Volume 2006 — The Book of Ron Paul

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 1
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

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.

2006 Ron Paul 1:2
This measure does nothing to address the root cause of the scandals — the ever-growing size and power of the Federal Government. As long the Federal Government continues to regulate, tax, and subsidize the American people, there will be attempts to influence those who write the laws and regulations under which the people must live. Human nature being what it is, there will also be those lobbyists and policymakers who will manipulate the power of the regulatory state to enrich themselves. As I have said before, and I fear I will have plenty of opportunity to say again, the only way to get special interest money and influence out of politics is to get the money and power out of Washington. Instead of passing new regulations and laws regulating the people’s right to petition their government, my colleagues should refuse to vote for any legislation that violates the constitutional limits on Federal power or enriches a special interest at the expense of American taxpayers. Returning to constitutional government is the only way to ensure that our republican institutions will not be corrupted by powerful interests seeking special privileges.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 2
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

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.

2006 Ron Paul 2:2
Unfortunately this legislation is motivated by politics rather than a genuine desire to limit unconstitutional foreign aid programs. The wording of the resolution itself does not close the door to providing U.S. aid to the Palestinians even if Hamas, the political party that won recent parliamentary elections, takes its seats in parliament without altering its stated policies toward Israel. Indeed, the legislation states that “no United States assistance should be provided directly to the Palestinian Authority” if Hamas occupies a majority of seats in the Palestinian parliament. This obviously suggests that the money can be spent “indirectly” in any case.

2006 Ron Paul 2:3
So this is hardly a strong statement opposing any and all aid to the Palestinians, which is the position that I hold.

2006 Ron Paul 2:4
I find it interesting that the same proponents of the United States government exporting democracy overseas are now demanding that something be done when people overseas do not vote the way the U.S. Government thinks they should. It seems that being for democracy means respecting that people overseas may not always vote the way Washington wants them to vote. If our aim is to ensure that only certain parties or individuals are allowed to lead foreign nations, why not just admit that democracy is the last thing we want? That attitude is evident in the fact that the U.S. Government spent more than $2 million trying to manipulate the Palestinian vote in favor of parties supported by Washington. You cannot have it both ways. Although it is always a good idea to eliminate foreign aid, we should be careful about calling the manipulation of elections overseas an exercise in “democracy promotion.”

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 3
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

The End Of Dollar Hegemony 15 February 2006

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker’s announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) is recognized for 60 minutes.

2006 Ron Paul 3:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, my Special Order tonight deals with the subject, the end of dollar hegemony. Mr. Speaker, 100 years ago it was called dollar diplomacy; after World War II and especially after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989 the policy had all been to dollar hegemony.

2006 Ron Paul 3:2
After all of this great success, our dollar dominance is coming to an end. It has been said, rightly, that he who holds the gold makes the rules. In earlier times it was readily accepted that fair and honest trade be required in an exchange of something of real value. First, it was simply barter of goods, and then it was discovered that gold held a universal attraction and was a convenient substitute for more cumbersome barter transactions.

2006 Ron Paul 3:3
Not only did gold facilitate exchange of goods and services, it served as a store of value for those who wanted to save for a rainy day. Though money developed naturally in the marketplace as governments grew in power, they assumed monopoly control over money. Sometimes governments succeeded in guaranteeing the quality and purity of gold; but in time, governments learned to outspend their revenues.

2006 Ron Paul 3:4
New or higher taxes always incurred the disapproval of the people, so it was not long before the kings and caesars learned how to inflate their currencies by reducing the amount of gold in each coin, always hoping their subjects would not discover the fraud. But the people always did, and they strenuously objected.

2006 Ron Paul 3:5
This helped pressure leaders to seek more gold by conquering other nations. The people became accustomed to living beyond their means and enjoyed the circuses and bread. Financing extravagances by conquering foreign lands seemed a logical alternative to working harder and producing more. Besides, conquering nations not only brought home gold; they brought home slaves as well. Taxing the people in conquered territories also provided an incentive to build empires.

2006 Ron Paul 3:6
This system of government worked well for a while, but the moral decline of the people led to an unwillingness to produce for themselves. There was a limit to the number of countries that could be sacked for their wealth, and this always brought empires to an end. When gold no longer could be obtained, their military might crumbled. In those days, those who held the gold truly wrote the rules and lived well.

2006 Ron Paul 3:7
That general rule has held fast throughout the ages. When gold was used and the rules protected honest commerce, productive nations thrived. Whenever wealthy nations, those with powerful armies and gold, strived only for empire and easy fortunes to support welfare at home, those nations failed.

2006 Ron Paul 3:8
Today, the principles are the same, but the process is quite different. Gold is no longer a currency of the realm; paper is. The truth now is he who prints the money makes the rules, at least for the time being. Although gold is not used, the goals are the same: compel foreign countries to produce and subsidize the country with military superiority and control over the monetary printing presses.

2006 Ron Paul 3:9
Since printing paper money is nothing short of counterfeiting, the issuer of the international currency must always be the country with the military might to guarantee control over the system. This magnificent scheme seems the perfect system for obtaining perpetual wealth for the country that issues the de facto world currency.

