage of further needed tax cut legislation over the coming months. Congress The Bush Tax Cut 11 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 11 June 2001 verse 7 ... Cached Long overdue pension and IRA reform finally has become law. The paltry $2000 IRA contribution increases incrementally to $5,000 by 2008, when it then is indexed for inflation each year. Likewise, the contribution limit for 401(k) and similar pension plans increases from the current $10,500 to $15,000. Americans over 50 are permitted to make larger "catch-up" contributions to both IRAs and 401(k)s. While I certainly believe individuals should be able to deduct unlimited amounts invested in retirement plans, it's encouraging that Congress finally raised the contribution amounts established decades ago. Congress The Bush Tax Cut 11 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 11 June 2001 verse 8 ... Cached The destructive estate tax gradually will be phased out over the coming decade. The amount an individual may own at death without being subject to the tax increases to $1 million in 2002, $1.5 million in 2004, and $2 million in 2006, while the outrageous top rate of 55% decreases gradually to 45% over the same period. After 2010, the estate tax will be fully repealed. Although I co-sponsored a bill to end the estate tax immediately, retroactive to January 2001, I am pleased that Congress finally is moving toward ending this most counterproductive and immoral tax. Congress Medical Privacy Threatened by Federal Health Bureaucrats 18 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 18 June 2001 verse 3 ... Cached The vast majority of Americans want and expect their medical records to be kept strictly confidential. Recent polls show that Americans overwhelmingly oppose giving government the power to create a national health database or issue health ID numbers. People instinctively understand that federal databases and ID numbers only serve to destroy personal privacy by making it easier for both government and the private sector to access their private medical history. Yet federal bureaucrats at the department of Health and Human Services, with the help of Congress, have succeeded in implementing regulations which place every American's medical records in the hands of the government. Worst of all, they have done so while claiming to protect our privacy! Only in Washington can so-called "medical privacy" regulations actually authorize such blatant invasions of privacy by the government. Congress Medical Privacy Threatened by Federal Health Bureaucrats 18 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 18 June 2001 verse 7 ... Cached As a physician, I have vigorously opposed the new HHS rules since they first were proposed by the Clinton administration. I introduced legislation earlier this year to prevent their implementation, but unfortunately the deadline for Congress to act on my bill expired last week. However, the fight is not lost, as the rules do not become legally enforceable until 2003. Congress still has time to pass new legislation which prohibits the federal government from gathering your private medical information. I urge every American concerned with medical privacy and quality health care to join me in the fight to keep government out of our medical records. Congress End Trade Sanctions that Hurt Texas Farmers 25 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 25 June 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Last week the Texas state legislature adopted a resolution calling for an end to U.S. economic sanctions against Cuba. Lawmakers emphasized the failure of sanctions to remove Castro from power, and the unwillingness of other nations to respect the embargo. One Representative stated: "We have a lot of rice and agricultural products, as well as high-tech products, that would be much cheaper for Cuba to purchase from Texas. All that could come through the ports of Houston and Corpus Christi." I wholeheartedly support this resolution, and I have introduced similar federal legislation in past years to lift all trade, travel, and telecommunications restrictions with Cuba. I only wish Congress understood the simple wisdom expressed in Austin, so that we could end the harmful and ineffective trade sanctions that serve no national purpose. Congress End Trade Sanctions that Hurt Texas Farmers 25 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 25 June 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Second, sanctions simply hurt American industries, particularly agriculture. Every market we close to our nation's farmers is a market exploited by foreign farmers. China, Russia, the middle east, North Korea, and Cuba all represent huge markets for our farm products, yet many in Congress favor current or proposed trade restrictions that prevent our farmers from selling to the billions of people in these areas. The department of Agriculture estimates that Iraq alone represents a $1 billion market for American farm goods. Given our status as one of the world's largest agricultural producers, why would we ever choose to restrict our exports? The only beneficiaries of our sanctions policies are our foreign competitors. Congress End Trade Sanctions that Hurt Texas Farmers 25 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 25 June 2001 verse 6 ... Cached Still, support for sanctions continues in Congress. The House International Relations committee last week considered legislation that will extend existing economic sanctions against Iran and Libya for another 5 years. While I certainly oppose this legislation, I did agree with the President that we should at least limit the time period to 2 years, so that Congress could reassess the policy sooner. I introduced an amendment to this effect, but the majority of committee members voted to continue "punishing" Iran and Libya for 5 years; presumably some members would agree to maintain sanctions indefinitely. Interestingly, the bill focuses on preventing oil exploration and development in the region, even when new sources of oil are sorely needed to reduce prices at the pump for American consumers. Congress End Trade Sanctions that Hurt Texas Farmers 25 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 25 June 2001 verse 7 ... Cached I certainly understand the emotional feelings many Americans have toward nations such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Cuba. Yet we must not let our emotions overwhelm our judgment in foreign policy matters, because ultimately human lives are at stake. For example, 10 years of trade sanctions against Iraq, not to mention aggressive air patrols and even bombings, have not ended Saddam Hussein's rule. If anything, the political situation has worsened, while the threat to Kuwait remains. The sanctions have, however, created suffering due to critical shortages of food and medicine among the mostly poor inhabitants of Iraq. So while the economic benefits of trade are an important argument against sanctions, we must also consider the humanitarian argument. Our sanctions policies undermine America's position as a humane nation, bolstering the common criticism that we are a bully with no respect for people outside our borders. Economic common sense, self-interested foreign policy goals, and humanitarian ideals all point to the same conclusion: Congress should work to end economic sanctions against all nations immediately. Congress "Patients Bill of Rights" or Federal Takeover of Medicine? 02 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 02 July 2001 verse 5 ... Cached So what should we do about the HMO mess? Before we call for government action, we should recognize that the federal government has virtually mandated HMOs on the American people First, the tax code excludes health insurance from taxation when purchased by an employer, but not when purchased by an individual. Second, the HMO Act of 1973 forced all but the smallest employers to offer HMOs to their employees. So while many in Congress are happy to criticize HMOs today, the public never hears how the present system was imposed upon the American people by federal law. In fact, one very prominent Senator now attacking managed care is on record in the 1970s lauding HMOs as "effective and efficient mechanisms for delivering health care of the highest quality." As usual, government intervention in the private market has caused unintended consequences, but Washington blames only the HMOs themselves- not the laws that created them. Congress "Patients Bill of Rights" or Federal Takeover of Medicine? 02 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 02 July 2001 verse 6 ... Cached Not surprisingly, the loudest voices on Capitol Hill now calling for a so-called "patients bill of rights" don't want to abolish the HMO mandate. Instead, more government is proposed to fix the problem. Congress wants to micromanage the system, deciding what treatments and drugs should be paid for by health insurers. Congress also wants to create new rules allowing lawsuits against employers when the HMO refuses treatment to an employee! Surely the trial lawyers will support the new laws, but Americans certainly should understand that more federal involvement will only increase the cost of health insurance for everyone. Undoubtedly, lower-paid workers will find themselves completely uninsured when their premiums increase beyond affordable levels. The truth is that any new legislation will only serve to increase government involvement in our health care system, to the detriment of us all. Without question, the true goal of some in Congress is to create a socialized medicine system. It's politically expedient to slap a "patients rights" label on legislation which simply leads us closer to a complete government takeover of medicine. Congress "Patients Bill of Rights" or Federal Takeover of Medicine? 02 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 02 July 2001 verse 7 ... Cached We can hardly blame the market for our current healthcare woes. As with all goods and services, medical care is best delivered by the free market, with competition and patient responsibility keeping costs down. Government has neither the constitutional authority nor the wisdom to determine appropriate contract terms between individuals and health insurers. Congress needs to abolish the HMO mandate and allow favorable tax treatment for individuals paying for health care directly. Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs), which are tax-deductible and tax-exempt accounts used to pay medical expenses, should be made available to all Americans. When patients spend their own money for health care, they have a direct incentive to negotiate lower costs with their doctor. When government controls health care, all cost incentives are lost. No "patients bill of rights" will help us when the money runs out. Congress UN Plans for Global Gun Control 16 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 16 July 2001 verse 4 ... Cached The gun control conference merely represents the newest UN threat to our national sovereignty. The Constitution clearly requires Congress to enact U.S. domestic laws. No treaty or international agreement can transfer this legislative power from Congress to UN bureaucrats, and the 2nd Amendment plainly prohibits restrictions on private gun ownership by U.S. citizens. Yet the trend toward unconstitutional international laws already is firmly established. The UN wants to generate the same acceptance for global gun laws that it has established for global environmental and labor laws. As the global government trend intensifies, the conflicts between internationalism and sovereign constitutional government will only increase. The UN gun control conference provides Congress and the American people with an opportunity to affirm the supremacy of the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment over the dictates of global gun-grabbers. Congress Congress Sends Billions Overseas 23 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 23 July 2001 verse 2 ... Cached Congress Sends Billions Overseas Congress Congress Sends Billions Overseas 23 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 23 July 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Congress recently plunged headlong into its summer appropriations period, making decisions about how to spend nearly two trillion dollars in 2002. Every year, Congress considers 13 massive appropriations bills that fund the federal government, and every year I'm amazed by the staggering amounts spent. The real problem, of course, is that so much of the spending funds agencies and programs not authorized in the Constitution. I especially object to foreign aid spending, which clearly is unconstitutional under the enumerated powers clause. In short, Congress has zero authority to send your tax dollars overseas, and the Founders would be dismayed by the extent of our intervention in the affairs of foreign nations. Yet few in Congress or the media ever question the wisdom of sending literally billions of U.S. tax dollars overseas. Congress Congress Sends Billions Overseas 23 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 23 July 2001 verse 4 ... Cached Last week Congress approved two separate appropriations measures that fund the State department and various foreign operations. Both are replete with foreign aid spending that either fails to achieve policy goals or actually harms American interests. The carrot-and-stick approach to foreign policy never works; we only end up with dependent allies and increasingly hostile enemies (who resent our failure to fund them). The State department bill contained nearly $1.7 billion in UN funding; $844 million for U.S. dues payments, and $850 million for so-called "peacekeeping"operations, which really are acts of war. I offered amendments to block this UN funding, which were supported by more than 60 of my colleagues. However, far more support is needed to end U.S. taxpayer funding of that most anti-American organization. Congress Congress Sends Billions Overseas 23 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 23 July 2001 verse 14 ... Cached It's ironic that Congress is sending more money abroad even as the U.S. economy limps toward recession. Those foreign aid dollars should have been returned to taxpayers to spend, save, invest, or donate to charity. In the fight against big government, we should start by demanding that Congress abide by the Constitution and stop sending U.S. taxpayer funds overseas. Congress Free Trade Means No Tariffs and No Subsidies 30 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 30 July 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Congress recently considered several trade-related measures containing massive subsidies for American corporations that sell their products overseas. For example, the Export-Import bank received more than $750 million in appropriations funding last week. The biggest beneficiary of this money is China, which has used Ex-Im funds to build nuclear power plants, expand its state-run airline, and even build steel factories that compete directly with our own struggling domestic steel industry. Undoubtedly the American companies who benefit from contracts with China are happy with these trade subsidies, but American taxpayers should not be forced to pay for corporate welfare that simply benefits some politically favored interests. I introduced an amendment to completely defund the Ex-Im bank, because true free trade cannot flourish when subsidies interfere with healthy market competition. Unfortunately, however, the debate in Washington tends to focus on which nations and companies should be subsidized, rather than whether American taxpayers should pay for trade subsidies at all. Congress Free Trade Means No Tariffs and No Subsidies 30 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 30 July 2001 verse 4 ... Cached I focus on the Constitution when voting on trade issues. This approach leads me to always oppose trade subsidies, as there is no enumerated power that gives Congress authority to send your money abroad to help big corporations sell their products. The current system allows the most powerful interests, with the largest political lobbies, to prevail in the Congressional pork subsidy game. So the biggest corporations tend to get bigger, while smaller competitors face a very uneven playing field. This is not free trade, but rather government-mangaged trade epitomized by international bodies like NAFTA and the WTO. As noted Austrian economist Murray Rothbard explained, we don't need government agreements to have free trade. In fact, true free trade means just the opposite- true free trade occurs only when government is not involved at all. We must remember that government-managed trade always means political favoritism. Merit, rather than politics, should determine which companies succeed in the export markets. Congress should abide by the Constitution and get out of the subsidy business altogether, so that real free trade can work and benefit all Americans. Congress Free Trade Means No Tariffs and No Subsidies 30 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 30 July 2001 verse 5 ... Cached The same free-market principles that compel me to oppose subsidies apply to tariffs as well. Simply put, tariffs are taxes. Like subsidies, tariffs are paid for by American taxpayers and consumers. I vote against tariffs for the same reasons I vote against any federal taxes- I want to get the federal government out of your pocketbook. Many tariff bills in Congress are touted as pro-American, but they really just raise taxes by stealth. In a free society, consumers must be allowed to buy goods from abroad if they so choose. Americans should not be taxed simply because they determine that their family budgets are better served by purchasing an imported item. Congress Free Trade Means No Tariffs and No Subsidies 30 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 30 July 2001 verse 6 ... Cached When Congress attempts to punish certain nations by imposing tariffs on their products, it really simply punishes average Americans who end up paying more for the goods they buy every day. Tariffs especially harm the poorest American families, who spend roughly half of their income on just two things: food and clothes. These basic necessities are the most highly-taxed items imported into the United States. Of course many families don't realize that they pay very high import tariffs, because the taxes are buried in the cost of everyday items. Yet estimates show that most poor families pay $1,100 annually because of import taxes. So while it's easy for Congress to impose self-righteous tariffs as a political statement, we forget that our own poorest citizens pay the real price. Congress Free Trade Means No Tariffs and No Subsidies 30 July 2001    Texas Straight Talk 30 July 2001 verse 7 ... Cached Finally, I always oppose trade sanctions against foreign nations. Sanctions are terribly ineffective foreign policy tools that harm the people, rather than the governments, of nations we hold in disfavor. Sanctions also hurt American exporters, including Texas farmers, who are prohibited from selling their products overseas. China, Russia, the middle east, North Korea, and Cuba all represent huge markets for our farm products, yet many in Congress favor current or proposed sanctions that prevent our farmers from selling to the billions of people in those nations. Given our status as one of the world's largest agricultural producers, why would we ever choose to restrict our exports? The only beneficiaries of our sanctions policies are our foreign competitors. I recently voted to against continued trade sanctions against Iran and Libya, and I have introduced legislation to end our trade embargo against Cuba. All Americans benefit from both sides of the free trade equation, and Congress should not interfere with exports any more than it should tax imports. Congress Government Cannot Mandate Solutions to Ethical Dilemmas 06 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 06 August 2001 verse 3 ... Cached The intensifying debate over cloning reached the House floor last week, in the form of legislation that not only bans the practice, but also criminalizes it. Meanwhile, the President has indicated that he soon will set forth a national policy regarding stem cell research. The controversy surrounding these issues certainly is understandable, as both involve very difficult and profound moral, legal, ethical, and religious questions. It is a mistake, however, to assume that the answers to these ethical dilemmas can be provided by Congress or the President. The notion that an all-powerful, centralized state should provide a monolithic solution to the cloning and stem cell debates is not only misguided, but also not in keeping with our Constitution. Remember, the republic was established to allow very decentralized, local decision making by states. Because the cloning and stem cell issues are so complex, we should not expect a blanket federal edict to resolve them without further dividing the American people. Congress Government Cannot Mandate Solutions to Ethical Dilemmas 06 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 06 August 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Morally complex issues require flexible approaches. The states have successfully dealt with the capital punishment issue for decades without an overriding federal law. The states also crafted their own abortion laws until 1973. Cloning and stem cell research issues likewise should be determined at the state level. Congress forgets that the Constitution grants only certain limited powers to federal lawmakers, reserving all other matters for the states under the 10th Amendment. Therefore, the constitutional approach would be to allow a mixture of moral standards, medical ethics, and local laws to determine the permissibility of cloning or stem cell research in each particular state. Unfortunately, however, neither political party has paid much attention to the Constitution during this debate, preferring instead to focus only on federal mandates and federal funding. No mention is made of states rights, even though state governments would do a much better job of reflecting local sentiment on these ethical issues. Congress Government Cannot Mandate Solutions to Ethical Dilemmas 06 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 06 August 2001 verse 6 ... Cached First and foremost, we should insist that no federal funding be used for cloning or stem cell research. Most people don't realize that much of the cloning research performed to date has been funded with federal tax dollars. We can't know whether private money would have been spent in the same manner, because federal funding reduces the incentive for private companies to invest their own research dollars- especially when there is no guarantee that cloning technology will produce worthwhile results. Indeed, my own suspicion as a medical doctor is that the potential benefits of cloning have been overblown. So cloning almost certainly would not be the pressing issue it is today if the federal government had not become involved in the first place. Now, of course, Congress wants to ban the very thing it has been funding for years. Congress Government Cannot Mandate Solutions to Ethical Dilemmas 06 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 06 August 2001 verse 7 ... Cached It is especially immoral to force Americans who oppose cloning and stem cell research to fund those activities with their tax dollars. Apparently Congress has not learned from the abortion debate that forcing taxpayers to fund very controversial programs creates tremendous resentment and dissension. In a free society, citizens are not forced to support practices that they abhor. Congress should remain neutral by following a strict policy of not subsidizing research, which encourages private funding while respecting the rights of those who do not want to pay for practices that offend their moral or religious sensibilities. Congress Legislation Needed to End the IRS Threat to Religious Freedom 13 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 13 August 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Are the political beliefs of churchgoers the business of the IRS? Not according to North Carolina Congressman Walter Jones, who recently introduced legislation that addresses the very serious issue of IRS harassment of churches that engage in conservative political activity. Specifically, the bill changes the tax code to clarify that no church or religious organization will lose its tax-exempt status because it participates in political campaigns or works to influence legislation. This bill is badly needed to end the IRS practice of threatening certain politically disfavored faiths with loss of their tax-exempt status, while ignoring the very open and public political activities of other churches. While some well-known leftist preachers routinely advocate socialism from the pulpit, many conservative Christian and Jewish congregations cannot present their political beliefs without risking scrutiny from the tax collector. The "Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act" (HR 2357) will end this political favoritism and government interference with free speech. I'm pleased to report that the Act already has been sponsored by more that 50 members of Congress. Congress What Happened to the Surplus? 20 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 20 August 2001 verse 3 ... Cached The congressional budget office recently released figures showing that the projected federal budget surplus for this year will be $75 billion less than originally forecast. Some economists and politicians believe the federal government could slip into deficit spending in 2002, and that the Social Security and Medicare trust funds could be threatened if revenues do not increase. Yet the facts about federal revenues and spending are often obscured in the debate, and the reality of government irresponsibility goes unreported. Congress What Happened to the Surplus? 20 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 20 August 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Furthermore, even the single-year surpluses are illusory when we consider that the Clinton administration raided Social Security and Medicare funds to claim a balanced budget. In reality, even the record revenues of the 1990s could not keep pace with the voracious spending appetites of Congress and the administration. So Social Security and Medicare funds were moved around to cover the difference between what was collected and what was spent each year. These unconscionable raids on your retirement and health care dollars should never be allowed, yet the practice has become commonplace in Washington. The sad truth is that the so-called Social Security and Medicare trust funds do not really exist at all, and taxpayers have every reason to be anxious about the future viability of both systems. Many Americans still believe that the FICA portion of taxes withheld from their paychecks has been set aside for them, but in fact the government holds nothing but IOUs that depend completely on future revenues. Congress and the administration should be forced to keep Social Security and Medicare funds completely separate before ever declaring that the budget is balanced. Congress What Happened to the Surplus? 20 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 20 August 2001 verse 6 ... Cached Some want to blame the shrinking surplus on the modest Bush tax cut, but declining revenues cannot be the result of rate reductions that do not take effect until 2002. Others point to the slowing economy as the source of the problem, as federal revenues for 2001 are expected to be $50 to $75 billion less than 2000. Yet the real reason the supposed surplus is disappearing is quite simple: Congress spends far too much. In fact, Congress will spend nearly $2 trillion in 2002, 11% more than it spent in 2001. Until the spending spree is brought under control, we should fully expect Congress to exceed its budget and resort to accounting tricks year after year. Congress What Happened to the Surplus? 20 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 20 August 2001 verse 7 ... Cached American voters should understand that Congress will always find a way to spend every last dollar sent to Washington. Remember, politicians get votes by promising everything to everyone, always at the expense of some other invisible taxpayers. Most politicians are unashamed of their unconstitutional pork-barrel spending, even highlighting during campaigns their "accomplishment" of spending more and more of your money. The federal government cannot maintain a budget surplus any more than an alcoholic can leave a fresh bottle of whiskey untouched in the cupboard. We must change our perception that a budget surplus is healthy for the economy, because every dollar parked in the federal treasury ultimately is spent by Congress. Those dollars could have been spent, saved, or invested in the private marketplace. With a spendthrift Congress, high federal revenues simply mean more federal spending. The only way to end the unconscionable waste is to drastically reduce federal revenues by cutting taxes. Voters need to regain control of the nation's finances by rejecting the big spenders at the ballot box. Congress Congressional Spending Threatens your Retirement 27 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 27 August 2001 verse 2 ... Cached Congressional Spending Threatens your Retirement Congress Congressional Spending Threatens your Retirement 27 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 27 August 2001 verse 4 ... Cached President Bush has been criticized in recent weeks over forecasts that the federal budget surplus will be smaller than expected at the end of 2001. Some in Congress and the media have even attempted to assert that the president's modest tax cut is somehow threatening the Social Security trust fund! This is preposterous- the economic slowdown causing the decline in federal revenues unquestionably began in the last year of the Clinton administration. The hypocrisy of the president's critics is especially galling when so many of the same politicians are the biggest spenders in Congress. After all, it is their massive unconstitutional spending which is the real threat to your Social Security dollars. Congress Congressional Spending Threatens your Retirement 27 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 27 August 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Unfortunately, the American people have been misled about how Congress spends Social Security funds. When FDR implemented the system in the 1930s, it was touted as a sensible pension plan for the working class. Most believed that Congress would put their money away for them, let it grow, and pay them a monthly retirement benefit roughly comparable to a private pension plan. In other words, the system was supposed to be a retirement savings plan, not a tax. It certainly was not supposed to serve as a massive slush fund for Congress. Congress Congressional Spending Threatens your Retirement 27 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 27 August 2001 verse 6 ... Cached The problem, however, is that Social Security is not run like a private pension plan- it's run like a pyramid scheme by a Congress that cannot stop spending. Every dollar collected is spent. There is no account full of money with your name on it- indeed, the Social Security trust fund exists only on paper. Your federal retirement benefits are nothing more than a Treasury department IOU. The money withheld from your paycheck goes to pay current retirees- and there's no guarantee that revenues will exist to pay your benefits when you retire. Congress Congressional Spending Threatens your Retirement 27 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 27 August 2001 verse 7 ... Cached The spendthrift Congress also raids Social Security to pay for a wide variety of completely unrelated pork barrel programs. In fact, this practice has become commonplace over the last decade. Congress consistently wants to spend more than the Treasury collects in general revenues each year, even in boom times when revenues are very high. At the same time, every administration is eager to claim a balanced budget. So Congress uses simple accounting tricks and spends your retirement dollars to fund an ever-growing list of programs, agencies, and federal employees. This practice amounts to nothing more than stealing from our nation's senior citizens, who spent their entire working lives paying into the Social Security system. Congress Congressional Spending Threatens your Retirement 27 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 27 August 2001 verse 8 ... Cached Fortunately, however, the public has become aware of the unconscionable spending of their Social Security dollars. Congress finally passed "Lockbox" legislation last year, although many members undoubtedly jumped on the bandwagon only when public pressure and scrutiny became intense. I'm pleased that the nonpartisan National Taxpayers Union named me as one of only seven in Congress who voted not to spend even one penny of Social Security funds on other government programs in 1999 and 2000. Congress Congressional Spending Threatens your Retirement 27 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 27 August 2001 verse 9 ... Cached When your Social Security payments are spent rather than saved, the viability of the entire system is threatened. We need to understand that the nation's demographics do not bode well for the future. The World War II generation has a much larger generation below it (the baby boomers) paying into the system. However, 20 years from now the situation will begin to be reversed, with millions of retired boomers relying on a much smaller generation of workers. Those same boomers also can be expected to live longer than any previous generation, putting further strain on the system. It's time to reexamine the system and force Congress to keeps its hands off of Social Security revenues. Remember, you deserve to get back every penny you pay into Social Security over decades of your working life. Congress Statement on the Congressional Authorization of the Use of Force 17 September 2001    Texas Straight Talk 17 September 2001 verse 2 ... Cached Statement on the Congressional Authorization of the Use of Force Congress Statement on the Congressional Authorization of the Use of Force 17 September 2001    Texas Straight Talk 17 September 2001 verse 6 ... Cached The best tool the framers of the Constitution provided under these circumstances was the power of Congress to grant letters of marque and reprisals, in order to narrow the retaliation to only the guilty parties. The complexity of the issue, the vagueness of the enemy, and the political pressure to respond immediately limits our choices. The proposed resolution is the only option we're offered and doing nothing is unthinkable. Congress Statement on the Congressional Authorization of the Use of Force 17 September 2001    Texas Straight Talk 17 September 2001 verse 13 ... Cached We are placing tremendous trust in our president to pursue our enemies as our commander-in-chief but Congress must remain vigilant as to not allow our civil liberties here at home to be eroded. The temptation will be great to sacrifice our freedoms for what may seem to be more security. We must resist this temptation. Congress What Should Government Do for the Airlines? 24 September 2001    Texas Straight Talk 24 September 2001 verse 9 ... Cached Congress also should consider privatizing more aspects of airline and airport security. Many security-intensive private industries do an excellent job of maintaining safety without depending on federal agencies. Nuclear power plants, chemical plants, oil refineries, and armored money transport companies all employ private security forces that operate very effectively. No government agency will ever care about the bottom-line security and profitability of the airlines more than the airlines themselves. Congress What Should Government Do for the Airlines? 24 September 2001    Texas Straight Talk 24 September 2001 verse 10 ... Cached Even after the huge failure by the FBI, FAA, CIA, and many other federal agencies to provide security and prevent the recent tragedy, some in Congress simply are calling for more money for these same failed agencies. Why should we increase funding for a system that is not working? Now is the time to change our approach and look for new solutions to make the flying public safe. We must reject the easy impulse to pour more federal dollars into the same failed policies. Congress Why Leave Pilots Defenseless? 01 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 01 October 2001 verse 5 ... Cached We should recognize that pilots themselves overwhelmingly favor having the choice to carry a gun when they fly. In fact, some have refused to return to work until they are permitted to do so. The airline pilot's unions, including the large Air Line Pilot's Association, recently urged Congress to allow arming of pilots. Congress, the administration, and the FAA should not second-guess the actual pilots who ultimately stand in harm's way in the event of a hijacking attempt. Surely pilots know better than any of us how best to maintain security in the skies. Congress America Retains its Sovereign Right to Respond to Attacks 08 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 08 October 2001 verse 3 ... Cached The tragic events of September 11th have led to renewed calls for the expansion of global government. Terrorism, we are told, is an international problem- and therefore the United States must subordinate its interests and defer to the international community before taking military action. Of course it's certainly commendable that President Bush is trying to build an international coalition to fight terrorism, and we should be enormously grateful to our allies for their support during these trying times. Yet we must never allow our national sovereignty to be eroded in the name of international cooperation. We cannot forget that our Constitution grants Congress and the President complete authority to provide for national defense and declare war. International support for our efforts against Bin Laden is desirable, but we do not need anyone's permission to act. Remember, the terrorists attacked on American soil and killed mostly American citizens. No international coalition can or should attempt to dictate our response. Congress Effective and Practical Counter-Terrorism Measures 15 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 15 October 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Over the past month I have introduced several bills designed to address terrorism and make Americans feel more secure. While many counter-terrorism proposals were considered in Congress last week, my belief is that the most effective steps we can take do not infringe upon the civil liberties of American citizens. In fact, I believe only a free society can ever be truly secure. The goal should be to make terrorists feel threatened, not the American people. Congress Effective and Practical Counter-Terrorism Measures 15 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 15 October 2001 verse 4 ... Cached Here are some concrete steps Congress can take immediately to make our borders, our cities, and our skies more secure: Congress Effective and Practical Counter-Terrorism Measures 15 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 15 October 2001 verse 9 ... Cached Letters of marque and reprisal: This constitutional tool can be used to give President Bush another weapon in the war on terrorism. Congress can issue letters of marque against terrorists and their property that authorize the President to name private sources who can capture or kill our enemies. This method works in conjunction with our military efforts, creating an incentive for people on the ground close to Bin Laden to kill or capture him and his associates. Letters of marque are especially suited to the current war on terrorism, which will be fought against individuals who can melt into the civilian population or hide in remote areas. The goal is to avail ourselves of the intelligence of private parties, who may stand a better chance of finding Bin Laden than we do through a conventional military invasion. Letters of marque also may help us avoid a wider war with Afghanistan or other Middle Eastern nations. Congress Effective and Practical Counter-Terrorism Measures 15 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 15 October 2001 verse 10 ... Cached End legal preferences for terrorist suspects: Congress should clarify all federal criminal statutes to insure that so-called "extralegal" preferences for criminal terrorist suspects are eliminated. In some past terrorist investigations, federal rules have been interpreted to require law enforcement to show something more than standard probable cause to obtain warrants. Law enforcement officials should never have to demonstrate anything more than standard probable cause when seeking a warrant in the war on terrorism. Congress U.S. Armed Forces Should Protect American Soil 22 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 22 October 2001 verse 3 ... Cached The tragic events of the past month have forced both President Bush and Congress to reassess the priorities of our federal government. The obvious consensus is that we have to do a better job of protecting Americans against future acts of war here on our own soil. Indeed, the President has promised that his administration will use every available resource to fight the war on terrorism. Yet our most potent resource, the U.S. military, is spread far too thin around the world to adequately protect us from growing terrorist hostilities and the possibility of a full-scale war. Congress Business as Usual in Washington? 29 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 29 October 2001 verse 3 ... Cached The first wave of shock and sadness over the events of September 11th has begun to pass, and now many Americans are looking to Washington for new policies designed to make us all safer. Yet Congress should be careful in its rush to enact new laws that may result in dangerous unintended consequences for American citizens. Congress Business as Usual in Washington? 29 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 29 October 2001 verse 9 ... Cached While Congress debates airport security, we are not even seriously considering restoring the right of pilots to carry weapons for self-defense. Even though pilots once carried guns to protect the mail, and armored truck drivers can still carry guns to protect money, protecting passengers with guns is prohibited on commercial flights. The US Air Force can shoot down a wayward aircraft, but a pilot cannot shoot down an armed terrorist. Pilots need a last of defense in the cockpit. Congress Business as Usual in Washington? 29 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 29 October 2001 verse 10 ... Cached Any talk of spending restraints is now a thing of the past. Countless groups have descended on Washington with their hands out. As usual with any disaster, this crisis is being parlayed into an "opportunity," as one former big-spending member of congress phrased it. The economic crisis that started a long time before 9/11 has swollen the ranks of those now demanding federal handouts. Congress Business as Usual in Washington? 29 October 2001    Texas Straight Talk 29 October 2001 verse 11 ... Cached There is one business that clearly will not go into a slump-the Washington lobbying industry. Last year it spent $1.6 billion lobbying Congress. This year it will spend much more. The bigger the disaster, the greater the number of vultures who descend on Washington. When I see this happening, it breaks my heart, because liberty and America suffer. It's all done in the name of justice, equality, and security. Congress Expansion of NATO is a Bad Idea 12 November 2001    Texas Straight Talk 12 November 2001 verse 4 ... Cached Consider our participation in NATO, which commits American military forces to conflicts that serve no national interest. Congress voted last week to expand NATO and increase the number of countries we are obligated to defend, even while our own military forces are stretched far to thin around the globe. Department of Defense figures show that 250,000 American troops are deployed on 6 continents and 141 nations. When we suffered the September 11th attack on our own shores, we were forced to call on foreign nations to supply AWACS planes and defend our domestic airspace! Our military entanglements, especially NATO, have left us relying on foreigners to defend us- yet this is exactly what the globalists want. They want us to lose our sense of national sovereignty, so that America's national defense becomes a matter of international consensus. Only by removing ourselves from NATO and the UN can we reassert our fundamental right to defend our borders without the approval or participation of any international coalition. Congress Expansion of NATO is a Bad Idea 12 November 2001    Texas Straight Talk 12 November 2001 verse 7 ... Cached Now Congress has endorsed the expansion of this purposeless alliance, of course taking the opportunity to grant 55 million of your tax dollars to the former Soviet bloc countries that want to join. This expansion may be profitable for weapons manufacturers and bureaucrats, but it represents another example of U.S. taxpayers subsidizing foreign governments and big corporations. It is time for the Europeans to take responsibility for their own military defense. Congress The Feds at the Airport 19 November 2001    Texas Straight Talk 19 November 2001 verse 3 ... Cached After a few weeks of trivial arguments between congressional Republicans and Democrats, Congress voted last Friday to pass a very bad aviation bill that vastly expands the scope of the federal government. The two parties really had very little to argue about, as the only real issue was whether airport security would be fully nationalized sooner or later. Sadly, only a handful of Republicans (and no Democrats) abided by the Constitution and opposed this latest federal power grab. The bill grants the airlines billions of taxpayer dollars in new subsidies, imposes new taxes on travelers, and rewards the federal unions by creating thousands of new government jobs. What the bill does not do, however, is create innovative approaches to safety in the sky. Congress The Feds at the Airport 19 November 2001    Texas Straight Talk 19 November 2001 verse 4 ... Cached A constituent of mine who happens to be an airline pilot put his opposition to federalized airport security quite succinctly: "I don't want the same people who bring me the IRS and the ATF to be in charge of airport security." In other words, federal agencies are not exactly known for their efficiency and excellence, to put it mildly. So why are we convinced that a federal takeover of airport security is such a good idea? I have spoken to many commercial pilots since the events of September 11th, and hundreds more have called, written, and emailed my office. I can assure you that not one agreed that airport security should be federalized. These men and women spend their working lives in airports and in the air; they are more vulnerable than any of us to terrorist hijackings. We should listen to their ideas about airport security before we let Congress create a massive new federal bureaucracy. Congress The Feds at the Airport 19 November 2001    Texas Straight Talk 19 November 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Remember, several federal agencies failed to prevent the September 11th attacks, including the FBI, CIA, and FAA. Now Congress wants to pour billions into the creation of a new federal workforce at airports. No doubt the federal union bosses are excited at the prospect of thousands of new members, but there is no reason to believe that an expansion of the Transportation department will produce better results. The pattern is always the same: government agencies fail to do their job, yet those same failed agencies are given more money and personnel when things go wrong. Congress The Feds at the Airport 19 November 2001    Texas Straight Talk 19 November 2001 verse 6 ... Cached Congress should be privatizing rather than nationalizing airport security. The free market can and does produce excellent security in many industries (including most European airports). Many security-intensive industries do an outstanding job of maintaining safety without depending on federal agencies. Nuclear power plants, chemical plants, oil refineries, and armored money transport companies all employ private security forces that operate very effectively. No government agency will ever care about the bottom-line security and profitability of the airlines more than the airlines themselves. Airlines cannot make money if travelers and flight crews are afraid to fly, and in a free market they would drastically change security measures to prevent future tragedies. In the current regulatory environment, however, the airlines prefer to relinquish all responsibility for security to the government, so that they cannot be held accountable for lapses in the future. Congress Can Freedom be Exchanged for Security? 26 November 2001    Texas Straight Talk 26 November 2001 verse 3 ... Cached It's easy for elected officials in Washington to tell the American people that the government will do whatever it takes to defeat terrorism. Such assurances inevitably are followed by proposals either to restrict the constitutional liberties of the American people or spend vast sums from the federal treasury. The history of the 20th century shows that the Constitution is violated most often by Congress during times of crisis; accordingly, most of our worst unconstitutional agencies and programs began during the two world wars and the Depression. Ironically, the Constitution itself was conceived in a time of great crisis. The founders intended its provision to place inviolable restrictions on what the federal government could do even in times of great distress. America must guard against current calls for government to violate the Constitution- break the law- in the name of law enforcement. Congress Can Freedom be Exchanged for Security? 26 November 2001    Texas Straight Talk 26 November 2001 verse 4 ... Cached The"anti-terrorism" legislation recently passed by Congress demonstrates how well-meaning politicians make shortsighted mistakes in a rush to respond to a crisis. Most of its provisions were never carefully studied by Congress, nor was sufficient time taken to debate the bill despite its importance. No testimony was heard from privacy experts or others from fields outside of law enforcement. Normal congressional committee and hearing processes were suspended. In fact, the final version of the bill was not made available to members before the vote! These political games should not be tolerated by the American public, especially when precious freedoms are at stake. Congress Can Freedom be Exchanged for Security? 26 November 2001    Texas Straight Talk 26 November 2001 verse 8 ... Cached In his speech to the joint session of Congress following the September 11th attacks, President Bush reminded all of us that the United States outlasted and defeated Soviet totalitarianism in the last century. The numerous internal problems in the former Soviet Union- its centralized economic planning and lack of free markets, its repression of human liberty, its excessive militarization- all led to its inevitable collapse. We must be vigilant to resist the rush toward ever-increasing state control of our society, so that our own government does not become a greater threat to our freedoms than any foreign terrorist. Congress Terrorism and the Expansion of Federal Power 10 December 2001    Texas Straight Talk 10 December 2001 verse 4 ... Cached Unfortunately, the focus in Congress seems to be on a domestic agenda that will adversely affect millions of ordinary Americans without making us any safer. An example can be found in a Customs Service bill slated for a vote in the House this week. This bill gives customs and postal agents new authority to open and inspect outgoing U.S. mail without probable cause or a warrant. I don't think many Americans are comfortable with having federal agents open and search the mail they send! Of course it's easier to pass such a measure when the public is in a fearful mood and demanding action. Ten or twenty years from now, when the recent attacks are a distant memory, federal agents will still be opening mail- mail sent by American citizens, not terrorists. Congress Terrorism and the Expansion of Federal Power 10 December 2001    Texas Straight Talk 10 December 2001 verse 6 ... Cached The cycle is repeating itself. Congress has been scrambling to pass new legislation (and spend billions of your tax dollars) since September. Most of the news laws passed and dollars spent have nothing to do with defending our borders and cities against terrorist attacks. I have already written and spoken at length concerning the dangers to our civil liberties posed by the rush to pass new laws. I do not believe that our Constitution permits federal agents to monitor phones, mail, or computers without a warrant. I do not believe that government should eavesdrop on confidential conversations between attorneys and clients. I certainly do not believe "terrorism" should be defined so broadly that American citizens expressing dissent against their own government could be investigated and prosecuted as terrorists. Congress Enron, Bankruptcy, and Easy Credit 17 December 2001    Texas Straight Talk 17 December 2001 verse 4 ... Cached It is a mistake for Congress view the Enron collapse as an justification for more government regulation. Publicly held corporations already comply with massive amounts of SEC regulations, including the filing of quarterly reports that disclose minute details of assets and liabilities. If these disclosure rules failed to protect Enron investors, will more red tape really solve anything? The real problem with SEC rules is that they give investors a false sense of security, a sense that the government is protecting them from dangerous investments. Congress Enron, Bankruptcy, and Easy Credit 17 December 2001    Texas Straight Talk 17 December 2001 verse 6 ... Cached The SEC, like all government agencies, is not immune from political influence or conflicts of interest. In fact, the new SEC chief used to represent the very accounting companies now under SEC scrutiny. If anything, the Enron failure should teach us to place less trust in the SEC and to question its existence. Yet many in Congress and the media characterize Enron's bankruptcy as an example of unbridled capitalism gone wrong. Congress Enron, Bankruptcy, and Easy Credit 17 December 2001    Texas Straight Talk 17 December 2001 verse 7 ... Cached Few in Congress seem to understand how the Federal Reserve system artificially inflates stock prices and causes financial bubbles. Yet what other explanation can there be when a company goes from a market value of more than $75 billion to virtually nothing in just a few months? The obvious truth is that Enron was never really worth anything near $75 billion, but the media focuses only on the possibility of deceptive practices by management, ignoring the primary cause of stock overvaluations: Fed expansion of money and credit. Congress Stimulus or Spending? 24 December 2001    Texas Straight Talk 24 December 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Congress adjourned for the year last week, leaving an economic stimulus bill in the hands of the Senate. Partisan spending interests in that body killed the bill, however, leaving the President without the jump start for the flagging economy that he sought. I certainly supported the President's efforts to pass tax relief this year, and it's unfortunate that the political climate in Washington prevented passage of even a very small tax cut. I only wish new spending measures were as contentious and difficult to pass through Congress! Congress Stimulus or Spending? 24 December 2001    Texas Straight Talk 24 December 2001 verse 5 ... Cached These obvious economic realities are lost on most Washington politicians, who either fail to understand basic economics or choose to ignore the long-term harm they cause. Many in Congress fought to add billions in wasteful pork spending to the stimulus bill. Of course the lobbyists and the special interests love any new spending, because it "stimulates" certain industries and groups. It's easy for politicians to point to the benefits of such spending; for example, a government contract certainly creates new jobs, right? The fallacy, of course, is that we never see the economic growth that would have been created if those tax dollars had never been sent to Washington in the first place. Remember, the private marketplace is always far more efficient that any government program. You know better than the government how to spend your own money, and the same principle applies to the economy as a whole. Spending is spending, even when politicians call it "investing in America" or "stimulus." Government cannot simply spend us into prosperity. Congress Peace and Prosperity in 2002? 31 December 2001    Texas Straight Talk 31 December 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Prosperity at home can only be achieved if we do not allow government to engage in the kind of runaway spending that marked the final months of 2001. Congress allowed terrorism to serve as an excuse for billions in special interest spending that had little or nothing to do with September 11th or fighting terrorism. The fiscal year 2002 budget, already bloated with billions of dollars in unnecessary and counterproductive spending before September 11th, has become a grab bag for every group or industry seeking a handout. Several federal agencies and bureaucracies needlessly receive more funding than originally requested by President Bush. Dangerous foreign aid spending also grows next year, sending more of your tax dollars overseas to fund dubious regimes that often later become our enemies- the Taliban being a poignant example. 