U.S. Rep. Ron Paul | Homeland Security |
Homeland Security
Counter-Terrorism and Homeland Security
October 9, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 82:3
Most security, especially in a free society, is best carried out by individuals protecting their own property and their own lives. The Founders certainly understood this and is the main reason we have the Second amendment. We cannot have a policeman stationed in each of our homes to prevent burglaries, but owners of property with possession of a gun can easily do it. A new giant agency for Homeland Security cannot provide security but it can severely undermine our liberties. This approach may well in the long run make many American feel less secure.
Homeland Security
Counter-Terrorism and Homeland Security
October 9, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 82:12
Since the President has already done a good job in locating, apprehending, and de-funding those associated with the September 11th attacks while using current existing laws, we should not further sacrifice our liberties with a vague promise of providing more security. We do not need a giant new national agency in order to impose a concept of homeland security that challenges our civil liberties. This is an idea whose time has not yet come.
Homeland Security
A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS --
October 25, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 90:45
Without an understanding of why terrorism is directed towards the United States, we may well build a prison for ourselves with something called homeland security while doing nothing to combat the root causes of terrorism. Let us hope we figure this out soon.
Homeland Security
The War On Terrorism
November 29, 2001 2001 Ron Paul 98:78
Now it’s argued that since the federal government has taken over the entire job of homeland security, all kinds of jobs can be found for the draftees to serve the state, even for those who are conscientious objectors.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
The Case For Defending America
24 January 2002 2002 Ron Paul 1:31
No matter how sincere and well motivated the effort to fight terrorism and provide for homeland security, if ill-advised it will result neither in vanquishing terrorism nor in preserving our liberties. I am fearful that here in Washington there is little understanding of the real cause of the terrorist attacks on us, little remembrance of the grand purpose of the American experiment with liberty, or even how our Constitution was written to strictly limit government officials and all that they do.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
Is America a Police State?
June 27, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 64:48
That’s why the post-9/11 analysis and subsequent legislation are crucial to the survival of those institutions that made America great. We now are considering a major legislative proposal dealing with this dilemma- the new Department of Homeland Security- and we must decide if it truly serves the interests of America.
Homeland Security
Is America a Police State?
June 27, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 64:85
If our immigration policies have failed us, when will we defy the politically correct fanatics and curtail the immigration of those individuals on the highly suspect lists? Instead of these changes, all we hear is that the major solution will come by establishing a huge new federal department- the Department of Homeland Security.
Homeland Security
Is America a Police State?
June 27, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 64:108
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.
Homeland Security
Is America a Police State?
June 27, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 64:110
Opposing currently proposed and recently passed legislation does not mean one is complacent about terrorism or homeland security. The truth is that there are alternative solutions to these problems we face, without resorting to expanding the size and scope of government at the expense of liberty.
Homeland Security
Is America a Police State?
June 27, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 64:117
Because of this, in combination with a foreign policy that generates more hatred toward us and multiplies the number of terrorists that seek vengeance, I am deeply concerned that Washington’s efforts so far sadly have only made us more vulnerable. I’m convinced that the newly proposed Department of Homeland Security will do nothing to make us more secure, but it will make us all a lot poorer and less free. If the trend continues, the Department of Homeland Security may well be the vehicle used for a much more ruthless control of the people by some future administration than any of us dreams. Let’s pray that this concern will never materialize.
Homeland Security
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY – WHO NEEDS IT?
July 23, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 73:1
Mr. Speaker, the Department of Homeland Security, who needs it? Mr. Speaker, everyone agrees the 9-11 tragedy confirmed a problem that exists in our domestic security and dramatized our vulnerability to outside attacks. Most agree that the existing bureaucracy was inept. The CIA, the FBI, the INS, and Customs failed to protect us.
Homeland Security
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY – WHO NEEDS IT?
July 23, 2002 2002 Ron Paul 73:13
A common sense improvement to homeland security would allow the DOD to provide protection, not a huge, new, militarized domestic department. We need to bring our troops home, including our Coast Guard; close down the base in Saudi Arabia; stop expanding our presence in the Muslim portion of the former Soviet Union; and stop taking sides in the long, ongoing war in the Middle East.