2006 Ron Paul 3:10
The one problem, however, is that such a system destroys the character of the counterfeiting nation’s people just as was the case when gold was the currency, and it was obtained by conquering other nations. This destroys the incentive to save and produce while encouraging debt and runaway welfare.

2006 Ron Paul 3:11
The pressure at home to inflate the currency comes from the corporate welfare recipients, as well as those who demand handouts as compensation for their needs and perceived injuries by others. In both cases, personal responsibility for one’s actions is rejected.

2006 Ron Paul 3:12
When paper money is rejected, or when gold runs out, wealth and political stability are lost. The country then must go from living beyond its means to living beneath its means until the economic and political systems adjust to the new rules; rules no longer written by those who ran the now defunct printing press.

2006 Ron Paul 3:13
Dollar diplomacy, a policy instituted by William Howard Taft and his Secretary of State, Philander C. Knox, was designed to enhance U.S. commercial investments in Latin America and the Far East. McKinley concocted a war against Spain in 1898 and Teddy Roosevelt’s corollary to the Monroe Doctrine preceded Taft’s aggressive approach to using the U.S. dollar and diplomat influence to secure U.S. investments abroad.

2006 Ron Paul 3:14
This earned the popular title of “dollar diplomacy.”

2006 Ron Paul 3:15
The significance of Roosevelt’s change was that our intervention now could be justified by the mere appearance that a country of interest to us was politically or fiscally vulnerable to European control. Not only did we claim a right, but even an official government obligation to protect our commercial interest from Europeans.

2006 Ron Paul 3:16
This new policy came on the heels of the gunboat diplomacy of the late 19th century, and it meant we could buy influence before resorting to the threat of force. By the time dollar diplomacy of William Howard Taft was clearly articulated, the seeds of the American empire were planted, and they were destined to grow in the fertile political soil of a country that lost its love and respect for the Republic bequeathed to us by the authors of the Constitution. Indeed they did. It was not too long before dollar diplomacy became dollar hegemony in the second half of the 20th century.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:18
Dollar dominance got a huge boost after World War II. We were spared the destruction that so many other nations suffered, and our coffers were filled with the world’s gold. But the world chose not to return to the discipline of the gold standard, and the politicians applauded. Printing money to pay the bills was a lot more popular than taxing or restraining or unnecessary spending. In spite of the short-term benefits, imbalances were institutionalized for decades to come.

2006 Ron Paul 3:19
The 1944 Bretton Woods agreement solidified the dollar as the preeminent world reserve currency, replacing the British pound. Due to our political and military muscle, and because we had a huge amount of physical gold, the world readily accepted our dollar, defined as 1/35 of an ounce of gold as the world’s reserve currency.

2006 Ron Paul 3:20
The dollar was said to be as good as gold and convertible to all foreign banks at that rate. For American citizens, however, it remained illegal to own. This was a gold exchange standard that from inception was doomed to fail.

2006 Ron Paul 3:21
The U.S. did exactly what many predicted she would do: she printed more dollars for which there was no gold backing. But the world was content to accept these dollars for more than 25 years with little question, until the French and others in the late 1960s demanded we fulfill our promise to pay 1 ounce of gold for each $35 they delivered to the U.S. Treasury. This resulted in a huge gold drain that brought an end to a very poorly devised pseudo-gold standard.

2006 Ron Paul 3:22
It all ended on August 15, 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window and refused to pay out any of our remaining 280 million ounces of gold. In essence, we declared our insolvency, and everyone recognized that some other monetary system had to be devised in order to bring stability to the markets. Amazingly, a new system was devised which allowed the U.S. to operate the printing presses for the world reserve currency, with no restraints placed on it, not even a presence of gold convertibility, none whatsoever.

2006 Ron Paul 3:23
Though the new policy was even more deeply flawed, it nevertheless opened the door for dollar hegemony to spread. Realizing the world was embarking on something new and mind- boggling, elite money managers with especially strong support from U.S. authorities struck an agreement with OPEC to price oil in U.S. dollars exclusively for all worldwide transactions.

2006 Ron Paul 3:24
This gave the dollar a special place among world currencies, in essence backed the dollar with oil. In return, the U.S. promised to protect the various oil-rich kingdoms in the Persian Gulf against threat or invasion or domestic coup. This arrangement helped ignite the radical Islamic movement among those who resented our influence in the region.

2006 Ron Paul 3:25
The arrangement gave the dollar artificial strength with tremendous financial benefits for the United States. It allowed us to export our monetary inflation by buying oil and other goods at a great discount as dollar influence flourished.

2006 Ron Paul 3:26
This post-Bretton Woods system was much more fragile than the system that existed between 1945 and 1971. Though the dollar-oil arrangement was helpful, it was not nearly as stable as the pseudo-gold standard under Bretton Woods. It certainly was less stable than the gold standard of the late 19th century.

2006 Ron Paul 3:27
During the 1970s, the dollar nearly collapsed as oil prices surged and gold skyrocketed to $800 an ounce. By 1979, interest rates of 21 percent were required to rescue the system. The pressure on the dollar in the 1970s, in spite of the benefits accrued to it, reflected reckless budget deficits and monetary inflation during the 1960s. The markets were not fooled by LBJ’s claim that we could afford both guns and butter.