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, especially when we are confronted with terrorist threats and an economic crisis. Congress Argentine Default and the IMF 14 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 14 January 2002 verse 5 ... Cached Why on earth would Congress fund such a lousy scheme? IMF supporters claim the organization exists to fight poverty in developing countries, but the evidence shows otherwise. At best IMF borrowers are governments of countries with little economic productivity; at worst the money ends up in the hands of corrupt dictators. Either way, most recipient nations end up with huge debts that they cannot service, which only adds to their poverty and instability. IMF money ultimately corrupts those countries it purports to help, by keeping afloat reckless political institutions that destroy their own economies. Congress Argentine Default and the IMF 14 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 14 January 2002 verse 6 ... Cached In truth, Congress funds the IMF because of the corporate interests it subsidizes. The huge multinational banks and corporations love the IMF. Big banks used IMF funds- taxpayer funds- to bail themselves out from billions in losses after the Asian financial crisis. Big corporations obtain lucrative contracts for a wide variety of construction projects funded with IMF loans. It's a familiar game in Washington, with corporate welfare disguised as compassion for the poor. Congress Argentine Default and the IMF 14 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 14 January 2002 verse 7 ... Cached The recent financial collapse in Argentina provides a perfect example of the folly of IMF "assistance." Although the Argentine economy has been in serious trouble for several years, IMF loans with an incredibly low interest rate of 2.6% kept pouring into the country. According to Congressman Jim Saxton, Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, this "continued lending over many years sustained and subsidized a bankrupt Argentine economic policy, whose collapse is now all the more serious. The IMF's generous subsidized bailouts lead to moral hazard problems, and enable shaky governments to pressure the IMF for even more funding or risk disaster." Yet unless Congress acts this year, U.S. taxpayers will be forced to pay for even more bad loans to equally unstable countries. Congress Argentine Default and the IMF 14 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 14 January 2002 verse 8 ... Cached The IMF was a bad idea from the very beginning- economically, constitutionally, and morally. There is no justification for taxing working Americans so the federal government can bail out foreign leaders and Wall Street. Participation in the IMF costs us billions every year, billions that should be returned to taxpayers. Hopefully the Argentine debacle will cause Congress to rethink our foolish participation in the IMF. Congress WTO Demands Change in U.S. Tax Laws 21 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 21 January 2002 verse 3 ... Cached Many Americans already have grave concerns about the loss of sovereignty inherent in our participation in global government organizations like the UN and the WTO (World Trade Organization). Few understand, however, the extent to which Congress already capitulates to the globalists when it writes the laws that affect all of us. Congress WTO Demands Change in U.S. Tax Laws 21 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 21 January 2002 verse 4 ... Cached Last week, the WTO appellate panel ruled that U.S. tax rules exempting some corporate income earned overseas from taxation constitute an "illegal subsidy." Incredible as it seems to liberty-minded Americans, the WTO and the Europeans are now telling us our laws are illegal and must be changed. It's hard to imagine a more blatant example of a loss of U.S. sovereignty. Yet there is no outcry or indignation in Congress at this naked demand that we change our laws to satisfy the rest of the world. I've yet to see one national politician or media outlet even suggest the obvious, namely that our domestic laws are simply none of the world's business. Congress WTO Demands Change in U.S. Tax Laws 21 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 21 January 2002 verse 5 ... Cached The sad irony is that Congress already changed our corporate tax rules last year in an attempt to appease the Europeans, who had filed a complaint with the WTO about our treatment of corporate overseas earnings. The Europeans accuse us of "subsidizing" U.S. companies by not taxing every last penny of their foreign income. Yet virtually all European countries have what is known as a "territorial" tax system, meaning they do not tax their citizens and companies on income earned outside the country at all. By contrast, America has a "worldwide" tax system, which imposes tax on income earned anywhere. Even so, the WTO continues to accuse of us maintaining an unfair practice, setting the stage for Europe to seek billions of dollars in sanctions. Congress WTO Demands Change in U.S. Tax Laws 21 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 21 January 2002 verse 6 ... Cached The solution to the WTO complaint is obvious- we should stop taxing foreign income altogether. Surely the Europeans could not object if we changed our system to more closely resemble theirs. After all, the IRS should not be taxing activity outside the U.S. anyway- it's outrageous that American citizens are actually less free than the socialist Europeans when it comes to income earned abroad. Prominent members of the Republican congressional leadership have stated they would prefer a territorial tax system, and I intend to hold them to it by introducing legislation that will end the taxation of foreign income. Congress WTO Demands Change in U.S. Tax Laws 21 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 21 January 2002 verse 7 ... Cached This latest affront to our sovereignty makes it clear we must get out of the WTO if we hope to avoid further international meddling in our domestic affairs. The WTO is not about free trade, but rather government-managed trade that benefits certain corporate interests. The Constitution grants Congress, and Congress alone, the authority to regulate trade and craft tax laws. Congress cannot cede even a small part of that authority to the WTO or any other international body, nor can the President legally sign any treaty which purports to do so. America's Founders never intended for our nation to become entangled in international trade agreements, and they certainly never intended to have our laws overridden by international bureaucrats. Congress may not object to being pushed around by the WTO, but the majority of Americans do. Congress Enron: Under-Regulated or Over-Subsidized? 28 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 28 January 2002 verse 3 ... Cached New revelations concerning wrongdoings at Enron seem to surface every day, and the scandal took a tragic turn last week with the suicide of a top Enron executive. In Washington, Congress has been scrambling to assemble hearings that will make various members look properly outraged and committed to reform. The popular media and some politicians want to portray Enron as a reckless company whose problems stemmed from a lack of federal oversight. Already legislation has been introduced to force all publicly traded companies to submit to federal audits. Congress Enron: Under-Regulated or Over-Subsidized? 28 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 28 January 2002 verse 5 ... Cached Enron provides a perfect example of the dangers of corporate subsidies. The company was (and is) one of the biggest beneficiaries of Export-Import Bank subsidies. The Ex-Im bank, a program that Congress continues to fund with your tax dollars, essentially makes risky loans to foreign governments and businesses for projects involving American companies. The Bank, which purports to help developing nations, really acts as a naked subsidy for certain politically-favored American corporations- especially corporations like Enron that lobbied hard and gave huge amounts of cash to both political parties. Its reward was more that $600 million in cash via six different Ex-Im financed projects. Congress Enron: Under-Regulated or Over-Subsidized? 28 January 2002    Texas Straight Talk 28 January 2002 verse 8 ... Cached The point is that Enron was intimately involved with the federal government. While most in Washington are busy devising ways to "save" investors with more government, we should be viewing the Enron mess as an argument for less government. It is precisely because government is so big and so thoroughly involved in every aspect of business that Enron felt the need to seek influence through campaign money. It is precisely because corporate welfare is so extensive that Enron cozied up to Congress and the Clinton administration. It's a game every big corporation plays in our heavily regulated economy, because they must when the government, rather than the marketplace, distributes the spoils. Congress Why Is There So Much Money In Politics? 04 February 2002    Texas Straight Talk 04 February 2002 verse 4 ... Cached If the Senator and so many others in Congress believe so strongly in campaign finance reform, why is money in politics such a big problem? In other words, why don't these politicians simply put their money where their mouth is, act with integrity, and do a better job of policing their own campaigns? Congress Why Is There So Much Money In Politics? 04 February 2002    Texas Straight Talk 04 February 2002 verse 6 ... Cached The so-called reform legislation being proposed is clearly unconstitutional. The First amendment unquestionably grants individuals and businesses the free and unfettered right to advertise, lobby, and contribute to politicians as they choose. More importantly, the Constitution does not grant Congress the power to regulate campaigns. In fact, article II expressly authorizes the regulation of elections, so the omission of campaigns is glaring. While some in the media have raised First amendment questions, few seem to understand that Congress clearly lacks the constitutional power to regulate campaigns at all. Congress Why Is There So Much Money In Politics? 04 February 2002    Texas Straight Talk 04 February 2002 verse 7 ... Cached Campaign finance reform really means more regulations, more controls, more telling the American people how they can spend their money and how they can lobby Congress. Your freedoms should not be restricted because some politicians cannot control themselves. The problem is that there are members of Congress who yield to the temptation and influence of money, who effectively sell their votes to those who can give them money and keep them in office. If enough members did not yield to the temptation, they would not have to posture with phony campaign finance reform bills and they would not have to undermine the Constitution. Congress Optimism or Pessimism for the Future of Liberty? 11 February 2002    Texas Straight Talk 11 February 2002 verse 6 ... Cached A danger also exists that the United States is becoming a police state. Just a few decades ago, this would have been unimaginable. The American republic was not designed with federal police powers, which should be the sole prerogative of the states. The military should not be used as police. Unfortunately, many Americans now welcome the use of military troops to police our public places, especially airports. Even before September 11th, more than 80,000 armed federal bureaucrats patrolled the countryside, checking for violations of federal laws and regulations. That number since September has increased by nearly 50%- and it will not shrink anytime soon. Meanwhile, a military takeover of homeland security looks certain. Can freedom and prosperity survive if the police state continues to expand? History demonstrates that Congress must not ignore this threat. Congress Don't Believe the Hype- "Campaign Finance Reform" Serves Entrenched Interests 18 February 2002    Texas Straight Talk 18 February 2002 verse 10 ... Cached Virtually all of my campaign support comes from individuals, the vast majority of whom give only small amounts. I have never allowed a special interest, corporation, or lobbyist to influence my vote in Congress. Yet Members who voted for last week's reform bill essentially are saying: "Stop us before we succumb to the special interest groups. We just can't control ourselves." They will continue to succumb, of course; they just want you to think otherwise. Congress The Voucher Debate and the Failure of Public Education 25 February 2002    Texas Straight Talk 25 February 2002 verse 6 ... Cached However, the voucher debate really ignores the more important question of whether public schools should be run by federal or local government. The Constitution does not authorize any federal involvement in education; Article I grants Congress no authority to create, fund, or regulate schools at all. Therefore, under the 10th Amendment public education should be purely a state and local matter. This means Congress should not be taxing you to fund a huge federal education bureaucracy that exercises dictatorial control over curriculum and standards nationwide. Those tax dollars should be left with parents and local voters, who can best decide how to allocate precious education resources. Public schools should be funded at the local level with local tax dollars, where waste is minimized and accountability is greatest. The failed federal system of public school funding has become a bureaucratic black hole, where the majority of tax dollars never reach the classroom. Congress The Voucher Debate and the Failure of Public Education 25 February 2002    Texas Straight Talk 25 February 2002 verse 7 ... Cached The Supreme Court, like Congress, should simply follow the Constitution. The Constitution allows states and local governments to decide for themselves whether to have a voucher program. It does not, however, allow the federal government to fund, regulate, or control those voucher programs. The emphasis on local control established in the Constitution is especially important when it comes to education, and it is no coincidence that our schools have declined as federal control has increased. It’s time to end the 40-year Washington stranglehold on education by returning control -which means returning tax dollars- to parents and local school systems. The best immediate approach is to give parents a federal tax credit for amounts spent on education. Ultimately, however, we can only resurrect our public schools by following the Constitution and ending the federal education monopoly. Congress Before We Bomb Baghdad... 04 March 2002    Texas Straight Talk 04 March 2002 verse 4 ... Cached Yet I remain convinced we should be very cautious before we send troops and bombs into Iraq. It's simple to point out that Saddam Hussein is a ruthless dictator, but it's not so easy to demonstrate that he poses a threat to us. We should also remember that the congressional resolution passed immediately after September 11th, which I supported, authorized military force only against those directly responsible for the attacks- and there is no evidence whatsoever that Iraq played a role in those attacks. This leaves me with two serious concerns: first, the near-certainty that this coming war will be undeclared, and hence unconstitutional; and second, that such a war does not serve our best interests. Congress Before We Bomb Baghdad... 04 March 2002    Texas Straight Talk 04 March 2002 verse 5 ... Cached First and foremost, we must follow the Constitution and require that the President secure a congressional declaration of war before he proceeds against Iraq. Undeclared wars represent one of the greatest threats to our constitutional separation of powers over the last 50 years, beginning with our "police action" in Korea. This most sacred legislative function- the power to send our young people into harm's way- must be exercised by Congress alone, the body most directly connected to the electorate. Congress Before We Bomb Baghdad... 04 March 2002    Texas Straight Talk 04 March 2002 verse 6 ... Cached The undeclared wars waged by various Presidents during the last century represent a very serious usurpation of the legislative function, adding greatly to the rise of the "imperial Presidency" that we witnessed so clearly during the Clinton years. I'm always amazed that Congress is quite willing to simply give away one of its greatest powers, especially when it spends so much time otherwise trying to expand its powers by passing extra-constitutional legislation. The reason for this, I'm afraid, is Congress learned in Vietnam that wars sometimes go very badly, and few want to be on record as having voted for a war if they can avoid it. So despite all the talk in Congress of "supporting the President," nobody wants to really support him by doing the obvious and passing a declaration of war. Congress Before We Bomb Baghdad... 04 March 2002    Texas Straight Talk 04 March 2002 verse 8 ... Cached Congress should not allow any administration to take our nation to war without the consent of the people. I fear that we are about to embark on an undeclared, unconstitutional war in Iraq that is exceedingly unwise and fraught with unforeseen consequences. This war will have nothing to do with US national security or Iraqi aggression. It will, however, make us all less secure by antagonizing millions of Muslims who understand the necessity of our actions against Al-Queda, but who will object to an invasion of Iraq. Congress The Truth about Government Debt 11 March 2002    Texas Straight Talk 11 March 2002 verse 4 ... Cached The bottom line is that our federal government almost always manages to spend more than it brings in each year in revenues. This is particularly troubling when we consider that taxes take more out of the legitimate private economy (as a percentage of GDP) than at any time since World War II. Still, Treasury Secretary O'Neill recently asked Congress to raise the "debt ceiling," which is based on a federal law that sets a limit on the total amount of debt the US government can have. The current debt ceiling is about $5.9 trillion (roughly the current national debt); O'Neill wants it raised to $6.7 trillion. The reason is that Congress is expected to increase spending even faster than usual over the next few years due to the war on terror. Congress The Truth about Government Debt 11 March 2002    Texas Straight Talk 11 March 2002 verse 6 ... Cached Federal Reserve chairman Greenspan recently endorsed a political trick to make the debt seem smaller simply by redefining those IOUs. The current law treats certain government obligations such as Social Security payments and veteran pensions as debts, meaning they must be included within the permitted debt ceiling. Of course they are debts, just like any other bill that will have to be paid in the future. Greenspan would have us redefine these obligations as "intergovernment accounts," which magically changes them from debts to "accrued liabilities." This semantic shift would free up lots of room under the debt ceiling for more borrowing. Congress could even use this approach to lower the ceiling and claim a victory for fiscal responsibility while still borrowing more! The reality, of course, is that those old debts will still exist, but we won't have to think about them for a few more years. Congress The Truth about Government Debt 11 March 2002    Texas Straight Talk 11 March 2002 verse 8 ... Cached When government borrows money, the actual borrowers- big spending administrations and politicians- never have to pay it back. Remember, administrations come and go, members of congress become highly-paid lobbyists, and bureaucrats retire with fat pensions. The benefits of deficit spending are enjoyed immediately by the politicians, who trade pork for votes and enjoy adulation for promising to cure every social ill. The bills always come due later, however- and nobody ever looks back and says, "Congressman so-and-so got us into this mess when he voted for all that spending 20 years ago." For government, the federal budget is essentially a credit card with no spending limit, billed to somebody else. We should hardly be surprised that such a government racks up huge amounts of debt! By contrast, responsible people restrain their borrowing because they will someday have to pay the money back. It's time for American taxpayers to understand that every dollar will have to be repaid. We should have the courage to face our grandchildren knowing that we have done all we can to end the government spending spree. Congress American Foreign Policy and the Middle East Powder Keg 01 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 01 April 2002 verse 5 ... Cached Congress and each successive administration pledge their political, financial, and military support for Israel. Yet while we call ourselves a strong ally of the Israeli people, we send billions in foreign aid every year to some Muslim states that many Israelis regard as enemies. From the Israeli point of view, many of the same Islamic nations we fund with our tax dollars want to destroy the Jewish state. So while Israeli Prime Minister Sharon understandably touts his close alliance with the U.S., many average Jews see America as hypocritically hedging its bets. Congress A Court of No Authority 08 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 08 April 2002 verse 8 ... Cached The United Nations and the ICC are inherently incompatible with national sovereignty. America must either remain a constitutional republic or submit to international law, because it cannot do both. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and the conflict between adhering to the rule of law and obeying globalist planners is now staring us in the face. At present we fortunately have a President who opposes the ICC, but ultimately it is up to Congress- and concerned citizens- to insure that no American ever stands trial before an international court. Congress Were the Founding Fathers Wrong about Foreign Affairs? 15 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 15 April 2002 verse 4 ... Cached I was immediately attacked for offering such heresy. We’ve reached the point where virtually everyone in Congress, the administration, and the media blindly accepts that America must become involved (financially and militarily) in every conflict around the globe. To even suggest otherwise in today’s political climate is to be accused of "aiding terrorists." It’s particularly ironic that so many conservatives in America, who normally adopt an "America first" position, cannot see the obvious harm that results from our being dragged time and time again into an intractable and endless Middle East war. The empty justification is always that America is the global superpower, and thus has no choice but to police the world. Congress Are Your Taxes Too Low? 22 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 22 April 2002 verse 4 ... Cached You may be tired of thinking about and paying taxes after April 15th, but many in Washington think you’re not paying enough. In fact, the preposterous idea that Americans are undertaxed is accepted as truth by a significant number of the members of Congress. These members believe today’s taxpayers are perpetrating an injustice by not paying more taxes, and that most of the money you make presumptively belongs to the government. Since your money really belongs to the government, tax cuts represent a government "giveaway." Congress Are Your Taxes Too Low? 22 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 22 April 2002 verse 5 ... Cached This mindset revealed itself last week during a vote on the House floor. At issue were the exceedingly modest tax cuts passed by Congress last year, which the Senate modified to expire in 10 years. The bill voted upon would remove the expiration date and make the cuts permanent (at least until Congress tries to raise taxes again). This simple measure was stridently opposed by almost 200 members, many of whom subjected us to lectures about the "irresponsibility" of not revisiting tax cuts often to make sure the government has plenty of money. These lawmakers (apparently) really believe taxes have been cut to the bone and government starved to its limits. Congress Are Your Taxes Too Low? 22 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 22 April 2002 verse 6 ... Cached Nothing could be further from the truth. Federal spending is wildly out of control, as evidenced by an annual budget that doubled between 1990 and 2000. Congress will spend $2.3 trillion in 2003, an astounding 22% more than 1999. Federal taxes now consume more of the legitimate private economy (as a percentage of GDP) that at any other time in our nation’s history except WWII. The federal budget is full of billions in unconstitutional and wasteful pork, and no serious person can argue otherwise. Those who oppose tax cuts simply use populist arguments to mask their support for the special-interests that benefit from uncontrolled spending. Congress Are Your Taxes Too Low? 22 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 22 April 2002 verse 7 ... Cached No tax debate in Congress would be complete without some members pointing out the terrible fact that some Americans make more money than others. The tired class warfare argument, namely that the rich somehow don’t pay their fair share, remains endlessly popular on the Hill- even though it is demonstrably false. IRS statistics show that the top 1% of earners pay a whopping 36% of federal income taxes, while the top 5% pay 55%! In fact, earners in the top half account for 96% of income tax revenues, while the bottom half pays only 4%. Surely Marx would approve of this tremendously progressive tax system, yet the media and the left continue to perpetuate the myth that wealthy Americans use an unfair tax system to enrich themselves. Congress Are Your Taxes Too Low? 22 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 22 April 2002 verse 8 ... Cached What the collectivists in Washington always seem to forget is that wealthy Americans are not a static group, but rather a dynamic one- because we still have class mobility in our relatively capitalist society. In other words, some taxpayers in the bottom 50% intend to move into the upper 50%, where they quickly will be thrust into higher tax brackets and deemed "rich" by the IRS. In fact, a family needs only an income of about $53,000 to find themselves in the top 25% of all taxpayers. These upwardly mobile Americans, whom Congress ought to be encouraging, presumably won’t be too excited about tax hikes for the rich when they find themselves labeled as such and footing the bill for a spendthrift Congress. Congress Are Your Taxes Too Low? 22 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 22 April 2002 verse 9 ... Cached An income tax would be wholly unnecessary if Congress restrained itself and spent your tax dollars only on legitimate constitutional functions like national defense. Remember, the federal government operated for more than 120 years without an income tax, using excise taxes to raise necessary revenues. Rather than squabbling about tiny changes in the existing tax code, Congress ought to be drastically reducing spending and scrapping the incomprehensible tax code altogether. Congress Predictions for an Unwritten Future 29 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 29 April 2002 verse 13 ... Cached The United States- with Tony Blair as head cheerleader- will attack Iraq without proper congressional authority; and a major war, the largest since World War II, will result. Congress Predictions for an Unwritten Future 29 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 29 April 2002 verse 23 ... Cached Congress and the President will shift radically toward expanding the size and scope of the federal government. This will satisfy both the liberals and conservatives. Military and police powers will grow, satisfying conservatives. The welfare state, both domestic and international, will expand, satisfying the liberals. Both sides will endorse military adventurism overseas. Congress Predictions for an Unwritten Future 29 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 29 April 2002 verse 24 ... Cached This is the most important of my predictions: policy changes could prevent all of the previous predictions from happening. I hope and pray that Congress will prove me wrong and work to save our republic. The actions Congress takes now will determine whether America can return to an era of peace and prosperity in the foreseeable future. Congress Pilots vs. Bureaucrats 06 May 2002    Texas Straight Talk 06 May 2002 verse 3 ... Cached More than 20,000 airline pilots presented a petition to Congress last week, demanding the right to carry guns in the cockpit to prevent future terrorist hijackings. Pilots from all of the major unions, including the large AirLine Pilots Association, overwhelmingly favor having the choice to carry a gun when they fly. These pilots are the men and women who actually stand in harm's way in the event of future hijacking attempts, and surely we should trust their judgment over the judgment of armchair bureaucrats and pundits in Washington. Yet the Transportation department continues to ignore both the wisdom of pilots and federal law by refusing to implement rules allowing firearms in the cockpit. Congress Pilots vs. Bureaucrats 06 May 2002    Texas Straight Talk 06 May 2002 verse 4 ... Cached Pilots already fought this fight last November. Congress passed an armed pilots provision as part of a larger airline safety bill, and the President signed the legislation. Transportation Secretary Mineta, however, has a long history of opposition to gun rights as a Congressman- and his anti-gun bias is interfering with his ability to do his job. He is no longer a lawmaker. His job now is to implement the laws passed by Congress. Yet like the IRS, the Transportation department simply won't follow laws it doesn't like. This illustrates perfectly how we have come to be governed by unaccountable, unelected bureaucrats who constantly undermine the legislative process. Congress Pilots vs. Bureaucrats 06 May 2002    Texas Straight Talk 06 May 2002 verse 7 ... Cached Legislation I introduced last September simply repeals current Transportation department regulations that prevent airlines from training and arming pilots. This approach puts the decision to arm pilots directly in the hands of the private individuals and companies that actually fly and own the aircraft that are at risk from hijacking. The weaker legislation already passed by Congress allows the Transportation department to establish and run a certification program for pilots wanting to carry guns, which requires active participation by the foot-dragging Mineta. Clearly he will do everything possible to prevent implementation of any government-run armed pilots program. Congress President Bush Delivers Victory over UN Court! 13 May 2002    Texas Straight Talk 13 May 2002 verse 4 ... Cached On the heels of the Bush administration decision, I introduced legislation aimed at prohibiting the use of taxpayer funds for the unconstitutional tribunal. I wanted to make sure that Congress took advantage of the moment and supported the administration by ensuring that your tax dollars aren’t used to pay for another UN scheme, especially one that the our President expressly rejected. My bill was supported by the House leadership, and several of my congressional colleagues joined as co-sponsors. The bill, which expressed that Congress should prohibit appropriations for the ICC, passed overwhelmingly as an amendment to a larger defense bill. Congress President Bush Delivers Victory over UN Court! 13 May 2002    Texas Straight Talk 13 May 2002 verse 6 ... Cached We must reassert that the Supreme Court is the court of highest authority for our nation, and that every American citizen enjoys protections guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. President Bush gave notice to the international community last week that the United States will not participate in a global court that undermines the checks and balances of our Constitution. He deserves our praise and our support for bravely standing against the ICC and against UN bureaucrats who have so little regard for our laws. Congress should follow his lead and respect the Constitution by refusing to send even one penny of taxpayer funds to the ICC bureaucrats. Congress No Taxpayer Funds for Nation-Building in Afghanistan 27 May 2002    Texas Straight Talk 27 May 2002 verse 3 ... Cached Whenever I discuss the issue of foreign aid with my colleagues, I always remind them that in all my years serving in Congress, I’ve never once had a constituent ask me to send more money overseas. Most Americans instinctively understand what the Constitution makes clear: Congress has no business sending tax dollars outside the country. Yet once again Congress has ignored the Constitution, this time voting to send $1.2 billion of your tax dollars to Afghanistan- even as our own troops engage in ongoing combat with hostile Taliban forces that many Afghans still support. It’s frankly almost schizophrenic to send billions in aid to the same country that harbors some of our most virulent enemies. Congress No Taxpayer Funds for Nation-Building in Afghanistan 27 May 2002    Texas Straight Talk 27 May 2002 verse 4 ... Cached Perhaps the legislation Congress passed last week should have been named the "Afghanistan Territorial Expansion Act," because it essentially treats that troubled nation like a new American territory. In fact, I doubt we give Guam, Puerto Rico, or other American territories anywhere near $1.2 billion every few years, so maybe we should consider full statehood for Afghanistan. This new State of Afghanistan even comes complete with an American governor, which the bill charitably calls a "coordinator." This coordinator essentially has the task of making sure the new Afghan government meets with our approval; never mind what ordinary Afghan wants. We say we want the Afghans to freely and democratically elect their own leaders, but only if we approve of the choices. In effect, we want to install a new government of our choosing. Congress No Taxpayer Funds for Nation-Building in Afghanistan 27 May 2002    Texas Straight Talk 27 May 2002 verse 5 ... Cached The President promised that we would not engage in nation-building in Afghanistan, and he did not sponsor or seek support for the bill passed by Congress. Yet when we fill a nation’s empty treasury, when we fund and train its military, when we arm it with our weapons, when we try to impose our standards and values within it, indeed when we attempt to impose a government and civil society of our own making upon it, we are nation building. There is no other term for it. Whether Congress wants to recognize it or not, this is neo-colonialism. Afghanistan will be unable to sustain itself economically for a very long time to come, and American taxpayers will pay the bills. This sad reality was inevitable from the moment we decided to invade it and replace its government, rather than use covert forces to eliminate the individuals truly responsible for September 11th. Perhaps the saddest truth is that Bin Laden remains alive and free even as we begin to sweep up the rubble from our bombs. Congress Congress Spends, Future Generations Pay the Bills 03 June 2002    Texas Straight Talk 03 June 2002 verse 2 ... Cached Congress Spends, Future Generations Pay the Bills Congress Congress Spends, Future Generations Pay the Bills 03 June 2002    Texas Straight Talk 03 June 2002 verse 3 ... Cached Congress recently passed the so-called "supplemental" spending bill, wasting billions of your tax dollars supplementing the already swollen $2.3 trillion 2003 federal budget. Congress loves the annual supplemental bill, because unlike other spending bills, the supplemental does not fund any particular federal departments or agencies. This means members and the administration can find a home for pet spending projects that would not be permitted in a defense or education bill. This year, however, the supplemental also provides convenient cover for the big-spenders to quietly increase the federal debt ceiling. Congress Congress Spends, Future Generations Pay the Bills 03 June 2002    Texas Straight Talk 03 June 2002 verse 4 ... Cached The problem is simple: Congress spends way too much. 2002 federal revenues are down compared to previous years, but Congress needs money to fund the post-September 11th spending spree. Faced with this pesky economic reality, Congress must do what any other organization does when spending exceeds income: borrow money. However, federal law sets a limit on the total amount of debt the Treasury can carry, and the limit- a whopping $5.95 trillion- has been reached. Since Congress apparently cannot control spending, the debt limit must be raised, this time by $700 billion. Yet no member, especially those who promote themselves as fiscal conservatives, wants to be on record as voting to increase the national debt. Congress Congress Spends, Future Generations Pay the Bills 03 June 2002    Texas Straight Talk 03 June 2002 verse 8 ... Cached Of course debt and credit, wisely used, can be proper tools for families and businesses. Yet when government borrows money, the actual borrowers- big spending administrations and members of Congress- never have to pay the bills. Instead, they enjoy the political benefits of delivering endless unconstitutional pork programs to their constituents and special interests, while future generations of taxpayers are stuck with the bill. It is time for voters to think about their grandchildren and stop rewarding spendthrift politicians with 97% reelection rates. Debt does matter, and it’s cowardly to ask future generations to pay for our extravagance. Congress Imperial Transportation Bureaucrat Says Yes to Lavish Offices, No to Armed Pilots 24 June 2002    Texas Straight Talk 24 June 2002 verse 6 ... Cached This is the same Mr. Magaw who recently announced at a Transportation committee hearing that he "would not allow" pilots to carry guns. That’s right, he would not allow it. In other words, the undersecretary believes that he, rather than Congress, will determine federal policy regarding armed pilots. This incredibly arrogant assumption of legislative power by an unelected bureaucrat should outrage every member of Congress, and every American who cares about the separation of federal powers. Apparently Mr. Magaw cares little for a Constitution that authorizes Congress, not unelected bureaucrats, to make the laws. Congress Imperial Transportation Bureaucrat Says Yes to Lavish Offices, No to Armed Pilots 24 June 2002    Texas Straight Talk 24 June 2002 verse 8 ... Cached We’ve already seen the Transportation department, headed by anti-gun Secretary Mineta, refuse to implement the armed pilots program passed by Congress last fall. The department must be learning from the IRS, which often simply refuses to allow new deductions passed by Congress. Both agencies demonstrate the disturbing trend toward lawmaking by unaccountable administrative agencies. Congress Imperial Transportation Bureaucrat Says Yes to Lavish Offices, No to Armed Pilots 24 June 2002    Texas Straight Talk 24 June 2002 verse 10 ... Cached A new armed pilots bill recently passed in the Aviation subcommittee, and may see a vote later this year. While I support this bill, which essentially makes pilots federal deputies, my own legislation is more direct. My bill simply allows the airlines and pilots to decide for themselves whether to allow guns in the cockpit. This approach respects both the Second amendment and the private property rights of the airlines. While no amount of security can guarantee another terrorist won’t again board an aircraft with a weapon, Congress can make sure pilots are not left defenseless by passing a direct armed pilots bill and overseeing its immediate implementation. Congress What does the First Amendment Really Mean? 01 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 01 July 2002 verse 3 ... Cached The entire nation seemed to condemn last week’s federal court ruling that the pledge of allegiance cannot be recited in schools. The notion that the phrase "one nation under God" renders the pledge unconstitutional is ridiculous to most Americans, who strongly believe that expressions of religious belief should be an integral part of public life. Yet although the public outcry against this terrible ruling is understandable, the real issue of religious freedom has not been addressed by Congress or the media. Congress What does the First Amendment Really Mean? 01 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 01 July 2002 verse 5 ... Cached It’s important to recognize that the First amendment applies only to Congress. Remember, the first sentence starts with "Congress shall make no law..." This means that matters of religious freedom and expression should be decided by the states, with disputes settled in state courts. The First amendment acts as a simple check on federal power, ensuring that the federal government has no jurisdiction or authority whatsoever over religious issues. The phony "incorporation" doctrine, dreamed up by activist judges to pervert the plain meaning of the Constitution, was used once again by a federal court to assume jurisdiction over a case that constitutionally was none of its business. Congress Securing the Homeland? 08 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 08 July 2002 verse 2 ... Cached Various congressional committees will spend the summer drafting the Homeland Security Act, legislation that will create the largest new federal bureaucracy in several decades. Only broad proposals exist at the moment, but the debate over details may reveal how special interests and power hungry bureaucrats stand in the way of common sense. We certainly don’t need another federal jobs program that does nothing to make us safe from terrorism, nor should we be eager to pour more money into the same agencies and policies that failed us on September 11th. Congress Securing the Homeland? 08 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 08 July 2002 verse 4 ... Cached There are commonsense measures Congress can take to make America safer immediately, measures that do not require the creation of new bureaucracies or the trampling of constitutional liberties. Congress Securing the Homeland? 08 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 08 July 2002 verse 7 ... Cached Congress also should urge the administration to take a hard look at some of our so-called allies in the Middle East. Several of my colleagues recently joined me in requesting that Secretary Powell add Saudi Arabia to the State department list of nations "not fully cooperating" with our anti-terrorism efforts. Congress Securing the Homeland? 08 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 08 July 2002 verse 8 ... Cached Evidence that Saudi Arabia fosters and promotes terrorism is overwhelming. The majority of al-Qaeda members are Saudis, as were most of the September 11th hijackers. Indeed, most of the prisoners being held in Guantanamo hold Saudi passports. This is hardly surprising, as the nation is home to the radical Islamic Wahabbi sect- a sect that calls for the wholesale destruction of America and the West. The Saudi government clearly has played a role in incubating and spreading radical anti-Americanism throughout the Middle East, yet the administration continues to treat the Saudis as allies, largely because of our oil dependency. Congress should demand an end to this hypocrisy, and the administration should demand that Saudi Arabia stop harboring our enemies while claiming to be our friend. Congress What About Government Accountability? 15 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 15 July 2002 verse 2 ... Cached Accounting scandals dominated the headlines last week, and publicity-hungry politicians from both the House and Senate enjoyed acting self-righteous while grilling WorldCom executives. However, the message that Congress will clamp down on corporate accounting practices rings hollow with at least one journalist. Neil Cavuto from Fox News recently offered a very important question that desperately needs to be asked of Congress: "Who the heck are YOU to judge? Given the incredible fiscal mismanagement that pervades the federal government, Congress is "throwing stones from a very big glass house," as Mr. Cavuto puts it. It’s refreshing to hear Mr. Cavuto point out the hypocrisy of politicians standing in judgment of executives whose misdeeds pale in comparison to their own reckless spending. Congress What About Government Accountability? 15 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 15 July 2002 verse 4 ... Cached Yet Mr. Cavuto is absolutely right. No corporation on earth comes close to the accounting fraud practiced year after year by the federal government. In fact, there is no real accountability at all for the trillions in tax dollars raised and spent annually by Congress and our entrenched federal agencies. The official "accounting" that does take place is a sham. Every year Congress creates a meaningless budget, the Fed prints phony money, the Budget office issues false revenue forecasts, and the administrative agencies waste billions in the most unproductive ways imaginable. Literally tens of billions of dollars go unaccounted for every year, simply disappearing down bureaucratic black holes. This hardly represents a standard against which corporations should be judged! Congress What About Government Accountability? 15 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 15 July 2002 verse 6 ... Cached So why is there not more outrage about government financial accountability? Of course we read the occasional news article lamenting $400 hammers at the Pentagon, but for the most part Congress gets a free pass on its own fiscal mismanagement. What we hear instead are calls for more regulation of our already heavily regulated mixed economy. Few suggest that federal interference in the market, especially Federal Reserve expansion of credit, creates the distortions that make it possible for corporations to become so overvalued in the first place. No one mentions that market forces ultimately cut through the distortions, causing the stock prices of fraudulent corporations to plummet. Instead we hear denunciations of the free market, and calls for more regulations from the very career politicians who are so completely unfit to manage anything. Congress What About Government Accountability? 15 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 15 July 2002 verse 7 ... Cached Of course Congress could clean up its financial mess, but ultimately it is voters who must demand accountability for their tax dollars. Remember that you give government at all levels nearly half of everything you earn. If you invested that much into a private company, don’t you think you would keep a close eye on it and demand accountability as a shareholder? The only thing we know for sure about the federal budget is that it will go up each year unless and until voters remove the politicians who insist on taxing, spending, and borrowing us to death. Congress Monitor thy Neighbor 22 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 22 July 2002 verse 2 ... Cached Opposition to the Patriot Act, legislation passed by Congress and signed by the President last year, is growing. Americans are beginning to understand that many precious liberties have been put in jeopardy by the government’s rush to enact new laws in the wake of September 11th. Federal law enforcement agencies now have broad authority to conduct secret, warrantless searches of homes; monitor phone and internet activity; access financial records; and undertake large-scale tracking of American citizens through huge databases. We’re told this is necessary to fight the unending war on terror, but in truth the federal government has been seeking these powers for years. September 11th simply provided an excuse to accelerate the process and convince all of us to relinquish more and more of our privacy to the federal government. Congress Monitor thy Neighbor 22 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 22 July 2002 verse 6 ... Cached I applaud Congressman Dick Armey for adding a provision to the homeland security bill that would prohibit the Justice department from implementing the TIPS program. His opposition brings needed public attention to this terrible idea. But even if Congress supports him, there is no guarantee another informant proposal will not surface soon thereafter. Congressional oversight of administrative agencies (consider the Treasury department and its renegade IRS) is nonexistent. The Justice department almost certainly will seek another way to implement the program, with or without congressional approval. Congress The Homeland Security Non-Debate 29 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 29 July 2002 verse 2 ... Cached Late Friday evening, after only a few short hours of debate, Congress passed legislation creating a new Department of Homeland Security. The new department represents the biggest government reorganization since the creation of the Department of Defense in the 1940s, and potentially the single biggest expansion of the federal government in our history. Over 175,000 federal employees will be part of the new DHS, and if history is any guide, it will take decades to get all of them working together even marginally. In fact, some estimate that the process of buying and leasing new offices, moving existing offices, and getting all of the new DHS personnel using the same computer and phone systems could take twenty years. So much for streamlining the intelligence gathering process. Congress The Homeland Security Non-Debate 29 July 2002    Texas Straight Talk 29 July 2002 verse 4 ... Cached I did vote for several amendments to the bill that would maintain the strength and independence of federal agencies that are vitally important to the 14th congressional district in Texas. However, I voted a resounding NO on final passage. This legislation will have an even greater negative impact than the terrible Patriot Act passed shortly after September 11th. Congress Will Congress Debate War with Iraq? 05 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 05 August 2002 verse 1 ... Cached Will Congress Debate War with Iraq? Congress Will Congress Debate War with Iraq? 05 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 05 August 2002 verse 3 ... Cached One expert not invited to testify at the Senate hearings was Scott Ritter. Mr. Ritter is a Republican, a twelve-year veteran of the Marine Corps, a former intelligence officer, and a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq. He is a widely respected expert on the region, having dealt directly with Iraqi officials- and he is a very harsh critic of Saddam Hussein. The only problem is that he disagrees with the President and Congress about our war plans, arguing that Iraq poses no military threat to the United States. So although he is perhaps the most qualified person in Washington to speak on the subject, his viewpoint was not heard. Congress Will Congress Debate War with Iraq? 05 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 05 August 2002 verse 6 ... Cached The fundamental question before Congress- whether the legislative branch once again will ignore its constitutional duty to declare war- remains unasked. The undeclared wars of the last 50 years- including Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo, and Iraq- represent nothing less than congressional cowardice, an unwillingness by members to carry out their sworn legislative duties. The result is an increasingly powerful presidency, and a terrible violation of the constitutional separation of powers. Congress Will Congress Debate War with Iraq? 05 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 05 August 2002 verse 7 ... Cached War is war, no matter what we call it. When we bomb another country, when we send troops, planes, and warships to attack it, we are at war. Calling war a "police action" or a "peacekeeping mission" does not change the reality. War constitutionally cannot be waged by executive order- the President’s status as Commander-in-Chief gives him authority only to execute war, not initiate it. The Constitution requires a congressional declaration of war precisely because the founders wanted the most representative branch of government, not an imperial President, to make the grave decision to send our young people into harm’s way. We owe it to those young people and the Constitution to have a sober congressional debate before we initiate war in Iraq. Congress Your Taxes Fund South American Bailout 12 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 12 August 2002 verse 2 ... Cached You may have seen minor media coverage last week focusing on the economic problems in South America, particularly Uruguay and Brazil. The U.S. Treasury, acting through the Exchange Stabilization Fund and without congressional approval, gave Uruguay $1.5 billion to ease the impact of a bank shutdown. While $1.5 billion barely raises an eyebrow in Washington anymore, and scarcely attracts media attention, this latest bailout provides a telling example of the real priorities of our federal government. Congress Your Taxes Fund South American Bailout 12 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 12 August 2002 verse 8 ... Cached What a shame that our government continues to fund risky overseas bailouts and unconstitutional foreign aid, even as our own nation faces serious financial problems here at home. Congress has lapsed into uncontrolled deficit spending, and billions more will be spent creating the Department of Homeland Security and funding an unwise war in Iraq. The private economy sputters along with little or no growth, while the stock market bubble loses more air almost daily. The pension and retirement plans of millions of Americans have suffered heavy losses, and the very solvency of Social Security is threatened by the coming retirement of the baby boom generation. Meanwhile, our military families and veterans are allowed to live in poverty. In the midst of all these problems at home, how in the world can we justify another nickel for foreign bailouts? Congress Does Government Run the Economy? 19 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 19 August 2002 verse 5 ... Cached But should government run the economy in a free society? Remember, there is a simple description for government control of the economy: socialism. America, however, was founded as a capitalist country. The Constitution grants Congress exceedingly limited regulatory and tax powers, because the founders were tired of having their business affairs managed by the Crown. So they created a strictly limited government, which allowed freedom and capitalism to flourish. Congress War in Iraq, War on the Rule of Law? 26 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 26 August 2002 verse 2 ... Cached The chorus of voices calling for the United States to attack Iraq grows louder. Recent weeks had seen growing controversy concerning the wisdom of such an attack, including controversy over the need for congressional approval for an invasion. The war hawk TV pundits have been busy working to quell the controversy by insisting the President has complete authority to wage war without congressional involvement. Congress War in Iraq, War on the Rule of Law? 26 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 26 August 2002 verse 4 ... Cached Yet whether to invade Iraq is precisely the question, and only Congress can answer it. The Constitution grants Congress the sole authority to declare war. The President cannot wage war legally without a congressional declaration. His status as commander-in-chief gives him authority only to execute war, not initiate it. The law in Article I, section 8, is quite clear. The undeclared wars of the 20th century may provide precedent for unilateral action by the President, but it is an illegal precedent. Congress War in Iraq, War on the Rule of Law? 26 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 26 August 2002 verse 5 ... Cached It appears that most in Congress would support an invasion of Iraq, so why can’t we simply agree to follow the Constitution and vote to declare war? Congress War in Iraq, War on the Rule of Law? 26 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 26 August 2002 verse 7 ... Cached I’m puzzled that Congress is so willing to give away one of its most important powers. Why do members of Congress from both parties, most of whom work incessantly to INCREASE the scope of congressional powers, suddenly refuse to wield power in one area where they have legitimate legislative authority? It mostly has to do with cowardice and politics. You can bet Republicans would be demanding congressional involvement if Clinton was in office. Congress War in Iraq, War on the Rule of Law? 26 August 2002    Texas Straight Talk 26 August 2002 verse 8 ... Cached The solution is simple. Follow the Constitution, debate the wisdom of a war in Iraq, and publicly record a vote on a declaration of war. Let Congress do its job. The young men and women who will be called upon to fight for the Constitution in Iraq deserve to see it followed at home. Congress Important Questions about War in Iraq 03 September 2002    Texas Straight Talk 03 September 2002 verse 2 ... Cached As Congress reconvenes this week, the possibility of war with Iraq looms larger than ever. I believe the Constitution clearly requires a declaration of war by Congress before a military invasion of Iraq can take place. I also believe that Congress and the American people need to engage in a sober and thorough debate over the wisdom of such an invasion before we commit our young soldiers to a new war in Iraq. At a minimum, the following questions should be carefully considered: Congress Important Questions about War in Iraq 03 September 2002    Texas Straight Talk 03 September 2002 verse 13 ... Cached All of these questions, and many more, need to be asked and answered in a full and robust congressional debate. Congress The Case against War in Iraq 09 September 2002    Texas Straight Talk 09 September 2002 verse 2 ... Cached For weeks I have been arguing that Congress needs to debate the wisdom of a war in Iraq. Recently I gave a speech before the House of Representatives outlining why I believe such a war would be exceedingly unwise. Congress The Case against War in Iraq 09 September 2002    Texas Straight Talk 09 September 2002 verse 8 ... Cached If we once again wage war without a clear declaration of war by Congress, as we have done on so many occasions since World War II, we further damage the Constitution. I fear we will engage our troops in a haphazard way, by executive order, or even by begging permission from the anti-American United Nations. This haphazard approach, combined with the lack of clearly defined goal for victory, makes it almost inevitable that true victory will not come. When Congress evades its responsibilities and allows war to be declared by the President or an international body, it ceases to represent the very people for whom the war supposedly will be fought. Congress Entangling Alliances Distort our Foreign Policy 16 September 2002    Texas Straight Talk 16 September 2002 verse 2 ... Cached As President Bush addressed the United Nations last week, I could not help thinking we have become incredibly mired in the "entangling alliances" another President George- George Washington- warned against. Sadly, many in Washington and the media seem to consider UN approval of our war plans far more important than a congressional debate on the matter. Congress Entangling Alliances Distort our Foreign Policy 16 September 2002    Texas Straight Talk 16 September 2002 verse 3 ... Cached America has an absolute sovereign right to defend itself. We do not need permission from the UN or anybody else to use military force. What is needed, however, is a congressional declaration of war. Our Constitution does not permit any President to initiate war simply because the UN gives him permission. When we seek permission, or even mere approval, from the United Nations, we give credibility to the terrible notion that American national security is a matter of international consensus. America alone should decide whether to send its sons and daughters to war. Congress Congress Becomes Irrelevant in the War Debate 07 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 07 October 2002 verse 1 ... Cached Congress Becomes Irrelevant in the War Debate Congress Congress Becomes Irrelevant in the War Debate 07 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 07 October 2002 verse 2 ... Cached Last week, during a hearing in the House International Relations committee, I attempted to force the committee to follow the Constitution and vote to declare war with Iraq. The language of Article I, section 8, is quite clear: only Congress has the authority to declare war. Yet Congress in general, and the committee in particular, have done everything possible to avoid making such a declaration. Why? Because members lack the political courage to call an invasion of Iraq what it really is- a war- and vote yes or no on the wisdom of such a war. Congress would rather give up its most important authorized power to the President and the UN than risk losing an election later if the war goes badly. There is always congressional "support" for a popular war, but the politicians want room to maneuver if the public later changes its mind. So members take half steps, supporting confusingly worded "authorizations" that they can back away from easily if necessary. Congress Congress Becomes Irrelevant in the War Debate 07 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 07 October 2002 verse 3 ... Cached It’s astonishing that the authorization passed by the committee mentions the United Nations dozens of times, yet does not mention the Constitution once. Congress has allowed itself to be bypassed completely, even though much is made of the President’s generosity in "consulting" legislators about the war. The real negotiations took place between the Bush administration and the UN, replacing debate in the people’s house. By transferring its authority to declare war to the President and ultimately the UN, Congress not only violates the Constitution, but also disenfranchises the American electorate. Congress Congress Becomes Irrelevant in the War Debate 07 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 07 October 2002 verse 4 ... Cached I don’t believe in resolutions that cite the UN as authority for our military actions. America has a sovereign right to defend itself, and we don’t need UN permission or approval to act in the interests of American national security. The decision to go to war should be made by the U.S. Congress alone. If Congress believes war is justified, it should give the President full warmaking authority, rather than binding him with resolutions designed to please our UN detractors. Congress Congress Becomes Irrelevant in the War Debate 07 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 07 October 2002 verse 5 ... Cached Sadly, the leadership of both parties on the International Relations committee fails to understand the Constitution. One Republican member stated that the constitutional requirement that Congress declare war is an anachronism and should no longer be followed, while a Democratic member said that a declaration of war would be "frivolous." I don’t think most Americans believe our Constitution is outdated or frivolous, and they expect Congress to follow it. Congress Congress Becomes Irrelevant in the War Debate 07 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 07 October 2002 verse 6 ... Cached When Congress issued clear declarations of war against Japan and Germany during World War II, the nation was committed and victory was