Homeland Security
Department of Homeland Security
26 July 2002 2002 Ron Paul 80:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, the move to create a federal Department of Homeland Security was initiated in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11 and subsequent revelations regarding bureaucratic bungling and ineptness related to those attacks. Leaving aside other policy initiatives that may be more successful in reducing the threat of future terror attacks, I believe the President was wellintentioned in suggesting that a streamlining of functions might be helpful.
Homeland Security
Department of Homeland Security
26 July 2002 2002 Ron Paul 80:3
This current proposed legislation suggest that merging 22 government agencies and departments — compromising nearly 200,000 federal employees — into one department will address our current vulnerabilities. I do not see how this can be the case. If we are presently under terrorist threat, it seems to me that turning 22 agencies upside down, sparking scores of turf wars and creating massive logistical and technological headaches — does anyone really believe that even simple things like computer and telephone networks will be up and running in the short term? — is hardly the way to maintain the readiness and focus necessary to defend the United States. What about vulnerabilities while Americans wait for this massive new bureaucracy to begin functioning as a whole even to the levels at which its component parts were functioning before this legislation was taken up? Is this a risk we can afford to take? Also, isn’t it a bit ironic that in the name of “homeland security” we seem to be consolidating everything except the government agencies most critical to the defense of the United States: the multitude of intelligence agencies that make up the Intelligence Community?
Homeland Security
Department of Homeland Security
26 July 2002 2002 Ron Paul 80:9
The airlines are bailed out and given guaranteed insurance against all threats. We have made the airline industry a public utility that get to keep its profits and pass on its losses to the taxpayers, like Amtrak and the post office. Instead of more ownership responsibility, we get more government controls. I am reluctant, to say the least, to give any new powers to bureaucrats who refuse to recognize the vital role free citizens exercising their second amendment rights play in homeland security.
Homeland Security
Department of Homeland Security
26 July 2002 2002 Ron Paul 80:12
Until we deal with the substance of the problem — serious issues of American foreign policy about which I have spoken out for years, and important concerns with our immigration policy in light of the current environment — attempts such as we undertake today at improved homeland security will amount to, more or less, rearranging deck chairs — or perhaps more accurately office chairs in various bureaucracies. Until we are prepared to have serious and frank discussions of policy this body will not improve the security of American citizens and their property. I stand ready to have that debate, but unfortunately this bill does nothing to begin the debate and nothing substantive to protect us. At best it will provide an illusion of security, and at worst these unanswered questions will be resolved by the realization that entities such as the Customs Service, Coast Guard and INS will be less effective, less efficient, more intrusive and mired in more bureaucratic red tape. Therefore, we should not pass this bill today.
Homeland Security
The Price Of War
5 September 2002 2002 Ron Paul 83:51
A noninterventionist foreign policy would go a long way toward preventing 9/11 type attacks upon us. The Department of Homeland Security would be unnecessary and the military, along with less bureaucracy in our intelligence- gathering agencies, could instead provide the security the new department is supposed to provide. A renewed respect for gun ownership and responsibility for defending one’s property would provide additional protection against potential terrorists.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
“You Are A Suspect”
14 November 2002 2002 Ron Paul 103:2
[New York Times, Nov. 14, 2002] YOU ARE A SUSPECT (By William Safire) Washington — If the Homeland Security Act is not amended before passage, here is what will happen to you: Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and email you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend — all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as “a virtual, centralized grand database.”
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
War No Excuse For Frivolous Spending
3 April 2003 2003 Ron Paul 46:6
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1559 endangers America’s economy by engaging in pork-barrel spending and corporate welfare unrelated to national security. This bill endangers America’s economic health by adding almost $80 billion to the already bloated federal deficit. Additions to the deficit endanger our financial independence because America will have to increase its reliance on foreign borrowers to finance our debt. H.R. 1599 also shortchanges Americans by giving lower priority to funding homeland security than to funding unreliable allies and projects, like the Middle Eastern TV Network, that will do nothing to enhance America’s security. Therefore, I must oppose this bill.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
The Lessons of 9/11
April 22, 2004 2004 Ron Paul 27:29
Over the years the entire psychology of national defense has been completely twisted. Very little attention had been directed toward protecting our national borders and providing homeland security.