2006 Ron Paul 3:28
Once again, the dollar was rescued, and this ushered in the age of true dollar hegemony, lasting from the early 1980s to the present. With tremendous cooperation coming from the central banks and international commercial banks, the dollar was accepted as if it were gold.

2006 Ron Paul 3:29
Federal Chairman Alan Greenspan, on several occasions before the House Banking Committee, answered my challenges to him about his previously held favorable views on gold by claiming that he and other central bankers had gotten paper money, that is the dollar system, to respond as if it were gold. Each time I strongly disagreed and pointed out that if they had achieved such a feat they would have defied centuries of economic history regarding the need for money to be something of real value. He smugly and confidently concurred with this.

2006 Ron Paul 3:30
In recent years, central banks and various financial institutions, all with vested interest in maintaining a workable fiat dollar standard, were not secretive about selling and maintaining large amounts of gold to the market, even while decreasing gold prices raised serious questions about the wisdom of such a policy. They never admitted to gold price fixing, but the evidence is abundant that they believed that if the gold price fell, it would convey a sense of confidence to the market, confidence that they, indeed, had achieved amazing success in turning paper into gold.

2006 Ron Paul 3:31
Increasing gold prices historically are viewed as an indicator of distrust in paper currency. This recent effort was not a whole lot different than the U.S. Treasury selling gold at $35 an ounce in the 1960s in an attempt to convince the world the dollar was as sound and as good as gold.

2006 Ron Paul 3:32
Even during the Depression, one of Roosevelt’s first acts was to remove free-market pricing as an indication of a flawed monetary system by making it illegal for American citizens to own gold. Economic law eventually limited that effort, as it did in the early 1970s, when our Treasury and the IMF tried to fix the price of gold by dumping tons into the market to dampen the enthusiasm of those seeking a safe haven for a falling dollar after gold ownership was relegalized.

2006 Ron Paul 3:33
Once again, the effort between 1980 and 2000 to fool the market as to the true value of the dollar proved unsuccessful. In the past 5 years, the dollar has been devalued in terms of gold by more than 50 percent. You just cannot fool all the people all the time, even with the power of the mighty printing press and the money-creating system of the Federal Reserve.

2006 Ron Paul 3:34
Even with all the shortcomings of the fiat monetary system, dollar influence thrived. The results seemed beneficial, but gross distortions built into the system remained. And true to form, Washington politicians are only too anxious to solve the problems cropping up with window dressing while failing to understand and deal with the underlying flawed policy. Protectionism, fixing exchange rates, punitive tariffs, politically motivated sanctions, corporate subsidies, international trade management, price controls, interest rate and wage controls, super- nationalist sentiments, threat of force, and even war are resorted to, all to solve the problems artificially created by a deeply flawed monetary and economic system.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:36
It sounds like a great deal for everyone, except the time will come when our dollars, due to their depreciation, will be received less enthusiastically or even be rejected by foreign countries. That could create a whole new ball game and force us to pay a price for living beyond our means and our production. The shift in sentiment regarding the dollar has already started, but the worst is yet to come.

2006 Ron Paul 3:37
The agreement with OPEC in the 1970s to price oil in dollars has provided tremendous artificial strength to the dollar as the preeminent reserve currency. This has created a universal demand for the dollar and soaks up the huge number of new dollars generated each year. Last year alone, M3 increased by over $700 billion. The artificial demand for our dollar, along with our military might, places us in the unique position to “rule” the world without productive work or savings and without limits on consumer spending or deficits. The problem is it cannot last.

2006 Ron Paul 3:38
Price inflation is raising its ugly head, and the NASDAQ bubble, generated by easy money, has burst. The housing bubble likewise created is deflating. Gold prices have doubled, and Federal spending is out of sight, with zero political will to rein it in. The trade deficit last year was over $728 billion. A $2 trillion war is raging, and plans are being laid to expand the war into Iran and possibly Syria. The only restraining force will be the world’s rejection of the dollar. It is bound to come and create conditions worse than 1979–1980, which required 21 percent interest rates to correct. But everything possible will be done to protect the dollar in the meantime. We have a shared interest with those who hold our dollars to keep the whole charade going.

2006 Ron Paul 3:39
Greenspan, in his first speech after leaving the Fed, said that gold prices were up because of concern about terrorism and not because of monetary concerns or because he created too many dollars during his tenure. Gold has to be discredited and the dollar propped up. Even when the dollar comes under serious attack by market forces, the central banks and the IMF will surely do everything conceivable to soak up the dollars in hope of restoring stability. Eventually, they will fail.

2006 Ron Paul 3:40
Most importantly, the dollar/oil relationship has to be maintained to keep the dollar as the preeminent currency. Any attack on this relationship will be forcefully challenged, as it already has been.

2006 Ron Paul 3:41
In November, 2000, Saddam Hussein demanded euros for his oil. His arrogance was a threat to the dollar; his lack of any military might was never a threat. At the first Cabinet meeting with the new administration in 2001, as reported by Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill, the major topic was how we could get rid of Saddam Hussein though there was no evidence whatsoever he posed a threat to us. This deep concern for Saddam Hussein surprised and shocked O’Neill.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:43
There was no public talk of removing Saddam Hussein because of his attack on the integrity of the dollar as a reserve currency by selling his oil in euros, yet many believe this was the reason for our obsession with Iraq. I doubt it was the only reason, but it may well have played a significant role in our motivation to wage war. Within a very short period after the military victory in Iraq, all Iraqi oil sales were carried out in dollars. The euro was immediately abandoned.