achieved. When Congress shirks its duty and avoids declaring war, as with Korea, and Vietnam, the nation is less committed and the goals are less clear. No lives should be lost in Iraq unless Congress expresses the clear will of the American people and votes yes or no on a declaration of war. Congress Why Won't Congress Declare War? 14 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 14 October 2002 verse 2 ... Cached Why Won't Congress Declare War? Congress Why Won't Congress Declare War? 14 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 14 October 2002 verse 3 ... Cached Two weeks ago, during a hearing in the House International Relations committee, I attempted to force the committee to follow the Constitution and vote to declare war with Iraq. The language of Article I, section 8, is quite clear: only Congress has the authority to declare war. Yet Congress in general, and the committee in particular, have done everything possible to avoid making such a declaration. Why? Because members lack the political courage to call an invasion of Iraq what it really is- a war- and vote yes or no on the wisdom of such a war. Congress would rather give up its most important authorized power to the President and the UN than risk losing an election later if the war goes badly. There is always congressional "support" for a popular war, but the politicians want room to maneuver if the public later changes its mind. So members take half steps, supporting confusingly worded "authorizations" that they can back away from easily if necessary. Congress Why Won't Congress Declare War? 14 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 14 October 2002 verse 4 ... Cached It’s astonishing that the authorization passed by the committee mentions the United Nations 25 times, yet does not mention the Constitution once. Congress has allowed itself to be bypassed completely, even though much is made of the President’s willingness to consult some legislative leaders about the war. The real negotiations took place between the Bush administration and the UN, replacing debate in the people’s house. By transferring its authority to declare war to the President and ultimately the UN, Congress not only violates the Constitution, but also disenfranchises the American people. Congress Why Won't Congress Declare War? 14 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 14 October 2002 verse 6 ... Cached I don’t believe in resolutions that cite the UN as authority for our military actions. America has a sovereign right to defend itself, and we don’t need UN permission or approval to act in the interests of American national security. The decision to go to war should be made by the U.S. Congress alone. If Congress believes war is justified, it should give the President full warmaking authority, rather than binding him with resolutions designed to please our UN detractors. Congress Why Won't Congress Declare War? 14 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 14 October 2002 verse 7 ... Cached Sadly, the leadership of both parties on the International Relations committee fails to understand the Constitution. One Republican member stated that the constitutional requirement that Congress declare war is an anachronism and should no longer be followed, while a Democratic member said that a declaration of war would be "frivolous." I don’t think most Americans believe our Constitution is outdated or frivolous, and they expect Congress to follow it. Congress Why Won't Congress Declare War? 14 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 14 October 2002 verse 8 ... Cached When Congress issued clear declarations of war against Japan and Germany during World War II, the nation was committed and victory was achieved. When Congress shirks its duty and avoids declaring war, as with Korea, and Vietnam, the nation is less committed and victory is elusive. No lives should be lost in Iraq unless Congress expresses the clear will of the American people and votes yes or no on a declaration of war. Congress Legislation for our Military Families and Veterans 21 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 21 October 2002 verse 2 ... Cached With thousands of our troops now deployed in Afghanistan, and thousands more probably headed to Iraq, it is important to remember the sacrifices made by our military families. Congress should do everything possible to make sure our soldiers and our veterans receive adequate pay, housing, health care, tax relief, and disability benefits. Congress Legislation for our Military Families and Veterans 21 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 21 October 2002 verse 5 ... Cached I also recently voted to support legislation that would make it easier for military families to qualify for the homeowner’s tax exemption when selling a house. Current tax rules require a homeowner to live in a residence for two continuous years to qualify for the exemption, but servicemembers tend to transfer between bases frequently. Congress voted overwhelmingly to change the two-year requirement for our armed forces, and hopefully the bill will become law before the end of the year. Congress Legislation for our Military Families and Veterans 21 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 21 October 2002 verse 6 ... Cached Similarly, Congress recently passed a resolution calling for a change in veteran’s disability payments. Currently, retired soldiers may only receive either their military pension or military disability benefits- not both. Nonmilitary government retirees and private sector employees, however, do receive both standard pensions and disability pay. This is very unfair to military retirees, who deserve pay for both their career work and the separate incident that caused their disability. Last week’s vote moves us closer to ending this injustice. Congress Legislation for our Military Families and Veterans 21 October 2002    Texas Straight Talk 21 October 2002 verse 7 ... Cached Finally, Congress should end the silence and formally address Gulf War Syndrome, which has had a devastating impact on thousand of veterans who served in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. As a medical doctor, I believe the evidence behind the existence of the syndrome is now conclusive. The syndrome likely represents several different maladies caused by exposure to conditions specific to the Gulf region at that time. We should be providing medical treatment to our sick Gulf War veterans, not insulting them by insisting that "it’s all in their heads." Congress should lead the way and craft legislation that requires VA hospitals to recognize and treat Gulf War Syndrome like any other illness. It’s the least we can do for the soldiers who risked their lives in the Gulf. Congress Honoring our Military Veterans 11 November 2002    Texas Straight Talk 11 November 2002 verse 3 ... Cached It’s easy to talk about honoring veterans and their sacrifices on a national holiday. Yet so often the rhetoric obscures the reality that the federal government treats veterans badly. Congress wastes billions of dollars funding so many unconstitutional programs, but it fails to provide adequately for the men and women who carry out the most important constitutional function: national defense. Congress Honoring our Military Veterans 11 November 2002    Texas Straight Talk 11 November 2002 verse 6 ... Cached Today’s American soldiers are the veterans of the future, and they should never be sent to war without clear objectives that serve definite American national security interests. They should never fight at the behest of the United Nations or any other international agency. They should never serve under a UN flag, nor answer to a UN commander. They deserve to know that they fight for the American people and the Constitution, and that the decision to send them into battle was made by their own congress rather than by UN bureaucrats who don’t care about them. Only by using American troops judiciously and in service of the Constitution can we avoid the kind of endless military entanglements we witnessed in Korea and Vietnam. We honor our veterans by ensuring that their service to the nation is never in vain. Congress The Homeland Security Monstrosity 18 November 2002    Texas Straight Talk 18 November 2002 verse 2 ... Cached Congress spent just a few short hours last week voting to create the biggest new federal bureaucracy since World War II, not that the media or even most members of Congress paid much attention to the process. Yet our most basic freedoms as Americans- privacy in our homes, persons, and possessions; confidentiality in our financial and medical affairs; openness in our conversations, telephone, and internet use; unfettered travel; indeed the basic freedom not to be monitored as we go through our daily lives- have been dramatically changed. Congress The Homeland Security Monstrosity 18 November 2002    Texas Straight Talk 18 November 2002 verse 3 ... Cached The last time Congress attempted a similarly ambitious reorganization of the government was with the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947. Back then, congressional hearings on the matter lasted two years before President Truman finally signed legislation. Even after this lengthy deliberation, however, organizational problems with the new department lasted more than 40 years! What do we expect from a huge bureaucracy conceived virtually overnight, by a Congress that didn’t even read the bill that creates it? Surely more deliberation was appropriate before establishing a giant new federal agency with 170,000 employees! Congress The Homeland Security Monstrosity 18 November 2002    Texas Straight Talk 18 November 2002 verse 4 ... Cached When the Homeland Security department first was conceived, some congressional leaders and administration officials outrageously told a credulous rank-and-file Congress that the new department would be "budget neutral." The agency simply would be a reorganization of existing federal employees, we were told, and would not increase the federal budget. In fact, the agency was touted as increasing efficiency, rather than expanding federal power. Of course the original 32 page proposal sent over by the White House quickly grew to 282 pages in House committees, ending up at more than 500 pages in the final version voted on last week- with a $3 billion price tag just for starters. The sheer magnitude of the bill, and the technical complexity of it, makes it impossible for anyone to understand completely. Rest assured that the new department represents a huge increase in the size and scope of the federal government that will mostly serve to spy on the American people. Can anyone, even the most partisan Republican, honestly say with a straight face that the Department of Homeland Security does not expand the federal government? Congress Homeland Security is the Largest Federal Expansion in 50 Years 25 November 2002    Texas Straight Talk 25 November 2002 verse 2 ... Cached The administration and Congress put the finishing touches on the monstrous Homeland Security bill last week, creating the first new federal department since the Department of Defense at the end of World War II. Laughably, the new department has been characterized as merely a "reorganization" of existing agencies, even though I notice no department was abolished to make up for it! One thing we can be sure of in this world is that federal agencies grow. The Homeland Security department, like all federal agencies, will increase in size exponentially over the coming decades. Its budget, number of employees, and the scope of its mission will EXPAND. Congress has no idea what it will have created twenty or fifty years hence, when less popular presidents have the full power of a domestic spying agency at their disposal. Congress Homeland Security is the Largest Federal Expansion in 50 Years 25 November 2002    Texas Straight Talk 25 November 2002 verse 3 ... Cached The frightening details of the Homeland Security bill, which authorizes an unprecedented level of warrantless spying on American citizens, are still emerging. Those who still care about the Bill of Rights, particularly the 4th amendment, have every reason to be alarmed. But the process by which Congress created the bill is every bit as reprehensible as its contents. Congress Homeland Security is the Largest Federal Expansion in 50 Years 25 November 2002    Texas Straight Talk 25 November 2002 verse 4 ... Cached Ironically, many in Congress who usually champion limited government were enthusiastic supporters of the largest federal expansion in 50 years. Twenty years ago President Reagan revitalized conservatives across the country by appealing to their Goldwater roots, promising to slash the size of government and eliminate whole departments. Yet the promise of a smaller government went unfulfilled, and today Congress passes budgets even larger that those of the Clinton years. Congress The Great Global Social Security Giveaway? 06 January 2003    Texas Straight Talk 06 January 2003 verse 7 ... Cached It is uncertain whether the administration will seek Congressional approval for this agreement. Let’s hope that such a substantive move- with such serious financial and legal implications- will not be made by Executive Order. Congress The Great Global Social Security Giveaway? 06 January 2003    Texas Straight Talk 06 January 2003 verse 8 ... Cached In the 107th Congress, I introduced the Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which would ensure that all money in the Social Security trust fund is spent solely on Social Security. As Congress continues to demonstrate an inability to control spending that threatens the Social Security trust fund, the need for this legislation has never been greater. That is why I intend to re-introduce this legislation in the 108th Congress, which opens this month. Social Security should be limited to United States citizens and nationals who have paid into the system. It should not be a global giveaway. Congress Conscription is Collectivism 13 January 2003    Texas Straight Talk 13 January 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Two Democratic Congressman introduced legislation last week to revive the military draft, taking a race-baiting shot at the President and his war plans. Their idea is not new, however, as similar proposals were introduced by Republicans in the months following September 11th. Although the administration is not calling for a draft at this time, last week’s controversy shows while conscription has been buried for 30 years, the idea is not necessarily dead. Congress Welfare for the Left, Welfare for the Right, Welfare for the World 03 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 03 February 2003 verse 9 ... Cached The State of the Union speech provided stark evidence that the era of big government is hardly over, and that welfare has not been reformed. Hydrogen boondoggles and AIDS industry welfare are just two small examples, symbols of what is wrong with a federal government that spends 2.4 trillion dollars in a single year. Not only does government spend far too much of your money, it spends the money badly. Once we as a society accepted the notion that Congress could fund programs not authorized in the Constitution, the sky was the limit- and we’ve reached that limit today. Congress Support the President's Tax-Free Savings Plan 10 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 10 February 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Yet many in the spendthrift Congress think income taxes that consume one-third or more of most Americans’ paychecks are not enough. They believe in taxing income twice: first when it’s earned, and again when it’s saved. Yet why should interest, dividends, and capital gains be taxed a second time? Is the congressional appetite for spending really so voracious that we cannot even allow taxpayers to enjoy some tax-free savings, as proposed by the President? Congress Support the President's Tax-Free Savings Plan 10 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 10 February 2003 verse 6 ... Cached Incredibly, members of both political parties seem to question the obvious benefit of tax-free accounts. With the Social Security system threatened by demographics and congressional spending raids, the need for private retirement saving has never been greater. America was in fact built with private savings. Only when individuals save money does a society develop the capital for investment and lending that is so critical to economic growth. Impoverished nations, by contrast, have little or no capital. This is often because of burdensome taxes and a lack of property rights. The desire to save money and build a better life is intrinsically human, and no society that punishes saving can remain prosperous for long. Congress Support the President's Tax-Free Savings Plan 10 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 10 February 2003 verse 7 ... Cached The President’s proposed savings accounts could put millions of Americans on the road to self-sufficiency. The only alternative to private saving is to allow ourselves to become a nation of government dependents, relying on Social Security and federal programs in our retirement years. Congress, especially the House leadership, should work hard to avoid this terrible fate by quickly passing tax-free savings accounts into law. Congress Counting on Social Security? 17 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 February 2003 verse 3 ... Cached Still, the problem seems vague and faraway for most. Today’s seniors hope the system will hold together for the remainder of their lives, while younger working people hope government will somehow fix things before they retire. Not surprisingly, Congress doesn’t want to face the problem until it becomes an acute crisis. It’s hard to sell voters on austerity today to avoid a relatively distant problem. Politicians usually operate on the opposite principle, by promising great things now and leaving the bills for others to pay later. Congress Counting on Social Security? 17 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 February 2003 verse 4 ... Cached This means the greatest threat to your Social Security retirement funds is Congress itself. Congress has never required that Social Security tax dollars be kept separate from general revenues. In fact, the Social Security “trust fund” is not a trust fund at all. The dollars taken out of your paycheck are not deposited into an account to be paid to you later. On the contrary, they are spent immediately to pay current benefits, and to fund completely unrelated federal programs. Your Social Security administration “account” is nothing more than an IOU, a hopeful promise that enough younger taxpayers will be around to pay your benefits later. Congress Counting on Social Security? 17 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 February 2003 verse 5 ... Cached This unconscionable system allows Congress to raid Social Security revenues for every conceivable pork spending project. Unless we change the spending culture in Washington, your retirement dollars will never be secure. At the very least, Congress needs to pass legislation requiring that Social Security revenues be spent only for payment of benefits. Congress Counting on Social Security? 17 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 February 2003 verse 6 ... Cached Furthermore, Congress needs to ensure that Social Security benefits are paid to American citizens only. In December, the national press reported on a deal looming between the administration and the Mexican government that would allow Mexican citizens who worked in the U.S.- even illegally- to qualify for Social Security benefits. A so-called “totalization” system would permit Mexican workers to add years worked in Mexico to those in the U.S. when qualifying for benefits. Unless Congress acts, the administration will begin using Social Security dollars to fund a global welfare system! Congress Counting on Social Security? 17 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 February 2003 verse 8 ... Cached All American taxpayers should be very concerned about congressional spending raids and global giveaways of Social Security dollars. Unless real spending constraints are imposed now, the Social Security dollars that millions of Americans rely on may vanish before they retire. Congress Buying Friends with Foreign Aid 24 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 24 February 2003 verse 6 ... Cached The billions we will give Turkey are just the tip of the iceberg. The foreign aid feeding frenzy will only intensify as America expands its role as world policeman. Already it is routine for some nations to send negotiating teams to Washington during the appropriations process, intent on securing the foreign aid loot to which they feel so entitled. Just as hordes of domestic lobbyists roam the halls of Congress seeking federal money for every conceivable special interest, we should expect foreign lobbyists to increasingly look for money from American taxpayers. In the new era of American empire, foreign aid spending serves as the carrot. Iraq will get the stick, at least at first. Once we occupy it, of course, we will spend billions there as well. Congress The 2003 Spending Orgy 03 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 03 March 2003 verse 3 ... Cached Yet has Congress responded to this new reality with spending freezes or other austerity measures? Hardly. Its response has been exactly opposite, passing a 2003 budget that is a whopping 22% higher than just two years ago! Not only is spending way up in terms of total dollars, but the rate at which spending grows each year is accelerating rapidly. In fact, a federal budget that once took a century to double in size will now do so in only about five years. This rate of growth cannot be sustained unless Congress truly intends to bankrupt the federal government. Congress The 2003 Spending Orgy 03 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 03 March 2003 verse 4 ... Cached This practice is akin to getting a pay cut at work, then immediately buying a bigger house with a higher mortgage payment. No sensible individual would spend more when his income drops, but Congress operates without any shred of common sense or restraint at budget time. When members of Congress consider the various spending bills, the money- hundreds of billions of dollars- hardly seems real. What’s another 10 million dollars, they reason, for a pet project or favor to a lobbyist? Unlike a family facing the loss of income, Congress can raise taxes, borrow from foreign governments, or spend money newly printed by the Federal Reserve. Spending cuts are simply not considered. In fact, the federal budget grows every year without exception, and the previous year’s spending is treated only as a baseline. How long could your family survive if it spent five or ten percent more money each and every year? Congress The 2003 Spending Orgy 03 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 03 March 2003 verse 6 ... Cached Meanwhile, Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan recently suggested before a congressional committee that billions could be saved if the Treasury used lower inflation estimates. In other words, if we say inflation is lower than the Consumer Price Index and other barometers indicate, Congress won’t have to spend as much on cost-of-living adjustments for programs like Social Security. This amounts to lying to the American people about our monetary policies, by hiding the true rate of inflation caused by printing too many dollars and keeping interest rates artificially low. Congress The 2003 Spending Orgy 03 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 03 March 2003 verse 7 ... Cached The looming hangover is reflected in the federal debt, which is officially about 5.6 trillion dollars. The real figure is much higher, because the official figure does not include outstanding future liabilities like Social Security and Medicare that millions of Baby Boomers will soon demand. The “debt limit,” created by federal law in a hopeful attempt to limit congressional spending, is routinely raised by Congress without political fallout. All Americans must become aware of how truly unrestrained federal spending has become, and realize that voters represent the last line of defense against the complete bankruptcy of the U.S. government. Congress Time to Renounce the United Nations? 17 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 March 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Our current situation in Iraq shows that we cannot allow U.S. national security to become a matter of international consensus. We don’t need UN permission to go to war; only Congress can declare war under the Constitution. The Constitution does not permit the delegation of congressional duties to international bodies. It’s bad enough when Congress relinquishes its warmaking authority to the President, but disastrous if we relinquish it to international bureaucrats who don’t care about America. Congress Honor Veterans with a Better Budget 24 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 24 March 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Congress narrowly passed a budget last week that calls for the federal government to spend in excess of 2 trillion dollars in 2004, which is more than double what the federal government spent in 1990. Yet while Congress finds hundreds of billions to fund every conceivable unconstitutional program and special-interest pork project, it fails to provide adequately for our nation’s veterans. In fact, the budget passed by the House calls for cuts of $15.1 billion from veterans programs over the next ten years. These cuts will affect programs that provide education benefits, compensation for veterans with service-related disabilities, and pensions for disabled veterans. Congress Honor Veterans with a Better Budget 24 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 24 March 2003 verse 3 ... Cached We should understand that veterans programs, unlike so many federal programs, are constitutional. The Constitution specifically provides for Congress to fund armed forces and provide national defense. Congress and the nation accordingly have a constitutional obligation to keep the promises made to those who provide that defense. This is why I support increased funding for veterans, while opposing the bloated spending bills that fund corporate and social welfare, pork favoritism, and special interests at the expense of those veterans. Congress Honor Veterans with a Better Budget 24 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 24 March 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Unfortunately, the trust that members of our armed forces put in our government has been breached time and time again, and last week’s budget vote represents anther blow to veterans. Even as we send hundreds of thousands of soldiers into Iraq, Congress can’t get its priorities straight. Congress Honor Veterans with a Better Budget 24 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 24 March 2003 verse 5 ... Cached We should remember that Gulf War I and II will swell the ranks of our combat veterans, many of whom will need medical care as they grow older. Congress should immediately end the silence and formally address Gulf War Syndrome, which has had a devastating impact on veterans who served in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. As a medical doctor, I believe the syndrome is very real, and likely represents several different maladies caused by exposure to conditions specific to the Gulf region at the time. Congress and the Veterans Administration should stop insulting our Gulf War veterans and recognize that the syndrome is a serious illness that needs treatment. We can only hope and pray that our soldiers in Iraq today do not suffer from similar illnesses in the future. Congress must, however, ensure adequate funding for the medical care that today’s soldiers will someday need. Congress Honor Veterans with a Better Budget 24 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 24 March 2003 verse 6 ... Cached Having served in the U.S. Air Force for five years, I feel an obligation to our veterans and current armed forces. Congress wastes so much money that only a small portion of that waste could make a huge difference in the lives of our veterans. Depending on what the Senate does, Congress may have a chance to revisit the 2004 budget and find the resolve to fully fund needed veterans programs. Congress The Free-Market Approach to the Medical Malpractice Crisis 31 March 2003    Texas Straight Talk 31 March 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Many Americans understandably want Congress to fix the medical malpractice problem. Yet the “solution” offered by Congress, namely the federalization of malpractice law, threatens to do more harm than good. First and foremost, this approach damages the Constitution by denying states the right to decide their own local medical standards and legal rules. Capping liability limits sounds appealing, but it fails to address the basic problem of too many lawsuits and too many shakedowns, most of which settle for less than the proposed caps anyway. Congress War Profiteers 07 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 07 April 2003 verse 2 ... Cached The president asked Congress last week to authorize new funding for the war in Iraq, which was not paid for in the wasteful budget recently passed in the House of Representatives. You might assume that Congress would simply approve legislation that pays for military supplies and hardware, troop wages, ammunition, fuel, food, and the like. In other words, the bread and butter items that our troops need to prosecute the war in Iraq. Congress War Profiteers 07 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 07 April 2003 verse 3 ... Cached But nothing is simple in Washington. Congress could not resist the opportunity to put its hands in taxpayers’ pockets by adding 20 billion dollars in completely unrelated spending to the final bill. In essence, Congress is so addicted to spending that it will use any opportunity, even a war, to spend money for every conceivable reason- however unrelated to the war in Iraq. Congress War Profiteers 07 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 07 April 2003 verse 4 ... Cached We must understand that America is in a financial crisis. Tax revenues are down due to the faltering economy, but congressional spending has exploded by more than 22% in just two years. As a result, annual deficits have risen rapidly, and the national debt now approaches 6.5 trillion dollars. Almost all of this new spending has been completely unrelated to homeland defense or national security concerns. The same old failed domestic agencies and special-interest pork programs have received the bulk of the dollars. While Congress should fund constitutional federal functions like national defense, our very solvency as a nation is being threatened by unconstitutional spending. Congress War Profiteers 07 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 07 April 2003 verse 7 ... Cached -$125 million for congressional security, to make sure members are safe even if the country is not; Congress War Profiteers 07 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 07 April 2003 verse 11 ... Cached -$5.5 million for the Library of Congress; Congress War Profiteers 07 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 07 April 2003 verse 12 ... Cached -$6.8 million for the Congressional Research Service and General Accounting Office; Congress War Profiteers 07 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 07 April 2003 verse 24 ... Cached These are just some examples of how Congress takes every possible opportunity to spend your money, even when it should be focused on the war in Iraq. Was it really too much to ask for a clean bill to fund the president's request, a bill unencumbered by pork handouts and useless foreign aid? Apparently not even war can prevent Congress from shamelessly sticking its hands in your pockets while cloaking itself in “support the troops” rhetoric. Congress Congress Exceeds its Credit Limit 14 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 April 2003 verse 1 ... Cached Congress Exceeds Its Credit Limit Congress Congress Exceeds its Credit Limit 14 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 April 2003 verse 2 ... Cached The term “national debt” really is a misnomer. It’s not the nation’s debt, but rather the federal government’s debt. The American people didn’t spend the money, but they will have to pay it back. And if Congress has its way, our nation’s Treasury will have twice as much debt ten years from now as it does today. Congress Congress Exceeds its Credit Limit 14 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 April 2003 verse 4 ... Cached The problem is very simple: Congress almost always spends more each year than the Treasury collects in revenues. Federal spending always goes up, but revenues are not so dependable, especially when the economy is bad. Since Congress spends more than the government makes, the federal government must either raise taxes, print more dollars to make debt payments, or borrow money. It’s happy to do all three, but they’re all bad for you- and the borrowing is bad for your grandchildren too. Congress Congress Exceeds its Credit Limit 14 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 April 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Federal law limits the total amount of debt the Treasury can carry, and the limit- currently $6.4 trillion- has been reached. So Congress must vote to raise the limit, even though just a few short months ago it was raised from $5.9 trillion. The whole point of the debt ceiling law was to limit borrowing, to force Congress into an open and presumably somewhat shameful vote when it wants to borrow more than a preset amount of money. Yet since there have been no political consequences for members who vote to raise the debt limit and support the outrageous spending bills in the first place, the debt limit has become merely another technicality on the road to bankruptcy. Only public outrage, demonstrated by actually voting the big spenders out of office, can change the spending habits of the U.S. Congress. Congress Congress Exceeds its Credit Limit 14 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 April 2003 verse 6 ... Cached Yet Congress is at it again, raising the debt limit in a new budget that is a wasteful as any I’ve seen during my tenure in Washington- and that’s a strong statement. In fact, the 2004 budget passed by the House raises the debt limit by nearly one trillion dollars, the single largest increase by far. The budget also contains a procedural rule that allows the debt limit to increase annually over the next ten years, almost doubling from the current $6.4 trillion to an incredible $12 trillion. Congress Congress Exceeds its Credit Limit 14 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 April 2003 verse 7 ... Cached Congress needs to stop this terrible spending spree before it bankrupts American taxpayers. All of the talk about tax cuts and budgets is just a smokescreen obscuring the real problem of uncontrolled spending. Unless the American people force Congress to change its spendthrift ways, newborn Americans may soon come into the world owing $44,000 instead of $22,000. Congress Assault Weapons and Assaults on the Constitution 21 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 21 April 2003 verse 2 ... Cached The Bush administration recently surprised and angered many pro-gun conservatives by announcing its support for an assault weapons ban passed in 1994. The law contained a ten-year sunset provision, and is set to expire in 2004 unless reauthorized by Congress. A spokesman for the administration stated flatly that the President “supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law.” Congress Keep the United Nations out of Iraq- and America 28 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 28 April 2003 verse 6 ... Cached Americans should seize the chance to expose the myth of so-called “international law.” Neither the UN nor any other international body has authority to make laws that bind the American people. Simply stated, just laws are derived from the consent of the governed, and Americans have not consented to be governed by foreign individuals or bodies. Constitutionally speaking, only Congress can craft our federal laws. While constitutionally-ratified treaties can be legitimate, no treaty can usurp the basic function of Congress by transferring legislative authority to an international body. When the UN attempts to dictate our domestic labor, environmental, trade, tax, and gun laws- as it already has- we need to remember that only the representative US Congress has authority to make our national laws Congress So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress 05 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 1 ... Cached So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress Congress So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress 05 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Just six short months ago the Republican party won a stunning victory in the 2002 election, increasing its majority in the House of Representatives and retaking the Senate. With Republicans controlling both Congress and the White House for the first time in fifty years, many assumed legislators would push a socially and fiscally conservative agenda. Congress So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress 05 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 3 ... Cached Yet nothing could be further from the truth, as an embarrassing vote last week clearly demonstrated. The supposedly conservative Congress overwhelmingly passed a foreign aid bill that could have come straight from the desk of the most liberal Democrat. The legislation sends $15 billion of your tax dollars to Africa, ostensibly to fight AIDS by distributing condoms, providing sex education, and funding abortion providers. Needless to say the bill gives money to some very questionable organizations and programs, and will undoubtedly pad the bank accounts of some of the worst governments in the world. Congress So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress 05 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 7 ... Cached The United States has sent billions and billions of dollars overseas for decades to do fine-sounding things like “building democracy,” “fighting drugs,” and “ending poverty.” Yet decades later we are told that in every category these problems have actually gotten worse. Most of the money has disappeared into the bank accounts of dictators, or into salaries for well-paid consultants who administer our foreign aid; very little has changed in the impoverished nations themselves. Yet we refuse to learn from these mistakes, and now Congress has made another multi-billion dollar mistake with the AIDS bill. Congress So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress 05 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 9 ... Cached Sadly, this $15 billion expenditure comes even as Congress is cutting funding for veterans by roughly the same amount. The Treasury is running record deficits, the Pentagon is engaged in enormously expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and veterans’ programs are badly underfunded- yet still Congress is sending billions overseas for yet another dubious and unconstitutional program. This should anger every American who still believes in the true conservative tenets of limited government, fiscal restraint, and private charity instead of social welfare programs. Congress The Phony Tax Cut Debate 12 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 12 May 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Republicans argue that tax cuts will raise revenues by increasing economic activity, thus providing Congress with even more money to spend. It should hardly be the goal of conservatives to increase federal revenues! Real income tax cuts of 30 or 50 percent would reduce revenues, which is exactly what Congress needs to restrain its terrible spendthrift habits. Increased revenues or not, however, no one argues for serious cuts in spending. After all, the latest Bush budget spends 22% more than the last Clinton budget only three years ago. Congress The Phony Tax Cut Debate 12 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 12 May 2003 verse 8 ... Cached · The money people earn is their own and they have a moral right to keep as much of it as possible. It does not belong to Congress. Congress The Phony Tax Cut Debate 12 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 12 May 2003 verse 9 ... Cached · Government spending is the problem! Taking a big chunk of the people’s earnings out of the economy, whether through taxes or borrowing, is always harmful. The real issue is total spending by government, yet this is ignored or politicized by both sides of the aisle in Congress. Congress Border Tragedy Reveals Deeper Problems 19 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 19 May 2003 verse 2 ... Cached We all feel tremendous sympathy for the men who lost their lives last week locked in a truck-trailer outside of Victoria, Texas, in the congressional district I represent. Regardless of the circumstances of their entry into the United States, it is a terrible tragedy for their families, and a horrific example of what can happen when human life is considered cheap. Congress Border Tragedy Reveals Deeper Problems 19 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 19 May 2003 verse 6 ... Cached This tragedy highlights something more chilling, however: our continued vulnerability to terrorist attacks. More than four million trucks enter the United States through Mexico each year; border authorities inspect less than one percent. Indeed, our borders have become more porous than ever, as federal authorities in some cases simply will not enforce the laws that Congress has passed. Congress The Federal Government Bully in State and Local Elections 26 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 26 May 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Consider the medical marijuana debate. Federal law currently prohibits the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) from using its huge advertising budget for partisan or political purposes. In fact, a broader law prohibits federal agencies in general from using taxpayer dollars to influence the outcome of local elections. The need for these laws is obvious if we hope to maintain any slight degree of federalism. However, if Congress passes a bill pending before a House committee, ONDCP will soon be exempt from the rules against politicking. It already blatantly ignored existing rules in recent months by sending representatives to Missouri and Nevada to openly oppose local medical marijuana initiatives. The message to local voters was very clear: do not dare pass a law that displeases your superiors in Washington. To do so was to risk an outright raid by federal agents to make sure the new law was not implemented, as we saw two years ago in California. Congress The Federal Debt Spiral 02 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 02 June 2003 verse 2 ... Cached The administration held a grand signing ceremony last Wednesday to celebrate the tax cut bill, a marginally worthwhile piece of legislation that does reduce income taxes slightly. The East Room of the White House was awash with cabinet members, Congressmen, Senators, administration staffers, supporters, and news media of every kind, all gathered for a perfect political photo-op. Congress The Federal Debt Spiral 02 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 02 June 2003 verse 3 ... Cached One day earlier, however, the President signed another bill into law without fanfare of any kind. There was no press conference, no cameras, and no ceremony whatsoever. In fact, the White House issued only the briefest comment on this particular bill, even though it affects the American people far more than the modest tax cut bill. The reason for the silence? The President had just approved a whopping $984 billion increase in the national debt, the single-largest increase in our nation’s history. This was hardly a proud moment for the President or Congress, so the White House understandably kept the whole matter very quiet. Congress The Federal Debt Spiral 02 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 02 June 2003 verse 4 ... Cached For perspective, this latest debt limit increase of nearly one trillion dollars is as large as the entire federal budget in 1985. The embarrassing increase was necessary because federal law limits the amount of debt the Treasury can carry, and the current $6.4 trillion limit had been reached. The federal government across the board has been spending money feverishly, at levels approximately 22% higher than just three years ago. This spending spree caused Congress to raise the debt limit from $5.9 trillion only six months ago, but the new limit was quickly reached. Congress The Federal Debt Spiral 02 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 02 June 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Debt simply has lost any remnant of stigma in Washington. The point of the debt limit law was to shine a public light on government borrowing and make lawmakers more accountable for deficit spending. The original intent behind the law- to limit borrowing- has been abandoned. Today Congress can raise the debt limit at any time with virtually no media attention. More importantly, there is no political fallout. This puts Congress in the position of a spendthrift debtor who can authorize spending limit increases on its own credit card! Congress The Federal Debt Spiral 02 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 02 June 2003 verse 6 ... Cached The House managed to avoid a direct vote on raising the debt limit, instead burying a series of automatic debt increases in the terrible 2004 budget passed in April. The Senate, by contrast, at least held an up-or-down vote on the issue. Yet only one Republican Senator voted against saddling the American people with nearly another trillion dollars of debt. Both parties in Congress clearly now view the debt ceiling law as purely symbolic at best. Privately, most members probably view it as an unnecessary obstacle that should be eliminated, an opinion shared by Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan. Congress The Federal Debt Spiral 02 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 02 June 2003 verse 8 ... Cached The spending problem is deeply rooted in Washington bureaucratic culture, and no administration is immune. The President can set the tone for fiscal restraint or fiscal indulgence, but ultimately Congress controls the purse strings though the appropriations process. One thing the President can do, however, is refuse to sign spending bills or debt limit increases. When neither Congress nor the administration is capable of fiscal self-control, the taxpayer is always the loser. How do you feel knowing the federal government just wrote itself a trillion dollar loan using your labor as collateral? Congress The Unbearable Cost of Running Iraq 09 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 09 June 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Recently fired Army Secretary Thomas White said last week that senior defense officials “are unwilling to come to grips” with the scale of the postwar US obligation in Iraq. Similarly, in February, Army chief of staff General Eric Shinseki brought the same message to Congress: occupation of Iraq would take “several hundred thousand” troops. Both men have been publicly admonished. Congress The Unbearable Cost of Running Iraq 09 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 09 June 2003 verse 9 ... Cached This policy threatens the long-term health not just of our economy but domestic spending on items like education and social security. While some of us in Congress raised these concerns prior to the beginning of the war with Iraq, our questions went unanswered. Instead of focusing on how this commitment would almost certainly drain our resources for years to come, the policy debate wrongly focused almost exclusively on whether we would have the “moral support” of our “allies” and international organizations such as NATO and the UN. Congress Who Deserves a Tax Credit? 16 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 16 June 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Congress passed a new child tax credit bill last week amid partisan controversy, clashes between the House and Senate chambers, and the usual class-warfare rhetoric. The debate raised uncomfortable questions about which Americans “deserve” a tax break, but the larger question- whether government deserves so much of our money- went unaddressed. Congress Who Deserves a Tax Credit? 16 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 16 June 2003 verse 4 ... Cached An overwhelming majority of the poor do work, however. The working poor certainly do pay federal taxes in the form of payroll taxes, also known as FICA. Even a minimum wage worker clocking 40 hours per week would pay hundreds of dollars annually in payroll taxes. So if Congress really wants to help the working poor, payroll taxes must be lowered. But while the self-styled champions of the poor continually clamor for income tax increases and more social services spending, they ignore the obvious and immediate benefits of a payroll tax cut for low-income workers. Congress Declining Dollar, Declining Fortunes 23 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 23 June 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Mr. Greenspan declined to answer my question about the tumbling value of the dollar, citing a kind of gentlemen’s agreement between him and the Treasury department not to discuss dollar policy. This is preposterous, of course, because he is unquestionably the one man on earth most responsible for the value of the U.S. dollar. If a member of Congress cannot ask the Federal Reserve Chairman a straightforward question about dollar policy, how can we expect the American public to have the faintest idea about what the Fed really does? The answer is that very few Americans pay any attention to the Fed, which has successfully insulated itself as a “nonpolitical” entity. Congress Declining Dollar, Declining Fortunes 23 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 23 June 2003 verse 7 ... Cached Both Congress and the Fed should be promoting sound dollar policies, because a sound and stable currency is required for sustained economic growth. Instead, both have through default and deliberate action promoted fiat policies that systematically depreciate the dollar. The financial markets understand this, and investors track the minute-by-minute fluctuations in value of the dollar seeking an investment advantage. This kind of speculation would not exist in a sound monetary system. Congress HillaryCare, Republican Style 30 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 30 June 2003 verse 2 ... Cached In a late-night vote last week, the Republican congress managed to do what Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy tried to do ten years ago: take the next big step toward socialized medicine in America. More specifically, Congress voted for a huge expansion of Medicare that enriches pharmaceutical companies, fleeces taxpayers with billions in new spending, and forces millions of seniors to accept inferior drug coverage. Conservatives might ask themselves whether this is what they had in mind when the party of “limited government” gained control of the House, Senate, and White House. Congress Independence from England, Dependence on Washington? 07 July 2003    Texas Straight Talk 07 July 2003 verse 6 ... Cached Today some Americans, including many members of Congress, view both the Constitution and our Founders as quaint anachronisms at best. Times have changed, they argue, and we hardly should be bound by rules established by a bunch of dead white men who could not possibly understand our modern society. The Constitution is relevant only if it “evolves” to allow for new realities, and the federal government certainly should not be constrained by outdated notions about its proper role. This viewpoint steadily gained acceptance throughout the 20th century, exemplified by the blatantly unconstitutional New Deal and Great Society programs, Supreme Court activism, the virtual abolition of states rights, and uncontrolled growth of the federal government. Congress What Happened to Conservatives? 14 July 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 July 2003 verse 2 ... Cached The so-called conservative movement of the last 20 years, starting with the Reagan revolution of the 1980s, followed by the 1994 Gingrich takeover of the House, and culminating in the early 2000s with Republican control of both Congress and the White House, seems a terrible failure today. Republicans have failed utterly to shrink the size of government; instead it is bigger and costlier than ever before. Federal spending spirals out of control, new Great Society social welfare programs have been created, and the national debt is rising by more than a half-trillion dollars per year. Whatever happened to the conservative vision supposedly sweeping the nation? Congress The Terrible Cost of Government 28 July 2003    Texas Straight Talk 28 July 2003 verse 6 ... Cached Of course both Congress and a succession of presidents are responsible for the spending mess. The president can set a tone for fiscal restraint or indulgence, and can veto spending bills if he has the political will to do so. Congress, however, actually crafts the laughable federal “budget” and appropriates the money, so the ultimate blame for spending increases must be accorded members of the House and Senate. It’s easy to talk about smaller government, but few actually vote against the 13 annual appropriations bills that fund so many wasteful and unconstitutional departments, agencies, and programs. There are simply too many special interests counting on the money contained in the appropriations bills, and those same interests will take their campaign contributions elsewhere if a congressman fails to play the game. Congress Federal Courts and the Imaginary Constitution 11 August 2003    Texas Straight Talk 11 August 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Similarly, a federal court judge in San Diego recently ordered that city to evict the Boy Scouts from a camp they have run in a city park since the 1950s. A gay couple, with help from the ACLU, sued the city claiming the Scouts’ presence was a violation of the “separation of church and state.” The judge agreed, ruling that the Scouts are in essence a religious organization because they mention God in their recited oath. Never mind that the land, once privately owned, had been donated to the city for the express purpose of establishing a Scout camp. Never mind that the Scouts have made millions of dollars worth of improvements to the land. The real tragedy is that our founders did not intend a separation of church and state, and never envisioned a rigidly secular public life for America. They simply wanted to prevent Congress from establishing a state religion, as England had. The First amendment says “Congress shall make no law”- a phrase that cannot possibly be interpreted to apply to the city of San Diego. But the phony activist “separation” doctrine leads to perverse outcomes like the eviction of Boy Scouts from city parks. Congress Federal Courts and the Imaginary Constitution 11 August 2003    Texas Straight Talk 11 August 2003 verse 7 ... Cached The political left increasingly uses the federal judiciary to do in court what it cannot do at the ballot box: advance an activist, secular, multicultural political agenda of which most Americans disapprove. This is why federal legal precedents in so many areas do not reflect the consensus of either federal or state legislators. Whether it’s gun rights, abortion, taxes, racial quotas, environmental regulations, gay marriage, or religion, federal jurists are way out of touch with the American people. As a society we should reconsider the wisdom of lifetime tenure for federal judges, while Congress and the President should remember that the Supreme Court is supreme only over other federal courts- not over the other branches of government. It’s time for the executive and legislative branches to show some backbone, appoint judges who follow the Constitution, and remove those who do not. Congress Look Outside Politics for Blackout Solution 18 August 2003    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Last week’s blackout that paralyzed much of the northeast has politicians scrambling to assign blame and pledge action to fix the problem. The universal consensus is that government, specifically Congress, must immediately “do something.” As with most crises, the problem is instantly assumed to stem from a lack of government regulation. Congress Look Outside Politics for Blackout Solution 18 August 2003    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 2003 verse 6 ... Cached Electricity, from coal burning sources or not, is likely to remain our primary form of power for decades. We simply need to accept this and build more electric power plants. In a free market, profit-seeking companies would be happy to build new plants and sell power to an ever-growing population. Unless and until government stops restricting supply and controlling prices, however, we can only expect the electric power system to remain vulnerable. It is precisely because electricity is so vitally important in our modern world that it should be delivered by the efficient free market, rather than the dismal bureaucratic sector. In this day and age, it is preposterous that we have problems delivering simple electric power where and when it is needed. The recent blackout cannot be blamed on technology or a lack of capital, and certainly not on a supposed market failure. The real problem- too much government regulation- is likely to be ignored as Congress rushes to engineer a wholesale federal takeover of the electricity industry. Congress Trust Us, We're the Government 25 August 2003    Texas Straight Talk 25 August 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Attorney General John Ashcroft has embarked on a bizarre promotional tour to counter growing public opposition to the Patriot Act. The administration clearly is worried by recent votes in Congress to limit the scope of the Act, votes that reflect the willingness of even GOP loyalists to buck the president on the issue. So Mr. Ashcroft is visiting several cities to give a stump speech that essentially says this: Trust us- we’re the government, and we say the Patriot Act does not threaten civil liberties. Congress Trust Us, We're the Government 25 August 2003    Texas Straight Talk 25 August 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Furthermore, Mr. Ashcroft is an administrator, not a legislator. It is not his job to write laws or say what the law should be. His job is to execute the laws passed by Congress. It is not his place to chide Congress or the American people for not supporting his viewpoint. He certainly should not be spending taxpayer money to lobby for his political positions. Congress Trust Us, We're the Government 25 August 2003    Texas Straight Talk 25 August 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Mr. Ashcroft complains that the Patriot Act is misunderstood. But it’s not the American public’s fault nobody knows exactly what the Patriot Act does. The Act contains over 500 pages of detailed legalese, the full text of which was neither read nor made available to Congress before it was voted on- which by itself should have convinced members to vote against it. Many of the surveillance powers authorized in the Act are not clearly defined and have not yet been tested. When they are tested, court challenges are sure to follow. The Act’s complexity is even more troubling when we consider how powers given to the Justice department today might be abused by future administrations. Congress War and Red Ink 15 September 2003    Texas Straight Talk 15 September 2003 verse 2 ... Cached The president plans to request another $87 billion from Congress to fund operations in Iraq, a number that not surprisingly is much higher than originally called for by the administration. It’s not surprising because everything government does costs more than originally expected, but it’s important to note that some in the administration who warned about the true financial costs of an Iraq war were forced to leave. Congress Your Money in Iraq 29 September 2003    Texas Straight Talk 29 September 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Ambassador Paul Bremer, head of the US provisional administration in Iraq, appeared before Congress last week to lobby hard for another $87 billion for nation building. This figure is in addition to the nearly $80 billion we’ve already spent in Iraq, and the new funding request is for 2004 only. If we stay in Iraq beyond 2004- and the administration has made it clear that reconstruction will be a long-term project- American taxpayers easily could spend one trillion dollars over the coming years. Congress Your Money in Iraq 29 September 2003    Texas Straight Talk 29 September 2003 verse 16 ... Cached Criticism of this foreign aid spending in Iraq is not restricted to the political left. Conservative groups and politicians are increasingly angry at the administration’s exorbitant spending. For example, Congressman Zach Wamp of Tennessee sits on the Appropriations committee, which is responsible for all spending bills. He has a modest idea: insist the reconstruction money be paid back as a loan when Iraq’s huge oil reserves resume operation. Similarly, Congressman Jeff Flake of Arizona wants to offset every dollar spent reconstructing Iraq with spending cuts in others areas, especially given the amount of wasteful pork in the federal budget. But the White House is adamantly opposed to both ideas. Why is a supposedly conservative administration resisting even the slightest attempts at fiscal restraint? Congress Paying Dearly for Free Prescription Drugs 06 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 06 October 2003 verse 2 ... Cached As Congress finalizes plans to expand Medicare, more and more seniors are beginning to understand that “free” prescription drugs from the government will carry a very high price tag. The tragedy is that our society is allowing the pharmaceutical industry, phony senior lobbies, and vote-hungry politicians to force millions of older Americans into a government-run Medicare ghetto. Congress Paying Dearly for Free Prescription Drugs 06 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 06 October 2003 verse 3 ... Cached All of us, including seniors, will pay for the drug benefit in the form of higher taxes. Congress claims the program will cost $400 billion over the next 10 years, but government cost projections cannot be trusted. Medicare today costs seven times more than originally estimated. Private economists estimate the true cost will be closer to $3 or $4 trillion over ten years, but even the government’s figure of $400 billion represents the largest entitlement increase since the failed Great Society programs of the 1960s. This new spending comes as the Treasury faces record single-year deficits, which soon will approach $1 trillion annually. Congress Paying Dearly for Free Prescription Drugs 06 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 06 October 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Furthermore, the Medicare drug benefit gives private companies a perverse incentive to dump their existing prescription coverage and force retirees into the government system. Many large companies already have badly underfunded pension plans. As more and more Baby Boomers retire, these companies will face serious financial crises. They will naturally seek to cut costs by eliminating drug coverage; some companies already have announced their intention to do so when the Medicare drug benefit becomes available. