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).
2001 Ron Paul 76:2
This bill’s entire existence rests on the presumption
that its supporters have absolutely
no confidence whatsoever in either freedom or
the market process. In a time of crisis, you
don’t need an “industrial policy” and you don’t
need some fascist or corporatist variety of socialism.
What one needs more than ever in a
time of crisis is the market — deviation from the
market process is the worst thing an economy
can do. Oftentimes, it’s the “industrial policy”
which is the very cause of the economic crisis
one hopes to remedy with yet another round
of “industrial policy” intervention.
2001 Ron Paul 76:3
We have an energy crisis in California created
by the bureaucrats and the politicians. As
prices skyrocket and a crisis is declared, it is
later said that prices are now down and
there’s less of a shortage or crisis. But it’s the
market process that worked because the
prices skyrocketed rather than skyrocketing
prices becoming the justification for abandoning
the market process.
2001 Ron Paul 76:4
Of course, if one likes socialism and rejects
the notion that freedom works, this type of an
Act and improper of delegating and centralizing
such powers is ideal. But why accept the
notions of socialism when you really need an
economy to provide products and services in
the nation’s time of most dire need? This
whole notion that the powers in this bill should
be illegitimately granted to a President and
then turned over to the head of FEMA is potentially
one of the most dangerous things this
body will ever do (or continue doing).
2001 Ron Paul 76:5
Mr. Speaker, I encourage the members of
this body to begin thinking about the amount
of false hope they place in the centralization of
power in the hands of a central-planners and
reconsider their apparent lack of confidence in
the market process and a free society. I encourage
a strict adherence to market principles
and strongly oppose H.R. 2510.