2006 Ron Paul 3:44
In 2001, Venezuela’s ambassador to Russia spoke of Venezuela’s switching to the euro for all their oil sales. Within a year, there was a coup attempt against Chavez, reportedly with assistance from our CIA.

2006 Ron Paul 3:45
After these attempts to nudge the euro toward replacing the dollar as the world’s reserve currency were met with resistance, the sharp fall of the dollar against the euro was reversed. These events may well have played a significant role in maintaining dollar dominance.

2006 Ron Paul 3:46
It has become clear the U.S. administration was sympathetic to those who plotted the overthrow of Chavez and was embarrassed by its failure. The fact that Chavez was democratically elected had little influence on which side we supported. Now a new attempt is being made against the petrodollar system. Iran, another member of the “Axis of Evil,” has announced her plans to initiate an oil bourse in March of this year. Guess what? The oil sales will be priced in euros, not dollars.

2006 Ron Paul 3:47
Most Americans forgot how our policies have systematically and needlessly antagonized the Iranians over the years. In 1953, the CIA helped overthrow a democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh and installed the authoritarian Shah, who was friendly to the U.S. The Iranians were still fuming over this when the hostages were seized in 1979. Our alliance with Saddam Hussein in his invasion of Iran in the early 1980s did not help matters and obviously did not do much for our relationship with Saddam Hussein. The administration’s announcement in 2001 that Iran was part of the Axis of Evil did not improve the diplomatic relationship between our two countries.

2006 Ron Paul 3:48
Recent threats over nuclear power, while ignoring the fact that they are surrounded by countries with nuclear weapons, does not seem to register with those who continue to provoke Iran. With what most Muslims perceive as our war against Islam and this recent history, there is little wonder why Iran might choose to harm America by undermining the dollar. Iran, like Iraq, has zero capability to attack us, but that did not stop us from turning Saddam Hussein into a modern-day Hitler ready to take over the world. Now Iran, especially since she has made plans for pricing oil in euros, has been on the receiving end of a propaganda war not unlike that waged against Iraq before our invasion.

2006 Ron Paul 3:49
It is not likely that maintaining dollar supremacy was the only motivating factor for the war against Iraq nor for agitating against Iran. Though the real reasons for going to war are complex, we now know the reasons given before the war started, like the presence of weapons of mass destruction and Saddam’s connection to 9/11, were false.

2006 Ron Paul 3:50
The dollar’s importance is obvious, but this does not diminish the influence of the distinct plans laid out years ago by the neoconservatives to remake the Middle East. Israel’s influence as well as that of the Christian Zionists likewise played a role in prosecuting this war. Protecting our oil supplies has influenced our Middle East policy for decades.

2006 Ron Paul 3:51
But the truth is that paying the bills for this aggressive intervention is impossible the old-fashioned way, with more taxes, more savings, and more production by the American people. Much of the expense of the Persian Gulf War in 1991 was shouldered by many of our willing allies. That is not so today. Now more than ever, the dollar hegemony, its dominance as the world’s reserve currency, is required to finance our huge war expenditures. This $2 trillion never-ending war must be paid for one way or another. Dollar hegemony provides the vehicle to do just that.

2006 Ron Paul 3:52
For the most part, the true victims are not aware of how they pay the bills. The license to create money out of thin air allows the bills to be paid through price inflation. American citizens as well as average citizens of Japan and China and other countries suffer from price inflation, which represents the tax that pays the bills for our military adventures. That is, until the fraud is discovered and the foreign producers decide not to take dollars nor hold them very long in payment for those goods. Everything possible is done to prevent the fraud of the monetary system from being exposed to the masses who suffer from it. If oil markets replace dollars with euros, it would in time curtail our ability to continue to print, without restraint, the world’s reserve currency.

2006 Ron Paul 3:53
It is an unbelievable benefit to us to import valuable goods and export depreciating dollars. The exporting countries have become addicted to our purchases for their economic growth. This dependency makes them allies in continuing the fraud, and their participation keeps the dollar’s value artificially high. If this system were workable long term, American citizens would never have to work again. We, too, could enjoy “bread and circuses” just as the Romans did, but their gold finally ran out and the inability of Rome to continue to plunder conquered nations brought an end to her empire.

2006 Ron Paul 3:54
The same thing will happen to us if we do not change our ways. Though we do not occupy foreign countries to directly plunder, we nevertheless have spread our troops across 130 nations of the world. Our intense effort to spread our power in the oil-rich Middle East is not a coincidence. But, unlike the old days, we do not declare direct ownership of the natural resources. We just insist that we can buy what we want and pay for it with our paper money. Any country that challenges our authority does so at great risk.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:56
Our whole economic system depends on continuing the current monetary arrangement, which means recycling the dollar is crucial. Currently, we borrow over $700 billion every year from our gracious benefactors, who work hard and take our paper for their goods. Then we borrow all the money we need to secure the empire, which includes the entire DOD budget of $450 billion, plus more. The military might we enjoy becomes the backing of our currency. There are no other countries that can challenge our military superiority, and therefore they have little choice but to accept the dollars we declare are today’s “gold.” This is why countries that challenge the system, like Iraq, Iran, and Venezuela, become targets of our plans for regime change.