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that at least one-third of all retirees will lose their private drug coverage and becomes wards of Medicare. Congress Lessons from the California Recall 13 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 13 October 2003 verse 4 ... Cached If the scenario on the west coast seems familiar, it’s because we’ve seen it before in Washington. Congress spends far too much regardless of revenues. The fundamental difference is that the State of California, unlike the federal government, cannot simply print money to pay its obligations. It has only two choices when spending outpaces revenues: borrow money or raise taxes. With its bond and credit ratings floundering, borrowing is a difficult and expensive venture. Taxpayers in the state already pay some of the highest taxes in the nation, so tax hikes are politically unpopular. Faced with this dilemma, California lawmakers did nothing, hoping to keep the treasury afloat until tax revenues rebounded. But the economic turnaround never happened, so California faces a crisis here and now. Somebody had to pay, and Gray Davis was the most visible symbol of an irresponsible government. Congress Lessons from the California Recall 13 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 13 October 2003 verse 6 ... Cached The crisis in Sacramento should serve as a cautionary tale for all Americans. Legislators in statehouses across the country and in Washington lack the political will to cut spending. They consistently spend more each year, without regard to revenues. If the process goes on too long, government becomes insolvent, unable to tax or borrow enough to satisfy its voracious appetite. It could happen in your state, and it is happening in Washington. It’s worse in DC, however, because Federal Reserve printing presses help our national politicians temporarily evade reality. If Congress continues to spend and print dollars at the pace of recent years, however, the devaluation of our currency will make all of us poorer for decades to come. Congress $20 Billion Giveaway Unjustified 20 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 20 October 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Congress passed an $87 billion spending bill last week to fund our occupation of Iraq, $20 billion of which is an outright foreign aid giveaway of your money for all kinds of civic and social programs there. This $20 billion was tied to money for troop support, so that members of Congress who object to wasteful and unconstitutional foreign aid would feel compelled to vote in favor of the bill. This new spending comes on top of the $80 billion we have already spent in Iraq, and the price tag easily could reach one trillion dollars if our occupation drags on for several years. Congress $20 Billion Giveaway Unjustified 20 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 20 October 2003 verse 7 ... Cached This is sound thinking and sound advice by the elder Mr. Bush. Had Congress heeded his words, we would not be voting to spend even more money nation building in Iraq. Congress The Appropriations Process 27 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Every fall Congress goes through what is known in Washington as the “appropriations process.” The term really is inaccurate, as it should be called the spending process. After all, your money has already been appropriated, which is to say taken, through taxes. Once taken, Congress spends the autumn months doing what it does best: spending money. Congress The Appropriations Process 27 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Congress passes 13 huge appropriations bills each year, along with a 14th known generously as the “supplemental” bill. These bills fund a vast array of federal departments, agencies, and programs, including more than a trillion dollars worth of entitlements. Each bill is stuffed with hundreds of pages of goodies for countless favored groups, industries, individual companies, and foreign governments. It’s common for dozens or hundreds of amendments to be added to each bill, always with more money for somebody. Congress The Appropriations Process 27 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 2003 verse 6 ... Cached This process gives members of the House Appropriations committee unwarranted power, because so many special interests depend on receiving a piece of the government pie. Members of Congress play along if they hope to bring home as much pork as possible to their districts, and this includes making deals with a variety of devils. Any member who hopes to solidify his reelection chances by delivering pork will find himself agreeing to vote for all kinds of unsavory bills in exchange. Congress The Appropriations Process 27 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 2003 verse 7 ... Cached Lobbyists also play a central role, acting as shadow legislators and pushing to ensure their clients get a healthy share of the federal largesse. Lobbyists wield power over legislators either by promising campaign funds, or threatening to support an opponent. Members of Congress understand this very clearly, and they work hard to avoid alienating any group represented by a powerful lobby. Congress The Appropriations Process 27 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 2003 verse 11 ... Cached Of course politicians in Washington like to talk about the need for fiscal restraint, but they never vote for it. Talk is one thing; the true test of any politician is how he votes. The only real measure of any member of Congress who claims to want smaller government is whether he votes NO on every appropriations bill. If he votes yes, he’s voting for bigger government. It’s that simple. A true fiscal conservative votes for less spending, not more. Congress The Appropriations Process 27 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 2003 verse 12 ... Cached Most Americans think the federal government is too large, spends too much money, and spends it badly. Even the most ardent liberals admit there is a tremendous amount of waste in government. But Congress clearly does not agree, because it relentlessly spends more and more each year. American taxpayers, therefore, have two basic options: start voting the big spenders out of office, or slowly submit to democratic socialism courtesy of a government that soon will devour 50% of the nation’s productive output. Congress Economic Woes Begin at Home 03 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 03 November 2003 verse 3 ... Cached However, instead of debating America’s monetary policy, Congress wants to debate China’s monetary policy. The goal is to pressure China to change the valuation of its currency, to unlink it from the U.S. dollar so that its value fluctuates. The main beneficiary of this would be certain U.S. manufacturers, at least in the short run. But American consumers would be the overwhelming losers in the long run, as the price of countless consumer items would rise. Manufacturing interests have powerful lobbies in Congress, but consumers do not. Congress Economic Woes Begin at Home 03 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 03 November 2003 verse 4 ... Cached China exports many products into the United States, which makes her a convenient scapegoat for our economic problems. Demanding that China adjust its currency valuation is merely a distraction from addressing the real economic dilemmas facing our country, however. Congress should be focused on our own disastrous monetary policies. As long as the Fed can print money at will and set interest rates, the value of our dollars will be subject to the whims of politicians and the perceived economic needs of politically powerful special interests. Congress Economic Woes Begin at Home 03 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 03 November 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Congress should consider the sobering fact that the Chinese hold billions of dollars of U.S. debt. The dollars the Chinese acquire by selling us goods and services eventually must be returned to the United States. Since the Chinese are not buying an equivalent amount of American goods and services, they use dollars to finance our extravagant spending. Congress Economic Woes Begin at Home 03 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 03 November 2003 verse 7 ... Cached Instead of promoting global economic government, Congress should reform those policies that reduce our manufacturers’ competitiveness. Recently, a prominent financial journalist visited with businessmen who are launching new enterprises in China. When he asked them why they chose to invest in China, they answered: “It is so much easier to start a business in China than in the United States, especially in places like Massachusetts and California.” Congress Mistreating Soldiers and Veterans 10 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 10 November 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Congress recently voted to send $87 billion to Iraq, money that will be used to build everything from roads to power plants to hospitals. Yet while Congress appears ready to rubber-stamp unlimited monies for nation building in Iraq, thousands of our own soldiers at home are languishing with substandard medical care. Congress Mistreating Soldiers and Veterans 10 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 10 November 2003 verse 7 ... Cached For years veterans have fought for concurrent receipt benefits to no avail. Last week Congress finally passed a very limited concurrent receipt law, but the change is unlikely to satisfy those disabled veterans who need benefits the most. Under the new partial concurrent receipt bill, only those veterans in essence deemed “disabled enough” will qualify; this means roughly two-thirds of disabled veterans will not receive concurrent receipt benefits at all. Even severely disabled veterans who do qualify may never enjoy their long-sought relief, because the bill passed by Congress takes ten years to phase in. How sad that some disabled soldiers will die in the next decade without seeing a penny of their concurrent receipt benefits. Congress Mistreating Soldiers and Veterans 10 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 10 November 2003 verse 8 ... Cached Members of our armed forces deserve more than platitudes when they return from foreign wars with illnesses or disabilities. Unfortunately, the trust our soldiers place in the federal government to provide for their health care has been breached time and time again. Last week’s partial grant of concurrent receipt benefits will prove woefully inadequate for most of our disabled veterans, veterans who could be well-served with just a fraction of the billions Congress gave away in Iraq. Congress Congress Grovels for the WTO 17 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 2003 verse 1 ... Cached Congress Grovels for the WTO Congress Congress Grovels for the WTO 17 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Although it was scarcely reported in the press, an extraordinary event took place in Washington earlier this month. Pascal Lamy, The European Union trade czar, visited with influential members of Congress for the express purpose of determining whether a new tax bill is being crafted to his satisfaction. If Mr. Lamy- a member of the French Socialist Party- is unsatisfied with the changes made to our tax code, he threatens to unleash a European trade war against U.S. imports. In effect he is a foreign bureaucrat acting as a shadow legislator by intervening in our lawmaking process. Congress Congress Grovels for the WTO 17 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 2003 verse 3 ... Cached This unseemly saga stems from our participation in the World Trade Organization. Since America first joined the WTO in 1994, Europe has objected to how we tax American companies on their overseas earnings. The EU took its dispute to the WTO grievance board, which voted in favor of the Europeans. After all, it’s not fair for high-tax Europe to compete with relatively low tax America; the only solution is to force the U.S. to tax its companies more. The WTO ruling was clear: Congress must change American tax rules to comply with “international law.” Congress Congress Grovels for the WTO 17 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Sadly, Congress chose to comply. We scrambled to change our corporate tax laws in 2001, but failed to appease the Europeans. They again complained to the WTO, which again sided with the EU. So we’re back to the drawing board, working overtime to change our domestic laws to satisfy the WTO and the Europeans. Congress Congress Grovels for the WTO 17 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 2003 verse 5 ... Cached This outrageous affront to our national sovereignty was of course predictable when we joined the WTO. During congressional debates we were assured that entry into the organization posed no threat whatsoever to our sovereignty. Consider this rosy description by one well-known “libertarian” think thank: “The WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism helps nations resolve trade disputes without resorting to costly trade wars. The system relies on voluntary compliance and does not compromise national sovereignty.” Congress Congress Grovels for the WTO 17 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 2003 verse 6 ... Cached But this was nonsense. A Congressional Research Service report was quite clear about the consequences of our membership: “As a member of the WTO, the United States does commit to act in accordance with the rules of the multi-lateral body. It is legally obligated to insure that national laws do not conflict with WTO rules.” With the Europeans and the WTO now telling us our laws are illegal and must be changed, it’s hard to imagine a more blatant loss of American sovereignty. Congress Congress Grovels for the WTO 17 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 17 November 2003 verse 9 ... Cached One critical point must not be ignored. The Constitution grants Congress, and Congress alone, the authority to regulate trade and craft tax laws. Congress cannot cede that authority to the WTO or any other international body, nor can the President legally sign any treaty that purports to do so. Our Founders never intended for America to become entangled in global trade schemes, and they certainly never intended to have our domestic laws overridden by international bureaucrats. Quasi-governmental organizations like the WTO are simply incompatible with American national sovereignty. Congress Medicare Plunder 24 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 24 November 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Congress worked late into the night this past weekend to pass a Medicare prescription drug bill that represents the single largest expansion of the federal welfare state since the Great Society programs of the 1960s. The new Medicare drug plan enriches pharmaceutical companies, fleeces taxpayers, and forces millions of older Americans to accept inferior drug coverage—while doing nothing to address the real reasons prescription drugs cost so much. Congress Medicare Plunder 24 November 2003    Texas Straight Talk 24 November 2003 verse 4 ... Cached The vast majority of older Americans already have private prescription drug coverage that they don’t want changed, and this 78% of seniors may well lose their good private coverage altogether. In fact, the government’s own Congressional Budget Office estimates that at least one-third of all private companies will dump their retirees into the Medicare system as a result of the new bill. Big corporations love the Medicare drug plan, because they want to shift the responsibility for providing drug benefits to their retirees onto taxpayers. Dozens of major companies shamelessly advertised in the Washington Times and elsewhere in support of the Medicare bill for this very simple reason. Their pension plans are dangerously underfunded, so naturally they use their lobbying influence to promote a Medicare drug system. In this sense the Medicare bill is a taxpayer-funded corporate bailout for hundreds of American companies. Congress GOP Abandons Conservatives 01 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 2003 verse 2 ... Cached The Medicare prescription drug bill passed by Congress last week may prove to be a watershed event for political conservatives in America. This latest expansion of the federal government, potentially the largest in our nation’s history, is firmly in keeping with the failed New Deal and Great Society programs of the utopian left. This leaves true conservatives, who believe strongly in limited government and identify with the Goldwater- era Republican party, wondering whether they still have a political home in the modern GOP. In the eyes of many conservatives, today’s GOP simply has abandoned its limited-government heritage to buy votes and gain political power in Washington. Congress GOP Abandons Conservatives 01 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 2003 verse 3 ... Cached The unfortunate truth is that the Bush administration, aided by a Republican congress, has increased spending more in three years than the previous administration did in eight. Federal spending has grown by more than 25% since President Bush took office. The federal government now spends roughly $21,000 per household every year, up from $16,000 just 4 years ago. Columnist Cal Thomas, in a recent article entitled “The Embarrassing GOP,” raises an excellent question: “How much of that $21,000 could you spend that would produce better results for yourself and your family?” Congress GOP Abandons Conservatives 01 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Consider that Mr. Bush has not vetoed a single bill, nor does he even bother to employ conservative rhetoric. Chris Edwards of the CATO Institute says this about the President: “I’ve never seen him give a speech in which he says government is too big and we need to cut costs.” Furthermore, the outlook for spending restraint during a second Bush term is nil: “When you have a president who has a bunch of his own spending initiatives like education and the Medicare drug bill, it makes it difficult for him to go out and say that Congress is being wasteful,” Mr. Edwards states. Congress GOP Abandons Conservatives 01 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 2003 verse 6 ... Cached The irony is that conservatives suffered through decades of Democratic control of Congress, always believing that liberals were to blame for the relentless growth of the federal government. When Republicans finally took control of Congress in 1994, many saw an opportunity for a real conservative revolution. But first, conservatives were told, the Democratic administration had to be removed. In the meantime, spending continued unabated throughout the 1990s. When Republicans won the White House in 2000, another opportunity seemed at hand. The Senate, however, was still in Democratic hands-- the last possible GOP scapegoat. Finally, in 2002 the GOP took control of the Senate and increased its majority in the U.S. House. Surely this was the moment conservatives had been waiting for! Yet the past year has seen more spending than ever, including the disastrous Medicare bill that will cost trillions over coming decades. The latest line is that the GOP needs a filibuster-proof Senate of 60 Republicans, and then, finally, the party can begin to implement a conservative agenda. Congress Elusive Peace in the Middle East 15 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 15 December 2003 verse 6 ... Cached President Bush and Secretary of State Powell, to their credit, have praised the Geneva Accord. The president termed the Accord “productive,” while the secretary stated he “Has an obligation to listen to individuals who have interesting ideas.” This is encouraging. Still, the impulse that demands American engagement is strong. One congressional leader scoffed at what he termed a “freelance peace plan,” but his sarcasm ignores the utter failure of “official” peace efforts. He also fails to understand that America cannot impose its will upon every conflict around the globe. Lasting, effective peace agreements can be crafted only by those who will live under them. Congress "Campaign Finance Reform" Muzzles Political Dissent 22 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 22 December 2003 verse 3 ... Cached In a devastating blow to political speech, the Supreme Court recently upheld most of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill passed by Congress last year. The legislation will do nothing to curb special interest power or reduce corruption in Washington, but it will make it harder for average Americans to influence government. “Campaign finance reform” really means the bright-line standard of free speech has been replaced by a murky set of regulations and restrictions that will muzzle political dissent and protect incumbents. Justice Scalia correctly accuses the Court of supporting a law “That cuts to the heart of what the First Amendment is meant to protect: the right to criticize the government…This is a sad day for freedom of speech.” Congress "Campaign Finance Reform" Muzzles Political Dissent 22 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 22 December 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Two important points ignored by the Court should be made. First, although the new campaign rules clearly violate the First amendment, they should be struck down primarily because Congress has no authority under Article I of the Constitution to regulate campaigns at all. Article II authorizes only the regulation of elections, not campaigns, because our Founders knew Congress might pass campaign laws that protect incumbency. This is precisely what McCain-Feingold represents: blatant incumbent protection sold to the public as noble reform. Congress Return of the Great Social Security Giveaway 05 January 2004    Texas Straight Talk 05 January 2004 verse 6 ... Cached Those in favor of sending US Social Security benefits to Mexican citizens argue that the crushing poverty in Mexico demands some form of US assistance to that country's aged. While the poverty in Mexico is truly deplorable and saddening, the fact remains that the US Congress has no constitutional authority to enact what is essentially another foreign aid program. I would applaud any private citizen who wishes to help his fellow man living in poverty, whether in the US or Mexico or wherever he wishes. But for the US government to force this kind of "charity" is both immoral and illegal. Congress Return of the Great Social Security Giveaway 05 January 2004    Texas Straight Talk 05 January 2004 verse 7 ... Cached When Congress returns late this month, it should take the opportunity to re-affirm that Social Security is an American program designed to benefit American retired workers. That is why I introduced HR 489, the Social Security for American Citizens Only Act, in the current Congress. This act forbids the federal government from providing Social Security benefits to non-citizens. It also ends the practice of totalization. Congress Government and Marriage 19 January 2004    Texas Straight Talk 19 January 2004 verse 7 ... Cached Government is not morality, government is force- and forcing taxpayers to fund another silly program will not strengthen the institution of marriage. If Mr. Bush really wants to promote marriage, he should work to dismantle the soul-destroying welfare system that rewards out-of-wedlock births. He should work to end the judicial assault on religious liberty. He should urge Congress to cut spending and taxes, so that more money can flow into churches and private charities. The president certainly is correct that marriage is important, and the need for stable, two-parent families is apparent. We should all be quite skeptical, however, of claims that government programs can fix the deep-rooted cultural problems responsible for the decline of the American family. Congress Congress Cannot Be Appointed 26 January 2004    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 2004 verse 1 ... Cached Congress Cannot Be Appointed Congress Congress Cannot Be Appointed 26 January 2004    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 2004 verse 2 ... Cached In the months following the September 11th terrorist attacks, questions arose about whether Congress could continue to function if many of its members were killed or injured in a future terrorist attack. These concerns resulted in the creation of a commission that advocated a first in American history, namely the appointment of individuals to the U.S. House. A constitutional amendment has been proposed that would provide the method for such appointments following a catastrophe that killed or disabled a majority of the people in Congress. Congress Congress Cannot Be Appointed 26 January 2004    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 2004 verse 3 ... Cached I strongly oppose this constitutional amendment, because I believe an appointed Congress would become an unaccountable, tyrannical Congress. Over the past year I met with top scholars, attorneys, and colleagues who reject the idea of an appointed House of Representatives. Fortunately, we had success in turning many members of Congress against the proposal through a series of public lectures, meetings, and published articles. Legislation I cosponsored, recently passed by the House Judiciary committee, will enable congressional districts around the nation to hold emergency elections without resorting to political appointments. The bill has the support of congressional leadership, and should reach the House floor in coming months. Congress Congress Cannot Be Appointed 26 January 2004    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Those advocating an appointed Congress argue that a U.S. House consisting of only a handful of surviving members would not be seen as legitimate by the public. In fact the opposite is true: the legitimacy of appointed “representatives” would be strongly questioned, especially by those who disagreed with their actions. Appointees would be viewed suspiciously as recipients of political patronage, regardless of the system put in place to appoint them. Appointees would not be seen as legitimate because they would in fact not be legitimate. Without exception, every member of the House of Representatives has been elected for over two hundred years. We can amend the Constitution, but we cannot force the public to accept the loss of its voting franchise. Congress Congress Cannot Be Appointed 26 January 2004    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 2004 verse 6 ... Cached One very important point should be emphasized: the Constitution already provides the framework for Congress to function after a catastrophic event. Article I section 2 instructs state governors to hold special elections to fill congressional vacancies, while Article I section 4 authorizes Congress to designate the “time, place, and manner” of such special elections if states should fail to act quickly following a national emergency. The legislation passed by the Judiciary committee simply exercises the existing congressional power by requiring states to hold special elections within 21 days after the House Speaker or acting Speaker declares that a majority of House members are incapacitated. Congress Spending and Lying 02 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 02 February 2004 verse 2 ... Cached The Congressional Budget Office issued a sobering report last week showing that federal debt, already more than $7 trillion, will increase $2.4 trillion by the end of this decade. The single-year deficit for 2004 will be nearly $500 billion. Congress Spending and Lying 02 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 02 February 2004 verse 3 ... Cached The federal spending frenzy of the last few years is well documented, but these latest figures have congressional Republicans and the White House scrambling to figuring out how to explain the budget mess to voters in November. Having abandoned even the limited government rhetoric of the Reagan and Gingrich years, mainstream Republicans now must attempt to out-pander the Democrats. The Medicare bill is clear evidence of this. Congress Spending and Lying 02 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 02 February 2004 verse 4 ... Cached Some conservatives have criticized Mr. Bush’s spending requests, but their votes don’t always match their words. True fiscal conservatives in Congress have only one choice: Vote NO on all spending bills, especially the 13 annual appropriations bills. This is the only honest measure of whether any member of Congress truly wants smaller government. It’s galling to hear members who voted for the Medicare bill and huge increases in 2004 agency budgets complain about excessive spending. Congress Congress Goes AWOL 09 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 09 February 2004 verse 1 ... Cached Congress Goes AWOL Congress Congress Goes AWOL 09 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 09 February 2004 verse 3 ... Cached We should not make Mr. Tenet the scapegoat. The issue is not whether our intelligence was perfect, but rather the process by which we allow our government to commit troops to war. That process bypassed Congress almost entirely. Congress Congress Goes AWOL 09 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 09 February 2004 verse 4 ... Cached Congress is to blame for its craven failure to seriously debate, much less declare, war in Iraq. The Constitution squarely charges Congress with the duty to declare war, a weighty responsibility that our founders thought should rest with the body most directly responsible to the people. The president’s status as commander-in-chief grants him the power only to execute war, not to decide whether war is justified. This is not seriously debatable by anyone who honestly examines the Constitution and the Federalist papers. Congress Congress Goes AWOL 09 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 09 February 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Various weak and disingenuous arguments have been made claiming that watered-down congressional resolutions authorizing force are adequate, and that war has been waged in the past without express declarations. But the letter of the Constitution trumps political expediency, and past sins hardly justify ignoring the rule of law today. It is pathetic to hear supposedly strict-constructionist conservatives use Clintonian verbal gymnastics to justify their party’s unconstitutional actions. Congress Congress Goes AWOL 09 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 09 February 2004 verse 6 ... Cached The furor over bad intelligence is a little late, to put it mildly. A proper investigation and debate by Congress clearly was warranted prior to any decision to go to war. The consequences cannot be undone. Hundreds of American soldiers have been killed, thousands more maimed or injured. More than one hundred billion dollars have been spent, and billions more will be needed to support our open-ended occupation of Iraq. The current after-the-fact debate is hollow and political. We now see those who abdicated their congressional responsibility to declare or reject war, who timidly voted to give the president the power he wanted, posturing as his harshest critics. Congress A Wise Consistency for Liberty 16 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 16 February 2004 verse 2 ... Cached Anyone who follows events in Washington quickly understands that there is no guiding philosophy behind the actions of Congress. New laws are made in a haphazard manner; new regulations are imposed on an ad hoc basis; trillions of dollars are spent without regard to whether the programs and agencies funded do any good whatsoever. Both political parties blame each other for the resulting mess, but both are guilty of an egregious lack of principle in virtually everything they do. Both parties cite the Constitution when it suits their purposes, but both regularly violate it-- particularly through legislation that exceeds the enumerated powers of Congress and tramples on states’ rights. Both support various actions by their party or president, yet strenuously oppose the same actions if taken by the other party. In short, there is no consistent guiding philosophy on Capitol Hill except political expediency. The battle in Washington is about political spoils, not ideology. Congress A Wise Consistency for Liberty 16 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 16 February 2004 verse 3 ... Cached Consistency is sorely needed in Washington. A guiding philosophy of liberty, based on constitutional restraints, should be followed consistently. Without philosophical consistency, the rule of law becomes nothing more than the imperial whims of the latest gang in Congress. Congress A Wise Consistency for Liberty 16 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 16 February 2004 verse 5 ... Cached To Emerson, foolish consistency meant being unwilling to admit errors and consistently defending a mistaken idea, regardless of facts. His quote referred a character trait, not to sound logical thinking. So it’s quite a distortion of Emerson’s views to use them to justify the incoherent and nonsensical policies coming out of Washington today. The political benefits of not being philosophically consistent are so overwhelming that politicians scarcely need to explain their votes. It’s simply assumed that members of Congress will vote based on pure self-interest. They are free to support whatever seems best for the moment. Adherence to any guiding philosophy would hamper their ability to please the parties, donors, lobbyists, and special interests that keep them in office. It’s advantageous to cling to the false notion that consistency is a hobgoblin, so they can dismiss any uncomfortable criticism. Congress Gay Marriage Quicksand 01 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 01 March 2004 verse 6 ... Cached But the Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996, explicitly authorizes states to refuse to recognize gay marriages performed in other states. Furthermore, the Supreme Court repeatedly has interpreted the Full Faith and Credit clause to allow Congress to limit the effect of state laws on other states. In fact, federal courts almost universally apply the clause only to state court judgments, not statutes. So a constitutional amendment is not necessary to address the issue of gay marriage, and will only drive yet another nail into the coffin of federalism. If we turn regulation of even domestic family relations over to the federal government, presumably anything can be federalized. Congress Gay Marriage Quicksand 01 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 01 March 2004 verse 7 ... Cached The choices are not limited to either banning gay marriage at the federal level, or giving up and accepting it as inevitable. A far better approach, rarely discussed, is for Congress to exercise its existing constitutional power to limit the jurisdiction of federal courts. Congress could statutorily remove whole issues like gay marriage from the federal judiciary, striking a blow against judicial tyranny and restoring some degree of states’ rights. We seem to have forgotten that the Supreme Court is supreme only over lower federal courts; it is not supreme over the other branches of government. The judiciary is co-equal under our federal system, but too often it serves as an unelected, unaccountable legislature. Congress Congressional Indecency 15 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 2004 verse 1 ... Cached Congressional Indecency Congress Congressional Indecency 15 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 2004 verse 2 ... Cached Congress is patting itself on the back after passing legislation last week that expands the power of the Federal Communications Commission to crack down on broadcasters with heavy new $500,000 fines. Most politicians were all too eager to appease those demanding that Congress “do something” about racy Super Bowl shows and distasteful radio hosts, especially in an election year. It is clear that most members of Congress gave little thought to the legality or wisdom of the bill, caring only that they be seen as defenders of all things decent. Congress Congressional Indecency 15 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 2004 verse 3 ... Cached In doing so, Congress ignored a fundamental truth: government control over radio and television broadcasts is incompatible with a free society. FCC control of broadcast content, whether through licensing, regulations, or fines, is naked censorship that is utterly at odds with the plain words of the First Amendment. It could not be any clearer: “Congress shall make no law.” Congress Congressional Indecency 15 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 2004 verse 5 ... Cached There’s nothing new about this latest congressional attack on expression. The political right wing has always embraced censorship, believing that government can foster and protect moral values through strict regulation of speech. But this curious attitude conflicts with the central tenet of conservatism, namely a healthy mistrust of government. Why do conservatives feel compelled to have a federal nanny state protect their children from indecency? Why do conservatives, who once questioned and resisted the growing involvement of government in our lives, now trust FCC bureaucrats to determine moral standards? Conservatives should know that a decent society is rooted in strong families, churches, and civic institutions, not government control of broadcasting. Congress Congressional Indecency 15 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 2004 verse 9 ... Cached Ultimately, broadcasters air indecent material only if the market demands it. Congress cannot raise the moral bearing of the American people by edict, but it can destroy liberty in the process. When it comes to decency, the American people should stop looking to government and start looking at themselves. Congress March (Budget) Madness 29 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 29 March 2004 verse 3 ... Cached Neither political party wants to address the fundamental yet unspoken issue lurking beneath any budget debate: What is the proper role for government in our society? Are these ever-growing social services and military expenditures really proper in a free country? We need to understand that the more government spends, the more freedom is lost. Instead of simply debating spending levels, we ought to be debating whether the departments, agencies, and programs funded by the budget should exist at all. My Republican colleagues especially ought to know this. Unfortunately, however, the GOP has decided to abandon principle and pander to the entitlements crowd. But this approach will backfire, because Democrats always offer to spend even more than Republicans. When congressional Republicans offer to spend $500 billion on Medicare, Democrats will offer $600 billion, and why not? It’s all funny money anyway, and it helps them get reelected. Congress March (Budget) Madness 29 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 29 March 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Furthermore, the budget passed last week further entrenches another phony Washington concept. An increasing percentage of the budget is categorized as “nondiscretionary” entitlement spending, meaning Congress ostensibly has no choice whether to fund certain programs. In fact, roughly two-thirds of the fiscal year 2005 budget is consumed by nondiscretionary spending. When Congress has no say over how two-thirds of the federal budget is spent, the American people effectively have no say either. Why in the world should the American people be forced to spend 1.5 trillion dollars funding programs that cannot even be reviewed at budget time? The very concept of nondiscretionary spending is a bureaucrat’s dream, because it assumes we as a society simply have accepted that most federal programs must be funded as a matter of course. NO program or agency should be considered sacred, and no funding should be considered inevitable. Congress March (Budget) Madness 29 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 29 March 2004 verse 6 ... Cached The increases in domestic, foreign, and military spending would be unnecessary if Congress stopped trying to build an empire abroad and a nanny state at home. Our interventionist foreign policy and growing entitlement society will bankrupt this nation if we do not change the way we think about the proper role of the federal government. Congress Whose Justice? 12 April 2004    Texas Straight Talk 12 April 2004 verse 2 ... Cached Judicial activism, the practice of judges ignoring the law and deciding cases based on their personal political views, has been a problem in America since well before the Supreme Court invented a right to abortion in Roe v. Wade. Many federal judges have become de facto legislators in recent decades, substituting their self-presumed wisdom for the will of Congress. In the process, the American people have lost more and more power to influence the laws under which they must live. Congress Whose Justice? 12 April 2004    Texas Straight Talk 12 April 2004 verse 7 ... Cached The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land in America. Congress needs to exercise its constitutional power over federal courts and send judges a strong message that Americans will be governed by American law only. I recently introduced legislation that forbids the Supreme Court and lower federal courts from citing any foreign or international laws, rules, policies, or court decisions as authority for their opinions. Federal judges take an oath of office promising to decide cases in accordance with the Constitution and US federal law. Those judges who insist on considering foreign law and foreign opinions should be removed from their positions for violating that oath, pure and simple. Justice Scalia warns that “Day by day, case by case, the Court is busy designing a Constitution for a country I do not recognize.” Congress needs to act quickly before Mr. Scalia’s fears are fully realized. Congress The Federal Reserve Debt Engine 26 April 2004    Texas Straight Talk 26 April 2004 verse 3 ... Cached Congress and the financial press treat Mr. Greenspan as an all-knowing sage, seeking his wisdom on political and even social issues that have nothing to do with monetary policy. During last week’s hearing Mr. Greenspan was asked his opinion on topics such as Social Security, tax cuts, federal spending, corporate accounting rules, the congressional budget process, and even immigration. It seems bizarre that a credulous Congress and public are willing to accept the judgment of on unelected, virtually unaccountable central banker while knowing little or nothing about the Federal Reserve itself. Congress Free Market Medicine 03 May 2004    Texas Straight Talk 03 May 2004 verse 2 ... Cached Last week the congressional Joint Economic committee on which I serve held a hearing featuring two courageous medical doctors. I had the pleasure of meeting with one of the witnesses, Dr. Robert Berry, who opened a low-cost health clinic in rural Tennessee. His clinic does not accept insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid, which allows Dr. Berry to treat patients without interference from third-party government bureaucrats or HMO administrators. In other words, Dr. Berry practices medicine as most doctors did 40 years ago, when patients paid cash for ordinary services and had inexpensive catastrophic insurance for serious injuries or illnesses. As a result, Dr. Berry and his patients decide for themselves what treatment is appropriate. Congress Free Market Medicine 03 May 2004    Texas Straight Talk 03 May 2004 verse 7 ... Cached While many in Congress are happy to criticize HMOs today, the public never hears how the present system was imposed upon the American people by federal law. In fact, one very prominent Senator now attacking HMOs is on record in the 1970s lauding them. As usual, government intervention in the private market failed to deliver the promised benefits and caused unintended consequences, but Congress never blames itself for the problems created by bad laws. Instead, we are told more government- in the form of “universal coverage”- is the answer. Congress Passing the Buck in Iraq 10 May 2004    Texas Straight Talk 10 May 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Members of Congress decry the fact that the administration did not inform us of these abuses and purposely kept Congress out of the information loop. Yet Congress made it clear to the administration from the very beginning that it wanted no responsibility for the war in Iraq. If Congress wanted to be kept in the loop it should have vigorously exercised its responsibilities. This means, first and foremost, that Congress should have voted on a declaration of war as required by the Constitution. Congress, after abandoning this responsibility in October 2002, now complains it is in the dark. Who is to say the legal ambiguity created by the congressional refusal to declare war may not have contributed to the mentality that prisoners need not be treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention? Until Congress takes up its constitutional responsibilities, complaints that the administration is not sufficiently forthcoming with information ring hollow. Congress Passing the Buck in Iraq 10 May 2004    Texas Straight Talk 10 May 2004 verse 6 ... Cached Congress has the power – and the obligation – to keep itself better informed. Congress should hold hearings on the torture allegations, exercising its subpoena power if necessary. Demanding that the administration investigate the matter is simply another example of Congress passing the buck. That’s what got us into trouble in the first place. Congress The War on Drugs is a War on Doctors 17 May 2004    Texas Straight Talk 17 May 2004 verse 6 ... Cached Doctors are not slaves, and they will not continue practicing medicine forever if the federal government insists on monitoring, harassing, fining, and even jailing them. Congress should take action to rein in overzealous prosecutors and law enforcement officials, and stop the harassment of legitimate physicians who act in good faith when prescribing pain relief drugs. Doctors should not be prosecuted for using their best medical judgment, nor should they be prosecuted for the misdeeds of their patients. Congress The Great Foreign Aid Swindle 24 May 2004    Texas Straight Talk 24 May 2004 verse 2 ... Cached Yet another ill-conceived foreign aid swindle has become law in the form of the “Millennium Challenge Act,” a disgraceful bill that sends billions of American tax dollars overseas even as our national debt explodes. The Act combines the worst aspects of bad domestic policy and bad foreign policy, by wasting $2.5 billion taxpayer dollars in 2005 alone while meddling in the affairs of foreign nations. Arrogant is the only word to describe a Congress that cares so little about its own taxpaying citizens while pretending to know what is best for the world. Congress Superpower or Superdebtor? 07 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 07 June 2004 verse 2 ... Cached Since the passage of the “Iraq Liberation Act” in 1998, the US government has spent more than 40 million taxpayer dollars on the Iraqi National Congress and its leader Ahmed Chalabi. As we now know, Chalabi in turn fed the US government lies about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and ties to al-Qaeda in the hope that the US would invade Iraq, overthrow Saddam Hussein, and put him in power. To hedge his bets, it appears he made a few deals with the Iranians, delivering US intelligence to that country. How’s that for gratitude? Now we see that the US has raided the house of Ahmed Chalabi and seized his papers and computers to see how much damage he may have caused the US with his Iranian dealings. Congress Torture, War, and Presidential Powers 14 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 14 June 2004 verse 3 ... Cached The Justice department, for its part, is depressingly silent on the issue. Attorney General Ashcroft refuses to release an existing Justice department memo on the matter to Congress. Why can’t the American people, much less Congress, see how the Justice department interprets presidential powers and federal torture laws? Why the secrecy? The Justice department is charged with enforcing federal laws, not suspending them or advising federal agencies to ignore them. Congress Torture, War, and Presidential Powers 14 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 14 June 2004 verse 7 ... Cached We are fighting undeclared wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and an open-ended war against terrorism worldwide. If the president claims extraordinary wartime powers, and we fight undeclared wars with no beginning and no end, when if ever will those extraordinary powers lapse? Since terrorism will never be eliminated completely, should all future presidents be able to act without regard to Congress or the Constitution simply by asserting “We’re at war”? Congress Zero Down for the American Dream 21 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 21 June 2004 verse 3 ... Cached This legislation is considered completely noncontroversial by both political parties, and will breeze through the full congress later this summer with the blessing of the administration. Nobody in Washington thinks twice about another welfare scheme that further entrenches the something-for-nothing mentality so prevalent today in America. Congress Zero Down for the American Dream 21 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 21 June 2004 verse 4 ... Cached The Zero Downpayment Act, as its names suggests, creates a federal program that allows some homebuyers to obtain federally-insured mortgages without making a down payment. “Federally-insured” really means taxpayer-insured, as taxpayers like you foot the bill for defaults. So while Congress congratulates itself on yet another program that supposedly helps the poor, it is taxpayers who pay for the inevitable defaults. Congress Zero Down for the American Dream 21 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 21 June 2004 verse 7 ... Cached Despite the congressional rhetoric about helping the poor, federal housing policies often harm poor people by pushing them into houses they may not be ready to buy. Given the realities of insurance, property taxes, maintenance, and repairs, many low-income buyers lose their homes and destroy their credit ratings. Easy credit and low interest rates, courtesy of the Federal Reserve, have dramatically increased housing demand and artificially increased prices. Zero down payment schemes do the same thing by pushing renters into the housing market. This increased demand actually serves to price many poor Americans out of the housing market indefinitely. Congress Why Can't Congress Stop Spending? 28 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 2004 verse 1 ... Cached Why Can’t Congress Stop Spending? Congress Why Can't Congress Stop Spending? 28 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 2004 verse 2 ... Cached Congress spent one evening last week debating a token measure to reduce government spending by implementing very slight caps on some future entitlements. Not surprisingly, even this exceedingly modest bill failed overwhelmingly. The process behind the vote, however, reveals just how deeply ingrained the spending problem really is. Congress Why Can't Congress Stop Spending? 28 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 2004 verse 3 ... Cached House leaders knew the spending control bill had little chance of passing. In fact, that’s why they allowed the vote to happen. The real goal was to appease fiscal conservatives in Congress, some of whom have become increasingly uncomfortable with the unrestrained spending contained in the proposed 2004 budget. Some of these conservatives supported an alternative budget that merely spent about 1% less than the proposed budget, and even that nominal act of rebellion earned them the ire of House leadership. The spending control measure considered last week was merely a symbolic gesture designed to quash their complaints and ensure cooperation when the final budget vote is cast later this year. After all, those members now can tell their constituents they voted to keep a lid on spending, even as they please their party bosses later. Congress Why Can't Congress Stop Spending? 28 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 2004 verse 4 ... Cached The pressure to go along with the herd in Congress is intense, regardless of which party is in control. Every member knows that thwarting his party’s leadership, particularly on budget matters, is risky. Any opposition to spending bills can result in veiled or even outright threats to cut funding for the member’s district, to limit the member’s committee assignments, and to bury the member’s legislation. Some members who buck the system find themselves facing primary opponents in the next election as a result. The desire to win reelection is paramount, and those who go along get plenty of help from their party’s fundraising machines. Congress Why Can't Congress Stop Spending? 28 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Predictably, almost all members of the House Appropriations committee- the committee initially responsible for every nickel of federal spending- voted against the bill. This simply highlights the institutional problem that plagues Congress and government in general: no politician ever voluntarily relinquishes power. In Congress, control of the nation’s purse strings represents the ultimate power. Appropriators can reward some lawmakers and punish others with the stroke of a pen, by adding or eliminating federal projects in any congressional district. No amount of talk about spending can change the reality that government power naturally grows. Congress Why Can't Congress Stop Spending? 28 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 2004 verse 6 ... Cached Everybody complains about pork, but members of Congress keep spending because voters do not throw them out of office for doing so. The rotten system in Congress will change only when the American people change their beliefs about the proper role of government in our society. Too many members of Congress believe they can solve all economic problems, cure all social ills, and bring about worldwide peace and prosperity simply by creating new federal programs. We must reject unlimited government and reassert the constitutional rule of law if we hope to halt the spending orgy. Congress Why Can't Congress Stop Spending? 28 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 2004 verse 7 ... Cached The words of H.R. Gross, the great libertarian-conservative congressman from Iowa, ring as true today as they did during a budget debate in 1974: Congress Why Can't Congress Stop Spending? 28 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 2004 verse 8 ... Cached “No amount of legislation will instill in a majority of the members of the House the ingredient, the element that has been missing. That is fiscal responsibility. Every Member knows that he or she cannot for long spend $75,000 a year on a salary of $42,000 and remain solvent. Every member knows this government cannot forever spend billions beyond tax revenue and endure. Congress already has the tools to halt the headlong flight into bankruptcy. It holds the purse strings. No President can impound funds or spend unwisely unless an improvident, reckless Congress makes available the money. I repeat, neither this nor any other legislation will provide morality and responsibility on the part of members of Congress.” Congress None of Your Business! 12 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 12 July 2004 verse 5 ... Cached I introduced an amendment last week that would have eliminated funds for this intrusive survey in a spending bill, explaining on the House floor that perhaps the American people don’t appreciate being threatened by Big Brother. The amendment was met by either indifference or hostility, as most members of Congress either don’t care about or actively support government snooping into the private affairs of citizens. Congress None of Your Business! 12 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 12 July 2004 verse 8 ... Cached At least the national census has its origins in the Constitution, which is more than one can say about the vast majority of programs funded by Congress. Still, Article I makes it clear that the census should be taken every ten years for the sole purpose of congressional redistricting (and apportionment of taxes, prior to the disastrous 16th amendment). This means a simple count of the number of people living in a given area, so that numerically equal congressional districts can be maintained. The founders never authorized the federal government to continuously survey the American people. Congress None of Your Business! 