Homeland Security
Opposes Commemorating 9/11
9 September 2004 2004 Ron Paul 66:2
This legislation is an endorsement of the policy of restricting freedoms at home that I have consistently opposed, including praise for the creation of the bloated and impotent Department of Homeland Security, the liberty-killing PATRIOT Act, and many other futile measures. It praises the notoriously ineffective air marshal program while avoiding altogether one of the most important lessons of the September 11, 2001 tragedy; The entire disaster could have been avoided with just one gun in the hands of each of the pilots. Four guns could have prevented September 11, 2001, but we are no closer to arming pilots than we were on September 10, 2001. Shortly after the attacks, I introduced a bill to allow pilots to be armed. Eventually, a version of that bill was passed, but pilots are still not armed. I also introduced several other bills to deal with the attacks of 9/11, protect us against future attacks, and do so without sacrificing our liberty.
Homeland Security
Where To From Here?
November 20, 2004 2004 Ron Paul 81:24
There will be little resistance to spending and deficits because it will be claimed they are necessary to “fight terrorism.” The irony is that Patriot Act-type regulations were all proposed before 9-11, and are now becoming a costly burden to American businesses. I’m getting more calls every day from constituents who are being harassed by government bureaucrats for “infractions” of all kinds totally unrelated to national security. This immeasurable cost from the stepped-up activity of government bureaucrats will further burden our economy as it slips toward recession — and do little to enhance homeland security.
Homeland Security
America’s Foreign Policy Of Intervention
26 January 2005 2005 Ron Paul 6:13
We have spent over $200 billion in these occupations, as well as hundreds of billions of dollars here at home hoping to be safer. We have created the Department of Homeland Security, passed the PATRIOT Act, and created a new super CIA agency. Our government is now permitted to monitor the Internet, read our mail, search us without proper search warrants, to develop a national ID card, and to investigate what people are reading in libraries. Ironically, illegal aliens flow into our country and qualify for driver’s licenses and welfare benefits with little restraint.
Homeland Security
National ID
26 January 2005 2005 Ron Paul 7:7
The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security can add anything it wants. So if they would like to put on our driver’s license that you belong to a pro-gun group, it may well become mandatory, because there may be an administration some day that might like to have that information.
Homeland Security
HR 418- A National ID Bill Masquerading as Immigration Reform
February 9, 2005 2005 Ron Paul 19:3
The REAL ID Act establishes a national ID card by mandating that states include certain minimum identification standards on driver’s licenses. It contains no limits on the government’s power to impose additional standards. Indeed, it gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to unilaterally add requirements as he sees fit.
Homeland Security
HR 418- A National ID Bill Masquerading as Immigration Reform
February 9, 2005 2005 Ron Paul 19:8
This legislation gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to expand required information on driver’s licenses, potentially including such biometric information as retina scans, finger prints, DNA information, and even Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) radio tracking technology. Including such technology as RFID would mean that the federal government, as well as the governments of Canada and Mexico, would know where Americans are at all time of the day and night.
Homeland Security
Border Protection Antiterrorism, And Illegal Immigration Control Act Of 2005
16 December 2005 2005 Ron Paul 127:2
Some measures in the bill sound good, but are in effect superfluous. Do we need new legislation requiring the Department of Homeland Security to achieve “operational control of the borders”? Shouldn’t the federal government already have “operational control of the borders”?
Homeland Security
National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2007
11 May 2006 2006 Ron Paul 35:7
Mr. Chairman, as a Vietnam-era U.S. Air Force veteran, I am in favor of a strong defense of the United States. I believe we need to focus on our own homeland security rather than spending half a trillion dollars on policies and programs that will not make Americans more safe, but may well have the opposite effect. We need to re-focus our defense priorities on the United States, on our own borders and our ports.