2006 Ron Paul 3:57
Ironically, dollar superiority depends on our strong military, and our strong military depends on the dollar. As long as foreign recipients take our dollars for real goods and are willing to finance our extravagant consumption and militarism, the status quo will continue, regardless of how huge our foreign debt and current account deficit become.

2006 Ron Paul 3:58
But real threats come from our political adversaries who are capable of confronting us militarily yet are not bashful about confronting us economically. That is why we see the new challenge from Iran being taken so seriously. The urgent arguments about Iran’s posing a military threat to the security of the United States are no more plausible than the false charges levied against Iraq. Yet there is no effort to resist this march to confrontation by those who grandstand for political reasons against the Iraq War.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:61
But then again our failure to find Osama bin Laden and destroy his network did not dissuade us from taking on Iraqis in a war totally unrelated to 9/11. Concern for pricing oil only in dollars helps explain our willingness to drop everything and teach Saddam Hussein a lesson for his defiance in demanding euros for oil.

2006 Ron Paul 3:62
Once again, there is the urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.

2006 Ron Paul 3:63
Using force to compel people to accept money without real value can only work for a short time. It ultimately leads to economic dislocation, both domestic and international, and always ends with a price to be paid. The economic law that honest exchange demands only things of real value as currency cannot be repealed. The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value. We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold or its equivalent for their oil rather than dollars or Euros. The sooner the better.

2006 Ron Paul 3:64
NEED FOR REFORM IN LIGHT OF LOBBYING SCANDAL Mr. Speaker, I would like to now switch topics and address another subject, and this is regarding the need for reform in light of the recent lobbying scandal.

2006 Ron Paul 3:65
Mr. Speaker, the Abramoff scandal has been described as the biggest Washington scandal ever, bigger than Watergate, bigger than ABSCAM, bigger than Koreagate, bigger than the House banking scandal, bigger than Teapot Dome. Possibly so. It is certainly serious and significant.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:67
But it is not so simple. Maybe what we have seen so far is just the tip of the iceberg and the insidious crisis staring us in the face that we refuse to properly identify and deal with.

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.

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.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:72
This system of government is coming to an end, a fact that significantly contributes to the growing anxiety of most Americans, especially those who pay the bills and receive little in return from the corrupt system that has evolved over the decades.

2006 Ron Paul 3:73
Believe me, if everybody benefited equally, there would be scant outcry over a little bribery and influence peddling. As our country grows poorer and more indebted, fewer people benefit. The beneficiaries are not the hard- working, honest people who pay the taxes. The groups that master the system of lobbying and special interest legislation are the ones who truly benefit.

2006 Ron Paul 3:74
The steady erosion of real wealth in this country and the dependency on government generated by welfare-ism and warfare-ism presents itself as the crisis of the ages. Lobbying scandals and the need for new leadership are mere symptoms of a much, much deeper problem.

2006 Ron Paul 3:75
There are quite a few reasons a relatively free country allows itself to fall into such an ethical and financial mess. One major contributing factor for the past 100 years is our serious misunderstanding of the dangers of pure democracy.

2006 Ron Paul 3:76
The Founders detested democracy and avoided the use of the word in all the early documents. Today, most Americans accept without question a policy of sacrificing life, property and dollars to force democracy on a country 6,000 miles away. This tells us how little opposition there is to democracy. No one questions the principle that a majority electorate should be allowed to rule the country, dictate rights, and redistribute wealth. Our system of democracy has come to mean worshiping the notion that a majority vote for the distribution of government largesse, loot confiscated from the American people through an immoral tax system, is morally and constitutionally acceptable.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:78
Buying influence is much more lucrative than working and producing for a living. The trouble is in the process; the process invites moral corruption. The dollars involved grow larger and larger because of the deficit financing and inflation that pure democracy always generates.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:81
The problem of special interest government that breeds corruption comes from our lack of respect for the Constitution in the first place. So what do we do? We further violate the Constitution, rather than examine it for guidance as to the proper role of the Federal Government.

2006 Ron Paul 3:82
Laws addressing bribery, theft, and fraud already on the books are adequate to deal with the criminal activities associated with lobbying. New laws and regulations are unnecessary.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:84
Even under today’s flawed system of democratic government, which is dedicated to redistributing property by force, a lot could be accomplished if government attracted men and women of good will and character. Members could just refuse to yield to the temptations of office and reject the path to a lobbying career.

2006 Ron Paul 3:85
But it seems once government adopts the rules of immorality, some of the participants in the process yield to the temptation as well, succumbing to the belief that the new moral standards are acceptable.

2006 Ron Paul 3:86
Today, though, any new rules designed to restrain special interest favoritism will only push the money further under the table.

2006 Ron Paul 3:87
Too much is at stake. Corporations, bureaucrats, lobbyists and politicians have grown accustomed to the system and have learned to work within it to survive. Only when the trough is empty will the country wake up. Eliminating earmarks in the budget will not solve the problem.

