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.
2001 Ron Paul 29:2
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2001,
H.R. 503, would amend title 18, United States
Code, for the laudable goal of protecting unborn
children from assault and murder. However,
by expanding the class of victims to
which unconstitutional (but already-existing)
Federal murder and assault statutes apply, the
Federal Government moves yet another step
closer to a national police state.
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?
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 Nations 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.
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 Courts intrusion
into rights of States and their previous attempts
to protect by criminal statute the
unborns 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 childs 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 unborns
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.
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.
2001 Ron Paul 29:7
Perhaps, equally dangerous is the loss of
another Constitutional protection which comes
with the passage of more and more federal
criminal legislation. Constitutionally, there are
only three Federal crimes. These are treason
against the United States, piracy on the high
seas, and counterfeiting (and, because the
constitution was amended to allow it, for a
short period of history, the manufacture, sale,
or transport of alcohol was concurrently a Federal
and State crime). Concurrent jurisdiction
crimes, such as alcohol prohibition in the past
and federalization of murder today, erode the
right of citizens to be free of double jeopardy.
The fifth amendment to the U.S. Constitution
specifies that no person be subject for the
same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of
life or limb . . . In other words, no person
shall be tried twice for the same offense. However,
in United States v. Lanza, the high court
in 1922 sustained a ruling that being tried by
both the Federal Government and a State
government for the same offense did not offend
the doctrine of double jeopardy. One
danger of unconstitutionally expanding the
Federal criminal justice code is that it seriously
increases the danger that one will be subject
to being tried twice for the same offense. Despite
the various pleas for federal correction of
societal wrongs, a national police force is neither
prudent nor constitutional.
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.
2001 Ron Paul 29:9
It is important to be reminded of the benefits
of federalism as well as the cost. There are
sound reasons to maintain a system of smaller,
independent jurisdictions — it is called competition
and, yes, governments must, for the
sake of the citizenry, be allowed to compete.
We have obsessed so much over the notion of
competition in this country we harangue
someone like Bill Gates when, by offering superior
products to every other similarly-situated
entity, he becomes the dominant provider
of certain computer products. Rather than
allow someone who serves to provide value
as made obvious by their voluntary exchanges
in the free market, we lambaste efficiency and
economies of scale in the private marketplace.
Curiously, at the same time, we further centralize
government, the ultimate monopoly and
one empowered by force rather than voluntary
exchange.
2001 Ron Paul 29:10
When small governments becomes too oppressive
with their criminal laws, citizens can
vote with their feet to a competing jurisdiction.
If, for example, one does not want to be
forced to pay taxes to prevent a cancer patient
from using medicinal marijuana to provide relief
from pain and nausea, that person can
move to Arizona. If one wants to bet on a football
game without the threat of government
intervention, that person can live in Nevada.
As government becomes more and more centralized,
it becomes much more difficult to vote
with ones feet to escape the relatively more
oppressive governments. Governmental units
must remain small with ample opportunity for
citizen mobility both to efficient governments
and away from those which tend to be oppressive.
Centralization of criminal law makes such
mobility less and less practical.
2001 Ron Paul 29:11
Protection of life (born or unborn) against
initiations of violence is of vital importance. So
vitally important, in fact, it must be left to the
States criminal justice systems. We have
seen what a legal, constitutional, and philosophical
mess results from attempts to federalize
such an issue. Numerous States have
adequately protected the unborn against assault
and murder and done so prior to the
Federal Governments unconstitutional sanctioning
of violence in the Roe v. Wade decision.
Unfortunately, H.R. 503 ignores the danger
of further federalizing that which is properly
reserved to State governments and, in so
doing, throws legal philosophy, the Constitution,
the Bill of Rights, and the insights of
Chief Justice Rehnquist out with the baby and
the bathwater.
This chapter appeared in Ron Pauls Congressional website at http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2001/cr042601C.htm