Homeland Security
Violent Radicalization And Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act
5 December 2007 2007 Ron Paul 106:6
In addition, this legislation will create a Department of Homeland Security-established university-based body to further study radicalization and to “contribute to the establishment of training, written materials, information, analytical assistance and professional resources to aid in combating violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism.” I wonder whether this is really a legitimate role for institutes of higher learning in a free society.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
Earmark Declaration
27 September 2008 2008 Ron Paul 64:3
Account: Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard Bridge Replacement. Legal Name and Address of the Requesting
Homeland Security
Earmark Declaration
27 September 2008 2008 Ron Paul 64:4
Agency: Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard Bridge Administration Office, Washington, DC; and the Gulf Intracoastal Canal Association, 2010 Butler Drive, Friendswood, Texas 77546.
Homeland Security
Earmark Declaration
27 September 2008 2008 Ron Paul 64:5
Description of Request: Provides $5,000,000 for the Galveston Causeway Railroad Bridge Replacement. Today, 21 thousand barges move 29 million tons of cargo worth $10 billion through the Galveston Bridge each year. In 2001, after a lengthy review process, the bridge was declared a hazard to navigation by the Coast Guard under the Truman Hobbs Act. The current estimated cost of replacement is almost $68 million. This request is consistent with the intended and authorized purpose of the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, under the Truman Hobbs Act. Under the Truman Hobbs Act, the Federal Government pays 90 percent of replacement cost and the bridge owner—Galveston County—pays 10 percent.
Homeland Security
Earmark Declaration
19 November 2008 2008 Ron Paul 70:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act (H.R. 2638): Requesting member: Ron Paul. Bill number: H.R. 2638. Account: Rdt&E Defense Health Program. Legal name of requesting entity: Gulf Chemical and Metallurgical Corporation. Address of requesting entity: PO Box 2290, 302 Midway Road, Freeport, TX 77542–2290. Description of request: The project earmarks $3,000,000 for a Department of Defense lead study of vanadium to assess the health safety and risks of military and civilian workers exposed to vanadium through work in military applications.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
Securing the Homeland?
08 July 2002 Texas Straight Talk 08 July 2002 verse 3 ... Cached
Real homeland security must focus on consolidation of federal agency resources, better intelligence gathering, and elimination of red tape and bureaucratic turf battles that prevent proper sharing of information. Proposals to merely hire thousands of new federal employees and throw money at new agencies- without changing the bureaucratic culture- are doomed to fail.
Homeland Security
Securing the Homeland?
08 July 2002 Texas Straight Talk 08 July 2002 verse 9 ... Cached
Ultimately we cannot make ourselves safer simply by creating new departments, spending more taxpayer money on federal police, or sending more troops into yet another foreign land. Real homeland security requires a reexamination of our policies and priorities abroad, and a commitment to the Constitution at home.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
The Homeland Security Non-Debate
29 July 2002 Texas Straight Talk 29 July 2002 verse 1 ... Cached
The Homeland Security Non-Debate
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
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?
Homeland Security
The Homeland Security Monstrosity
18 November 2002 Texas Straight Talk 18 November 2002 verse 1 ... Cached
The Homeland Security Monstrosity
Homeland Security
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?
Homeland Security
The Homeland Security Monstrosity
18 November 2002 Texas Straight Talk 18 November 2002 verse 5 ... Cached
The list of dangerous and unconstitutional powers granted to the new Homeland Security department is lengthy. Warrantless searches, forced vaccinations of whole communities, federal neighborhood snitch programs, federal information databases, and a sinister new "Information Awareness Office" at the Pentagon that uses military intelligence to spy on domestic citizens are just a few of the troubling aspects of the new legislation. To better understand the potential damage to our liberties, I strongly recommend a November 14th New York Times op-ed piece by William Safire entitled "You Are A Suspect." The article provides a devastating critique of the new Homeland Security bureaucracy and a chilling warning of what the agency could become. The article can be read on my website, www.house.gov/Paul, under the section entitled "Speeches."