2006 Ron Paul 3:88
Comparing the current scandal to the big one, the Abramoff types are petty thieves. The government deals in trillions of dollars, the Abramoffs in mere millions. Take a look at the undeclared war we are bogged down in 6,000 miles from our shore. We have spent $300 billion already, but Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz argues that the war will actually cost between $1 trillion and $2 trillion when it is all over. That is trillions, not billions. Even that figure is unpredictable, because we may be in Iraq for another year or 10. Who knows.

2006 Ron Paul 3:89
Considering the war had nothing to do with our national security, we are talking big bucks being wasted in lining the pockets of well-connected American corporations. Waste, fraud, stupidity, and no-bid contracts characterize the process; and it is all done in the name of patriotism and national security. Dissenters are accused of supporting the enemy. Now, this is a ripoff that a little tinkering with House rules and restraints on lobbyists won’t do much to solve.

2006 Ron Paul 3:90
Think of how this undeclared war has contributed to our national deficit, undermined military preparedness, antagonized our allies, and exposed us to an even greater threat from those who resent our destructive occupation. Claiming we have no interest in the oil of the entire Middle East hardly helps our credibility throughout the world.

2006 Ron Paul 3:91
The system of special interest government that has evolved over the last several decades has given us a national debt of over $8 trillion, a debt that now expands by over $600 billion every year. Our total obligations are estimated to be between $15 trillion and $20 trillion. Most people realize that the Social Security system, the Medicare system and the new prescription drug program are unfunded. Thousands of private pension funds are now being dumped on the U.S. Government and American taxpayers. We are borrowing over $700 billion each year from foreigners to finance this extravagance, and we now qualify as the greatest international debtor Nation in history.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:93
These problems can’t be addressed with token leadership changes and tinkering with the budget. A new and dramatic direction is required.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:95
The biggest ripoff of all, the paper money system that is morally and economically equivalent to counterfeiting, is never questioned. It is the deceptive tool for transferring billions from the unsuspecting poor and middle class to the special-interest rich, and in the process the deficit-propelled budget process supports the spending demands of all the special interests, left and right, welfare and warfare, while delaying payment to another day and sometimes even to another generation.

2006 Ron Paul 3:96
The enormous sums spent each year to support the influential special interests expand exponentially and no one really asks how it is accomplished. Raising taxes to balance the budget is out of the question, and rightfully so. Foreigners have been generous in their willingness to loan us most of what we need, but even that generosity is limited and may well diminish in the future.

2006 Ron Paul 3:97
But if the Federal Reserve did not pick up the slack and create huge amounts of new credit and money out of thin air, interest rates would rise and call a halt to the charade. The people who suffer from a depreciated dollar don’t understand why they suffer, while the people who benefit promote the corrupt system. The wealthy clean up on Wall Street and the unsophisticated buy in at the market tops. Wealth is transferred from one group to another, and it is all related to the system that allows politicians and the central banks to create money out of thin air. It is literally legalized counterfeiting.

2006 Ron Paul 3:98
Is it any wonder jobs go overseas? True capital only comes from savings, and Americans save nothing. We only borrow and consume. A counterfeiter has no incentive to take his newly created money and build factories. The incentive for Americans is to buy consumers goods from other countries whose people are willing to save and invest in their factories and jobs. The only way we can continue this charade is to borrow excess dollars back from the foreign governments who sell us goods and perpetuate the pretense of wealth that we enjoy.

2006 Ron Paul 3:99
The system of money contributes significantly to the problems of illegal immigration. On the surface, immigrants escaping poverty in Mexico and Central America come here for the economic opportunity that our economy offers. However, the social services they receive, including education and medical benefits, as well as the jobs they get, are dependent on our perpetual indebtedness to foreign countries. When the burden of debt becomes excessive, this incentive to seek prosperity here in the United States will change.

2006 Ron Paul 3:100
The prime beneficiaries of a paper money system are those who use the money early, governments, politicians, bankers, international corporations and the military industrial complex. Those who suffer most are the ones at the end of the money chain, the people forced to use depreciated dollars to buy urgently needed goods and services to survive. And guess what? By then, their money is worth less, prices soar, and their standard of living goes down.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:102
The remaining wealth that we struggle to hold on to is based on debt, future tax revenues, and our ability to manufacture new tax dollars without restraint.

2006 Ron Paul 3:103
There is only one problem. It all depends on trust in the dollar, especially by foreign holders and purchasers. This trust will end, and signs of the beginning of the end are already appearing.

2006 Ron Paul 3:104
During this administration, the dollar has suffered severely as a consequence of the policy of inflating the currency to pay our bills. The dollar price of gold has more than doubled. This means the dollar has depreciated in terms of gold, the time-honored and reliable measurement of a nation’s currency, by an astounding 55 percent. The long-term economic health of a nation is measured by the soundness of its currency. Once Rome converted from a republic to an empire, she depreciated her currency to pay the bills. This eventually led to Rome’s downfall. That is exactly what America is facing unless we change our ways.