12 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 12 July 2004 verse 9 ... Cached More importantly, they never envisioned a nation where the people would roll over and submit to every government demand. The American Community Survey is patently offensive to all Americans who still embody that fundamental American virtue, namely a healthy mistrust of government. The information demanded in the new survey is none of the government’s business, and the American people should insist that Congress reject it now before it becomes entrenched. Congress Saving the World with Your Money 19 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 2004 verse 2 ... Cached The Millennium Challenge Act, a new foreign aid scheme I wrote about back in May, received its hoped-for $2.5 billion from Congress last week. Only 41 members of Congress supported an effort to strip the funding, demonstrating once again that the two parties are not serious about reducing federal spending. Considering all the rhetoric in Washington about runaway spending, one would think a new foreign welfare program would be among the easiest things to cut politically. Congress Saving the World with Your Money 19 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 2004 verse 5 ... Cached The Millennium Challenge Act is designed to appease fiscal conservatives and defense hawks by appearing to single out friendly, well-behaved nations for aid payments, ostensibly creating a carrot-and-stick approach. But the Act merely puts a shiny new label on the same old failed policy of trying to remake the world using welfare. Welfare has never worked at home and it’s never worked abroad, no matter what “incentives” Congress tries to attach. Congress Saving the World with Your Money 19 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 2004 verse 7 ... Cached Does anyone actually believe this? It is beyond presumptuous to think Congress can change the politics, economies, and cultures of foreign nations. It is simply preposterous to imagine that foreign aid will be cut off once given, no matter what a nation does or fails to do. After all, we’ve been giving billions to some of our worst enemies for decades. Once a federal program begins, it becomes permanent. Mark my words, the Millennium Challenge Act budget will grow in future years. Congress Saving the World with Your Money 19 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 2004 verse 8 ... Cached The question nobody in Washington wants to answer is this: What gives the Congress the right to send American tax dollars overseas in the first place? Certainly not the Constitution. Why should American taxpayers, many of whom are poor themselves, be expected to fund foreign welfare? Remember that the poorest Americans are hardest hit by the inflation tax, which is the direct result of deficit spending and the printing of new money to service federal debts. Congress Saving the World with Your Money 19 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 2004 verse 9 ... Cached Congress hardly needs to concoct another way to spend money. Government debt already exceeds seven trillion dollars, and runaway spending will force yet another increase in the federal debt ceiling law before the end of the year. At its current pace, Congress soon will create single-year deficits of one trillion dollars. Combine this indebtedness with future liabilities- in the form of exploding Social Security and Medicare obligations- and it’s clear that Congress can find better things to do with $2.5 billion than send it overseas. Congress Saving the World with Your Money 19 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 2004 verse 10 ... Cached My very modest proposal is this: eliminate the Millennium Challenge Act, apply half the money to the national debt, and spend the rest domestically if Congress simply can’t bear to give it back to taxpayers. Even the worst domestic program is better than useless and meddlesome foreign aid. Congress Resisting Judicial Tyranny 26 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 26 July 2004 verse 2 ... Cached The US House passed the Marriage Protection Act last week, a bill designed to ensure that the “full faith and credit” clause of the Constitution is not used to impose gay marriage on Texas or any other state. You may remember Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, which explicitly authorizes states to refuse recognition of gay marriages performed in other states. However, the lack of respect federal judges show for the plain language of the Constitution necessitated further congressional action. The Act underscores an important legal point: Marbury vs. Madison did not alter the congressional power to regulate and limit federal court jurisdiction, which is plainly stated in Article III. The drafters of the Constitution gave Congress the power to limit federal jurisdiction to provide a check on out-of-control federal judges. In other words, the federalist concept of checks and balances applies to the judiciary just as it does to the legislative and executive branches. The Marriage Protection Act represents a long-overdue exercise of the congressional power to limit and define federal court jurisdiction. Congress Resisting Judicial Tyranny 26 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 26 July 2004 verse 5 ... Cached The definition of marriage- a union between a man and a woman- can be found in any dictionary. It’s sad that we need government to define an institution that has existed for centuries. The best approach to complex social problems, as always, is to follow the Constitution. This means Congress should restrict federal court jurisdiction when necessary, and social matters should be left up to states under the Ninth and Tenth amendments. Congress Resisting Judicial Tyranny 26 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 26 July 2004 verse 6 ... Cached Since the Marriage Protection Act requires only a majority vote in both houses of Congress and the president’s signature to become law, it is a more practical way to deal with the gay marriage issue than the time-consuming process of passing a constitutional amendment. In fact, since the Defense of Marriage Act overwhelmingly passed both houses, there is no reason why the Marriage Protection Act cannot become law this year. Congress Resisting Judicial Tyranny 26 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 26 July 2004 verse 7 ... Cached Congress has a constitutional responsibility to stop rogue federal judges from using a flawed interpretation of the Constitution to rewrite the laws and traditions governing marriage. The Marriage Protection Act, if passed by the Senate and signed by the President, will protect the people of Texas from having marriage defined by federal judges rather than the Texas legislature. Congress Police State USA 09 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 09 August 2004 verse 4 ... Cached Freedom is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference. Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. This doesn’t stop governments, including our own, from seeking more control over and intrusion into our lives. As one Member of Congress stated to the press last week, “people who don’t want to be searched don’t need to come on Capitol grounds.” What an insult! The Capitol belongs to the American people who pay for it, not to Congress or the police. Congress Police State USA 09 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 09 August 2004 verse 5 ... Cached It is worth noting that the government rushes first to protect itself, devoting enormous resources to make places like the Capitol grounds safe, while just beyond lies one of the most dangerous neighborhoods in the nation. What makes Congress more worthy of protection from terrorists than ordinary citizens? Congress Election Monitoring- Insulting yet Inevitable 16 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 16 August 2004 verse 2 ... Cached Earlier this month Secretary of State Colin Powell, at the request of several members of Congress, invited the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to monitor our upcoming elections. It is the second time this international organization, of which we are a member, has monitored US elections -- the last time was the congressional elections of 2002. Congress Election Monitoring- Insulting yet Inevitable 16 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 16 August 2004 verse 3 ... Cached Of course neither the OSCE nor any other international organization should have a say in how we conduct elections in the United States. But then again neither should the federal government. Unlike the other member states of the OSCE, the United States has a federalist system where no single national authority runs our elections. Under Article II, presidential elections- as opposed to congressional elections- are run by the states themselves. Hence the electoral college, which essentially gives us 50 state elections. Congress The 9-11 Commission Charade 23 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 23 August 2004 verse 2 ... Cached The 9-11 Commission report, released late last month, has disrupted the normally quiet Washington August. Various congressional committees are holding hearings on the report this week, even though Congress is not in session, in an attempt to show the government is “doing something” about terrorism in an election year. The Commission recommendations themselves have been accepted reverently and without question, as if handed down from on high. Congress The 9-11 Commission Charade 23 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 23 August 2004 verse 6 ... Cached Our nation will be safer only when government does less, not more. Rather than asking ourselves what Congress or the president should be doing about terrorism, we ought to ask what government should stop doing. It should stop spending trillions of dollars on unconstitutional programs that detract from basic government functions like national defense and border security. It should stop meddling in the internal affairs of foreign nations, but instead demonstrate by example the superiority of freedom, capitalism, and an open society. It should stop engaging in nation-building, and stop trying to create democratic societies through military force. It should stop militarizing future enemies, as we did by supplying money and weapons to characters like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. It should stop entangling the American people in unholy alliances like the UN and NATO, and pledge that our armed forces will never serve under foreign command. It should stop committing American troops to useless, expensive, and troublesome assignments overseas, and instead commit the Department of Defense to actually defending America. It should stop interfering with the 2nd amendment rights of private citizens and businesses seeking to defend themselves. Congress A Texas Platform for the GOP 30 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 30 August 2004 verse 3 ... Cached First and foremost, the Texas GOP is serious about reducing the size and scope of government. The party platform calls for strict congressional adherence to the 10th amendment, and the abolition of all federal agencies not authorized under a strict interpretation of the Constitution. It urges a return to truly republican government, based on limited federal powers and states rights. The language of the platform is refreshingly frank, with quotes like "We believe that government spending is out of control and needs to be reduced" and "We respect our Founders' intent to restrict the power of the federal government over the states and the people." In fact, whole sections of the document are devoted to worthy subjects like "Limiting the expanse of government power." Contrast these words with what you'll hear this week from the big spending, big government Republicans from Washington. Congress A Texas Platform for the GOP 30 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 30 August 2004 verse 5 ... Cached The Texas GOP platform also calls for a congressional audit of the Federal Reserve Bank, and demands full public access to the written minutes from Fed board meetings. Such an audit could at the very least serve to educate the American people about Fed inflation and the dangers of fiat currency. In Washington, the Federal Reserve system is virtually never discussed by Congress or the administration, despite its enormous impact on our economic well-being. Monetary policy is simply off the table as a political and policy matter for both national parties, but the Texas GOP recognizes the importance of sound money. Congress Reject the National ID Card 06 September 2004    Texas Straight Talk 06 September 2004 verse 2 ... Cached Washington politicians are once again seriously considering imposing a national identification card - and it may well become law before the end of the 108th Congress. The much-hailed 9/11 Commission report released in July recommends a federal identification card and, worse, a "larger network of screening points" inside the United States. Does this mean we are to have "screening points" inside our country where American citizens will be required to "show their papers" to government officials? It certainly sounds that way! Congress Reject the National ID Card 06 September 2004    Texas Straight Talk 06 September 2004 verse 4 ... Cached Congress has embraced the 9/11 Commission report uncritically since its release in July. Now Congress is rushing to write each 9/11 Commission recommendation into law before the November election. In the same way Congress rushed to pass the PATRIOT Act after the September 11 attacks to be seen "doing something," it looks like Congress is about to make the same mistake again of rushing to pass liberty-destroying legislation without stopping to consider the consequences. Because it is so controversial, we may see legislation mandating a national identification card with biometric identifiers hidden in bills implementing 9/11 Commission recommendations. We have seen this technique used in the past on controversial measures. Congress Mental Health Screening for Kids- Part II 20 September 2004    Texas Straight Talk 20 September 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Some members of Congress objected to my amendment on the grounds that the federal screening program does not yet exist, so it’s premature to oppose it. But the whole point was to prevent the proposal from being implemented in the first place. Once created, federal programs are nearly impossible to eliminate. Congress had a rare opportunity to stop a bad idea in its tracks, before it becomes entrenched. Every member who opposes the idea of forcing kids to undergo mental health screening should have sent a strong statement by voting for my amendment. They will have another chance to kill the initiative when I introduce a stand-alone bill later this year. Congress The IMF Con 27 September 2004    Texas Straight Talk 27 September 2004 verse 3 ... Cached You won’t hear either presidential candidate say much about the issue of foreign aid during this election season, despite the record levels of federal spending and debt that plague our economy. Very few Americans realize the extent to which Congress sends billions of their tax dollars overseas to fund the most counterproductive foreign welfare schemes imaginable, always in the guise of helping the poor. A recent report by the congressional Joint Economic Committee on which I serve highlights the reckless manner in which one organization, the International Monetary Fund, wastes your money around the world. Congress The IMF Con 27 September 2004    Texas Straight Talk 27 September 2004 verse 4 ... Cached The IMF provides a perfect illustration of the both the folly of foreign aid and the real motivations behind it. The IMF touts itself as a bank of sorts, although it makes “loans” that no rational bank would consider-- mostly to shaky governments with weak economies and unstable currencies. The IMF has little incentive to operate profitably like a private bank, since its funding comes mostly from a credulous US Congress that demands little accountability. As a result, it is free to make high-risk loans at below- market interest rates. Congress The Imperial Judiciary 04 October 2004    Texas Straight Talk 04 October 2004 verse 6 ... Cached The ultimate solution to the problem of unbridled judicial activism at the federal level is clear: Congress must reassert its constitutional authority to define and restrict the jurisdiction of federal courts. This power is plainly granted in Article III, and no constitutional amendments are required. On the contrary, any constitutional amendment addressing judicial activism would only grant legitimacy to the dangerous idea that social issues are federal matters. Remember, when social issues are federalized, conservatives always lose. Giving more authority over social matters to any branch of the federal government is a mistake, because a centralized government is unlikely to reflect local sentiment for long. If anything, the marriage amendment would have given the secular left an excuse to impose gay marriage on all of us in future years, as the issue would have been irrefutably federalized. Congress The Imperial Judiciary 04 October 2004    Texas Straight Talk 04 October 2004 verse 7 ... Cached Congressional cowardice enables judicial activism. Just as Congress ceded far too much legislative authority to presidents throughout the 20th century, it similarly has allowed federal judges to operate wildly beyond their constitutional role. In fact, many current members of Congress apparently accept the false notion that federal court judgments are superior to congressional statutes. Unless and until Congress asserts itself by limiting federal court jurisdiction, judges will continue to act as de facto lawmakers. Congress The Imperial Judiciary 04 October 2004    Texas Straight Talk 04 October 2004 verse 8 ... Cached The political left increasingly uses the federal judiciary to do in court what it cannot do at the ballot box: advance an activist, secular, multicultural political agenda of which most Americans disapprove. As a society we should reconsider the wisdom of lifetime tenure for federal judges, and pay closer attention to the judicial nomination procedure. It’s time for the executive and legislative branches to show some backbone, appoint judges who follow the Constitution, and remove those who do not. It’s also time for Congress to start establishing clear limits on federal judicial power. Congress The 9-11 Intelligence Bill- More of the Same 11 October 2004    Texas Straight Talk 11 October 2004 verse 3 ... Cached Last week the House of Representative passed the “9-11 Recommendations Implementation Act,” a bill that ostensibly puts in place the ideas endorsed by the 9-11 Commission. As I related to you back in August, however, the commission amounted to nothing more than current government officials meeting with former government officials, many of whom now lobby government officials, and agreeing that we need more government! Most of the reforms contained in this bill will not make America safer, but they definitely will make us less free. The Act also wastes American taxpayer money on unconstitutional and ineffective foreign aid programs, designed to prove that money can buy us friends. Instead of expanding the federal police state, Congress should make America safer by expanding liberty and refocusing our foreign policy on defending this nation's vital interests, rather than wasting American blood and treasure on quixotic crusades to “democratize” the world. Congress Government Debt- The Greatest Threat to National Security 25 October 2004    Texas Straight Talk 25 October 2004 verse 3 ... Cached Once again the federal government has reached its “debt ceiling,” and once again Congress is poised to authorize an increase in government borrowing. Between its ever-growing bureaucracies, expanding entitlements, and overseas military entanglements, the federal government is borrowing roughly one billion dollars every day to pay its bills. Congress Government Debt- The Greatest Threat to National Security 25 October 2004    Texas Straight Talk 25 October 2004 verse 6 ... Cached Since 1969, the federal government has spent more that it received in revenues every year. Even supposed single-year surpluses never existed, but were merely an accounting trick based on stealing IOUs from the imaginary Social Security trust fund. Remember that the total federal debt continued to rise rapidly even during the claimed surplus years. Since Congress is incapable of spending only what the Treasury takes in, it must borrow money. Unlike ordinary debts, however, government debts are not repaid by those who spend the money-- they’re repaid by you and future generations. Congress Social Security: House of Cards 08 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 08 November 2004 verse 3 ... Cached President Bush should be commended for promising to address the looming Social Security crisis during his second term, a crisis that Congress and successive presidents have ignored for decades. Hopefully Americans will realize that the notion of Social Security as an insurance program is a lie, and that Congress has not put their Social Security contributions into any trust fund. Congress Social Security: House of Cards 08 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 08 November 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Seniors hope the system will hold together for the remainder of their lives, while younger working people hope government will somehow fix things before they retire. Not surprisingly, Congress has chosen to ignore the problem until it becomes acute. It’s hard to sell voters on austerity today to avoid a relatively distant crisis. Politicians usually operate on the opposite principle, by promising great things now and leaving the bills for others to pay later. Congress Social Security: House of Cards 08 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 08 November 2004 verse 6 ... Cached The greatest threat to your Social Security retirement funds is Congress itself. Congress has never required that Social Security tax dollars be kept separate from general revenues. In fact, the Social Security “trust fund” is not a trust fund at all. The dollars taken out of your paycheck are not deposited into an account to be paid to you later. On the contrary, they are spent immediately to pay current benefits, and to fund completely unrelated federal programs. Your Social Security administration “account” is nothing more than an IOU, a hopeful promise that enough younger taxpayers will be around to pay your benefits later. Decades of spendthrift congresses have turned the Social Security system into a giant Ponzi scheme, always dependent on new generations. The size and longevity of the Baby Boom generation, however, will finally collapse the house of cards. Congress Social Security: House of Cards 08 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 08 November 2004 verse 8 ... Cached Furthermore, who would decide what stocks, bonds, mutual funds, or other investment vehicles deserve government approval? Which politicians would you trust to build an investment portfolio with billions of your Social Security dollars? The federal government has proven itself incapable of good money management, and permitting politicians and bureaucrats to make investment decisions would result in unscrupulous lobbying for venture capital. Large campaign contributors and private interests of every conceivable type would seek to have their favored investments approved by the government. In a free market, an underperforming or troubled company suffers a decrease in its stock price, forcing it either to improve or lose value. Wary investors hesitate to buy its stock after the price falls. If a company successfully lobbied Congress, however, it would enjoy a large investment of your tax dollars. This investment would cause an artificial increase in its stock price, deceiving private investors and unfairly harming the company's honest competition. Government-managed investment of tax dollars in the private market is a recipe for corruption and fiscal irresponsibility. Congress Social Security: House of Cards 08 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 08 November 2004 verse 9 ... Cached The Social Security crisis is a spending crisis. The program could be saved tomorrow if Congress simply would stop spending so much money, apply even 10% of the bloated federal budget to a real trust fund, and begin saving your contributions to earn simple interest. That this simple approach seems impossible speaks volumes about the inability of Congress to cut spending no matter what the circumstances. Congress The Middle East Quagmire 15 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 15 November 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Congress and each successive administration pledge their political, financial, and military support for Israel. Yet while we call ourselves a strong ally of the Israeli people, we send billions in foreign aid every year to some Muslim states that many Israelis regard as enemies. From the Israeli point of view, many of the same Islamic nations we fund with our tax dollars want to destroy the Jewish state. Many average Israelis and American Jews see America as hypocritically hedging its bets. Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace 22 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 22 November 2004 verse 3 ... Cached Last week Congress increased the mortgage on your future yet again, by voting to allow the federal government to borrow another $800 billion to pay its bills. This latest increase in the federal debt limit represents merely another chapter in the unprecedented explosion in federal spending that has occurred in recent years. At its present rate of spending, the federal government soon will amass $1 trillion of new debt in just one year. By contrast, the entire federal debt was only $1 trillion when President Reagan took office in 1981. Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace 22 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 22 November 2004 verse 4 ... Cached It’s particularly galling when members of Congress pledge never to raise taxes, but then vote to increase the debt limit. By doing so, they are voting to raise taxes on future generations pure and simple. Debt does matter, despite the flawed arguments of the supply-siders. It will have to be repaid by future generations who did not incur it. To hear supposed conservatives argue the case for more federal debt is disgraceful, quite frankly. Deficit spending is the antithesis of conservatism. Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace 22 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 22 November 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Congress has become like the drunk who promises to sober up tomorrow, if only he can keep drinking today. Does anyone really believe this will be the last time, that Congress will tighten its belt if granted one last loan? What a joke! There is only one approach to dealing with an incorrigible spendthrift: cut him off. Congress wastes hundred of billions of dollars every year on countless agencies and programs. Rather than raising the federal government’s credit limit, Congress easily could mandate cuts in the existing bloated budget. Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace 22 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 22 November 2004 verse 6 ... Cached Most Americans do not spend much time worrying about the national debt, which now totals more than eight trillion dollars. The number is so staggering that it hardly seems real, even when economists issue bleak warnings about how much every American owes-- currently about $25,000. Of course, Congress never hands taxpayers a bill for that amount. Instead, the federal government uses your hard-earned money to pay interest on this debt, which is like making minimum payments on a credit card. Notice that the principal never goes down. In fact, it is rising steadily. Congress Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace 22 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 22 November 2004 verse 8 ... Cached The whole point of the debt ceiling law was to limit borrowing by forcing Congress into an open and presumably somewhat shameful vote when it wants to borrow more than a preset amount of money. Yet since there have been no political consequences for members who vote to raise the debt limit and support the outrageous spending bills in the first place, the debt limit has become merely another technicality on the road to bankruptcy. The only way to control federal spending is to take away the government’s credit card and refuse to allow Congress to borrow one red dime. Congress TSA- Bullies at the Airport 29 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 29 November 2004 verse 4 ... Cached TSA was created in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Although the National Guard, DOD, FBI, CIA, NSA, and FAA utterly failed to protect American citizens on that tragic day, federal legislators immediately proposed creating yet another government agency. But the commercial flying community did not want airport security federalized, and my office was inundated with messages from airline pilots opposing the creation of TSA. One pilot stated, “I don't want the same people who bring me the IRS and ATF to be in charge of airport security.” But Congress didn't listen to the men and women who spend their working lives flying, so it created another agency that costs billions of dollars, employs thousands of unionized federal workers, and produces poor results. Congress TSA- Bullies at the Airport 29 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 29 November 2004 verse 6 ... Cached TSA has created an atmosphere of fear and meek subservience in our airports that smacks of Soviet bureaucratic bullying. TSA policies are subject to change at any moment, they differ from airport to airport, and they need not be in writing. One former member of Congress demanded to see the written regulation authorizing a search of her person. TSA flatly told her, "We don't have to show it to anyone." Think you have a right to know the laws and regulations you are expected to obey? Too bad. Get in line and stay quiet, or we'll make life very hard for you. This is the attitude of TSA personnel. Congress Ignoring Reality in Iraq 13 December 2004    Texas Straight Talk 13 December 2004 verse 6 ... Cached This demonstrates once again the folly of nation building, which is something candidate Bush wisely rejected before the 2000 election. The worsening situation in Iraq also reminds us that going to war without a congressional declaration, as the Constitution requires, leads us into protracted quagmires over and over again. Congress It Can't Happen Here 20 December 2004    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 2004 verse 4 ... Cached The question is no longer rhetorical. We are not yet living in a total police state, but it is fast approaching. The seeds of future tyranny have been sown, and many of our basic protections against government have been undermined. The atmosphere since 2001 has permitted Congress to create whole new departments and agencies that purport to make us safer- always at the expense of our liberty. But security and liberty go hand-in-hand. Members of Congress, like too many Americans, don’t understand that a society with no constraints on its government cannot be secure. History proves that societies crumble when their governments become more powerful than the people and private institutions. Congress It Can't Happen Here 20 December 2004    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Unfortunately, the new intelligence bill passed by Congress two weeks ago moves us closer to an encroaching police state by imposing the precursor to a full-fledged national ID card. Within two years, every American will need a “conforming” ID to deal with any federal agency-- including TSA at the airport. Congress It Can't Happen Here 20 December 2004    Texas Straight Talk 20 December 2004 verse 6 ... Cached Undoubtedly many Americans and members of Congress don’t believe America is becoming a police state, which is reasonable enough. They associate the phrase with highly visible symbols of authoritarianism like military patrols, martial law, and summary executions. But we ought to be concerned that we have laid the foundation for tyranny by making the public more docile, more accustomed to government bullying, and more accepting of arbitrary authority- all in the name of security. Our love for liberty above all has been so diminished that we tolerate intrusions into our privacy that would have been abhorred just a few years ago. We tolerate inconveniences and infringements upon our liberties in a manner that reflects poorly on our great national character of rugged individualism. American history, at least in part, is a history of people who don’t like being told what to do. Yet we are increasingly empowering the federal government and its agents to run our lives. Congress Hands Off the Electoral College 27 December 2004    Texas Straight Talk 27 December 2004 verse 5 ... Cached The emphasis on democracy in our modern political discourse has no historical or constitutional basis. Yet we have become obsessed with democracy, as though any government action would be permissible if a majority of voters simply approved of it. Democracy has become a sacred cow, a deity which no one dares question. Democracy, we are told, is always good. But the founders created a constitutionally limited republic precisely to protect fundamental liberties from the whims of the masses, to guard against the excesses of democracy. The electoral college likewise was created in the Constitution to guard against majority tyranny in federal elections. The President was to be elected by the states rather than the citizenry as a whole, with votes apportioned to states according to their representation in Congress. The will of the people was to be tempered by the wisdom of the electoral college. Congress Another UN Insult 03 January 2005    Texas Straight Talk 03 January 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Let me take this opportunity to wish readers of this weekly column a very happy New Year. I appreciate your willingness to work for liberty by staying informed about the actions of your government, and I hope you will redouble your efforts this year to spread the message of freedom. Remember to visit my congressional website- www.house.gov/paul - throughout 2005 to find new weekly messages and speeches, which you are free to distribute to your family and friends. Congress Another UN Insult 03 January 2005    Texas Straight Talk 03 January 2005 verse 6 ... Cached Obviously, many of those now calling for the U.S. to withdraw from the UN resent its refusal to sanction our war in Iraq. Few Americans realize, however, that the resolution passed by Congress cited various UN resolutions more than twenty times as justification for invading Iraq-- in contrast to the media images of President Bush “going it alone” and disregarding the UN. So despite the anti-UN bluster from the right, a Republican president’s stated reason for invading Iraq was that it failed to obey UN resolutions! Congress UN Scandals Are Not the Issue 17 January 2005    Texas Straight Talk 17 January 2005 verse 7 ... Cached American citizens abroad, of course, are subject to the laws of their host nation. At home, however, American citizens are subject only to our domestic laws. Congress, and Congress alone, has the constitutional power to craft our federal laws. While constitutionally-ratified treaties can be legitimate, no treaty can legally usurp the basic function of Congress by transferring legislative authority to an international body. Not even the wildest interpretation of the Constitution would allow Congress simply to abandon its lawmaking power to another body. Yet this is what UN advocates would have us believe when the UN attempts to dictate or influence our domestic labor, environmental, trade, tax, and gun laws-- as it already has. Congress Want to Reform Social Security? Stop Spending. 24 January 2005    Texas Straight Talk 24 January 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Social Security reform promises to be the biggest domestic issue this year in Washington, but most of the proposals are nothing more than flim-flam. The only honest solution to the future insolvency of the program is for Congress to stop spending so much money. Unless Congress makes real cuts in spending-- and stops spending Social Security taxes on completely unrelated programs-- millions of Americans simply will not receive even a fraction of the money they paid into Social Security. Ignore the rhetoric about tax increases and cuts in benefits, as though you are to blame for the problem! All Social Security obligations could be met if Congress did not spend so much on other things. Congress Want to Reform Social Security? Stop Spending. 24 January 2005    Texas Straight Talk 24 January 2005 verse 4 ... Cached In the 1930s, Social Security was presented to the American people as a social insurance program, with individuals paying a monthly “premium” in exchange for retirement benefits later. It was supposed to be a forced savings program, based on the assumption that some people would be unable or unwilling to save for their older years. Seven decades later, however, the ratio of younger working people to older retirees has changed dramatically, exposing the Ponzi-like congressional raid on the system itself. What has not changed, however, is our willingness to accept the notion that the government should force us to save for our older years. Congress Don't Let Congress Fund Orwellian Psychiatric Screening of Kids 31 January 2005    Texas Straight Talk 31 January 2005 verse 1 ... Cached Don't Let Congress Fund Orwellian Psychiatric Screening of Kids Congress Don't Let Congress Fund Orwellian Psychiatric Screening of Kids 31 January 2005    Texas Straight Talk 31 January 2005 verse 9 ... Cached Your help is needed. Please tell everyone you know about HR 181, and ask them to call their representatives and senators in Washington to voice strong opposition to forced mental health screening. Demand that the Department of Health and Human Services receive no tax dollars in this year’s appropriation bill for screening programs, and that states receive no federal dollars for programs of their own. Refer to my congressional website for articles from September 2004 about mental health screening, and sobering statistics about anti-depressant drugs and kids in the text of HR 181. Most of all, talk with your friends, family, and colleagues about the underlying issue of whether the state owns your kids. Remind them that freedom can be maintained only when state power is limited, especially when it comes to fundamental freedoms over our bodies and minds. Congress The National ID Trojan Horse 14 February 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 February 2005 verse 3 ... Cached The U.S. House of Representatives passed a national ID bill last week that masqueraded as “immigration reform.” The bill does nothing to address immigration policy, however, nor does it propose deporting a single illegal alien already in our country. It does nothing to address the porous border between the U.S. and Mexico, which is the fundamental problem. In reality, the bill is a Trojan horse. It pretends to offer desperately needed border control in order to con a credulous Congress into sacrificing more of our constitutionally protected liberty. Congress The Maestro Changes his Tune 21 February 2005    Texas Straight Talk 21 February 2005 verse 8 ... Cached Third, Fed policies do indeed have adverse political ramifications. Fiat currency and big government go hand-in-hand. Without a gold standard, Congress is free to spend recklessly and fall back on monetary expansion to pay the bills. Politically, it’s easier to print new dollars than raise taxes or borrow overseas. The Fed in essence creates paper reserves that enable Congress to undertake spending measures that far exceed tax revenues. The ill effects of this process are not felt by the politicians, who can always find popular support for new spending. Average Americans suffer, however, when their dollars are “confiscated through inflation,” as Mr. Greenspan termed it. Congress Bowing and Scraping for the WTO 28 February 2005    Texas Straight Talk 28 February 2005 verse 3 ... Cached The World Trade Organization, which the United States joined in 1994, has been disastrous for American sovereignty. A tax bill passed last year provides a vivid example of just how blatantly Congress is surrendering our sovereignty to quasi-governmental bodies like the WTO. For years, high-tax Europe has objected to how we tax American companies on their overseas earnings. The EU took its dispute to the WTO grievance board, which voted in favor of the Europeans. The WTO ruling was clear: Congress must change American law to comply with European rules. Congress Bowing and Scraping for the WTO 28 February 2005    Texas Straight Talk 28 February 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Make no mistake about it: WTO ministers tell Congress to change American laws, and Congress complies. In fact, congressional leaders obediently scrambled to make sure the corporate tax bill passed before a WTO deadline. Thousands and thousands of bills languish in committees, yet a bill ordered by the WTO was pushed to the front of the line. Congress Bowing and Scraping for the WTO 28 February 2005    Texas Straight Talk 28 February 2005 verse 6 ... Cached This affront to our national sovereignty was of course predictable when we joined the WTO. A Congressional Research Service report was quite clear about the consequences of our membership: “As a member of the WTO, the United States does commit to act in accordance with the rules of the multi-lateral body. It is legally obligated to insure that national laws do not conflict with WTO rules.” Congress Bowing and Scraping for the WTO 28 February 2005    Texas Straight Talk 28 February 2005 verse 7 ... Cached Our membership in the WTO is unconstitutional, which is to say illegal. The Constitution grants Congress, and Congress alone, the authority to regulate trade. Congress cannot cede that authority to the WTO or any other international body, nor can the President legally sign any treaty that purports to do so. When Congress in essence transfers its authority over trade matters to the WTO, it acts illegally. Congress Bowing and Scraping for the WTO 28 February 2005    Texas Straight Talk 28 February 2005 verse 8 ... Cached Fortunately, Congress has an opportunity this year to withdraw our membership in the WTO. When the U.S. first joined the organization in 1994, a rushed lame-duck Congress inserted a 5 year review clause to garner some last-minute votes. This clause allows members of Congress to bring a resolution every 5 years calling for a vote on our continued membership. I plan to join with other House colleagues this year in demanding withdrawal from the WTO. Our sovereignty is a precious national asset, and the American people are tired of watching Congress sell out one constitutional principle after another. Congress Tax Reform is a Shell Game 07 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 07 March 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Tax reform is back in the news, brought to the political forefront by a recent meeting of the president’s advisory panel on tax reform. Once again, politicians and former politicians are lamenting the complexity of our tax laws, as though their own spending measures have nothing to do with it. But we’ve heard this song before. In fact, we’ve been promised a simpler, fairer, and better income tax system many times, most recently in 1997 and 1986 when Congress made relatively significant changes to the tax code. Yet the federal tax system remains an embarrassment, both in terms of the tax burden itself and the outrageous compliance costs engendered by its complexity. Congress Tax Reform is a Shell Game 07 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 07 March 2005 verse 8 ... Cached Government spending is the problem! When the federal government takes $2.5 trillion dollars out of the legitimate private economy in a single year, whether through taxes or borrowing, spending clearly is out of control. Deficit spending creates a de facto tax hike, because deficits can be repaid only by future tax increases. By this measure Congress and the president have raised taxes dramatically over the past few years, despite the tax-cutting rhetoric. The real issue is total spending by government, not tax reform. Congress Tax Reform is a Shell Game 07 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 07 March 2005 verse 9 ... Cached Who wants a 40% flat tax? Who wants a national sales tax if it adds 35% to the retail price of everything we buy? In other words, why change the tax structure if spending stays the same? Once we accept that Congress needs $2.5 trillion from us-- and more each year-- the only question left is from whom it will be collected. Until the federal government is held to its proper constitutionally limited functions, tax reform will remain a mirage. Congress Deficits Make You Poorer 14 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 March 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Most Americans are vaguely aware that Congress has run up huge deficits in recent years, but the numbers involved are so large that it’s hard to grasp what our government’s indebtedness really means to us as individuals. The total federal debt is quickly approaching $8 trillion, courtesy of an administration that borrows roughly one billion dollars every day to pay its bills. Congress Deficits Make You Poorer 14 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 March 2005 verse 5 ... Cached Repaying trillions of dollars will not be easy, however. Interest payments alone already consume nearly 10% of the annual federal budget, and Congress shows no sign of abating its spending appetite anytime soon. In fact, present spending rates will produce single-year deficits of $1 trillion in coming years unless the public finally gets fed up and demands an end to it. Congress Deficits Make You Poorer 14 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 March 2005 verse 8 ... Cached Deficits mean more monetary inflation. Deficit spending necessitates the creation of more fiat dollars by the Federal Reserve to keep the government afloat. Congress knows it can always fall back on the Fed money machine, which of course encourages more deficit spending. It’s a vicious cycle that ultimately makes every dollar you have worth less. Congress Deficits Make You Poorer 14 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 March 2005 verse 10 ... Cached The economic situation today is reminiscent of the 1970s. The economic malaise of that era resulted from the profligacy of the 1960s, when Congress wildly expanded the welfare state and fought an expensive war in southeast Asia. Large federal deficits led to stagflation-- a combination of high price inflation, high interest rates, high unemployment, and stagnant economic growth. I fear that today’s economic fundamentals are worse than the 1970s: federal deficits are higher, the supply of fiat dollars is much greater, and personal savings rates are much lower. If the federal government won’t stop spending, borrowing, printing, and taxing, we may find ourselves in far worse shape than 30 years ago. Congress Where is Your Money Going? 21 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 21 March 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Last week Congress spent another $82 billion in an “emergency” supplemental appropriations bill. There is no emergency, however: Congress simply exceeded its fiscal year budget once again and needs more money. The 13 standard appropriations bills, which provide about $2.4 trillion to run the federal government in 2005, are not enough to satisfy the ravenous spending appetites of Congress and the administration. Hence the so-called emergency supplemental bill, which cravenly combines troop funding with useless foreign aid and domestic pork. Congress Where is Your Money Going? 21 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 21 March 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Supplemental spending bills are particularly galling because “emergency” funds are not subject to the same congressional budget rules. This allows Congress to spend billions of dollars completely outside the stated budget, with little or no public attention. It also underscores how meaningless government budgets really are-- unlike families and businesses, the political class never has to worry about busting the budget. Congress Where is Your Money Going? 21 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 21 March 2005 verse 5 ... Cached Remember the optimistic claims about how the Iraq war would pay for itself? The liberated Iraqis would exploit the country’s oil resources and gratefully write a check to Uncle Sam, so the story went. Yet we don’t hear much about repayment from the Iraqis these days. American taxpayers already have spent over $200 billion in Iraq, and now Congress is digging us deeper into debt with the supplemental bill. Congress Empty Rhetoric for Veterans 04 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 04 April 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Many military veterans were shocked to see that the federal budget for 2006 makes several cuts in veterans benefits and services. Under the proposed budget, the Veterans Administration will increase once again the co-pay cost of prescription drugs, while adding a new annual fee for medical benefits. The budget also calls for the reduction of veterans home funding and limits the number of VA nursing home beds. Some members of Congress have even suggested rewriting the definition of "veteran" in a way that could deny VA health benefits for millions of retired servicemen. Congress Empty Rhetoric for Veterans 04 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 04 April 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Unfortunately, the trust that members of our armed forces put in their government has been breached time and time again, and the recent budget vote represents anther blow to veterans. Even as we send hundreds of thousands of soldiers into Iraq, Congress can’t get its priorities straight. Congress Empty Rhetoric for Veterans 04 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 04 April 2005 verse 5 ... Cached Our invasion of Iraq will swell the ranks of our combat veterans, many of whom will need medical care as they grow older. Sadly, health issues arising from the first war with Iraq still have not been addressed. Congress should immediately end the silence and formally address Gulf War Syndrome, which has had a devastating impact on veterans who served in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. As a medical doctor, I believe the syndrome is very real, and likely represents several different maladies caused by exposure to conditions specific to the Gulf region at the time. Congress and the VA should stop insulting Gulf War veterans and recognize that the syndrome is a serious illness that needs treatment. We can only hope and pray that our soldiers in Iraq today do not suffer from similar illnesses in the future. Congress Empty Rhetoric for Veterans 04 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 04 April 2005 verse 6 ... Cached It’s easy to talk about honoring veterans and their sacrifices, even while the federal government treats veterans badly. Congress wastes billions of dollars funding countless unconstitutional programs, but fails to provide adequately for the men and women who carry out the most important constitutional function: national defense. Congress Empty Rhetoric for Veterans 04 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 04 April 2005 verse 8 ... Cached Today’s American soldiers are the veterans of the future, and they should never be sent to war without clear objectives that serve definite American national security interests. They should never fight at the behest of the United Nations or any other international agency. They should never serve under a UN flag, nor answer to a UN commander. They deserve to know that they fight for the American people and the Constitution, and that the decision to send them into battle was made by their own Congress via an express declaration of war—NOT by UN bureaucrats who don’t care about them. Congress Theology, Not Politics 11 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 11 April 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Members of Congress from both political parties outdid themselves last week in heaping praise upon Pope John Paul II in the wake of his passing. Many spoke at length on the floor of the House of Representatives, and some even flew to Rome for his funeral. Congress Theology, Not Politics 11 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 11 April 2005 verse 4 ... Cached I’m happy to witness so many politicians honoring a great man of God and peace. The problem, however, is that so few of them honored him during his lifetime by their actions as legislators. In fact, most members of Congress support policies that are totally at odds with Catholic teachings. Congress Why Do We Fund UNESCO? 18 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 18 April 2005 verse 11 ... Cached President Reagan’s politically brave withdrawal from UNESCO portended an era of greater disengagement from the United Nations itself. Congress can revitalize that worthy goal by urging the administration to rethink its terrible decision to entangle the American people with an organization as rotten as UNESCO. I recently introduced a congressional resolution urging an official withdrawal from UNESCO, and I plan to attach the resolution as an amendment to a foreign aid spending bill this summer. It will be interesting to see whether the same members of Congress who savaged the UN before the Iraq war actually vote to get America out of UNESCO. Congress Dietary Supplements and Health Freedom 25 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 25 April 2005 verse 17 ... Cached Over the past decade the American people have made it clear they do not want the federal government to interfere with their access to dietary supplements. In 1994, Congress bowed to overwhelming public pressure and passed the Dietary Supplements and Health and Education Act, which liberalized the rules regarding the regulation of dietary supplements. Congressional offices received a record number of comments in favor of the Act, which demonstrates how strongly Americans feel about health freedom. Congress Dietary Supplements and Health Freedom 25 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 25 April 2005 verse 18 ... Cached The FDA simply has thumbed its nose at Congress and ignored the new rules in many instances, by attempting to suppress information about health supplements. But in 1999 a federal appellate court affirmed that the American people have a First Amendment right to such information without interference from the FDA. However, members of Congress have had to intervene with the FDA on several occasions to ensure that they followed the court order. Congress Dietary Supplements and Health Freedom 25 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 25 April 2005 verse 19 ... Cached My regular listeners already know about another looming threat to dietary supplement freedom. The Codex Alimentarius Commission, an offshoot of the United Nations, is working to “harmonize” food and supplement rules between all nations of the world. Under Codex rules, even basic vitamins and minerals will require a doctor’s prescription. As Europe moves ever closer to adopting Codex standards, it becomes more likely that the World Trade Organization will attempt to force those standards on the United States. This is yet another example of how the WTO threatens American sovereignty. By cooperating with Codex, the FDA is blatantly ignoring the will of Congress and the American people. Congress Reconsidering the Patriot Act 02 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 02 May 2005 verse 3 ... Cached When Congress passed the Patriot Act in the emotional aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks, a sunset provision was inserted in the bill that causes certain sections to expire at the end of 2005. But this begs the question: If these provisions are critical tools in the fight against terrorism, why revoke them after five years? Conversely, if these provisions violate civil liberties, why is it acceptable to suspend the Constitution for any amount of time? Congress Reconsidering the Patriot Act 02 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 02 May 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Congress is scheduled to review those sections this year, but there is little chance any portion of the Act will be allowed to lapse. If anything, many members of Congress are eager to expand federal police powers. Congress Reconsidering the Patriot Act 02 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 02 May 2005 verse 7 ... Cached Many of the most constitutionally offensive measures in the Act are not limited to terrorist offenses, but apply to any criminal activity. In fact, some of the new police powers could be applied even to those engaging in peaceful protest against government policies. The bill as written defines terrorism as acts intended “to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion.” Under this broad definition, a scuffle at an otherwise peaceful pro-life demonstration might subject attendees to a federal investigation. We have seen abuses of law enforcement authority in the past to harass individuals or organizations with unpopular political views. Congress has given future administrations a tool to investigate pro-life or gun rights organizations on the grounds that fringe members of such groups advocate violence. Congress Reconsidering the Patriot Act 02 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 02 May 2005 verse 9 ... Cached The Act makes it far easier for the government to monitor your internet usage by adopting a lower standard than probable cause for intercepting e-mails and internet communications. I wonder how my congressional colleagues would feel if all of their e-mail headings and the names of the web sites they visited were available to law enforcement upon a showing of mere “relevance.” Congress National ID Cards Won't Stop Terrorism or Illegal Immigration 09 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 09 May 2005 verse 5 ... Cached Think this sounds farfetched? Read the REAL ID Act, HR 418, for yourself. Its text is available on the Library of Congress website. A careful reading also reveals that states will be required to participate in the “Drivers License Agreement,” which was crafted by DMV lobbyists years ago. This agreement creates a massive database of sensitive information on American citizens that can be shared with Canada and Mexico! Congress National ID Cards Won't Stop Terrorism or Illegal Immigration 09 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 09 May 2005 verse 6 ... Cached Terrorism is the excuse given for virtually every new power grab by the federal government, and the national ID is no exception. But federal agencies have tried to create a national ID for years, long before the 9-11 attacks. In fact, a 1996 bill sought to do exactly what the REAL ID Act does: transform state drivers’ licenses into de facto national ID cards. At the time, Congress was flooded with calls by angry constituents and the bill ultimately died. Congress Does the WTO Serve Our Interests? 16 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 16 May 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Last week I had an opportunity to present the case against US membership in the World Trade Organization at a seminar in Washington. Later this summer Congress will have a similar opportunity to raise objections about the WTO when several colleagues and I bring a resolution to the House floor seeking the wholesale withdrawal of the US from the organization. Congress Does the WTO Serve Our Interests? 