Homeland Security
Homeland Security is the Largest Federal Expansion in 50 Years
25 November 2002 Texas Straight Talk 25 November 2002 verse 1 ... Cached
Homeland Security is the Largest Federal Expansion in 50 Years
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
Homeland Security is the Largest Federal Expansion in 50 Years
25 November 2002 Texas Straight Talk 25 November 2002 verse 5 ... Cached
Of course the Homeland Security bill did receive some opposition from the President’s critics. Yet did they attack the legislation because it threatens to debase the 4th amendment and create an Orwellian surveillance society? Did they attack it because it will chill political dissent or expand the drug war? No, they attacked it on the grounds that it failed to secure enough high-paying federal union jobs, thus angering one of Washington’s most powerful special interest groups. Ultimately, however, even the most prominent critics voted for the bill.
Homeland Security
Homeland Security is the Largest Federal Expansion in 50 Years
25 November 2002 Texas Straight Talk 25 November 2002 verse 6 ... Cached
The lesson learned from the rush to create a Homeland Security department is that the size and scope of government grows regardless of which party is in power. The federal government now devours a whopping 40% of the nation’s GDP, the highest level since World War II- and a massive new department can only make things worse. The Homeland Security bill provides a vivid example of the uncontrolled spending culture in Washington, a culture that views the true source of political power- your tax dollars- as unlimited.
Homeland Security
Government Vaccines- Bad Policy, Bad Medicine
09 December 2002 Texas Straight Talk 09 December 2002 verse 7 ... Cached
The possibility that the federal government could order vaccines is real. Provisions buried in the 500-page homeland security bill give federal health bureaucrats virtually unchecked power to declare health emergencies. Specifically, it gives the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services- in my view one of the worst of all federal agencies- power to declare actual or potential bioterrorist emergencies; to administer forced "countermeasures," including vaccines, to individuals or whole groups; and to extend the emergency declaration indefinitely. These provisions mirror those found in the Model Emergency Health Powers Act, a troubling proposal that was rejected by most state legislatures last year. That Act would have given state governors broad powers to suspend civil liberties and declare health emergencies. Yet now we’re giving virtually the same power to the Secretary of HHS. Equally troubling is the immunity from civil suit granted to vaccine manufacturers in the homeland security bill, which potentially could leave individuals who get sick from a bad batch of vaccines without legal recourse.
Homeland Security
The 2003 Spending Orgy
03 March 2003 Texas Straight Talk 03 March 2003 verse 5 ... Cached
One might assume the 2003 spending increases are largely the result of September 11th and homeland security concerns, but actually it’s the standard types of federal pork that drive the overall spending surge. Virtually all federal agencies and federal programs, including those that have nothing to do with defense or terrorism, have enjoyed budget increases of more than 20% over the last two years.
Homeland Security
The National ID Trojan Horse
14 February 2005 Texas Straight Talk 14 February 2005 verse 7 ... Cached
This legislation gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to expand required information on drivers’ licenses, potentially including such biometric information as retina scans, finger prints, DNA information, and even Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) radio tracking technology. Including such technology as RFID means the federal government, as well as the governments of Canada and Mexico, could know where American citizens are at all times.
Homeland Security
National ID Cards Won't Stop Terrorism or Illegal Immigration
09 May 2005 Texas Straight Talk 09 May 2005 verse 4 ... Cached
Absent a political miracle in the Senate, within two years every American will need a conforming national ID card to participate in ordinary activities. This REAL ID Act establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of highly personal information about American citizens: at a minimum their name, date of birth, place of residence, Social Security number, and physical characteristics. The legislation also grants open-ended authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to require biometric information on IDs in the future. This means your harmless looking driver’s license could contain a retina scan, fingerprints, DNA information, or radio frequency technology.