2006 Ron Paul 3:105
Now, this is a real scandal worth worrying about. Since it is not yet on Washington’s radar screen, no attempt at addressing the problem is being made. Instead, we will be sure to make those the Constitution terms petitioners to redress their grievances fill out more forms. We will make government officials attend more ethics courses so they can learn how to be more ethical.

2006 Ron Paul 3:106
A free nation as it moves towards authoritarianism tolerates and hides a lot of the abuse in the system. The human impulse for wealth creation is hard to destroy, but in the end it will happen here if true reform of our economic, monetary, and political system is not accomplished.

2006 Ron Paul 3:107
Whether government programs are promoted for good causes, helping the poor, or bad causes, permitting a military industrial complex to capitalize on war profits, the principles of the market are undermined. Eventually, nearly everyone becomes dependent on the system of deficits, borrowing, printing press money, and the special interest budget process that distributes the loot by majority vote.

2006 Ron Paul 3:108
Today, most business interests and the poor are dependent on government handouts. Education and medical care is almost completely controlled and regulated by an overpowering central government. We have come to accept our role as world policeman and nation builder with little question despite the bad results and inability to pay the bills.

2006 Ron Paul 3:109
The question is, what will it take to bring about the changes in policy needed to reverse this dangerous trend? The answer is, quite a lot; and, unfortunately, it is not on the horizon. It probably will not come until there is a rejection of the dollar as the safest and strongest world currency and a return to commodity money like gold and silver to return confidence.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:111
Counterfeiting money never creates wealth. It only steals wealth from the unsuspecting. The Federal Reserve creation of money is exactly the same. Increasing the dollars in circulation can only diminish the value of each existing dollar. Only production and jobs can make a country wealthy in the long run. Today, it is obvious our country is becoming poorer and more uneasy as our jobs and capital go overseas.

2006 Ron Paul 3:112
The Abramoff scandal can serve a useful purpose if we put it in the context of the entire system that encourages corruption. If it is seen as an isolated case of individual corruption and not an expected consequence of big government run amok, little good will come of it. If we understand how our system of government intervenes in our personal lives, the entire economy and the internal affairs of other nations around the world, we can understand how it generates the conditions where lobbyists thrive.

2006 Ron Paul 3:113
Only then will some good come of it. Only then will we understand that undermining the first amendment right of people to petition the government is hardly a solution to this much more serious and pervasive problem.

2006 Ron Paul 3:114
If we are inclined to improve conditions we should give serious consideration to the following policy reforms, reforms the American people who cherish liberty would enthusiastically support. Let us have no more No Child Left Behind legislation. Let us have no more prescription drugs programs. No more undeclared wars. No more nation building. No more acting as the world policeman. No more deficits. No more excessive spending everywhere. No more political and partisan resolutions designed to embarrass those who may well have legitimate and honest disagreements with current policy. No inferences that disagreeing with policy is unpatriotic or disloyal to the country. No more pretense of budget reforms while ignoring off-budget spending in the ever-growing 14 appropriations bills.

2006 Ron Paul 3:115
Cut funding for corporate welfare, foreign aid, international NGOs, defense contractors, the military industrial complex, and rich corporate farmers before cutting welfare for the poor at home. No more unconstitutional intrusions into the privacy of law-abiding American citizens. Reconsider the hysterical demands for security over liberty by curtailing the ever-expanding oppressive wars on drugs, tax violators and gun ownership.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 3:117
Congress was not meant to be a rubber stamp. It is time for a new direction.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 4
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Don’t Rush To War In Iran 16 February 2006

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL), a member of the International Relations Committee.

(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

2006 Ron Paul 4:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. I rise to express a note of caution regarding

2006 Ron Paul 4:2
this resolution. I see this resolution somewhat like some of the resolutions that we debated and passed prior to our commitment to go into Iraq. As a matter of fact, some of the language is very similar. If you substitute the word “Iraq” for “Iran,” you would find out that these concerns are very similar.

2006 Ron Paul 4:3
I do not quite have the concern that others have expressed that Iran is on the verge of having a nuclear weapon. They have never been found in violation. There has been a lot of talk and a lot of accusation, but technically they have never been found in any violation.

2006 Ron Paul 4:4
My concern for this type of language and these plans is that nothing ever changes. This is the type of thing that occurred before. Of course, we went into Iraq, and yet today the success in Iraq is very questionable. Fifty-five percent of the American people say it was a mistake to have gone into Iraq. Only forty percent of the people support staying in Iraq. Attitudes have shifted now since the success in Iraq has been so poor.

2006 Ron Paul 4:5
We went into Afghanistan to look for Osama bin Laden, and we sort of got distracted. We have forgotten about him just about completely. Instead we went into Iraq. Though the Iraq war is not going well, all of a sudden we are looking to take on another burden, another military mission. I find some things in the resolution that are very confrontational because it invokes sanctions. People say, well, sanctions are not that bad. That is no shooting or killing. But sanctions and boycotts and embargoes, these are acts of war. And, of course, many times our administration has expressed the sentiment that if necessary we are going to use force against Iran; we are going to start bombing. And why do we follow this policy? Especially since it literally helps the radicals in Iran. This mobilizes them. There is an undercurrent in Iran that is sympathetic to America, and yet this brings the radicals together by this type of language and threats. There is no doubt that our policy helps the hard-liners.