16 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 16 May 2005 verse 7 ... Cached I am just saying that we need to be honest about the fact that we are transferring from the United States at a practical level significant authority to a new organization. This is a transformational moment. I would feel better if the people who favor this would just be honest about the scale of change.... This is not just another trade agreement. This is adopting something which twice, once in the 1940s and once in the 1950s, the U.S. Congress rejected. I am not even saying that we should reject it; I, in fact, lean toward it. But I think we have to be very careful, because it is a very big transfer of power. Congress Congress and the Federal Reserve Erode Your Dollars 23 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 23 May 2005 verse 1 ... Cached Congress and the Federal Reserve Erode Your Dollars Congress Congress and the Federal Reserve Erode Your Dollars 23 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 23 May 2005 verse 4 ... Cached This kind of bluster may serve political interests, but in reality we have nobody to blame but ourselves for the sharp decline in the US dollar. Congress and the Federal Reserve, not China, are the real culprits in the erosion of your personal savings and buying power. Congress relentlessly spends more than the Treasury collects in taxes each year, which means the US government must either borrow or print money to operate- both of which cause the value of the dollar to drop. When we borrow a billion dollars every day simply to run the government, and when the Federal Reserve increases the money supply by trillions of dollars in just 15 years, we hardly can expect our dollars to increase in value. Congress Missing the Point: Federal Funding of Stem Cell Research 30 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 30 May 2005 verse 2 ... Cached Medical and scientific ethics issues are in the news again, as Congress narrowly passed a bill last week that funds controversial embryonic stem cell research. While I certainly sympathize with those who understandably hope such research will lead to cures for terrible diseases, I object to forcing taxpayers who believe harvesting embryos is immoral to pay for it. Congress Missing the Point: Federal Funding of Stem Cell Research 30 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 30 May 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Congressional Republicans, eager to appease pro-life voters while still appearing suitably compassionate, supported a second bill that provides nearly $80 million for umbilical cord stem cell research. But it’s never compassionate to spend other people’s money for political benefit. Congress Missing the Point: Federal Funding of Stem Cell Research 30 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 30 May 2005 verse 4 ... Cached The issue is not whether the federal government should fund one type of stem cell research or another. The issue is whether the federal government should fund stem cell research at all. Clearly there is no constitutional authority for Congress to do so, which means individual states and private citizens should decide whether to permit, ban, or fund it. Neither party in Washington can fathom that millions and millions of Americans simply don’t want their tax dollars spent on government research of any kind. This viewpoint is never considered. Congress Missing the Point: Federal Funding of Stem Cell Research 30 May 2005    Texas Straight Talk 30 May 2005 verse 6 ... Cached The debate over stem cell research involves profound moral, religious, and ethical question-- questions Congress is particularly ill equipped to resolve. The injustice of forcing taxpayers to fund research some find ethically abhorrent is patently obvious. When we insist on imposing one-size-fits-all social policies determined in Washington, we invariably make millions of Americans very angry. Again, the constitutional approach to resolving social issues involves local, decentralized decision-making. This approach is not perfect, but it is much better than pretending Congress possesses the magical wisdom to serve as the nation’s moral arbiter. Decentralized decisions and privatized funding would eliminate much of the ill will between supporters and opponents of stem cell research. Congress CAFTA: More Bureaucracy, Less Free Trade 06 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 06 June 2005 verse 4 ... Cached I oppose CAFTA for a very simple reason: it is unconstitutional. The Constitution clearly grants Congress alone the authority to regulate international trade. The plain text of Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 is incontrovertible. Neither Congress nor the President can give this authority away by treaty, any more than they can repeal the First Amendment by treaty. This fundamental point, based on the plain meaning of the Constitution, cannot be overstated. Every member of Congress who votes for CAFTA is voting to abdicate power to an international body in direct violation of the Constitution. Congress CAFTA: More Bureaucracy, Less Free Trade 06 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 06 June 2005 verse 6 ... Cached It is absurd to believe that CAFTA and other trade agreements do not diminish American sovereignty. When we grant quasi-governmental international bodies the power to make decisions about American trade rules, we lose sovereignty plain and simple. I can assure you first hand that Congress has changed American tax laws for the sole reason that the World Trade Organization decided our rules unfairly impacted the European Union. Hundreds of tax bills languish in the House Ways and Means committee, while the one bill drafted strictly to satisfy the WTO was brought to the floor and passed with great urgency last year. Congress NeoCon Global Government 13 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 13 June 2005 verse 3 ... Cached This week Congress will vote on a bill to expand the power of the United Nations beyond the dreams of even the most ardent left-wing, one-world globalists. But this time the UN power grabbers aren’t European liberals; they are American neo-conservatives, who plan to use the UN to implement their own brand of world government. Congress Can the UN Really be Reformed? 20 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 20 June 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Congress voted last week to give the United Nations unprecedented new authority to intervene in sovereign states, under the guise of UN “reform.” The reform bill theoretically provides for Congress to withhold 50% of US dues to the UN, but this will never happen. The bill allows the Secretary of State to make the ultimate decision about payment, and the State department strongly opposes withholding our dues in the first place. In fact, the State department is the UN’s closest ally in the entire federal government. This talk about withholding our dues is nothing but hot air designed to dupe real conservatives outside Washington into believing Congress is getting tough with the UN. Nothing could be further from the truth. Both the congressional leadership and the Bush administration are firmly committed to globalism, as evidenced not only by their commitment to the UN, by also by their position on trade agreements like CAFTA. Mark my words, in five years nobody will be talking about UN reform and our dues payments will be higher than ever. Congress Federal Funding for Mental Health Screening of Kids 27 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 27 June 2005 verse 3 ... Cached On Friday Congress defeated an amendment I introduced that would have prevented the federal government from moving forward with an Orwellian program to mandate mental health screening of kids in schools. This program, recommended by a presidential commission, has not yet been established at the federal level. However, your tax dollars are being given to states that apply for grants to establish their own programs-- and a full-fledged program run by the Department of Health and Human Services is on the way. Congress Federal Funding for Mental Health Screening of Kids 27 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 27 June 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Nearly 100 members of Congress supported my amendment. Many of these members represent Texas and Illinois, two states that already have mental health screening programs in place. They have heard from their constituents, who believe intimate mental health problems should be addressed by parents, kids, and their doctors- not the government. These parents do not appreciate yet another government program that undermines their parental authority. Congress Federal Funding for Mental Health Screening of Kids 27 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 27 June 2005 verse 14 ... Cached Certainly there are legitimate organic mental illnesses, but that does not mean it is the role of government to subject every child to arbitrary screening without the consent of parents. Most Americans still understand that certain things are none of the government’s business, even if Congress does not. If you are a parent, do everything you can to protect your children by demanding to be notified of any screening program in their schools. As a voter, let your state and federal legislators know that you don’t want tax dollars spent on mental health screening programs. If we act now, we still can prevent the federal government from creating a nationwide, mandatory program that will place millions of American youngsters into a stigmatized, drugged, mental health ghetto. Congress Lessons from the Kelo Decision 04 July 2005    Texas Straight Talk 04 July 2005 verse 7 ... Cached The Kelo case also demonstrates that local government can be as tyrannical as centralized government. Decentralized power is always preferable, of course, since it’s easier to fight city hall than Congress. But government power is ever and always dangerous, and must be zealously guarded against. Most people in New London, Connecticut, like most people in America, would rather not involve themselves in politics. The reality is that politics involves itself with us whether we like it or not. We can bury our heads in the sand and hope that things don’t get too bad, or we can fight back when government treats us as its servant rather than its master. Congress Lessons from the Kelo Decision 04 July 2005    Texas Straight Talk 04 July 2005 verse 8 ... Cached If anything, the Supreme Court should have refused to hear the Kelo case on the grounds that the 5th amendment does not apply to states. If constitutional purists hope to maintain credibility, we must reject the phony incorporation doctrine in all cases-- not only when it serves our interests. The issue in the Kelo case is the legality of the eminent domain action under Connecticut law, not federal law. Congress can and should act to prevent the federal government from seizing private property, but the fight against local eminent domain actions must take place at the local level. The people of New London, Connecticut could start by removing from office the local officials who created the problem in the first place. Congress What Should America do for Africa? 11 July 2005    Texas Straight Talk 11 July 2005 verse 4 ... Cached The White House attempted to quell criticism that America is not doing enough to save Africa by announcing that the U.S. would double its economic aid to the continent, from $4.3 billion to $8.6 billion, over the next few years. Neither Congress nor the American people were consulted prior to this pronouncement, I might add. I think the public might not share the administration’s generous mood, especially as we spend billions in Iraq and face single year deficits of $500 billion. Frankly, a federal government with nearly $8 trillion in debt has no business giving money to anybody. Congress CAFTA and Dietary Supplements 18 July 2005    Texas Straight Talk 18 July 2005 verse 4 ... Cached The Codex Alimentarius Commission, organized by the United Nations in the 1960s, is charged with “harmonizing” food and supplement rules between all nations of the world. Under Codex rules, even basic vitamins and minerals require a doctor’s prescription. The European Union already has adopted Codex-type regulations, regulations that will be in effect across Europe later this year. This raises concerns that the Europeans will challenge our relatively open market for health supplements in a WTO forum. This is hardly far-fetched, as Congress already has cravenly changed our tax laws to comply with a WTO order. Congress CAFTA and Dietary Supplements 18 July 2005    Texas Straight Talk 18 July 2005 verse 9 ... Cached The largely government-run health care establishment, including the nominally private pharmaceutical companies, want government to control the dietary supplement industry-- so that only they can manufacture and distribute supplements. If that happens, as it already is happening in Europe, the supplements you now take will be available only by prescription and at a much higher cost-- if they are available at all. This alone is sufficient reason for Congress to oppose the unconstitutional, sovereignty-destroying CAFTA bill. Congress The Patriot Act Four Years Later 25 July 2005    Texas Straight Talk 25 July 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Congress passed legislation last week that reauthorizes the Patriot Act for another 10 years, although the bill faced far more opposition than the original Act four years ago. I’m heartened that more members of Congress are listening to their constituents, who remain deeply skeptical about the Patriot Act and expansions of federal police power in general. They rightfully wonder why Congress is so focused on American citizens, while bin Laden and other terrorist leaders still have not been captured. Congress The Patriot Act Four Years Later 25 July 2005    Texas Straight Talk 25 July 2005 verse 6 ... Cached Unfortunately, some of my congressional colleagues referenced the recent London bombings during the debate, insinuating that opponents of the Patriot Act somehow would be responsible for a similar act here at home. I won’t even dignify that slur with the response it deserves. Let’s remember that London is the most heavily monitored city in the world, with surveillance cameras recording virtually all public activity in the city center. British police officials are not hampered by our 4th amendment nor our numerous due process requirements. In other words, they can act without any constitutional restrictions, just as supporters of the Patriot Act want our own police to act. Despite this they were not able to prevent the bombings, proving that even a wholesale surveillance society cannot be made completely safe against determined terrorists. Congress misses the irony entirely. The London bombings don’t prove the need for the Patriot Act, they prove the folly of it. Congress The Sausage Factory 01 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 01 August 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Congress passed a multinational trade bill known as CAFTA last week, but not without a feverish late night vote marred by controversy and last-minute vote switching. Leaving aside the arguments for or against CAFTA itself, the process by which the bill ultimately passed should sicken every American who believes in representative government. Congress The Sausage Factory 01 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 01 August 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Late-night arm-twisting by House leaders to get votes is of course nothing new. We witnessed far worse when Congress passed the ruinous Medicare prescription drug bill in the dead of night two years ago. Yet even after months of unprecedented wheeling and dealing by corporate lobbyists, congressional leaders, and the White House, the Washington establishment still failed to pass CAFTA in the US House. That’s right, when the 15-minute voting period expired last Wednesday evening, CAFTA seemingly had been defeated. Congress Immigration and the Welfare State 08 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 08 August 2005 verse 3 ... Cached More and more of my constituents are asking me when Congress will address the problem of illegal immigration. The public correctly perceives that neither political party has the courage to do what is necessary to prevent further erosion of both our border security and our national identity. As a result, immigration may be the sleeper issue that decides the 2008 presidential election. Congress Politics and Judicial Activism 15 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 15 August 2005 verse 7 ... Cached Congress is guilty of enabling judicial activism. Just as Congress ceded far too much legislative authority to presidents throughout the 20th century, it similarly has allowed federal judges to operate wildly beyond their constitutional role. In fact, many current members of Congress apparently accept the false notion that federal court judgments are superior to congressional statutes. Unless and until Congress asserts itself by limiting federal court jurisdiction, judges will continue to act as de facto lawmakers. Congress Politics and Judicial Activism 15 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 15 August 2005 verse 8 ... Cached The congressional power to strip federal courts of jurisdiction is plainly granted in Article III, and no constitutional amendments are required. On the contrary, any constitutional amendment addressing judicial activism would only grant legitimacy to the dangerous idea that social issues are federal matters. Giving more authority over social matters to any branch of the federal government is a mistake, because a centralized government is unlikely to reflect local sentiment for long. Both political parties are guilty of ignoring the 9th and 10th amendments, and federalizing whole areas of law that constitutionally should be left up to states. This abandonment of federalism and states’ rights paved the way for an activist federal judiciary. Congress Borrowing, Spending, Counterfeiting 22 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 22 August 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Few Americans truly understand how our Federal Reserve system enables Congress to spend far beyond its means, but the cycle of spending and printing money affects all of us. Simply put, the more money our Treasury prints, the less every dollar is worth. Our pure fiat money system, in place since the last vestiges of a gold standard were eliminated in the early 1970s, has reduced the value of your savings by 80%. Disregard the government’s Consumer Price Index, which substantially underreports price inflation. Monetary inflation is true inflation, and we only need to look at the cost of homes, cars, energy, and medical care to recognize that a dollar buys far less today than ever. Congress Borrowing, Spending, Counterfeiting 22 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 22 August 2005 verse 5 ... Cached First, federal debt continues to grow exponentially and shows no sign of abating. Americans were shocked at the notion of a $1 trillion federal debt in 1980; just 25 years later the total approaches $8 trillion. The Bush administration and the current Congress have increased spending at rates unseen since the New Deal and Great Society eras, and single-year deficits now exceed $500 billion. There is zero political will in Washington to curb spending, as evidenced by the shameful transportation bill recently passed by Congress. Congress Borrowing, Spending, Counterfeiting 22 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 22 August 2005 verse 6 ... Cached Second, federal entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare will not be “fixed” by politicians who are unwilling to make hard choices and admit mistakes. Demographic trends will force tax increases and greater deficit spending to maintain benefits for millions of older Americans who are dependent on the federal government. Faced with uncomfortable financial realities, Congress will seek to avoid the day of reckoning by the most expedient means available-- and the Federal Reserve undoubtedly will accommodate Washington by printing more dollars to pay the bills. Congress Borrowing, Spending, Counterfeiting 22 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 22 August 2005 verse 8 ... Cached Finally, we face a reordering of the entire world economy. China, Japan, and Asia in general have been happy to hold U.S. debt instruments in recent decades, but they will not prop up our spending habits forever. Foreign central banks are increasingly reluctant to hold more U.S. dollars, understanding that American leaders do not have the discipline to maintain a stable currency. When the rest of the world finally abandons the dollar as the global reserve currency, both Congress and American consumers will find borrowing money a more expensive proposition. Congress Borrowing, Spending, Counterfeiting 22 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 22 August 2005 verse 10 ... Cached The greatest threat facing America today is not terrorism, or foreign economic competition, or illegal immigration. The greatest threat facing America today is the disastrous fiscal policies of our own government, marked by shameless deficit spending and Federal Reserve currency devaluation. It is this one-two punch-- Congress spending more than it can tax or borrow, and the Fed printing money to make up the difference-- that threatens to impoverish us by further destroying the value of our dollars. Congress Hey, Big Spender 29 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 29 August 2005 verse 3 ... Cached When Congress returns to Washington in September, final touches in the form of last-minute pork will be added to the enormous 2006 federal budget. Rosy predictions about a balanced budget in five years will be made, and both parties will pat themselves on the back for crafting another budget agreement. There will be little partisan acrimony, and the media scarcely will report the results of the vote. Congressional spending, which dramatically affects every American, never generates much public interest-- while distractions like Terri Schiavo and Michael Jackson occupy the nation’s attention for months. Congress Hey, Big Spender 29 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 29 August 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Congressional budget agreements really don’t mean much. A congressional budget passed in 2005 has absolutely no impact on spending decisions in the future, and will be quickly forgotten as all past budgets have been. No politician or government official in 2010 will be heard to say, “Gee, we promised back in 2005 to spend less than this, so we better stick to that pledge.” Only a fool can believe that Congress will consider itself bound by past budgets, and constitutionally the budget is passed one year at a time. Anything else is just talk. Congress can make all the deals it wants, but it can only implement a budget for the coming fiscal year. Congress Hey, Big Spender 29 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 29 August 2005 verse 6 ... Cached For more than 25 years there have been promises about balancing the budget five years out using government forecasts. It’s always the same story: "Just give us a little more time, and we promise we’ll stop spending so much. We just have to fix X, Y, and Z first." Congress is like the drunk who promises to sober up tomorrow, without the slightest intention of doing so. The voting public is like the battered wife who somehow keeps believing the promises. Congress Hey, Big Spender 29 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 29 August 2005 verse 7 ... Cached We will never have a balanced budget until Congress either raises taxes or cuts spending. It's really that simple. I support balancing the budget by cutting the budget, but most people in Washington abhor that option. They abhor making real cuts to the budget because it means cutting the sacred cows of modern American politics. If we cut spending, we cut the power of Congress. Most people do not realize it, but absolutely no major program has been cut one cent in many, many years. Congress Hey, Big Spender 29 August 2005    Texas Straight Talk 29 August 2005 verse 9 ... Cached The bottom line is that everyone in Washington says they oppose pork and want government to spend less, but few in Congress actually vote that way. Most DC politicians are far too dependent on special interest money to make any waves. “Go along to get along” is the creed of the political class, and nothing will change unless and until the American public stops electing and re-electing the big spenders to office. Congress Gas, Taxes, and Middle East Policy 05 September 2005    Texas Straight Talk 05 September 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Congress can help immediately by suspending federal gas taxes, which alone add 18.4 cents to the cost of every gallon. The state of Texas adds another 20 cents per gallon in taxes. Citizens are always asked to sacrifice during crises; why are governments never expected to do the same? Immediate, short-term relief for every American at the pump could be a reality when Congress returns to Washington this week. Congress should pass, and the president should immediately sign, a bill suspending the federal gas tax. This would create pressure for states to do the same. This is the simplest, fastest, and soundest way to drop gas prices and ease the financial impact of Katrina. Wouldn’t it be better to leave that money in the pockets of the American public at least temporarily, especially as we’re all being asked to provide financial help to hurricane victims? Congress Responding to Katrina 12 September 2005    Texas Straight Talk 12 September 2005 verse 4 ... Cached When it comes to government relief efforts for the victims of Hurricane Katrina, Congress must be very careful with the nearly $52 billion dollars approved last week-- almost all of which goes to FEMA. The original $10 billion authorized by Congress for hurricane relief was spent in a matter of days, and there is every indication that FEMA is nothing but a bureaucratic black hole that spends money without the slightest accountability. Any federal aid should be distributed as directly as possible to local communities, rather than through wasteful middlemen like FEMA. We cannot let the Katrina tragedy blind us to fiscal realities, namely the staggering budget deficits and national debt that threaten to devastate our economy. Congress Responding to Katrina 12 September 2005    Texas Straight Talk 12 September 2005 verse 5 ... Cached Why does Congress assume that the best approach is simply to write a huge check to FEMA, the very government agency that failed so spectacularly? This does not make sense. We have all seen the numerous articles detailing the seemingly inexcusable mistakes FEMA made - before and after the hurricane. Yet in typical fashion, Congress seems to think that the best way to fix the mess is to throw money at the very government agency that failed. We should not be rewarding failure. Congress Deficit Spending and Katrina 19 September 2005    Texas Straight Talk 19 September 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Some economists estimate that rebuilding New Orleans and other areas impacted by Hurricane Katrina will cost taxpayers at least $200 billion, which may be a conservative figure considering it could takes decades to fully restore the city. The problem is that our Treasury does not have an extra $200 billion dollars on hand. This means the money either will be printed or borrowed, both of which bode ill for the American economy. Several conservatives in Congress, however, are cautioning against throwing more and more taxpayer money at the problem with no accountability. While we all want to help the victims of Katrina, we must remember that no one is better off if we create record deficits that hobble our children and grandchildren for generations. Congress Deficit Spending and Katrina 19 September 2005    Texas Straight Talk 19 September 2005 verse 7 ... Cached Congress reacted to Katrina in the expected irresponsible manner. It immediately appropriated over $60 billion with little planning or debate. As with all rapid government expenditures, the amount of waste and mismanagement will be staggering. Congress knows it won’t need to raise taxes to pay the bill, because the Federal Reserve will accommodate reckless deficit spending. Congress Deficit Spending and Katrina 19 September 2005    Texas Straight Talk 19 September 2005 verse 8 ... Cached My simple suggestion to my colleagues is this: Find dollar-for-dollar offsets for all hurricane relief spending while public attention remains focused on the destruction in New Orleans. Once interest in Katrina fades, other spending priorities will reassert themselves and any sense that tax dollars are finite will be lost. Congressional spending habits, in combination with our flawed monetary system, could bring us a financial whirlwind that makes Katrina look like a minor storm. Congress Praising the Texas Gulf Coast Response to Rita 26 September 2005    Texas Straight Talk 26 September 2005 verse 4 ... Cached In the 14th congressional district, local leaders did an exceptional job of preparing for Hurricane Rita. Officials and citizens in Galveston and Brazoria counties deserve special praise for showing the nation and the world the right way to prepare for a natural disaster. They proved that the best emergency planning takes place at the state and local level, by people who know the local citizens, roads, coastlines, and topography. Congress Who Opposes Simpler, Lower Taxes? 17 October 2005    Texas Straight Talk 17 October 2005 verse 3 ... Cached The president’s advisory panel on tax reform held a public meeting last week to discuss possible changes to our tax code, which most Americans view as a disgrace. Unfortunately, the reform panel consists almost entirely of Washington beltway insiders who have absolutely nothing in common with ordinary American taxpayers. The members are former Congressmen and Senators, DC think tank scholars, university professors, and-- unbelievably-- a former commissioner of the IRS! It’s hard to imagine someone more opposed to taxpayer interests than the head of the IRS, the very agency that millions of Americans want abolished. Congress Who Opposes Simpler, Lower Taxes? 17 October 2005    Texas Straight Talk 17 October 2005 verse 4 ... Cached It’s doubtful that former politicians and tax bureaucrats will propose meaningful tax reform. After all, we’ve heard this song before. Remember the big tax reform bills of 1986, 1997, and 2001? We were promised a simpler tax code each time, but it never happened. Some slight progress has been made in terms of very modest rate reductions and a slow phaseout of the estate tax, but even those changes may be reversed by revenue-hungry future congresses. Congress Who Opposes Simpler, Lower Taxes? 17 October 2005    Texas Straight Talk 17 October 2005 verse 7 ... Cached When it comes to actual tax reform legislation in Congress, don’t underestimate the lobbying influence of accountants, tax attorneys, tax preparers, IRS employees, and mortgage companies, just to name a few. Many, many groups and industries benefit from our Byzantine tax system in one way or another. They will not accept major changes to the tax code without a fight. Congress Who Opposes Simpler, Lower Taxes? 17 October 2005    Texas Straight Talk 17 October 2005 verse 8 ... Cached True tax reform is as simple as cutting or eliminating taxes. No studies, panels, committees, or hearings are needed. When reform proposals seem complicated, they almost certainly don’t cut taxes. Government spending is the problem! When the federal government takes $2.5 trillion dollars out of the legitimate private economy in a single year, whether through taxes or borrowing, spending clearly is out of control. Deficit spending creates a de facto tax hike, because deficits can be repaid only by future tax increases. By this measure Congress and the president have raised taxes dramatically over the past few years, despite the tax-cutting rhetoric. The real issue is total spending by government, not tax reform. Congress Will the Estate Tax ever be Repealed? 24 October 2005    Texas Straight Talk 24 October 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Just two years ago, Congress was poised to eliminate the hated estate tax permanently. Today, however, several U.S. Senators are using their own wasteful spending habits to justify retaining the tax. In the eyes of these Senators, budget deficits are never the result of too much spending, but rather too little taxing. They cannot imagine giving up even the tiny fraction of federal revenues raised by the estate tax. Why is a one percent revenue cut unthinkable to these lawmakers, while annual three or five percent spending increases are considered business as usual? To answer this question, look no further than the transportation bill passed last week in the Senate. It is perhaps the most pork-filled, wasteful appropriations bill passed in years. The bottom line is that spending money is what keeps these Senators in office. They won’t stop pork spending because the American voting public rewards them for it. Congress A Free Market in Gasoline 31 October 2005    Texas Straight Talk 31 October 2005 verse 5 ... Cached Federal subsidies and regulations are largely responsible for limiting the supply of refined gasoline in this country. The demand for gasoline has risen dramatically in America due to population growth in recent decades, but virtually no new refining capacity has been added. Basic economics tells us that rising demand and a fixed supply will lead to higher prices. No amount of congressional grandstanding about price gouging will change this economic reality. We must increase domestic exploration, drilling, and refining if we hope to maintain reasonable gas prices. We need more competition, which means we need less government. Congress A Free Market in Gasoline 31 October 2005    Texas Straight Talk 31 October 2005 verse 11 ... Cached What can Congress do to provide Americans with some relief at the pump? First it can suspend federal gas taxes, which would save consumers nearly 20 cents per gallon. In the long term, Congress must pass legislation like HR 4004, which I introduced earlier this month. HR 4004 takes a comprehensive approach by allowing offshore drilling, eliminating regulations that restrict refining, and suspending harmful tax rules that discourage domestic oil production. If we hope to have a stable, affordable supply of gas, we must allow the free market to operate. Congress Deficts at Home, Welfare Abroad 07 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 07 November 2005 verse 3 ... Cached In the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and with an ongoing war in Iraq that costs more than $1 billion per week, taxpayers might think Congress has better things to do with $21 billion than send it overseas. Yet that’s exactly what Congress did last Friday, approving a useless and counterproductive foreign aid spending bill. Never mind that the total federal debt recently topped $8 trillion, or that a major US city was virtually destroyed only a few months ago. Arrogant is the only word to describe a Congress that cares so little about its own taxpaying citizens while pretending to know what is best for the world. Congress Too Little, Too Late 14 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 November 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Congress is poised to consider a budget bill this week in a vote both parties consider critical, but in reality the bill is nothing more than a political exercise by congressional leaders designed to convince voters that something is being done about runaway federal spending. Having spent the last five years out-pandering the Democrats by spending money to buy off various voting constituencies, congressional Republicans now find themselves forced to appeal to their unhappy conservative base by applying window dressing to the bloated 2006 federal budget. Congress Too Little, Too Late 14 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 November 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Ignore the talk about Congress "slashing" vital government programs in this budget bill, which is just nonsense. This Congress couldn't slash spending if the members' lives depended on it. Congress Too Little, Too Late 14 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 November 2005 verse 5 ... Cached Remember, this is a Congress that has increased spending by 33% since President Bush took office in 2001. And we're not talking about national defense or anti-terrorism spending. We're talking about a one-third increase in garden variety domestic spending. This is also a Congress that passed the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill, the single largest increase in entitlement spending since the Great Society programs of the 1960s. So there's not much credibility to be found on Capitol Hill when it comes to reducing the federal budget. Congress Too Little, Too Late 14 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 November 2005 verse 7 ... Cached The budget reconciliation bill reduces spending by a mere $5.6 billion in a 2006 budget of nearly $2.5 trillion. This represents just a fraction of one percent, a laughable amount. Does anyone seriously believe the federal budget cannot be trimmed more than this? Consider that the federal budget was only about $1 trillion in 1990, a mere 15 years ago- and government was far too large and too intrusive then. After all the talk about deficit spending, this is the best a Republican congress and Republican president can come up with? What a farce. Congress Too Little, Too Late 14 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 November 2005 verse 8 ... Cached Projections of big savings beyond 2006 because of this bill are pure fiction. Congress has no authority to pass budgets or appropriate money beyond the next fiscal year. Future Congresses will not pay one whit of attention to this bill, and its hopeful predictions will be forgotten. Congress Too Little, Too Late 14 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 November 2005 verse 9 ... Cached Furthermore, we need to get our budget cutting priorities in order. Why are we cutting domestic programs while we continue to spend billions on infrastructure in Iraq? In just the past two weeks Congress approved a $21 billion foreign aid bill and a $130 million scheme to provide water for developing nations. Why in the world aren't these boondoggles cut first? Congress Too Little, Too Late 14 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 November 2005 verse 10 ... Cached The spending culture in Washington creates an attitude that government can solve every problem both at home and abroad simply by funding another program. But we've reached a tipping point, with $8 trillion in debt and looming Social Security and Medicare crises. Government spending has become a national security issue, because unless Congress stops the bleeding the resulting economic downturn will cause us more harm than any terrorist group could ever hope to cause. And we're doing it to ourselves, from within. Congress Too Little, Too Late 14 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 November 2005 verse 11 ... Cached Congress is running out of options in its game of buy now, pay later. Foreign central banks are less interested in loaning us money. Treasury printing presses are worn out from the unprecedented increase in dollars ordered by the Federal Reserve Bank over the past 15 years. Taxpayers are tapped out. Where will the money for Big Government conservatism come from? Congress Too Little, Too Late 14 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 November 2005 verse 12 ... Cached Congressional Republicans and Democrats can posture until doomsday, but the needed course of action is clear. Declare an across-the-board ten percent cut for the federal 2006 budget, and focus spending on domestic priorities. If congressional leaders cannot take this simple step toward balancing the 2006 budget, they should at least not attempt to delude the American people that serious spending cuts are being made. Congress Slashing the Budget? 21 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 21 November 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Only in Washington DC can a spending increase be called a spending cut-- but that’s exactly what happened last week. Congress passed a budget bill that merely slows the rate at which some federal spending grows by a tiny percentage, and both parties acted as though a revolution had taken place. Congress Slashing the Budget? 21 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 21 November 2005 verse 7 ... Cached The budget bill fails to address the root of the spending problem--this belief that Congress continually must create new federal programs and agencies. However, with the federal government’s unfunded liabilities-- Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid-- projected to reach as much as $50 trillion by the end of this year, Congress no longer can avoid serious efforts to rein in spending. Instead of a smoke-and-mirrors approach, Congress should begin the journey toward fiscal responsibility by declaring a ten percent reduction in real spending, followed by a renewed commitment to fund only those government functions that are consistent with the Constitution. Congress More of the Same at the Federal Reserve 28 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 28 November 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Benjamin Bernanke, a former member of the Board of Governors at the Federal Reserve, is all but certain to be confirmed by the Senate as the next Chairman of that institution. He may find that the adulation given to Mr. Greenspan does not carry over into his tenure so easily, especially if he continues to help Congress run up huge deficits. Congress Don't Complicate Immigration Reform 12 December 2005    Texas Straight Talk 12 December 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Congress is poised to consider an immigration reform bill this week, but as usual the devil will be in the details. A sensible bill would bolster enforcement of existing immigration laws, reject any form of amnesty, and address the underlying welfare state that adds to the problem. I fear, however, that Congress will bow to the president and accept some sort of amnesty. Even worse, I fear Congress may use the immigration bill to create a national employment database that has nothing to do with border control and everything to do with monitoring American citizens and employers. Congress Don't Complicate Immigration Reform 12 December 2005    Texas Straight Talk 12 December 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Most Americans understandably want Congress to do something about illegal immigration, which has become a national embarrassment. One important solution is better enforcement of the laws we’ve got-- which plainly call for illegal immigrants to be arrested and deported. Congress can pass any law it wants, but unless federal agencies enforce those laws they are meaningless. Congress Don't Complicate Immigration Reform 12 December 2005    Texas Straight Talk 12 December 2005 verse 5 ... Cached The ultimate responsibility for our immigration mess, therefore, lies squarely with successive presidents, not Congress. For decades our chief executives simply have lacked the political will, the manpower, or the desire to police our borders and deport lawbreakers. It’s been nearly impossible politically for presidents or candidates to suggest the obvious, namely that illegal immigration mocks the rule of law and creates huge social and economic problems. But the tide is turning, and a majority of Americans will demand real action on immigration by the next administration. Congress Don't Complicate Immigration Reform 12 December 2005    Texas Straight Talk 12 December 2005 verse 8 ... Cached Second, we must end birthright citizenship by constitutional amendment, if necessary. House Joint Resolution 46, which I introduced earlier this year, begins the process in Congress. As long as illegal immigrants know that their children born here will be citizens, the perverse incentive to sneak into this country remains strong. Citizenship involves more than the mere location of one’s birth. True citizenship requires cultural connections and an allegiance to the United States. Americans are happy to welcome those who wish to come here and build a better life for themselves, but we rightfully expect immigrants to show loyalty and attempt to assimilate themselves culturally. Birthright citizenship sometimes confers the benefits of being American on people who do not truly embrace America. Congress Small Steps Toward Immigration Reform 19 December 2005    Texas Straight Talk 19 December 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Congress passed an immigration bill last week that takes some small steps toward asserting control over our nation’s porous borders. I supported the bill despite its lack of substance, in the hope that it will move America in the right direction on the critical issue of illegal immigration. Congress Small Steps Toward Immigration Reform 19 December 2005    Texas Straight Talk 19 December 2005 verse 8 ... Cached Congress and the administration are still way behind the American people on the immigration issue. American culture is rooted in political and legal traditions based on liberty and constitutionally limited government—and we rightfully expect immigrants to respect and learn about those traditions. Real immigration reform, based on asserting our sovereign right to retain a cultural identity, will be a huge issue in next year’s congressional elections and the 2008 presidential election. Congress Domestic Surveillance and the Patriot Act 26 December 2005    Texas Straight Talk 26 December 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Recent revelations that the National Security Agency has conducted broad surveillance of American citizens' emails and phone calls raise serious questions about the proper role of government in a free society. This is an important and healthy debate, one that too often goes ignored by Congress. Congress Domestic Surveillance and the Patriot Act 26 December 2005    Texas Straight Talk 26 December 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Public concerns about the misnamed Patriot Act are having an impact, as the Senate last week refused to reauthorize the bill for several years. Instead Congress will be back in Washington next month to consider many of the Act's most harmful provisions. Congress Domestic Surveillance and the Patriot Act 26 December 2005    Texas Straight Talk 26 December 2005 verse 8 ... Cached Some Senators last week complained that the Patriot Act is misunderstood. But it's not the American public's fault nobody knows exactly what the Patriot Act does. The Act contains over 500 pages of detailed legalese, the full text of which was neither read nor made available to Congress in a reasonable time before it was voted on- which by itself should have convinced members to vote against it. Many of the surveillance powers authorized in the Act are not clearly defined and have not yet been tested. When they are tested, court challenges are sure to follow. It is precisely because we cannot predict how the Patriot Act will be interpreted and used in future decades that we should question it today. Congress Peace and Prosperity in 2006? 02 January 2006    Texas Straight Talk 02 January 2006 verse 3 ... Cached The ongoing war in Iraq, hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and congressional scandals all served to make 2005 a tough year for America. We can hope and pray that 2006 is a happier and more peaceful year for our nation. Congress Peace and Prosperity in 2006? 02 January 2006    Texas Straight Talk 02 January 2006 verse 8 ... Cached Dangerous foreign aid spending also grows next year, sending more of your tax dollars overseas to fund dubious regimes that often later become our enemies- as we've seen in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Congress cannot continue to increase spending each year and expect tax revenues to keep pace. No reasonable person can argue that a $2.4 trillion budget does not contain huge amounts of special interest spending that can and should be cut by Congress, especially when we are waging an off-budget war in Iraq that costs more than $1 billion every week. Congress Federal Courts and the Growth of Government Power 16 January 2006    Texas Straight Talk 16 January 2006 verse 3 ... Cached The Senate hearings regarding the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court demonstrated that few in Washington view the Constitution as our founders did. The Constitution first and foremost is a document that limits the power of the federal government. It prevents the president, Congress, and the Supreme Court from doing all kinds of things. But judging by last week's hearings, the Constitution is an enabling document, one that authorizes the federal government to involve itself in nearly every aspect of our lives. Congress Federal Courts and the Growth of Government Power 16 January 2006    Texas Straight Talk 16 January 2006 verse 6 ... Cached Also troubling was the apparent consensus among both the Senators and Judge Alito that Congress has no authority to limit federal court jurisdiction by forbidding it to hear certain types of cases. This is completely false: Article III Section 2 of the Constitution plainly grants Congress the authority to limit federal court jurisdiction in many kinds of cases. It is perfectly constitutional for Congress to pass court-stripping legislation to reflect public sentiment against an overreaching Supreme Court. Congress Federal Courts and the Growth of Government Power 16 January 2006    Texas Straight Talk 16 January 2006 verse 9 ... Cached Second, if the American people don't like any of the "laws" created by the Supreme Court, they have no choice but to live with them unless by some miracle the Court later overturns itself. The people have no recourse through Congress to address unpopular Court decisions. Congress Federal Courts and the Growth of Government Power 16 January 2006    Texas Straight Talk 16 January 2006 verse 10 ... Cached The ramifications of these assertions are very serious. They mean the Supreme Court not only can invalidate the actions of Congress or the President, but also craft de facto laws that cannot be undone by the people's elected legislators! This is wildly beyond the role of the federal judiciary as envisioned by the founders. They certainly never intended to create an unelected, lifetime-tenured, superlegislature. Congress New Rules, Same Game 23 January 2006    Texas Straight Talk 23 January 2006 verse 3 ... Cached Last week I mailed each of my congressional colleagues a copy of a speech outlining my views on the lobbying and ethics scandals engulfing Washington. I’m afraid many of them won’t like my conclusion: to reduce corruption in government, we must make government less powerful-- and hence less interesting to lobbyists. Congress New Rules, Same Game 23 January 2006    Texas Straight Talk 23 January 2006 verse 4 ... Cached I find it hard to believe that changing the congressional ethics rules or placing new restrictions on lobbyists will do much good. After all, we already have laws against bribery, theft, and fraud. We already have ethics rules in Congress. We already have campaign finance reform. We already require campaigns and lobbyists to register with the federal government and disclose expenditures. We already require federal employees, including the president and members of congress, to take an oath of office. None of it is working, so why should we think more rules, regulations, or laws will change anything? Congress New Rules, Same Game 23 January 2006    Texas Straight Talk 23 January 2006 verse 7 ... Cached It’s no wonder a system of runaway lobbying and special interests has developed. When we consider the enormous entitlement and welfare system in place, and couple that with a military-industrial complex that feeds off perpetual war and encourages an interventionist foreign policy, the possibilities for corruption are endless. We shouldn’t wonder why there is such a powerful motivation to learn the tricks of the lobbying trade-- and why former members of Congress and their aides become such high priced commodities. Congress The Real Washington Scandal 06 February 2006    Texas Straight Talk 06 February 2006 verse 3 ... Cached Supreme Court nominations, congressional ethics scandals, and insider politics dominated the Washington headlines in recent weeks. But perhaps the most important story, in terms of its impact on average Americans, has gone virtually unreported. Congress The Real Washington Scandal 06 February 2006    Texas Straight Talk 06 February 2006 verse 7 ... Cached For years the Federal Reserve Bank and Congress have maintained a cozy relationship. The Fed, by pumping more and more money into the economy, has allowed Congress to spend wildly beyond the amount collected each year by the Treasury. Congress loves deficit spending, because new programs are always politically popular and tax hikes are always unpopular. In return, Congress has maintained a completely hands-off approach toward the Fed system, allowing Mr. Greenspan free reign to "run the economy" with tremendous deference from both the public and the press. Congress The Real Washington Scandal 06 February 2006    Texas Straight Talk 06 February 2006 verse 8 ... Cached The results are not pretty. True inflation, correctly measured by the amount of money and credit available, has skyrocketed in the last 15 years. At the same time, federal deficits have exploded. Congress is addicted to spending, and the Fed is happy to supply the fix by providing easy money. Congress The Ever-Growing Federal Budget 13 February 2006    Texas Straight Talk 13 February 2006 verse 3 ... Cached The Bush administration released a proposed 2007 budget last week that increases federal spending to a staggering $2.77 trillion, a sum that is 4 times larger than the Reagan-era budgets of the early 1980s. With a public angry about useless earmarks and bridges to nowhere, and a Republican congressional delegation promising to restore some small measure of fiscal discipline, it's troubling that the administration chooses to ignore economic reality and increase spending without regard to revenues and deficits. Congress The Ever-Growing Federal Budget 13 February 2006    Texas Straight Talk 13 February 2006 verse 12 ... Cached Neither political party wants to address the fundamental yet unspoken issues inherent in any budget proposal: What is the proper role for government in our society? Are these ever-growing entitlement and military expenditures really consistent with a free country? Do the proposed expenditures, and the resulting taxes, make us more free or less free? Should the government or the marketplace provide medical care? Should the U.S. military be used to remake whole nations? Are the programs, agencies, and departments funded in the budget proposal constitutional? Are they effective? Could they operate with a smaller budget? Would the public even notice if certain items were eliminated altogether? These are the kinds of questions the American people should ask, even if Congress lacks the courage to apply any principles whatsoever to the budget process. Congress Katrina Relief Six Months Later 20 February 2006    Texas Straight Talk 20 February 2006 verse 7 ... Cached Congress reacted to Katrina in typical Washington-knows-best fashion. It immediately appropriated over $60 billion with no planning or debate, mostly to show that government was “doing something.” Political grandstanding masqueraded as compassion. As with all rapid government expenditures, the money was spent badly. Every member of Congress must have known that throwing $50 billion at FEMA, the very agency that failed so badly to prepare for Katrina, would not turn out well. Congress Katrina Relief Six Months Later 20 February 2006    Texas Straight Talk 20 February 2006 verse 9 ... Cached The best way to rebuild New Orleans is to provide entrepreneurial incentives for people and businesses willing to do the hard work involved. I voted for several bills last fall that provide some measure of tax relief for Katrina victims, but more could be done. Imagine the revitalization that would occur if Congress declared New Orleans a federal tax-free zone for 5 or 10 years. Congress The Port Security Controversy 27 February 2006    Texas Straight Talk 27 February 2006 verse 3 ... Cached Many Americans are upset by the thought of a Dubai-based corporation running port operations in several major American cities. The company involved now has agreed to delay taking over those operations while the Bush administration and Congress settle their differences and address the ire of the American people. Congress The Port Security Controversy 27 February 2006    Texas Straight Talk 27 February 2006 verse 7 ... Cached It's important to note the administration did not bother to consult with Congress or the state governors involved. The Treasury department approved the purchase with no congressional oversight whatsoever. While many applaud unchecked presidential authority when it comes to war in Iraq, wiretapping, and other national security matters, they now demand that Congress overturn a unilateral administration decision. The lesson learned is that everybody likes presidential power when they agree with how it’s used. When they don’t, they rediscover that the Constitution authorizes Congress to make policy after all. Congress International Taxes? 06 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 06 March 2006 verse 8 ... Cached Since I was elected to Congress I have been fighting continuously against these UN efforts to pick your pocket. In the 109th Congress I successfully amended the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act of 2005 to prohibit any of the funds in the Act from being used by the U.N. to develop or publicize any proposal concerning taxation or fees on any United States person to raise revenue for the U.N. or any of its specialized or affiliated agencies. Congress International Taxes? 06 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 06 March 2006 verse 9 ... Cached I also introduced H. R. 1017 in the current Congress which would permanently prohibit United States contributions to the United Nations if that organization develops, implements, or publicizes any proposal to tax Americans. Congress International Taxes? 