Homeland Security
Praising the Texas Gulf Coast Response to Rita
26 September 2005 Texas Straight Talk 26 September 2005 verse 12 ... Cached
The people of south Texas relied not on FEMA or federal Homeland Security, but rather on themselves, their families, their neighbors, their local police and fire crews, and their local officials. The Texas Department of Public Safety and Governor Perry played strong supporting roles, but the real work was done locally, community by community. Nobody in Washington can know what is best for Galveston or any other community when facing a natural disaster. Of course federal tax dollars should be returned to south Texas to fund rebuilding in ways that strengthen our infrastructure against future hurricanes. But the real lesson of Katrina was taken to heart in Texas: local citizens must take the initiative and take care of themselves when emergencies arise. Congratulations to everyone in the 14th district for the tremendous show of Texas self-reliance in the face of Hurricane Rita.
Homeland Security
Small Steps Toward Immigration Reform
19 December 2005 Texas Straight Talk 19 December 2005 verse 4 ... Cached
Some measures in the bill sound good, but are in effect superfluous. Do we need new legislation requiring the Department of Homeland Security to achieve “operational control of the borders”? Shouldn’t the federal government already have “operational control of the borders”?
Homeland Security
The Ever-Growing Federal Budget
13 February 2006 Texas Straight Talk 13 February 2006 verse 7 ... Cached
· The biggest increases in federal spending under Bush are not related to the war on terror or homeland security. Education spending, for example, grew a whopping 137% between 2001 and 2005.
Homeland Security
Katrina Relief Six Months Later
20 February 2006 Texas Straight Talk 20 February 2006 verse 8 ... Cached
All federal aid for Katrina should have been distributed as directly as possible to local communities, rather than through wasteful middlemen like FEMA and Homeland Security. Considering the demonstrated ineptitude of government at both the federal and state level in this disaster, the people affected by the hurricane and subsequent flood no doubt would have been better off if relief money simply was sent directly to them or to community organizations dedicated to clean-up and reconstruction.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
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.
Homeland Security
Security Washington-Style
14 May 2007 Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2007 verse 5 ... Cached
I was opposed to the creation of a new Homeland Security Department from the beginning. Only in Washington would anyone call the creation of an additional layer of bureaucracy on top of already bloated bureaucracies “streamlining.” Only in Washington would anyone believe that a bigger, more centralized federal government means more efficiency.
Homeland Security
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."
Homeland Security
Security Washington-Style
14 May 2007 Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2007 verse 7 ... Cached
Likewise with FEMA. At the time of the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, I wrote “we risk seeing FEMA become less responsive as part of DHS. FEMA needs to be a flexible, locally focused, hands-on agency that helps people quickly after a disaster.” Unfortunately and tragically, we all know very well what happened in 2005 with Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. We know that FEMA’s handing of the disaster did in many cases more harm than good. FEMA was so disorganized and incompetent in its management of the 2005 hurricanes that one can only wonder how much the internal disarray in the Department of Homeland Security may have contributed to that mismanagement.
Homeland Security
Security Washington-Style
14 May 2007 Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2007 verse 8 ... Cached
Folding responsibility for defending our land borders into the Department of Homeland Security was also a bad idea, as we have come to see. The test is simple: We just ask ourselves whether our immigration enforcement has gotten better or worse since functions were transferred into this super bureaucracy. Are our borders being more effectively defended against those who would enter our country illegally? I don’t think so.
Homeland Security
Security Washington-Style
14 May 2007 Texas Straight Talk 14 May 2007 verse 9 ... Cached
Are we better off with an enormous conglomerate of government agencies that purports to keep us safe? Certainly we are spending more money and getting less for it with the Department of Homeland Security. Perhaps now that the rush to expand government in response to the attacks of 9/11 is over, we can take a good look at what is working, what is making us safer, and what is not. If so, we will likely conclude that the Department of Homeland Security is too costly, too bloated, and too bureaucratic. Hopefully then we will refocus our efforts on an approach that doesn’t see more federal bureaucracy in Washington as the best way to secure the rest of the nation.
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.