06 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 06 March 2006 verse 10 ... Cached Of course, my preference is that the United States end its participation in the corrupt UN entirely, and I introduce HR 1146 in every Congress to do just that. But until my colleagues are willing to take this important step, I will continue to offer measures like my amendment last year to help protect your hard-earned money from the greedy hands of the globalist United Nations. Congress How Government Debt Grows 13 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 13 March 2006 verse 3 ... Cached Today our national debt stands at $8.2 trillion, which represents about $26,000 for every man, woman, and child in America. Interestingly, the legal debt limit is only $8.18 trillion, a figure that was reached a few weeks ago. This means the Treasury department must ask Congress to raise the debt limit very soon, most likely as part of a larger bill so it can be hidden from the American people. Congress How Government Debt Grows 13 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 13 March 2006 verse 4 ... Cached Raising the debt ceiling is nothing new. Congress raised it many times over the last 15 years, despite the supposed “surpluses” of the Clinton years. Those single-year surpluses were based on accounting tricks that treated Social Security funds as general revenues. In reality the federal government ran deficits throughout the 1990s, and the federal debt rose steadily. Congress How Government Debt Grows 13 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 13 March 2006 verse 5 ... Cached Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan made it easier for Congress to obscure the extent of federal debt. He endorsed a change in the law that redefined Social Security and veterans pensions. In reality those obligations are debts, just like any other bill that must be paid in the future. But Mr. Greenspan urged renaming these obligations “intergovernment accounts,” which magically changed them from debts to “accrued liabilities.” This semantic shift frees up lots of room under the debt ceiling for more borrowing. Congress How Government Debt Grows 13 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 13 March 2006 verse 8 ... Cached When government borrows money, the actual borrowers- big spending administrations and politicians- never have to pay it back. Remember, administrations come and go, members of congress become highly paid lobbyists, and bureaucrats retire with safe pensions. The benefits of deficit spending are enjoyed immediately by politicians, who trade pork for votes and enjoy adulation for promising to cure every social ill. The bills always come due later, however. Nobody ever looks back and says, “Congressman so-and-so got us into this mess when he voted for all that spending 20 years ago.” Congress How Government Debt Grows 13 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 13 March 2006 verse 9 ... Cached For government, the federal budget is essentially a credit card with no spending limit, billed to somebody else. We hardly should be surprised that Congress racks up huge amounts of debt! By contrast, responsible people restrain their borrowing because they will have to pay the money back. It's time for American taxpayers to understand that every dollar will have to be repaid. We should have the courage to face our grandchildren knowing that we have done all we can to end the government spending spree. Congress Another "Emergency" Spending Bill 20 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 20 March 2006 verse 3 ... Cached Congress funds the federal government through 13 enormous appropriations bills, but even an annual budget of more than $2 trillion is not enough to satisfy Washington’s appetite for new spending. As a result, a new category of spending bill has emerged, known as the “emergency supplemental” appropriation. There’s no real emergency, however; Congress simply needs a 14th spending bill as a grab bag filled with hundreds of pages of goodies for countless favored groups, industries, individual companies, and foreign governments. It’s common for dozens of amendments to be added to the supplemental bill, all with more money for somebody. Congress Another "Emergency" Spending Bill 20 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 20 March 2006 verse 4 ... Cached So-called emergency supplemental spending bills, once a rarity, have become the norm over the last ten years in Washington. There’s always some excuse why Congress cannot stick to its budget, so supplemental bills are passed to permit spending extra “off-budget” funds. “Emergency” spending now has become routine, planned spending. Congress Another "Emergency" Spending Bill 20 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 20 March 2006 verse 5 ... Cached American taxpayers should know this latest emergency supplemental bill spends almost $92 billion, making it the largest supplemental appropriation in the history of the U.S. Congress. The entire federal budget was less than $92 billion in the early 1960s! Congress Another "Emergency" Spending Bill 20 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 20 March 2006 verse 9 ... Cached The real emergency is in Washington, where Congress is spending and borrowing America into a perfect storm. As economist James Turk explains, the federal government now relies upon debt to finance 20% of its spending. Low interest rates during the 1990s and early 2000s kept interest payments on government debts- Treasury Bonds and Treasury Bills- somewhat manageable. During the same period, however, the Federal Reserve greatly increased the money supply, which has caught up to us in the form of price inflation. The Fed now must raise rates to combat this inflation, but higher interest rates will chill economic growth and slow tax revenue. To quote Mr. Turk, “The federal government faces a potentially toxic mix of constrained revenues, soaring expenditures, ballooning debt, and rising interest rates.” Congress The Perils of Economic Ignorance 27 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 27 March 2006 verse 6 ... Cached I certainly have seen firsthand a great deal of economic ignorance in Congress over the years. Few members pay any attention whatsoever to the Federal Reserve Bank, despite the tremendous impact Fed policy has on their constituents. Even many members of the banking and finance committees have little or no knowledge of monetary policy. Perhaps this is why so many in Congress seem to believe we can all become rich by printing new dollars, or that we can make 2+2=5 by taking money from some people and giving it to others. Congress The Perils of Economic Ignorance 27 March 2006    Texas Straight Talk 27 March 2006 verse 7 ... Cached We cannot suspend the laws of economics or the principles of human action any more than we can suspend the laws of physics. Yet this is precisely what Congress attempts to do time and time again, no matter how many times history proves them wrong or economists easily demonstrate the harms caused by a certain policy. Congress Cough Up 10 April 2006    Texas Straight Talk 10 April 2006 verse 3 ... Cached April 15th, our national tax day, comes this year just as Congress prepares to pass the 2007 federal budget. If you think paying taxes was painful this year, I’ve got some bad news: the new budget is a grotesque illustration of everything wrong with the federal government. At $2.7 trillion, it’s the largest budget in U.S. history by a long shot. Like it or not, the pressure to raise your taxes will be enormous in coming years no matter who controls Congress. The amount of money government spends, borrows, and prints simply cannot be sustained. Congress Cough Up 10 April 2006    Texas Straight Talk 10 April 2006 verse 5 ... Cached Most people understandably want a simpler income tax system, but it’s useless to discuss tax reform without spending reform. Who wants a 40% flat tax? Who wants a national sales tax if it adds 50% to the retail price of everything we buy? In other words, why change the tax structure if spending stays the same? Once we accept that Congress needs $2.7 trillion from us, the only question is how it will be collected. The current answer is the labyrinthine tax code, which pits taxpayers against each other in a political scramble to make sure the other guy pays. The truth is that Congress does not need $2.7 trillion, or anything close to it, to fund the proper constitutional functions of the federal government. Congress Cough Up 10 April 2006    Texas Straight Talk 10 April 2006 verse 7 ... Cached The real enemy of tax reform is the spending culture in Washington. Let me repeat: we will never have tax reform in this country until Congress changes its spending habits. The reform rhetoric, regardless of which party it comes from, never changes the reality that federal spending grows every year. Congress spent $2.4 trillion in the last Bush budget; the new budget proposes to spend $2.7 trillion. The same unconstitutional agencies are funded, the same unwise programs are perpetuated, but at higher levels than last year. The previous budget serves merely as a baseline; the only question in any given year is how much spending will increase. Once created, no spending program is ever eliminated. The cycle goes on and on, with different administrations and different people in Congress. Congress Sanctions against Iran 17 April 2006    Texas Straight Talk 17 April 2006 verse 3 ... Cached As the drumbeat for military action against Iran grows louder, some members of Congress are calling to expand the longstanding U.S. trade ban that bars American companies from investing in that nation. In fact, many war hawks in Washington are pushing for a comprehensive international embargo against Iran. The international response has been lukewarm, however, because the world needs Iranian oil. But we cannot underestimate the irrational, almost manic desire of some neoconservatives to attack Iran one way or another, even if it means crippling a major source of oil and destabilizing the worldwide economy. Congress True Foreign Aid 01 May 2006    Texas Straight Talk 01 May 2006 verse 9 ... Cached Sadly, this does not happen when government aid is mismanaged. More often than not, the very government agencies that mismanaged the assistance in the first place come back to Congress for a budget increase to solve the problem they created. Congress Foreign Policy, Monetary Policy, and Gas Prices 08 May 2006    Texas Straight Talk 08 May 2006 verse 4 ... Cached But price controls won’t work, and allegations of price gouging and “windfall profits” amount to nothing more than congressional grandstanding. No government official or politician is fit to define a “fair” price for gas or a “fair” profit for oil companies. This is not the Soviet Union. The last thing we need is centralized government planning when it comes to our precious energy supplies. Congress Foreign Policy, Monetary Policy, and Gas Prices 08 May 2006    Texas Straight Talk 08 May 2006 verse 9 ... Cached We also must understand the effect monetary policy has on gas prices. The price of gas, like the price of all things, goes up because of inflation. And inflation by definition is an increase in the money supply. The money supply is controlled by the Federal Reserve Bank, and responds to the deficits Congress creates. When deficits are excessive, as they are today, the Fed creates new dollars out of thin air to buy Treasury bills and keep interest rates artificially low. But when new money is created out of nothing, the money already in circulation loses value. Once this is recognized, prices rise-- some more rapidly than others. That’s what we see today with the cost of energy. Congress The Declining Dollar Erodes Personal Savings 15 May 2006    Texas Straight Talk 15 May 2006 verse 5 ... Cached Remember, gold is static. Gold isn’t going up, the dollar is going down. And it’s going to continue until the American people demand an end to deficit spending by Congress and unrestrained creation of new dollars by the Federal Reserve and Treasury department. Congress The Declining Dollar Erodes Personal Savings 15 May 2006    Texas Straight Talk 15 May 2006 verse 6 ... Cached A sharply rising gold price is really a vote of “no confidence” in Congress’ ability to control the budget, the Fed’s ability to control the money supply, and the administration’s ability to bring stability to the Middle East. Congress Stop the NAIS 29 May 2006    Texas Straight Talk 29 May 2006 verse 5 ... Cached As usual, Congress is spending millions of dollars creating a complex non-solution to a very simple problem. NAIS will cost taxpayers at least $33 million for starters. Congress The Annual Foreign Aid Rip-Off 05 June 2006    Texas Straight Talk 05 June 2006 verse 2 ... Cached This week, Congress will vote to send more than 20 billion of your hard-earned dollars overseas, when it passes the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill for 2007. Our annual foreign aid bill is one of the most egregious abuses of the taxpayer I can imagine. Not only is it an unconstitutional burden on America’s working families, but this yearly attempt to buy friends and influence foreign governments is counterproductive and actually results in less goodwill toward the United States overseas. Congress The Annual Foreign Aid Rip-Off 05 June 2006    Texas Straight Talk 05 June 2006 verse 5 ... Cached This year’s bill is even worse than last year’s bill. Aside from the almost 600 million dollar increase, the bill will spend half a billion dollars on something called the “Trade Capacity Enhancement Fund.” This is nothing but an enormous fund to bribe foreign governments to “liberalize” their trade policies. As one of the strongest proponents of free trade in Congress, I know well that open and free trade is its own reward. Countries that trade freely with each other are wealthier and far less likely to go to war. We shouldn’t kid ourselves: this new program is not about free trade. Its purpose is to encourage countries to enter into new so-called trade agreements with the US government. Government to government trade agreements produce government-managed trade relationships, which are not free trade at all. This fund is a colossal waste of money that will result in less free trade worldwide. Congress The Annual Foreign Aid Rip-Off 05 June 2006    Texas Straight Talk 05 June 2006 verse 6 ... Cached Also, this year Congress will nearly double funding for the monstrous Millennium Challenge program. This is billed as a different kind of foreign aid, in that it only goes to governments that pursue “free market” economic and social reforms. Of course this is a waste of money: governments that pursue wise economic policies will attract much more in foreign private investment than the US government can send them. The true reward for sound economic policies is increased prosperity. Foreign aid does not purchase that prosperity but in fact distorts internal markets and props up inefficient companies. Congress Why Won't Congress Abolish the Estate Tax? 12 June 2006    Texas Straight Talk 12 June 2006 verse 1 ... Cached Why Won't Congress Abolish the Estate Tax? Congress Why Won't Congress Abolish the Estate Tax? 12 June 2006    Texas Straight Talk 12 June 2006 verse 4 ... Cached Fortunately, estate taxes no longer devour 60% of some individuals’ wealth when they die. Congress passed legislation in 2001 that reduced estate tax rates and increased the amount of assets exempt from the tax. Yet Congress has been unable to abolish the estate tax altogether, and due to a political compromise the old rates will be back in effect come 2011 unless Congress acts first. Congress Why Won't Congress Abolish the Estate Tax? 12 June 2006    Texas Straight Talk 12 June 2006 verse 5 ... Cached The estate tax raises very little money. In fact, even at its height the estate tax accounted for only a little more than 1% of federal revenues. A congressional Joint Economic committee report estimates that Americans spend as much avoiding estate taxes—paying attorneys and accountants—as they do paying estate taxes. A study by a Stanford professor concluded that “True revenues associated with estate taxation may well have been near zero, or even negative.” Congress Congress Rejects UN Taxes 19 June 2006    Texas Straight Talk 19 June 2006 verse 1 ... Cached Congress Rejects UN Taxes Congress A New Declaration 03 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 03 July 2006 verse 9 ... Cached It is easy to simply blame faceless bureaucrats and politicians for our current state of affairs, and they do bear much of the blame. But blame also rests with those who expect Washington DC to solve every problem under the sun. If the public demanded that Congress abide by the Constitution and pass only constitutional spending bills, politicians would have no choice but to respond. Congress A New Declaration 03 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 03 July 2006 verse 10 ... Cached Everybody seems to agree that government waste is rampant and spending should but cut—but not when it comes to their communities or pet projects. So members of Congress have every incentive to support spending bills and adopt a go-along, get-along attitude. This leads to the famous compromises, but the bill eventually comes due on April 15th. Congress Federal Reserve Policy Destroys the Value of Your Savings 10 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 10 July 2006 verse 7 ... Cached The coming dollar crisis is not likely to be “fixed” by politicians who are unwilling to make hard choices, admit mistakes, and spend less money. Demographic trends will place even greater demands on Congress to maintain benefits for millions of older Americans who are dependent on the federal government. Congress Federal Reserve Policy Destroys the Value of Your Savings 10 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 10 July 2006 verse 8 ... Cached Faced with uncomfortable financial realities, Congress will seek to avoid the day of reckoning by the most expedient means available-- and the Federal Reserve undoubtedly will accommodate Washington by printing more dollars to pay the bills. The Fed is the enabler for the spending addicts in Congress, who would rather spend new fiat money than face the political consequences of raising taxes or borrowing more abroad. Congress IRS Threatens Political Speech 24 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 24 July 2006 verse 5 ... Cached I agree with my colleague Walter Jones of North Carolina that the political views of any particular church or its members are none of the government’s business. Congressman Jones introduced legislation that addresses this very serious issue of IRS harassment of churches engaging in conservative political activity. This bill is badly needed to end the IRS practice of threatening certain politically disfavored faiths with loss of their tax-exempt status, while ignoring the very open and public political activities of other churches. While some well-known leftist preachers routinely advocate socialism from the pulpit, many conservative Christian and Jewish congregations cannot present their political beliefs without risking scrutiny from the tax collector. Congress What Congress Can Do About High Gas Prices 31 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 31 July 2006 verse 1 ... Cached What Congress Can Do About Higher Gas Prices Congress What Congress Can Do About High Gas Prices 31 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 31 July 2006 verse 7 ... Cached Third: We must remember that prices of all things go up because of inflation. Inflation by definition is an increase in the money supply. The money supply is controlled by the Federal Reserve Bank, and responds to the deficits Congress creates. When deficits are excessive, as they are today, the Fed creates new dollars out of thin air to buy Treasury bills and keep interest rates artificially low. But when new money is created out of nothing, the money already in circulation loses value. Once this is recognized, prices rise-- some more rapidly than others. That’s what we see today with the cost of energy. Congress What Congress Can Do About High Gas Prices 31 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 31 July 2006 verse 9 ... Cached If we want to do something about gas prices, Congress should greatly reduce federal spending, balance the budget, and eliminate regulations that interfere with the market development of alternative fuels. All subsidies and special benefits to energy companies should be ended. And in the meantime let’s eliminate federal gas taxes at the pump. Congress The Threat of Rising Property Taxes 07 August 2006    Texas Straight Talk 07 August 2006 verse 8 ... Cached At the federal level, Congress can act now to provide relief to those paying high property taxes. Although property taxes are deductible on your federal tax return, the current rules require taxpayers to itemize to take the deduction. Many people have a hard time paying $2,000 or $3,000 in property taxes, but they don’t have enough other itemized deductions to exceed the standard deduction. Congress Your Taxes Subsidize China 14 August 2006    Texas Straight Talk 14 August 2006 verse 4 ... Cached Very few people realize that China is one of the biggest beneficiaries of American taxpayer subsidies. Thanks to the largesse of Congress and the President, China enjoys subsidized trade and the flow of US tax dollars into Beijing's coffers. Congress Your Taxes Subsidize China 14 August 2006    Texas Straight Talk 14 August 2006 verse 5 ... Cached I offered an amendment before the House of Representatives last month that would have ended the $4 billion subsidy our nation quietly gives China through the US government's Export-Import Bank. The bank underwrites the purchases of goods and services by the Chinese government and others around the world. Unfortunately, only a minority of Democrats or Republicans supported my measure. Apparently, many members of Congress are happy to bash China, but don’t mind lending her U.S. taxpayer money at sweetheart interest rates. Congress Your Taxes Subsidize China 14 August 2006    Texas Straight Talk 14 August 2006 verse 7 ... Cached There is no constitutional authority for Congress to make loans to any country, and certainly no basis for giving away the hard-earned cash of Americans to communist leaders who brutalize their women and children with forced abortions, and persecute Christians for their faith. Congress Lowering the Cost of Health Care 21 August 2006    Texas Straight Talk 21 August 2006 verse 3 ... Cached As a medical doctor, I’ve seen first-hand how bureaucratic red tape interferes with the doctor-patient relationship and drives costs higher. The current system of third-party payers takes decision-making away from doctors, leaving patients feeling rushed and worsening the quality of care. Yet health insurance premiums and drug costs keep rising. Clearly a new approach is needed. Congress needs to craft innovative legislation that makes health care more affordable without raising taxes or increasing the deficit. It also needs to repeal bad laws that keep health care costs higher than necessary. Congress Lowering the Cost of Health Care 21 August 2006    Texas Straight Talk 21 August 2006 verse 5 ... Cached While many in Congress are happy to criticize HMOs today, the public never hears how the present system was imposed upon the American people by federal law. As usual, government intervention in the private market failed to deliver the promised benefits and caused unintended consequences, but Congress never blames itself for the problems created by bad laws. Instead, we are told more government- in the form of “universal coverage”- is the answer. But government already is involved in roughly two-thirds of all health care spending, through Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs. Congress Lowering the Cost of Health Care 21 August 2006    Texas Straight Talk 21 August 2006 verse 8 ... Cached The following are bills Congress should pass to reduce health care costs and leave more money in the pockets of families: Congress A North American United Nations? 28 August 2006    Texas Straight Talk 28 August 2006 verse 5 ... Cached What is a "dialogue"? We don't know. What we do know, however, is that Congressional oversight of what might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is non-existent. Congress has had no role at all in a "dialogue" that many see as a plan for a North American union. Congress A North American United Nations? 28 August 2006    Texas Straight Talk 28 August 2006 verse 14 ... Cached This all adds up to not only more and bigger government, but to the establishment of an unelected mega-government. As the SPP website itself admits, "The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America represents a broad and ambitious agenda." I hope my colleagues in Congress and American citizens will join me in opposing any "broad and ambitious" effort to undermine the security and sovereignty of the United States. Congress Elected Officials Threaten Property Rights 04 September 2006    Texas Straight Talk 04 September 2006 verse 6 ... Cached The Kelo case demonstrates that local government can be as tyrannical as centralized government. Decentralized power is always preferable, of course, since it's easier to fight city hall than Congress. But government power is ever and always dangerous, and must be zealously guarded against. Most people in New London, Connecticut, like most people in America, would rather not involve themselves in politics. The reality is that politics involves itself with us whether we like it or not. We can bury our heads in the sand and hope things don't get too bad, or we can fight back when government treats us as its servant rather than its master. Congress Elected Officials Threaten Property Rights 04 September 2006    Texas Straight Talk 04 September 2006 verse 7 ... Cached Congress can and should act to prevent the federal government from seizing private property. I've introduced and cosponsored several bills that prohibit or severely limit the power of Washington agencies to seize private property in locations around the nation. But the primary fight against local eminent domain actions must take place at the local level. The people of New London, Connecticut, like the people of Texas, could start by removing from office local officials who have so little respect for property rights. Congress Immigration Reform in 2006? 11 September 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 September 2006 verse 3 ... Cached With the November elections looming, politics is taking priority over sensible policy. It appears congressional leaders have no intention of addressing the issue of illegal immigration this year, preferring not to tackle such a thorny problem for fear of angering voters one way or another. Congress Immigration Reform in 2006? 11 September 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 September 2006 verse 5 ... Cached Both the Bush administration and congressional leadership have promised to spend the next two months addressing national security issues. But real national security cannot be achieved unless and until our borders are physically secured. It’s as simple as that. All the talk about fighting terror and making America safer is meaningless without border security. It makes no sense to seek terrorists abroad if our own front door is left unlocked. Congress Immigration Reform in 2006? 11 September 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 September 2006 verse 6 ... Cached Although the border security bill already passed by the House is a good start, Congress needs to pass broader legislation this year based on the following simple points: Congress Immigration Reform in 2006? 11 September 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 September 2006 verse 9 ... Cached Third, reject amnesty. If we reward lawbreakers who enter this country illegally with citizenship, then any new laws Congress might pass likewise can be ignored. Reform must begin with a new mentality that immigration laws will be enforced. Congress Amnesty and the Welfare State 18 September 2006    Texas Straight Talk 18 September 2006 verse 3 ... Cached Last week I spoke about simple steps Congress should take to address the problem of illegal immigration. Simple, however, does not mean easy. While the American people are demanding real immigration reform, many in Washington lack the political will to do what is required. Congress Amnesty and the Welfare State 18 September 2006    Texas Straight Talk 18 September 2006 verse 4 ... Cached That’s why I’ve joined my colleagues in the House Immigration Reform caucus in demanding legislation this year that focuses on securing physical control of our borders while rejecting amnesty in any form. Congress has taken notice, and took an important first step last week by passing the Secure Fence Act of 2006-- legislation that provides physical security by lengthening border walls and creating a virtual border fence that extends thousands of miles. Congress Amnesty and the Welfare State 18 September 2006    Texas Straight Talk 18 September 2006 verse 5 ... Cached But many Senators, Representatives, and administration officials remain committed to pursuing amnesty in some form. The dictionary defines amnesty as a general pardon for offenders by a government, and most of the immigration reform proposals in both chambers of Congress certainly meet that definition. Millions of people who broke the law by entering, staying, and working in our country will not be punished, but rather rewarded with a visa and ultimately citizenship. This is amnesty, plain and simple. Lawbreakers are given legal status, while those seeking to immigrate legally face years of paperwork and long waits for a visa. Congress Deficit Spending and Social Security 09 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 09 October 2006 verse 4 ... Cached Still, the problem seems vague and faraway for most. Today’s seniors hope the system will hold together for the remainder of their lives, while younger working people hope government will somehow fix things before they retire. Not surprisingly, Congress doesn’t want to face the problem until it becomes an acute crisis. It’s hard to sell voters on austerity today to avoid a relatively distant problem. Politicians usually operate on the opposite principle, by promising great things now and leaving the bills for others to pay later. Congress Deficit Spending and Social Security 09 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 09 October 2006 verse 5 ... Cached The only honest solution to the future insolvency of Social Security is for Congress to stop spending so much money. When Congress outspends federal revenues, it raids Social Security funds to cover the difference. Unless Congress makes real cuts in spending-- and stops spending Social Security taxes on completely unrelated programs-- millions of Americans simply will not receive even a fraction of the money they paid into Social Security. Ignore the rhetoric about tax increases and cuts in benefits, as though you are to blame for the problem! All Social Security obligations could be met if Congress did not spend so much on other things. Congress Deficit Spending and Social Security 09 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 09 October 2006 verse 6 ... Cached Congress can begin addressing the problem immediately by cutting at least 5% from other areas of the federal budget every year for the next five years. The budget has nearly tripled just since 1990; surely Congress can find 5% worth of fat to cut each year. When members of Congress vote for bigger and bigger appropriations bills each year, they threaten the very solvency of Social Security. That's why I vote against every wasteful appropriations bill. Congress Deficit Spending and Social Security 09 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 09 October 2006 verse 7 ... Cached Social Security contributions are supposed to be set aside from general revenues and placed in a trust fund. The truth, of course, is that your contributions are not put aside. Over the decades Congress found itself simply unable to sit on a big pile of money, so it began treating Social Security contributions as general revenues to fund the ever-growing federal government. Today your Social Security account is nothing more than a ledger filled with IOUs. Congress Deficit Spending and Social Security 09 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 09 October 2006 verse 8 ... Cached I introduced legislation to end this terrible practice. Under my bill, HR 219, your Social Security contributions are set aside in an interest-bearing account and cannot be spent. In other words, your Social Security account would be treated as YOUR account and not a slush fund for Congress. This is the simplest approach to Social Security reform, and it has the added benefit of making it harder for Congress and the administration to mask the deficit spending that is the real cause of our problems. Congress Taxes, Spending, and Debt are the Real Issues 16 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 16 October 2006 verse 3 ... Cached In Washington we hear a lot of talk about tax cuts, but the rhetoric does not always match the reality. For most Americans, taxes remain too complex and too high. After the tumult of the upcoming midterm election, it is imperative that Congress gets back to basics and addresses our terrible tax system. Congress Taxes, Spending, and Debt are the Real Issues 16 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 16 October 2006 verse 6 ... Cached I apply a very simple test to any proposal to overhaul the tax code: Does it reduce or eliminate an existing tax? If not, then it amounts to nothing more than a political shell game that pits taxpayers against each other in a lobbying scramble to make sure the other guy pays. True tax reform is as simple as cutting or eliminating taxes. No studies, panels, committees, or hearings are needed. When reform proposals seem complicated, they almost certainly don’t cut taxes. Congress should simply focus on cutting existing taxes and reducing spending, instead of complicated overhauls of the system. Congress Taxes, Spending, and Debt are the Real Issues 16 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 16 October 2006 verse 8 ... Cached Tax relief is important, but members of Congress need to back up tax cuts with spending cuts- and they need to vote NO on every wasteful appropriations bill until we start over with the federal budget. True fiscal conservatism combines both low taxes and low spending. Congress Taxes, Spending, and Debt are the Real Issues 16 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 16 October 2006 verse 9 ... Cached Cutting spending would not be hard if Congress simply showed the political will to tackle the problem. I’m not talking about cutting the rate at which government spending grows, but cutting the actual amount of money spent by the federal government in a single year. Congress Taxes, Spending, and Debt are the Real Issues 16 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 16 October 2006 verse 10 ... Cached If federal spending grows at 5% rather than 7% one year, that’s hardly a great achievement on the part of Congress. The current federal budget of around $2.7 trillion could be cut to $2.5 trillion quite easily. The vast majority of Americans would not even notice. But we must begin chipping away at the federal budget if we hope to address the underlying problem of government debt. Congress Do Tax Cuts Cost the Government Money? 23 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 23 October 2006 verse 3 ... Cached Whenever tax cuts are discussed in Washington, the media and most politicians use the phrase, “cost to government.” “How much will this tax cut cost the government?” we are asked, as though some crime is being contemplated when we consider reducing taxes. The American people have every right to fund the federal government at whatever level they deem acceptable, and if they choose-- through their elected representatives-- to reduce that funding level, they are not somehow injuring the government. If Congresses passes a new law that results in you paying $1000 less in taxes next year, have you taken something from the government that rightfully belongs to it? Or has the government simply taken less from you? Congress Do Tax Cuts Cost the Government Money? 23 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 23 October 2006 verse 7 ... Cached Tax reduction is my first priority in Congress. The reality is that most working Americans lose about half of their incomes to federal, state, and local taxes. “Tax Freedom Day,” representing the portion of the year you must work to pay for government at all levels, is roughly June 1st for most Americans. Imagine all of your hard work this year between January and the end of May going to the government! Congress The NAFTA Superhighway 30 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2006 verse 3 ... Cached By now many Texans have heard about the proposed “NAFTA Superhighway,” which is also referred to as the trans-Texas corridor. What you may not know is the extent to which plans for such a superhighway are moving forward without congressional oversight or media attention. Congress The NAFTA Superhighway 30 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2006 verse 6 ... Cached Governor Perry is a supporter of the superhighway project, and Congress has provided small amounts of money to study the proposal. Since this money was just one item in an enormous transportation appropriations bill, however, most members of Congress were not aware of it. Congress The NAFTA Superhighway 30 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2006 verse 9 ... Cached The SPP was not created by a treaty between the nations involved, nor was Congress involved in any way. Instead, the SPP is an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments. One principal player is a Spanish construction company, which plans to build the highway and operate it as a toll road. But don’t be fooled: the superhighway proposal is not the result of free market demand, but rather an extension of government-managed trade schemes like NAFTA that benefit politically-connected interests. Congress The NAFTA Superhighway 30 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2006 verse 10 ... Cached The real issue is national sovereignty. Once again, decisions that affect millions of Americans are not being made by those Americans themselves, or even by their elected representatives in Congress. Instead, a handful of elites use their government connections to bypass national legislatures and ignore our Constitution-- which expressly grants Congress the sole authority to regulate international trade. Congress The NAFTA Superhighway 30 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2006 verse 12 ... Cached A new resolution, introduced by Representative Virgil Goode of Virginia, expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a NAFTA superhighway, or enter into any agreement that advances the concept of a North American Union. I wholeheartedly support this legislation, and predict that the superhighway will become a sleeper issue in the 2008 election. Congress The NAFTA Superhighway 30 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 30 October 2006 verse 13 ... Cached Any movement toward a North American Union diminishes the ability of average Americans to influence the laws under which they must live. The SPP agreement, including the plan for a major transnational superhighway through Texas, is moving forward without congressional oversight-- and that is an outrage. The administration needs a strong message from Congress that the American people will not tolerate backroom deals that threaten our sovereignty. Congress Demographic Reality and the Entitlement State 13 November 2006    Texas Straight Talk 13 November 2006 verse 3 ... Cached The Government Accountability Office, or GAO, is an investigative arm of Congress charged with the thankless task of accounting for the money received and spent by the federal government. As you might imagine, people who spend all day examining the nitty-gritty realities of federal spending and deficits might not share the voters' enthusiasm for grand campaign promises. Congress Demographic Reality and the Entitlement State 13 November 2006    Texas Straight Talk 13 November 2006 verse 9 ... Cached Are ever growing entitlement and military expenditures really consistent with a free country? Do these expenditures, and the resulting deficits, make us more free or less free? Should the government or the marketplace provide medical care? Should younger taxpayers be expected to provide retirement security and health care even for affluent retirees? Should the U.S. military be used to remake whole nations? Are the programs, agencies, and departments funded by Congress each year constitutional? Are they effective? Could they operate with a smaller budget? Would the public even notice if certain programs were eliminated altogether? These are the kinds of questions the American people must ask, even though Congress lacks the courage to do so. Congress Milton Friedman 1912-2006 20 November 2006    Texas Straight Talk 20 November 2006 verse 9 ... Cached We cannot suspend the laws of economics or the principles of human action any more than we can suspend the laws of physics. Yet this is precisely what Congress attempts to do time and time again, no matter how many times history proves them wrong or economists easily demonstrate the harms caused by a certain policy. The nation would be well-served if Congress spent more time reading the works of Milton Friedman, and less time worrying about petty party spoils. Congress Rethinking the Draft 27 November 2006    Texas Straight Talk 27 November 2006 verse 4 ... Cached Democratic Congressman Charles Rangel of New York, soon to be a powerful committee chair, has openly called for reinstating the Selective Service System. Retired Army General Barry McCaffrey claims that our ground forces in both Afghanistan and Iraq are stretched far too thin, and desperately need reinforcements. Meanwhile, other political and military leaders suggest that several hundred thousand additional troops might be needed simply to restore some semblance of order in Iraq. We are nearing the point where a choice will have to be made: either decrease our troop commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan significantly, or produce thousands of new military recruits quickly. So a discussion of military conscription is not purely academic. Congress Rethinking the Draft 27 November 2006    Texas Straight Talk 27 November 2006 verse 6 ... Cached So why is the idea of a draft even considered? One answer is that our military forces are spread far too thin, engaged in conflicts around the globe that are none of our business. With hundreds of thousands of troops stationed in literally hundreds of foreign nations, we simply don't have enough soldiers to invade and occupy every country labeled a threat or deemed ripe for regime change. Given the choice, many in Congress would rather draft more young bodies than rethink our role as world policeman and bring some of our troops home. Congress Monetary Inflation is the Problem 04 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 04 December 2006 verse 4 ... Cached This decline in the value of the dollar is simple to explain. The dollar loses value as the direct result of the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury increasing the money supply. Inflation, as the late Milton Friedman explained, is always a monetary phenomenon. The federal government consistently wants to spend more than it can tax and borrow, so Congress turns to the Fed for help in covering the difference. The result is more dollars, both real and electronic-- which means the value of every existing dollar goes down. Congress Who Makes Foreign Policy? 11 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 December 2006 verse 3 ... Cached The Iraq Study Group released its report last week, giving the president several recommendations to consider in prosecuting the war. Similarly, the incoming Democratic leaders in Congress promise to urge the President to take a new course in Iraq. Meanwhile, one newly elected member of Congress was asked on national television about the Iraq war. She responded by saying she had no real opinion, and that foreign policy was “up to the president.” Congress Who Makes Foreign Policy? 11 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 December 2006 verse 5 ... Cached The media, Congress, and the American public all seem to have accepted something that is patently untrue: namely, that foreign policy is the domain of the president and not Congress. This is absolutely not the case and directly contrary to what our founding fathers wanted. Congress Who Makes Foreign Policy? 11 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 December 2006 verse 6 ... Cached The role of the president as Commander in Chief is to direct our armed forces in carrying out policies established by the American people through their representatives in Congress. He is not authorized to make those policies. He is an administrator, not a policy maker. Foreign policy, like all federal policy, must be made by Congress. To allow otherwise is to act in contravention of the Constitution. Congress Who Makes Foreign Policy? 11 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 December 2006 verse 7 ... Cached Library of Congress scholar Louis Fisher, writing in The Oxford Companion to American Military History, summarizes presidential war power: Congress Who Makes Foreign Policy? 11 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 December 2006 verse 8 ... Cached The president's authority was carefully constrained. The power to repel sudden attacks represented an emergency measure that allowed the president, when Congress was not in session, to take actions necessary to repel sudden attacks either against the mainland of the United States or against American troops abroad. It did not authorize the president to take the country into full-scale war or mount an offensive attack against another nation. Congress Who Makes Foreign Policy? 11 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 December 2006 verse 9 ... Cached But it’s not simply the decision to wage war that is left to Congress. Consider also the words of James Madison: Congress Who Makes Foreign Policy? 11 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 December 2006 verse 11 ... Cached So Congress is charged not only with deciding when to go to war, but also how to conduct-- and bring to a conclusion-- properly declared wars. Of course the administration has some role to play in making treaties, and the State Department should pursue beneficial diplomacy. But the notion that presidents should establish our broader foreign policy is dangerous and wrong. No single individual should be entrusted with the awesome responsibility of deciding when to send our troops abroad, how to employ them once abroad, and when to bring them home. This is why the founders wanted Congress, the body most directly accountable to the public, to make critical decisions about war and peace. Congress Who Makes Foreign Policy? 11 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 11 December 2006 verse 12 ... Cached It is shameful that Congress ceded so much of its proper authority over foreign policy to successive presidents during the 20th century, especially when it failed to declare war in Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo, and Iraq. It’s puzzling that Congress is so willing to give away one of its most important powers, when most members from both parties work incessantly to expand the role of Congress in domestic matters. By transferring its role in foreign policy to the President, Congress not only violates the Constitution, but also disenfranchises the American electorate. Congress The Original Foreign Policy 18 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 18 December 2006 verse 5 ... Cached Last week I wrote about the critical need for Congress to reassert its authority over foreign policy, and for the American people to recognize that the Constitution makes no distinction between domestic and foreign matters. Policy is policy, and it must be made by the legislature and not the executive. Congress More of the Same in 2007 25 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 25 December 2006 verse 4 ... Cached The midterm congressional elections are over, and the Iraq Study Group report is complete. Many Americans are unhappy about the war and want a change in policy. But what we are going to get from both parties in Washington is more of the same-- much more-- when it comes to Iraq. Congress More of the Same in 2007 25 December 2006    Texas Straight Talk 25 December 2006 verse 11 ... Cached Anyone who voted for Democrats last month expecting a change in our Iraq policy was sorely mistaken. Incoming congressional leaders have publicly stated their support for increasing troop levels, and Democrats have no intention of pursuing any serious withdrawal plan in Congress. They will not withhold war funding. The war will plod on, and Democrats will call for more of the same. Congress The World's Reserve Currency 01 January 2007    Texas Straight Talk 01 January 2007 verse 6 ... Cached More importantly, our greatest benefactors for the last twenty years-- Asian central banks-- have lost their appetite for holding U.S. dollars. China, Japan, and Asia in general have been happy to hold U.S. debt instruments in recent decades, but they will not prop up our spending habits forever. Foreign central banks understand that American leaders do not have the discipline to maintain a stable currency. When the rest of the world finally abandons the dollar as the global reserve currency, both Congress and American consumers will find borrowing money a more expensive proposition. Congress The World's Reserve Currency 01 January 2007    Texas Straight Talk 01 January 2007 verse 8 ... Cached At some point Americans must realize that Congress, and the Federal Reserve system that permits the creation of new money by fiat, are the real culprits in the erosion of your personal savings and buying power. Congress relentlessly spends more than the Treasury collects in taxes each year, which means the U.S. government must either borrow or print money to operate-- both of which cause the value of the dollar to drop. When we borrow a billion dollars every day simply to run the government, and when the Federal Reserve increases the money supply by trillions of dollars in just 15 years, we hardly can expect our dollars to increase in value. Congress Totalization is a Bad Idea 08 January 2007    Texas Straight Talk 08 January 2007 verse 6 ... Cached It’s important to note that Congress, like the American people, heretofore had not seen this totalization agreement. This decision to expand our single largest entitlement program was made with no input from the legislative branch of government. If the president signs it, Congress will have to affirmatively act to override him and in essence veto the agreement. This is the opposite of how it’s supposed to work. Congress Totalization is a Bad Idea 08 January 2007    Texas Straight Talk 08 January 2007 verse 10 ... Cached Those in favor of sending U.S. Social Security benefits to Mexican citizens argue that crushing poverty in Mexico demands some form of U.S. assistance to that country's aged. While poverty in Mexico truly is deplorable and saddening, the fact remains that Congress has no constitutional authority to enact what is essentially another foreign aid program. Congress Can We Achieve Peace in the Middle East? 22 January 2007    Texas Straight Talk 22 January 2007 verse 7 ... Cached Congress and each successive administration pledge their political, financial, and military support for Israel. Yet while we call ourselves a strong ally of the Israeli people, we send billions in foreign aid every year to some Muslim states that many Israelis regard as enemies. From the Israeli point of view, many of the same Islamic nations we fund with our tax dollars want to destroy the Jewish state. Many average Israelis and American Jews see America as hypocritically hedging its bets. Congress Inflation and War Finance 29 January 2007    Texas Straight Talk 29 January 2007 verse 3 ... Cached The Pentagon recently reported that it now spends roughly $8.4 billion per month waging the war in Iraq, while the additional cost of our engagement in Afghanistan brings the monthly total to a staggering $10 billion. Since 2001, Congress has spent more than $500 billion on specific appropriations for Iraq. This sum is not reflected in official budget and deficit projections. Congress has funded the war by passing a series of so-called “supplemental” spending bills, which are passed outside of the normal appropriations process and thus deemed off-budget. Congress Inflation and War Finance 29 January 2007    Texas Straight Talk 29 January 2007 verse 4 ... Cached This is fundamentally dishonest: if we’re going to have a war, let’s face the costs-- both human and economic-- squarely. Congress has no business hiding the costs of war through accounting tricks. Congress Inflation and War Finance 29 January 2007    Texas Straight Talk 29 January 2007 verse 6 ... Cached Congress and the Federal Reserve Bank have a cozy, unspoken arrangement that makes war easier to finance. Congress has an insatiable appetite for new spending, but raising taxes is politically unpopular. The Federal Reserve, however, is happy to accommodate deficit spending by creating new money through the Treasury Department. In exchange, Congress leaves the Fed alone to operate free of pesky oversight and free of political scrutiny. Monetary policy is utterly ignored in Washington, even though the Federal Reserve system is a creation of Congress. Congress Inflation and War Finance 29 January 2007    Texas Straight Talk 29 January 2007 verse 10 ... Cached The $500 billion we’ve officially spent in Iraq is an enormous sum, but the real total is much higher, hidden within the Defense Department and foreign aid budgets. As we build permanent military bases and a $1 billion embassy in Iraq, we need to keep asking whether it’s really worth it. Congress should at least fund the war in an honest way so the American people can judge for themselves. Congress Political Power and the Rule of Law 05 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 05 February 2007 verse 3 ... Cached With the elections over and the 110th Congress settling in, the media have been reporting ad nauseam about who has assumed new political power in Washington. We're subjected to breathless reports about emerging power brokers in Congress; how so-and-so is now the powerful chair of an important committee; how certain candidates are amassing power for the 2008 elections, and so on. Nobody questions this use of the word "power," or considers its connotations. It's simply assumed, in Washington and the mainstream media, that political power is proper and inevitable. Congress Another Spending Bill for the War in Iraq 12 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 12 February 2007 verse 3 ... Cached Two weeks ago I discussed how Congress and the administration use our fiat money system to literally create some of the funds needed to prosecute our ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We’ve already spent more than $500 billion in Iraq, mostly through supplemental spending bills that are not part of the normal appropriations and budget process. But with costs soaring and no end to the war in sight, yet another supplemental spending bill must be passed soon—and both parties in Congress are only too willing to provide the money under the guise of supporting the troops. Congress Another Spending Bill for the War in Iraq 12 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 12 February 2007 verse 4 ... Cached Never mind that the American people showed their dissatisfaction with the war in the fall elections. Congress lacks the political will to stand up to the administration and assert its power over the purse strings, and too many vested interests in the defense sector benefit from the supplemental bills. A cynic might even suggest that many Democrats want the war to drag on, despite their supposed opposition, to damage the president politically and benefit them in 2008. But whatever the reason, the money for war keeps flowing. Congress Another Spending Bill for the War in Iraq 12 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 12 February 2007 verse 5 ... Cached Defense Department officials will ask Congress for the next supplemental bill in coming weeks. The amount requested is likely to be at least $140 billion. If we stay in Iraq beyond 2007--and the administration has made it clear that we will-- the bill to American taxpayers easily could top one trillion dollars in another year or two. Congress Another Spending Bill for the War in Iraq 12 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 12 February 2007 verse 6 ... Cached I doubt very seriously that most Americans think the war in Iraq is worth one trillion dollars. Even those who do must face the reality that the federal government simply doesn’t have the money. Congress continues to spend more than the Treasury raises in taxes year after year, by borrowing money abroad or simply printing it. Paying for war with credit is reckless and stupid, but paying for war by depreciating our currency is criminal. Congress Another Spending Bill for the War in Iraq 12 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 12 February 2007 verse 7 ... Cached Even the most modest suggestions for controlling spending in Iraq have been rejected. Some in Congress argued that reconstruction money should be paid back when Iraq’s huge oil reserves resume operation. Another idea was to find dollar-for-dollar offsets in the rest of the federal budget for every dollar spent in Iraq. But the administration adamantly opposed both ideas. Budget cuts are unpopular, and the profits from Iraqi oil will never compensate American taxpayers. Congress Another Spending Bill for the War in Iraq 12 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 12 February 2007 verse 9 ... Cached We have embarked on the most expensive nation-building experiment in history. We seek nothing less than to rebuild Iraq’s judicial system, financial system, legal system, transportation system, and political system from the top down-- all with hundreds of billion of US tax dollars. We will pay to provide job training for Iraqis; we will pay to secure Iraq’s borders; we will pay for housing, health care, social services, utilities, roads, schools, jails, and food in Iraq. In doing so, we will saddle future generations of Americans with billions in government debt. The question of whether Iraq is worth this much to us is one Congress should answer now-- by refusing another nickel for supplemental spending bills. Congress Monetary Policy is Critically Important 19 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 19 February 2007 verse 3 ... Cached Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke testifies twice every year before the congressional Financial Services committee, and I look forward to these opportunities to raise questions about monetary policy. I believe monetary policy is critically important yet overlooked in Washington. Money is the lifeblood of any economy, and control over a nation's currency means control over its economic well being. Fed bankers quite literally determine the value of our money, by controlling the supply of dollars and establishing interest rates. Their actions can make you richer or poorer overnight, in terms of the value of your savings and the buying power of your paycheck. So I urge all Americans to educate themselves about monetary policy, and better understand how a small group of unelected individuals at the Federal Reserve and Treasury department wield tremendous power over our lives. Congress Monetary Policy is Critically Important 19 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 19 February 2007 verse 5 ... Cached Transparency in monetary policy is a goal we should all support. I've often wondered why Congress so willingly has given up its prerogative over monetary policy. Astonishingly, Congress in essence has ceded total control over the value of our money to a secretive central bank. Congress Monetary Policy is Critically Important 19 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 19 February 2007 verse 6 ... Cached Congress, although not by law, essentially has given up all its oversight responsibility over the Federal Reserve. There are no true audits, and Congress knows nothing of the conversations, plans, and actions taken in concert with other central banks. We get less and less information regarding the money supply each year, especially now that M3 is no longer reported. Congress Monetary Policy is Critically Important 19 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 19 February 2007 verse 7 ... Cached The role the Fed plays in the President's secretive Working Group on Financial Markets goes unnoticed by members of Congress. The Federal Reserve shows no willingness to inform Congress voluntarily about how often the Working Group meets, what actions it takes that affect the financial markets, or why it takes those actions. Congress Monetary Policy is Critically Important 19 February 2007    Texas Straight Talk 19 February 2007 verse 12 ... Cached In 2006 dollars, the minimum wage was $9.50 before the 1971 breakdown of Bretton Woods. Today that dollar is worth $5.15. Congress congratulates itself for raising the minimum wage by mandate, but in reality it has lowered the minimum wage by allowing the Fed to devalue the dollar. We must consider how the growing inequalities created by our monetary system will lead to social discord. Congress The Coming Entitlement Meltdown 05 March 2007    Texas Straight Talk 05 March 2007 verse 4 ... Cached If you didn’t see the show, Mr. Walker’s theme was simple: government entitlement spending is like a runaway freight train headed straight at American taxpayers. He singled out the Medicare prescription drug bill, passed by Congress at the end of 2003, as “probably the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s.” Congress The Coming Entitlement Meltdown 05 March 2007    Texas Straight Talk 05 March 2007 verse 6 ... Cached The financial impact of the drug bill cannot be overstated. Government projections that the program would cost $400 billion over the next decade were a joke, as everyone in Congress knew even as they voted for the bill. The real cost will be at least $1 trillion in the first decade alone, and much more in following decades as the American population grows older. Congress The Coming Entitlement Meltdown 05 March 2007    Texas Straight Talk 05 March 2007 verse 11 ... Cached The answer to these critical financial realities is simple, but not easy: We must rethink the very role of government in our society. Anything less, any tinkering or “reform,” won’t cut it. A good start would be for Congress to repeal the Medicare prescription drug bill. Congress The DC Gun Ban 12 March 2007    Texas Straight Talk 12 March 2007 verse 4 ... Cached Of course we should not have too much faith in our federal courts to protect gun rights, considering they routinely rubber stamp egregious violations of the 1 st, 4th, and 5th Amendments, and allow Congress to legislate wildly outside the bounds of its enumerated powers. Furthermore, the DC case will be appealed to the Supreme Court with no guarantees. But it is very important nonetheless for a federal court only one step below the highest court in the land to recognize that gun rights adhere to the American people, not to government-sanctioned groups. Rights, by definition, are individual. "Group rights" is an oxymoron. Congress Don't Blame the Market for Housing Bubble 19 March 2007    Texas Straight Talk 19 March 2007 verse 4 ... Cached When the bubble finally bursts completely, millions of Americans will be looking for someone to blame. Look for Congress to hold hearings into subprime lending practices and “predatory” mortgages. We’ll hear a lot of grandstanding about how unscrupulous lenders took advantage of poor people, and how rampant speculation caused real estate markets around the country to overheat. It will be reminiscent of the Enron hearings, and the message will be explicitly or implicitly the same: free-market capitalism, left unchecked, leads to greed, fraud, and unethical if not illegal business practices. Congress Don't Blame the Market for Housing Bubble 19 March 2007    Texas Straight Talk 19 March 2007 verse 9 ... Cached Fed credit also distorts mortgage lending through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two government schemes created by Congress supposedly to help poor people. Fannie and Freddie enjoy an implicit guarantee of a bailout by the federal government if their loans default, and thus are insulated from market forces. This insulation spurred investors to make funds available to Fannie and Freddie that otherwise would have been invested in other securities or more productive endeavors, thereby fueling the housing boom. Congress More Funding for the War in Iraq 26 March 2007    Texas Straight Talk 26 March 2007 verse 7 ... Cached While I have been opposed to the war in Iraq from the beginning and do believe that there is a strong constitutional role for Congress when it comes to war, I could not support what appeared to be micro-management of the war in this bill. There is a distinction between the legitimate oversight role of Congress and attempts to meddle in the details of how the war is to be fought. The withdrawal and readiness benchmarks in this bill are in my view inappropriate. That is why the president has threatened to veto this bill. Congress More Funding for the War in Iraq 26 March 2007    Texas Straight Talk 26 March 2007 verse 8 ... Cached In the last Congress I co-sponsored legislation urging the president to come up with a plan to conclude our military activity in Iraq, but that legislation contained no date-specific deadlines to complete withdrawal. Congress More Funding for the War in Iraq 26 March 2007    Texas Straight Talk 26 March 2007 verse 9 ... Cached Once again Congress wants to have it both ways. Back in 2002, Congress passed the authorization for the president to attack Iraq if and when he saw fit. By ignoring the Constitution, which clearly requires a declaration of war, Congress could wash its hands of responsibility after the war began going badly by citing the ambiguity of its authorization. This time, House leaders want to appear to be opposing the war by including problematic benchmarks, but they include language to allow the president to waive these if he sees fit. Congress More Funding for the War in Iraq 26 March 2007    Texas Straight Talk 26 March 2007 verse 10 ... Cached To top it off, House leadership may have actually made war with Iran more likely. The bill originally contained language making it clear that the president would need congressional authorization before attacking Iran – as the Constitution requires. But this language was dropped after special interests demanded its removal. This move can reasonably be interpreted as de facto congressional authority for an attack on Iran. Let’s hope that does not happen. Congress The 2008 Federal Budget 02 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2007 verse 3 ... Cached The fiscal year 2008 budget, passed in the House of Representatives last week, is a monument to irresponsibility and profligacy. It shows that Congress remains oblivious to the economic troubles facing the nation, and that political expediency trumps all common sense in Washington. To the extent that proponents and supporters of these unsustainable budget increases continue to win reelection, it also shows that many Americans unfortunately continue to believe government can provide them with a free lunch. Congress The 2008 Federal Budget 02 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2007 verse 4 ... Cached To summarize, Congress proposes spending roughly $3 trillion in 2008. When I first came to Congress in 1976, the federal government spent only about $300 billion. So spending has increased tenfold in thirty years, and tripled just since 1990. Congress The 2008 Federal Budget 02 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2007 verse 6 ... Cached For those who thought a Democratic congress would end the war in Iraq, think again: their new budget proposes supplemental funds totaling about $150 billion in 2008 and $50 billion in 2009 for Iraq. This is in addition to the ordinary Department of Defense budget of more than $500 billion, which the Democrats propose increasing each year just like the Republicans. Congress The 2008 Federal Budget 02 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2007 verse 8 ... Cached My message to my colleagues is simple: If you claim to support smaller government, don’t introduce budgets that increase spending over the previous year. Can any fiscal conservative in Congress honestly believe that overall federal spending cannot be cut 25%? We could cut spending by two-thirds and still have a federal government as large as it was in 1990. Congress The 2008 Federal Budget 02 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2007 verse 9 ... Cached Congressional budgets essentially are meaningless documents, with no force of law beyond the coming fiscal year. Thus budget projections are nothing more than political posturing, designed to justify deficit spending in the near term by promising fiscal restraint in the future. But the time for thrift never seems to arrive: there is always some new domestic or foreign emergency that requires more spending than projected. Congress The 2008 Federal Budget 02 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2007 verse 10 ... Cached The only certainty when it comes to federal budgets is that Congress will spend every penny budgeted and more during the fiscal year in question. All projections about revenues, tax rates, and spending in the future are nothing more than empty promises. Congress will pay no attention whatsoever to the 2008 budget in coming years. Congress The Federal Reserve Monopoly over Money 09 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 09 April 2007 verse 3 ... Cached Recently I had the opportunity to question Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke when he appeared before the congressional Joint Economic committee. The topic that morning was the state of the American economy, and many of my colleagues raised questions about how the Fed might better "regulate" things to ease fears of an economic downturn. The tenor of my colleagues' questions suggested that Mr. Bernanke's job is nothing less than to run the U.S. economy, like some kind of Soviet central planner. Congress The Federal Reserve Monopoly over Money 09 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 09 April 2007 verse 4 ... Cached Certainly it’s true that Mr. Bernanke can drastically affect the economy at the drop of a hat, simply by making decisions about the money supply and interest rates. But why do members of Congress assume this is good? Why do we accept without objection that a small group of people on the Federal Reserve Board wields so much power over our economic well-being? Is centralized, monopoly control over our money even compatible with a supposedly free-market economy? Congress The Federal Reserve Monopoly over Money 09 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 09 April 2007 verse 5 ... Cached Few Americans give much thought to the Federal Reserve System or monetary policy in general. But even as they strive to earn a living, and hopefully save or invest for the future, Congress and the Federal Reserve Bank are working insidiously against them. Day by day, every dollar you have is being devalued. Congress The Federal Reserve Monopoly over Money 09 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 09 April 2007 verse 6 ... Cached The greatest threat facing America today is not terrorism, or foreign economic competition, or illegal immigration. The greatest threat facing America today is the disastrous fiscal policies of our own government, marked by shameless deficit spending and Federal Reserve currency devaluation. It is this one-two punch-- Congress spending more than it can tax or borrow, and the Fed printing money to make up the difference-- that threatens to impoverish us by further destroying the value of our dollars. Congress Government and Racism 16 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 16 April 2007 verse 5 ... Cached It’s also disconcerting to hear the subtle or not-so-subtle threats against free speech. Since the FCC regulates airwaves and grants broadcast licenses, we’re told it’s proper for government to forbid certain kinds of insulting or offensive speech in the name of racial and social tolerance. Never mind the 1st Amendment, which states unequivocally that, “Congress shall make NO law.” Congress Security and Liberty 23 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 23 April 2007 verse 7 ... Cached I fear that Congress will use this terrible event to push for more government mandated mental health programs. The therapeutic nanny state only encourages individuals to view themselves as victims, and reject personal responsibility for their actions. Certainly there are legitimate organic mental illnesses, but it is the role of doctors and families, not the government, to diagnose and treat such illnesses. Congress Getting Iraq War Funding Wrong Again 30 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 30 April 2007 verse 3 ... Cached This week, Congress finalized the controversial $124 billion Iraq emergency supplemental spending bill, with the House and Senate both voting in favor of final passage. The majority of my Republican colleagues and I voted against this measure, and the president has vowed to veto the legislation. Congress Getting Iraq War Funding Wrong Again 30 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 30 April 2007 verse 5 ... Cached As I wrote when this measure first came before the House, we have to make a clear distinction between the Constitutional authority of Congress to make foreign policy, and the Constitutional authority of the president, as commander in chief, to direct the management of any military operation. We do no favor to the troops by micromanaging the war from Capitol Hill while continuing to fund it beyond the president’s request. Congress Getting Iraq War Funding Wrong Again 30 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 30 April 2007 verse 7 ... Cached What is the best way forward in Iraq? Where do we go from here? First, Congress should admit its mistake in unconstitutionally transferring war power to the president and in citing United Nations resolutions as justification for war against Iraq. We should never go to war because another nation has violated a United Nations resolution. Then we should repeal the authority given to the president in 2002 and disavow presidential discretion in starting wars. Then we should start bringing our troops home in the safest manner possible. Congress Getting Iraq War Funding Wrong Again 30 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 30 April 2007 verse 8 ... Cached Though many will criticize the president for mis-steps in Iraq and at home, it is with the willing participation of Congress, through measures like this war funding bill, that our policy continues to veer off course. Additionally, it is with the complicity of Congress that we have become a nation of pre-emptive war, secret military tribunals, torture, rejection of habeas corpus, warrantless searches, undue government secrecy, extraordinary renditions, and uncontrolled spying on the American people. Fighting over there has nothing to do with preserving freedoms here at home. More likely the opposite is true. Congress Unconstitutional Legislation Threatens Freedoms 07 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 07 May 2007 verse 6 ... Cached HR 1592 could lead to federal censorship of religious or political speech on the grounds that the speech incites hate. Hate crime laws have been used to silence free speech and even the free exercise of religion. For example, a Pennsylvania hate crime law has been used to prosecute peaceful religious demonstrators on the grounds that their public Bible readings could incite violence. One of HR 1592’s supporters admitted that this legislation could allow the government to silence a preacher if one of the preacher’s parishioners commits a hate crime. More evidence that hate crime laws lead to censorship came recently when one member of Congress suggested that the Federal Communications Commission ban hate speech from the airwaves. Congress Security Washington-Style 14 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2007 verse 3 ... Cached Congress voted this past week to authorize nearly $40 billion for the Homeland Security Department, but the result will likely continue to be more bureaucracy and less security for Americans. Congress Security Washington-Style 14 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2007 verse 4 ... Cached Five years into this new Department, Congress still cannot agree on how to handle the mega-bureaucracy it created, which means there has been no effective oversight of the department. While Congress remains in disarray over how to fund and oversee the department, we can only wonder whether we are more vulnerable than we were before Homeland Security was created. Congress Security Washington-Style 14 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2007 verse 6 ... Cached When Congress voted to create the Homeland Security Department, I strongly urged that -- at the least -- FEMA and the Coast Guard should remain independent entities outside the Department. Our Coast Guard has an important mission -- to protect us from external threats -- and in my view it is dangerous to experiment with re-arranging the deck chairs when the United States is vulnerable to attack. As I said at the time, “the Coast Guard and its mission are very important to the Texas Gulf coast, and I don’t want that mission relegated to the back burner in a huge bureaucracy." Congress Fixing What's Wrong With Iraq 21 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 21 May 2007 verse 3 ... Cached Many of my colleagues, faced with the reality that the war in Iraq is not going well, line up to place all the blame on the president. The president “mismanaged” the war, they say. “It’s all the president’s fault,” they claim. In reality, much of the blame should rest with Congress, which shirked its constitutional duty to declare war and instead told the president to decide for himself whether or not to go to war. Congress Fixing What's Wrong With Iraq 21 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 21 May 2007 verse 4 ... Cached More than four years into that war, Congress continues to avoid its constitutional responsibility to exercise policy oversight, particularly considering the fact that the original authorization no longer reflects the reality on the ground in Iraq . Congress Fixing What's Wrong With Iraq 21 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 21 May 2007 verse 10 ... Cached With both objectives of the original authorization completely satisfied, what is the legal ground for our continued involvement in Iraq ? Why has Congress not stepped up to the plate and revisited the original authorization? Congress Fixing What's Wrong With Iraq 21 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 21 May 2007 verse 11 ... Cached This week I plan to introduce legislation that will add a sunset clause to the original authorization (Public Law 107-243) six months after passage. This is designed to give Congress ample time between passage and enactment to craft another authorization or to update the existing one. With the original objectives fulfilled, Congress has a legal obligation to do so. Congress also has a moral obligation to our troops to provide relevant and coherent policy objectives in Iraq . Congress Fixing What's Wrong With Iraq 21 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 21 May 2007 verse 12 ... Cached Unlike other proposals, this bill does not criticize the president’s handling of the war. This bill does not cut off funds for the troops. This bill does not set a timetable for withdrawal. Instead, it recognizes that our military has achieved the objectives as they were spelled out in law and demands that Congress live up to its constitutional obligation to provide oversight. I am hopeful that this legislation will enjoy broad support among those who favor continuing or expanding the war as well as those who favor ending the war. We need to consider anew the authority for Iraq and we need to do it sooner rather than later. Congress Immigration ‘Compromise’ Sells Out Our Sovereignty 25 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 25 May 2007 verse 7 ... Cached Additionally, one of the most absurd incentives for people to come to the US illegally is the promise of instant US citizenship to anyone born on our soil. That is why when Congress returns next week I will be re-introducing my Constitutional amendment to deny automatic citizenship to individuals born on US soil to parents who are not US citizens or who do not owe permanent allegiance to the United States . Congress Immigration ‘Compromise’ Sells Out Our Sovereignty 25 May 2007    Texas Straight Talk 25 May 2007 verse 8 ... Cached There are many other very troubling items buried deep in the Senate’s immigration compromise. The bill explicitly calls for an “acceleration” of the March 2005 agreement between the US president, the president of Mexico , and the prime minister of Canada , known as the “Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America .” This somewhat secretive agreement – a treaty in all but name – aims to erase the borders between the United States , Canada , and Mexico and threatens our sovereignty and national security. The SPP was agreed by the president without the participation of Congress. It should be eliminated, not accelerated! Congress The Price of Delaying the Inevitable in Iraq 04 June 2007    Texas Straight Talk 04 June 2007 verse 8 ... Cached Those in Congress who have heard the cry of the electorate to end the war refuse to do so out of fear, the demagogues will challenge their patriotism and support of the troops so nothing happens except more of the same. The result is continued stalemate with the current policy and the daily sacrifice of American lives. Congress Amnesty Opponents Are Not Un-American 11 June 2007    Texas Straight Talk 11 June 2007 verse 4 ... Cached Supporters of the amnesty bill like to claim that border protection is their first priority. But if enforcement of our borders is the highest priority, certainly a much shorter bill could have been written. Even better, why not enforce existing laws? According to our Constitution, Congress makes the laws that the executive branch is to enforce. The rush to pass this new law seems to obfuscate this simple fact. There are plenty of laws already in place, so it seems sensible to largely solve this problem without new laws. Congress Earmark Victory May Be A Hollow One 18 June 2007    Texas Straight Talk 18 June 2007 verse 4 ... Cached Though much attention is focused on the notorious abuses of earmarking, and there are plenty of examples, in fact even if all earmarks were eliminated we would not necessary save a single penny in the federal budget. Because earmarks are funded from spending levels that have been determined before a single earmark is agreed to, with or without earmarks the spending levels remain the same. Eliminating earmarks designated by Members of Congress would simply transfer the funding decision process to federal bureaucrats rather then elected representatives. In an already flawed system, earmarks can at least allow residents of Congressional districts to have a greater role in allocating federal funds - their tax dollars - than if the money is allocated behind locked doors by bureaucrats. So we can be critical of the abuses in the current system but we shouldn't lose sight of how some reforms may not actually make the system much better. Congress Rights of Taxpayers is Missing Element in Stem Cell Debate 25 June 2007    Texas Straight Talk 25 June 2007 verse 4 ... Cached The debate in Washington has again turned to federal funding of stem cell research, with President Bush moving to veto legislation passed recently by Congress. Those engaged in this debate tend to split into warring camps claiming exclusive moral authority to decide the issue once and for all. Congress Rights of Taxpayers is Missing Element in Stem Cell Debate 25 June 2007    Texas Straight Talk 25 June 2007 verse 9 ... Cached If Congress attempts to override the President’s veto, I will support the President. As a physician, I am well aware that certain stem cells have significant medical potential and do not raise the moral dilemmas presented by embryonic stem cell research. My objection is focused on the issue of federal funding. Unfortunately, in the Washington environment of “either subsidize it, or else ban it,” it is unlikely there will be much focus given to the issue of federal funding. Instead, virulent charges will fly regarding who is willing to sacrifice the lives and health of others to make a political point. Congress Signing Statements Erode Constitutional Balance 09 July 2007    Texas Straight Talk 09 July 2007 verse 8 ... Cached In modern Washington nothing is more misunderstood, and less appreciated, than the genius of republicanism. Presidents issue signing statements that effectively “approve in part and reject in part,” laws of the land—even though there is no constitutional provision for such a process. In addition, Congress cedes its powers at the crucial moment when a decision on whether or not a war is to be fought will be made, only to then criticize the effort it could have used its powers to stop. Congress Signing Statements Erode Constitutional Balance 09 July 2007    Texas Straight Talk 09 July 2007 verse 10 ... Cached Concerns with signing statements ought to include a concern for the health of our constitutional republic, it ought not to be based upon the political battle of the day. Regardless of whether the President is named Bush or Clinton, and without respect to any particular political interest, we in Congress need to fulfill our oath of office and protect and defend the constitution and our republic. Our constituents deserve no less, and should demand it of all of us. Congress Globalism 16 July 2007    Texas Straight Talk 16 July 2007 verse 3 ... Cached The recent defeat of the amnesty bill in the Senate came after outraged Americans made it clear to the political elite that they would not tolerate this legislation, which would further erode our national sovereignty. Similarly, polls increasingly show the unpopularity of the Iraq war, as well as of the Congress that seems incapable of ending it. Congress As Recess Begins, Spending Spree Continues 06 August 2007    Texas Straight Talk 06 August 2007 verse 3 ... Cached These last few weeks the House has been in a rush to pass spending bills before August recess. In fact, visitors walking the hallways of Congress become immediately struck by the apparent spending battle between the “conservative Democrats” of the so-called “Blue Dog Coalition,” and the Republican Study Committee, or RSC, generally representing the more conservative bloc of Republican House members. Members of each of these groups place large posters on easels outside their offices. The purpose behind this seems clear, to point the finger at the opposite party for the current budget mess that continues to threaten America’s future. Congress As Recess Begins, Spending Spree Continues 06 August 2007    Texas Straight Talk 06 August 2007 verse 4 ... Cached When Republicans had control of the Presidency and both houses of Congress, very little was done to stem the tide of federal spending. In fact, spending increased every year over the past decade. New programs such as “No Child Left Behind,” and entitlements like the Prescription Drug Benefit, were added at great cost to federal taxpayers. Congress As Recess Begins, Spending Spree Continues 06 August 2007    Texas Straight Talk 06 August 2007 verse 6 ... Cached While both sides continue attempting to score political points, the country goes further and further into debt, because neither side is really willing to make the tough decisions necessary to halt the run away train of federal spending. Several Republicans go to the House floor with amendments to stop spending directed by Congress, often seeking to cut projects that total $100,000 or less. While it is true that hundreds of thousands can and do add up, the same people who argue for these spending cuts think nothing of spending billions more in Iraq. At the same time, basically every spending bill that comes to the House Floor would have the majority spend more, even over and above the increases requested by the Administration. Congress As Recess Begins, Spending Spree Continues 06 August 2007    Texas Straight Talk 06 August 2007 verse 7 ... Cached Current arguments over spending really have no connection to the idea of the overall reduction in the size and scope of government. The Democrats who argue that tax cuts are a form of spending are just as misleading as the Republicans who say they can make a serious dent by changing congressionally directed spending into administration directed spending. Congress Surrender Should Not be an Option 02 September 2007    Texas Straight Talk 02 September 2007 verse 5 ... Cached The best congressional leadership can come up with is the concept of strategic redeployment, or moving our troops around, possibly into Saudi Arabia or even, alarmingly enough, into Iran. Rather than ending this war, we could be starting another one. Congress The Sunlight Rule 16 September 2007    Texas Straight Talk 16 September 2007 verse 6 ... Cached This has long been a concern of mine, and for this reason I have reintroduced The Sunlight Rule. (H.RES 63) This proposed rule stipulates that no piece of legislation can be brought before the House of Representatives for a vote unless it has been available to members and staff to read for at least ten days. Any amendments must be available for at least 72 hours before a vote. The Sunlight Rule provides the American people the opportunity to be involved in enforcing congressional rules by allowing citizens to move for censure of any Representative who votes for a bill brought to the floor in violation of this act. Congress The Sunlight Rule 16 September 2007    Texas Straight Talk 16 September 2007 verse 7 ... Cached So far I have two co-sponsors. It is my belief that this simple new rule could greatly disinfect the House of the creeping, insidious growth, merely by shining the light on legislation before it is voted on. We need time to think before we enact. The American people deserve at least this much from their Congress. Congress The Money Has to Come From Somewhere 23 September 2007    Texas Straight Talk 23 September 2007 verse 3 ... Cached The Fed does not act in a vacuum. Mr. Greenspan rightly criticizes Congress and the administration for abandoning principles of fiscal responsibility. However, monetary policy at the Fed did nothing solve money problems, but merely delayed impending crises by creating bubbles. Congress Congressional Control of Health Care is Dangerous to Children 30 September 2007    Texas Straight Talk 30 September 2007 verse 1 ... Cached Congressional Control of Health Care is Dangerous for Children Congress Congressional Control of Health Care is Dangerous to Children 30 September 2007    Texas Straight Talk 30 September 2007 verse 2 ... Cached This week Congress is again grasping for more control over the health of American children with the expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Parents who think federally subsidized health care might be a good idea should be careful what they wish for. Congress Keeping Promises to Seniors 07 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 07 October 2007 verse 2 ... Cached With our country's finances stretched thin, our credit limit fast approaching, and our currency inflated to the breaking point, there is no indication yet of any urgency on the part of Congress to rein in spending. The predictable answer to the government's voracious spending habits is this week’s proposal by some Democratic Congressional leaders for tax increases to pay for operations in Iraq . Here at home, however, there are promises our seniors heavily rely upon. We must keep these promises. Congress Keeping Promises to Seniors 07 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 07 October 2007 verse 7 ... Cached When that day of reckoning comes, there will no longer be “excess” payroll tax receipts available to prop up government spending, and the risk of financial crisis will be significant. Instead of forward thinking solutions, politicians are discussing alarming proposals, such as an agreement with Mexico to let their citizens collect social security money intended for our seniors. This would break the bank even sooner. But, current Members of Congress will no longer be in office to face the wrath of seniors and their families when the trust fund goes bankrupt. Instead, they will be retired and enjoying their own plush Congressional pensions. Congress Keeping Promises to Seniors 07 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 07 October 2007 verse 9 ... Cached Congress must take action now, so we can keep the promises we made to our seniors. Congress Taxing Ourselves to Death 14 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 14 October 2007 verse 2 ... Cached This past week, Congress had an opportunity to permanently repeal the death tax by amending the Tax Collection Responsibility Act of 2007 to include language that ends the estate tax forever. This would have been a good provision in an overall bad bill. 212 Democrats were enough to keep this spectre looming on the horizon if the Bush tax cuts are not renewed in 2011. The bill passed without this silver lining and now we face big in increases taxes and penalties in the next five years. Congress Taxing Ourselves to Death 14 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 14 October 2007 verse 4 ... Cached The basic tenets of the American dream are that through hard work and ingenuity, you can earn a better life for yourself, and you can give your children a better start than you had. Surveying American history this vision has played out through steady economic progress and growth from one generation to the next. Our prosperity now is our reward for hard work and achievement in the past. Today we are the strongest economy in the world, and have much to be proud of, but Congress doesn’t seem to understand that we did not tax our way here. Congress Taxing Ourselves to Death 14 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 14 October 2007 verse 7 ... Cached Other anti-property rights provisions in the Tax Collection Responsibility Act make desperate last attempts to extract the most amount of revenue possible from expatriots on their way out the door. A telling signal that a country is taxing itself to death is capital flight and expatriation. When successful Americans no longer feel their property is secure from government thieves, and they have too much to lose by staying, they vote with their feet and go elsewhere. This country is poorer for the loss of that citizen’s investment here, but it is their right to keep and enjoy what they have built up. How dare Congress or the IRS try to deny them that? And what message does that send to the next generation of young entrepreneurs? Congress Interventionism? Isolationism? Actually, Both. 21 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 21 October 2007 verse 4 ... Cached The House has passed similar resolutions for years, praising some foreign countries or political groups while chastising others. It is my policy to vote against resolutions of this sort whenever they have the impact of placing our country in the middle of an internal political problem of some other nation, or involving us in some regional conflict. In fact, this is almost always the specific intent of resolutions of this sort. Often, I am the only Member of Congress to vote against these resolutions. Congress Interventionism? Isolationism? Actually, Both. 21 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 21 October 2007 verse 5 ... Cached Some have questioned these votes, arguing that they are meaningless statements of opinion. However, I have always been more skeptical, and careful, about voting for these measures. Last week’s reaction by Turkey , a long term ally and NATO member, shows that Congress should be a lot more restrained in sticking our government’s nose into the affairs of other nations. Congress Interventionism? Isolationism? Actually, Both. 21 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 21 October 2007 verse 8 ... Cached In this instance, the problem is that many of my colleagues in Congress are more interested in seeking to score political points and proclaim their moral superiority, instead of worrying about our nation’s best interests. Also, in most of these situations, those who oppose the resolution regarding Turkey all-too-often fail to realize that similar resolutions dealing with other nations have the exact same effect. Namely, they isolate our country from the rest of the world. Congress Interventionism? Isolationism? Actually, Both. 21 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 21 October 2007 verse 9 ... Cached Even if other countries do not take the rather extreme step of recalling their ambassador, this kind of meddling by Congressional resolution almost always serves to offend governments and political leaders in other counties. Congress Interventionism? Isolationism? Actually, Both. 21 October 2007    Texas Straight Talk 21 October 2007 verse 10 ... Cached Last week’s events make clear that Congress, and our foreign policy establishment, must reconsider the entire policy of interventionism if we are to avoid further isolation of our nation. Congress Tax Reform Promises Treats, Delivers Tricks 04 November 2007    Texas Straight Talk 04 November 2007 verse 4 ... Cached Rangel's plan boasts loudly about repealing the AMT, but under the Democrats’ pay-as-you-go rules, actual tax cuts are not allowed. Congress must replace any tax revenue reduction with an increase somewhere else, and of course, there are no rules preventing tax hikes. Thus, a new 4% surtax on incomes over $150,000 for singles and $200,000 for couples is proposed to "pay for" the estimated lost revenue. This simultaneously raises $36 billion MORE than simply leaving the AMT alone, and creates a huge new marriage penalty tax. It won't be long before $150,000 is an average income, and middle class taxpayers will again face the situation we see coming today from inflation and the AMT. Overall, the Rangel tax plan is estimated to increase taxes by $3.5 trillion over the next 10 years. Congress Tax Reform Promises Treats, Delivers Tricks 04 November 2007    Texas Straight Talk 04 November 2007 verse 5 ... Cached With the leadership in Congress calling for this massive tax hike, spending levels promising to absorb all that and then some (thanks to our ambitiously misguided foreign policy), as well as the Federal Reserve's again cheapening the dollar, American taxpayers are wondering where their purchasing power went. We are working harder than ever before, as our standard of living falls. Congress Tax Reform Promises Treats, Delivers Tricks 04 November 2007    Texas Straight Talk 04 November 2007 verse 8 ... Cached But this message is not getting through to the leadership of Congress. Congress has ensnared itself in rules so that the only changes in tax policy allowed are increases, while the administration is obsessed with spending, especially spending us into oblivion by spreading this dead-end war when we should be coming home. Congress Tax Reform Promises Treats, Delivers Tricks 04 November 2007    Texas Straight Talk 04 November 2007 verse 9 ... Cached If Washington can only do wrong, then let’s hope for gridlock, until a more sensible Congress is in office. Sometimes a do-nothing Congress is a lot better than the alternative. Congress The True Cost of Taxing and Spending 18 November 2007    Texas Straight Talk 18 November 2007 verse 2 ... Cached Congressman Charlie Rangel recently unveiled a tax plan that Republicans estimate would raise taxes by $3.5 trillion over 10 years. Democrats questioned the math. Congress The True Cost of Taxing and Spending 18 November 2007    Texas Straight Talk 18 November 2007 verse 9 ... Cached Tax and spend policies create needs they can never satisfy. A government check does not make up for a lost job. Americans do not want more of this. Americans believe in hard work and self-sufficiency, not standing in line for government hand-outs. We are supposed to be living in a land of opportunity, but opportunities fade fast if more tax and spend policies are enacted. The more Congress meddles in the economy, the bigger the problems get. Congress The True Cost of Taxing and Spending 18 November 2007    Texas Straight Talk 18 November 2007 verse 10 ... Cached Congress should not increase taxes by $3.5 trillion and the administration needs to end the occupation of Iraq with its costs of $3.5 trillion to taxpayers. Let the hardworking American taxpayers keep their money. Families need that $46,000 far more than government does. Congress Pain at the Pump 25 November 2007    Texas Straight Talk 25 November 2007 verse 6 ... Cached Much of government intervention in the oil industry in the past has been counter-productive and has resulted in disastrous unintended consequences. This Thanksgiving, I am grateful for every mile Americans can still afford to travel to be with family. I am working hard in Congress to reverse the costly trend of government interference and return markets, including oil markets, to true economic freedom. Congress On Illegal Immigration and Border Security 02 December 2007    Texas Straight Talk 02 December 2007 verse 7 ... Cached The anger is understandable when it comes to illegal immigration and the problems with our borders. I will continue to fight in Congress for more effective ways to address these issues in keeping with the Constitutional mandate to protect America . Congress On the Omnibus Spending Bill 23 December 2007    Texas Straight Talk 23 December 2007 verse 2 ... Cached This week Congress finished work on its final spending package for the year. This "Omnibus" bill contains many of the spending bills that did not get passed throughout the year. Last minute changes made by the Senate mean President Bush is likely to sign the legislation into law. Congress On the Omnibus Spending Bill 23 December 2007    Texas Straight Talk 23 December 2007 verse 6 ... Cached How odd is it that while this legislation failed to pass, we are now earmarking hundreds of millions of dollars for bases in countries such as Bahrain and Qatar? Our policy is gone awry, is costing us billions here, and billions there, totaling trillions of dollars when added up. Yet the last key piece of legislation passed by Congress this year does absolutely nothing to even begin to address this problem. In fact, as I have suggested here, it only exaggerates the problem. Congress On the Omnibus Spending Bill 23 December 2007    Texas Straight Talk 23 December 2007 verse 11 ... Cached Despite the recent actions of Congress, I do hope everyone has a Merry Christmas and safe travels. Congress No Sunlight on the Omnibus 06 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 06 January 2008 verse 2 ... Cached One Christmas tradition Congress could do without is the broken process of passing the annual Omnibus Spending Bill, which we recently did right before the holiday recess. Congress No Sunlight on the Omnibus 06 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 06 January 2008 verse 3 ... Cached Every December Congress fights and argues over spending and never seems to be able to pass the necessary appropriations until the very last minute. There is panic and threats of government shut downs and reduction in essential services. And they always threaten the essential services, as if there is no waste they could possibly eliminate instead. This past December, right on cue the administration warned about dire civilian defense department layoffs if the money didn't come soon. Congress No Sunlight on the Omnibus 06 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 06 January 2008 verse 4 ... Cached And so at the very last minute the Omnibus was rushed through in a whirlwind, just in time to save the day. Members of Congress had less than 24 hours to read the nearly 3,500 page bill before a vote was taken. The bill was supposedly much too important to waste time reading it. Congress No Sunlight on the Omnibus 06 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 06 January 2008 verse 6 ... Cached However, we are led to believe that if the Omnibus bill failed, horrible things would have happened. But the situation is a setup that ensures our government spending balloons every year just as the elites and special interests dictate. The vast majority of Members of Congress don't actually know what the money is being spent on until after passage and by then it is too late. Congress No Sunlight on the Omnibus 06 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 06 January 2008 verse 7 ... Cached To address this flawed and corruptible process I have proposed a very simple change called the Sunlight Rule, which mandates that bills be presented to Congress and staff for review in their final form no less than 10 days before they come to the floor for a vote. This would allow the representatives of the American people time to read the bills before having to make a decision on them. Every now and then you hear criticisms of congressmen and women for not reading the bills. That is a problem, however in cases like the Omnibus spending bills, a few hours is not nearly enough time to comb through and evaluate the hundreds of pages they contain. The rules do not currently specify any amount of time that must be allotted for Congress to read or deliberate any legislation before a vote. That needs to change. Congress No Sunlight on the Omnibus 06 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 06 January 2008 verse 8 ... Cached Congress should read the bills. But to do that requires an appropriate amount of time. More appropriately phrased, Congress should be ALLOWED to read the bills. And no member of Congress should, in good conscience, vote affirmatively on a bill they haven't fully analyzed. Congress No Sunlight on the Omnibus 06 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 06 January 2008 verse 9 ... Cached I am hoping that in the New Year more of my colleagues will resolve to take a stand for honesty and due diligence in representing the people of this country and that we can enact the Sunlight Rule. With it, we will be a wiser, more open Congress and our decisions in Washington will be more deliberative and fully informed as they ought to be. Congress Legislative Forecast for 2008 13 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 13 January 2008 verse 2 ... Cached Congress is re-convening this coming week and I would like to take this opportunity to give my legislative forecast for the coming year. Here are a few things we can expect to see from Washington . Congress Legislative Forecast for 2008 13 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 13 January 2008 verse 6 ... Cached Last, I expect, in spite of rhetoric to the contrary, we will see more federal control of education as Congress prepares to reauthorize No Child Left Behind. Congress Legislative Forecast for 2008 13 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 13 January 2008 verse 7 ... Cached If this is indeed the agenda of Congress, let us hope that there is not nearly enough time to accomplish it all this year. Congress Constitutional Responses to Terrorism 20 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 20 January 2008 verse 2 ... Cached It has been over 6 years since the atrocities of September 11 were committed and there are still some very basic measures that need to be taken to bring the perpetrators to justice and make America safer. I have proposed legislation to help with these efforts and will continue to fight in Congress for the safety and security of the American people. Congress Economic Stimulus Concerns 27 January 2008    Texas Straight Talk 27 January 2008 verse 11 ... Cached Sending out checks and cutting interest rates yet again is merely a shot in the arm when in actuality, the economy needs major surgery. I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress to provide major tax relief to the American people. Congress Paving Paradise 03 February 2008    Texas Straight Talk 03 February 2008 verse 6 ... Cached From Washington I have voiced my staunch disapproval of taking these hard-working taxpayers’ land for a private toll road, by introducing legislation (HR 5191) that simply states, “No Federal funds appropriated or made available before, on, or after the date of enactment of this Act may be used by a unit of Federal, State, or local government to carry out the highway project known as the 'Trans-Texas Corridor'.” I am working hard in Congress to make sure that no Federal funding is used to undermine property rights in this way. Congress Second Amendment Battle in DC 10 February 2008    Texas Straight Talk 10 February 2008 verse 2 ... Cached As a United States Congressman, I take my oath to uphold all of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights very seriously. Unfortunately, too many in Washington DC believe they can pick-and-choose which provisions of the constitution they can uphold. For example, many politicians, judges, and bureaucrats believe they have the power to disregard our right to own guns, even though the second amendment explicitly guarantees the people's right to "keep and bear arms." Congress Second Amendment Battle in DC 10 February 2008    Texas Straight Talk 10 February 2008 verse 6 ... Cached This is why I have signed on to a brief headed by Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and signed by a majority of Congress asking the Supreme Court to uphold the lower court's decision and take a stand for stricter standards of constitutional review for gun laws. I am pleased to work with Senator Hutchison, and so many of my other colleagues, on this important issue. As a member of the Second Amendment Caucus, I will continue to work with those of my colleagues who support gun rights and grassroots activists to defend the Second Amendment Rights of Americans. Congress Taxes or Tolls on the TTC 24 February 2008    Texas Straight Talk 24 February 2008 verse 7 ... Cached Toll roads should not be paid for with taxpayer dollars, or even bond funding that pledge future tax dollars. Taxpayers should not have to pay additional fees for something they have already paid for. Eminent domain should absolutely not be used for private businesses. This public-private partnership has all the makings of the worst of both worlds. I am doing my part at the Federal level in Congress to limit the damage to the taxpayer. I introduced a bill in that prohibits the use of federal funding for any part of the TTC and I will continue to push for this bill, and other bills protecting property rights, taxpayers rights and our national sovereignty. The government should not fund and enforce private efforts like this and thumb their nose at land owners and taxpayers. Congress Hope for the Economy 02 March 2008    Texas Straight Talk 02 March 2008 verse 5 ... Cached I have many bills in Congress that address the high taxes Americans pay, but one in particular – my Tax-Free Tips Act – should be a no-brainer at a time like this. This legislation would exempt gratuities earned by service sector workers from income tax liability. A tip is a small gift and there is no contractual requirement to give it, yet if someone leaves a restaurant without tipping, the IRS will still estimate how much they should have been tipped and tax the waiter based on that, should they perform an audit. This is patently wrong. Congress Can Foreign Aid Save Africa? 09 March 2008    Texas Straight Talk 09 March 2008 verse 2 ... Cached Congress is poised to pass the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) authorizing up to $50 million in unconstitutional foreign aid. The bill passed out of the Foreign Affairs Committee with a bipartisan agreement to nearly double the President's requested amount. It is always distressing to see officials in our government reach across the aisle to disregard Constitutional limitations. Congress Can Foreign Aid Save Africa? 09 March 2008    Texas Straight Talk 09 March 2008 verse 7 ... Cached The energy that lobbying groups and celebrities expend for charitable causes here on the Hill could be better put to use actually addressing problems. It is sadly symptomatic of the trend toward bigger government that instead of private fundraising efforts, people put their hand out to Congress. It is unfortunate that some activists prefer funding taken by force, to donations freely given. Congress The Double Trouble of Taxation 20 April 2008    Texas Straight Talk 20 April 2008 verse 4 ... Cached Aside from the direct loss of money and productivity, the funds from the income tax enable the government to do some very destructive things, such as vastly over-regulating economic activity, making it difficult to earn money in the first place. The federal government funds over 50 agencies, departments and commissions that formulate rules and regulations. These bureaucracies operate with little to no oversight from the people or Congress and generate around 4,000 new rules every year and operate at a cost of about 40 billion dollars. There are some 75,000 pages of regulations in the Federal Register that Americans are expected to know and abide by. Complying with these governmental regulations costs American businesses more than one trillion dollars per year, according to a study by Mark Crain for the Small Business Administration. This complicated system drives production to other countries and shrinks our job market here at home. Congress Politicizing Pain 27 April 2008    Texas Straight Talk 27 April 2008 verse 7 ... Cached The Federal government should recognize that states have the authority to decide these issues. This affords all states the opportunity to see which policies are most beneficial. As a Congressman and a physician, I strongly advocate that healthcare decisions should be made by doctors and patients, not politicians or federal agents, which is why I am an original co-sponsor of the recently introduced “Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act” which would bar the Federal government from intervening in such doctor/patient relationships that violate no state law. Congress Big Government Responsible for High Gas Prices 04 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 04 May 2008 verse 3 ... Cached Instead of imposing further restraints on the market, Congress should consider reforming the federal policies that raise gas prices. For example, federal and state taxes can account for as much as a third of what consumers’ pay at the pump. The Federal Government’s boom-and-bust monetary policy also makes consumers vulnerable to inflation and to constant fluctuations in the prices of essential goods such as oil. It is no coincidence that oil prices first became an issue shortly after President Nixon unilaterally severed the dollar’s last link to gold. Congress Big Government Responsible for High Gas Prices 04 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 04 May 2008 verse 4 ... Cached Basic economics says that when government restricts the supply of a good, the price will increase. Yet Congress continues to reject simple measures that could increase the supply of oil. For example, Congress refuses to allow reasonable, environmentally sensitive, offshore drilling. Congress also refuses to remove the numerous regulatory hurdles that add to the prohibitively expensive task of constructing new refineries. Building a new refinery requires billions of dollars in capital investment. It can take several years just to obtain the necessary federal permits. Even after the permits are obtained, construction of a refinery may still be delayed or even halted by frivolous lawsuits. It is no wonder that there has not been a new refinery constructed in the United States since 1976. Congress Big Government Responsible for High Gas Prices 04 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 04 May 2008 verse 6 ... Cached The free market can meet the American people’s demand for a reliable supply of gasoline as long as government does not distort the market through excessive taxation and regulation. Therefore, Congress should lower prices gas prices by pursuing an agenda of low taxes, regulatory relief, and sound money by passing legislation such as my Affordable Gas Act. Congress Big Government Responsible for Housing Bubble 11 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 11 May 2008 verse 3 ... Cached However, many in Washington fail to realize it was government intervention that brought on the current economic malaise in the first place. The Federal Reserve’s artificially low interest rates created the loose, easy credit that ignited a voracious appetite in the banks for borrowers. People made these lending and buying decisions based on market conditions that were wildly manipulated by government. But part of sound financial management should be recognizing untenable or falsified economic conditions and adjusting risk accordingly. Many banks failed to do that and are now looking to taxpayers to pick up the pieces. This is wrong-headed and unfair, but Congress is attempting to do it anyway. Congress Big Government Responsible for Housing Bubble 11 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 11 May 2008 verse 5 ... Cached The solution is for government to stop micromanaging the economy and let the market adjust, as painful as that will be for some. We should not force taxpayers, including renters and more frugal homeowners, to switch places with the speculators and take on those same risks that bankrupted them. It is a terrible idea to spread the financial crisis any wider or deeper than it already is, and to prolong the agony years into the future. Socializing the losses now will only create more unintended consequences that will give new excuses for further government interventions in the future. This is how government grows - by claiming to correct the mistakes it earlier created, all the while constantly shaking down the taxpayer. The market needs a chance to correct itself, and Congress needs to avoid making the situation worse by pretending to ride to the rescue. Congress The Economy: Another Casualty of War 18 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 18 May 2008 verse 3 ... Cached The continued War in Iraq and the constant state of emergency has allowed Congress to use these so-called "emergency" bills as a vehicle to dramatically increase spending across the board--including spending that does not meet even the most generous definition of emergency. For example, the spending proposals currently being considered by Congress provide $210 million to the Census Bureau and $4 million for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. $4.6 billion is requested for the closing of military bases, but not any of the more than 700 bases overseas – but bases here at home! Another $387 million would go to various international organizations and $850 million more just in international food aid - all this when food prices are skyrocketing here and American families are having a hard time making ends meet. Because this spending will be part of "emergency" measures, it will not count against debt ceilings, or any spending limits set by Congressional budget resolutions, and does not have to be offset in any way. Congress The Economy: Another Casualty of War 18 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 18 May 2008 verse 5 ... Cached The bottom line is that our dollar is falling, the economy is in rough shape, and government spending is wildly out of control. Congress argues over relatively minor details, instead of dramatically changing our flawed foreign policy. We need to bring our troops home, not only from Iraq and Afghanistan , but from South Korea , Germany , and the other 138 countries where we have troops stationed. Our foreign policy of interventionism is not only offensive to others, inviting further terrorist attacks, but it is ruining our economy as we tax, borrow and print the money to pay the bills of our empire. The economy and ultimately the American people suffer because Washington is refusing to adopt more sensible and constitutional policies. Congress The Economy: Another Casualty of War 18 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 18 May 2008 verse 6 ... Cached Squabbling between those who favor increased welfare and those who favor increased warfare has giving the American people a temporary reprieve from having to bear the burden of yet another dramatic increase in government this week. However, as early as next week a compromise could be reached that expands both government warfare and welfare. As congressional approval ratings drop to 18% according to a recent Gallup poll, the American people are telegraphing that Congress is taking the country in the wrong direction. Our government must stop bankrupting the country so that we can get back on track to a peaceful, prosperous future. Congress Salute to Veterans 25 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 25 May 2008 verse 3 ... Cached Congress has considered several bills this past week that would affect veterans. Many of the measures are very positive. I applaud efforts to shore up health care for veterans, and make sure that veterans know about the services available to them. I strongly support improving educational opportunities for veterans. I also believe a pay raise is well-deserved, and long overdue for our men and women in uniform. These benefits constitute their pay for serving our country. Congress Salute to Veterans 25 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 25 May 2008 verse 4 ... Cached What I do not support is inserting immoral, unconstitutional provisions into veterans’ bills. For example, HR 6081 the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act, in addition to providing important tax benefits for soldiers, sends the IRS after civilians who move overseas. This method of funding is actually a slap in the face to our soldiers who vow to keep us free. Afterall, how free are we, if we are not really free to leave? Congress should not use the military as an excuse to behave tyrannically. Congress Salute to Veterans 25 May 2008    Texas Straight Talk 25 May 2008 verse 6 ... Cached This Memorial Day, I thank all our soldiers who have fought so bravely for our country. I will continue to work hard in Congress to ensure they are treated with dignity, and receive the compensations they have been promised and deserve. They have given their best for this nation, and we should respond in kind. Congress Sowing More Big Government with the Farm Bill 01 June 2008    Texas Straight Talk 01 June 2008 verse 2 ... Cached Recently Congress sent the latest Farm Bill to the president. The bill features brand new federal programs, expansion of existing subsidies, more food stamps and more foreign food aid. This bill hits the taxpayer hard, while at the same time ensuring food prices will remain elevated. The president vetoed the bill, citing concerns over its costs and subsidies for the wealthy in a time of high food prices and record farm income. Nevertheless, this over-reaching, government-expanding Farm Bill will soon be law. Congress Sowing More Big Government with the Farm Bill 01 June 2008    Texas Straight Talk 01 June 2008 verse 7 ... Cached Those who believe federal farm programs benefit independent farmers, should take note that after 70 years of this type of government intervention, small farms continue to struggle while large corporate farms control an ever-increasing share of the agricultural market. Subsidies for agribusiness should be stopped and the free market should be allowed to work. With commodity and food prices on the rise, Congress had an opportunity to scale down government controls and taxpayer funding of agriculture. Instead, despite the warning sent by an 18% approval rating, Congress stubbornly opted for more of the same. Congress Rising Energy Prices and the Falling Dollar 09 June 2008    Texas Straight Talk 09 June 2008 verse 5 ... Cached This is not the time for members of Congress to take political potshots at each other, or to imagine that the free market is somehow to blame. This is the time to understand and fix problems. That begins with making sure the decision makers have a firm grasp on the causes of the problems and possible effects of their decisions. This is absolutely crucial if we want to get it right this time. That is why I am in the process of calling for hearings on Capitol Hill on how the falling value of the dollar affects energy prices. 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. Home Page    Contents    Concordance   E-mail list.