2006 Ron Paul 4:6
There has been no talk, it has been implied, but there has been no serious talk that Iran is a threat to our national security. There is no way. Even if they had nuclear weapons, they are not going to be a threat to our national security. Pakistan, that is not a democratic nation. It happens to be a military dictatorship. They have nuclear weapons. India has nuclear weapons. As a matter of fact, the nuclear weapons serve as a balance of power between two countries. The Soviets, had 30,000 nuclear weapons, and we followed a policy of containment. We did not say we have to go into the Soviet Union and bomb their establishment. No. Finally that problem dissipated. And yet we create unnecessary problems for ourselves. We go looking for trouble, and I see this as very detrimental for what we are doing with this resolution.

2006 Ron Paul 4:7
There is one portion of the resolution that concerns me about our urging the Russians and China to take a firm stand, and that has to do with the resolved clause No. 3; it says to the people of Russia and China to “expeditiously consider and take action in response to any report of Iran’s noncompliance” in fulfillment of the mandate of the Security Council to respond and deal with situations . . .

2006 Ron Paul 4:8
Any report? I mean, some report in the newspaper? Is it an IAEA report? Or whatever. That is so open-ended that this is a risky, risky resolution.

2006 Ron Paul 4:9
I urge a “no” vote on this resolution.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 5
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Citizen Soldier Protection Act Of 2006 16 February 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 16, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 5:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Citizen Soldier Protection Act of 2006. This legislation will protect our American soldiers from being forced to serve under a United Nations or other foreign command and from being forced to wear the insignia of the United Nations or other foreign states.

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!

2006 Ron Paul 5:3
I hope my colleagues will join me in defending our men and women in uniform by cosponsoring Citizen Soldier Protection Act of 2006.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 6
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

1 March 2006

2006 Ron Paul 6:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order at this time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?

There was no objection.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) is recognized for 5 minutes.

2006 Ron Paul 6:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, everyone knows our country is deeply in debt. Most Americans decry the rampant growth in government spending. Essentially, however, no one in Washington is concerned enough to do anything about it.

2006 Ron Paul 6:3
Debt is like an addiction: the political pain of withdrawal keeps politicians spending, so they do not offend any special interest groups demanding that government benefits continue. As with all addictions, long-term dependency on a dangerous substance can kill the patient. Dependency on bad policy also can destroy the goose that many believe lays the golden egg.

2006 Ron Paul 6:4
Our ever-increasing government expenditures, which perpetuate a runaway welfare/warfare state, simply are not sustainable. The fallacy comes from the belief that government can provide for our needs and manage a worldwide empire. In truth, government can provide benefits only by first taking resources from productive American citizens or borrowing against the future. Inevitably, government programs exceed the productive capacity of the people or their willingness to finance wasteful spending.

2006 Ron Paul 6:5
The authority to accumulate deficits provides a tremendous incentive to politicians to increase spending. Total spending is the real culprit. The more government taxes, borrows, or inflates, the less chance the people have to spend their resources wisely. The way government spends money also causes great harm. By their very nature, governments are inefficient and typically operate as we recently witnessed with FEMA in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas over the last 6 months. Governments are bureaucratic, inefficient, and invite fraud. This is just as true in foreign affairs as it is in domestic affairs. Throughout history, foreign military adventurism has been economically harmful for those nations bent on intervening abroad. Our Nation is no different.

2006 Ron Paul 6:6
Largesse at home and militarism abroad requires excessive spending and taxation, pushing deficits to a point where the whole system collapses. The biggest recent collapse was the fall of the Soviet Empire just 15 years ago. My contention is that we are not immune from a similar crisis. Today, our national debt is $8.257 trillion. Interestingly, the legal debt limit is $8.184 trillion.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 6:8
But this official debt figure barely touches the subject. Total obligations of the Federal Government, including Social Security and Medicare and prescription drugs, are now over $50 trillion, a sum younger generations will not be able to pay. This means the standard of living of a lot of Americans who are retired will decline sharply in the near future.

2006 Ron Paul 6:9
Two vehicles are used to fund this wild spending. First, the Federal Reserve creates dollars out of thin air and purchases Treasury bills without limit, a very nice convenience.

2006 Ron Paul 6:10
Second, foreign entities, mostly central banks, own $1.5 trillion of our debt. They purchased over $200 billion in just the last 12 months, increasing their holdings by 15 percent. This is a consequence of our current account deficit and the outsourcing of more and more American manufacturing jobs. Few economists argue that this arrangement can continue much longer.

2006 Ron Paul 6:11
Excessive spending, a rapidly growing national debt, the Federal Reserve inflation machine, and foreign borrowing all put pressure on the dollar. Unless we treat our addiction to debt, it will play havoc with the dollar, undermine our economic well-being, and destroy our liberties. It is time for us to get our house in order.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 7
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Treat Physicians Fairly Act 2 March 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, March 2, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 7:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Treat Physicians Fairly Act, legislation providing tax credits to physicians to compensate for the costs of providing uncompensated care. This legislation helps compensate medical professionals for the., costs imposed on them by federal laws forcing doctors to provide uncompensated medical care. The legislation also provides a tax deduction for hospitals that incur costs related to providing uncompensated care.

2006 Ron Paul 7:2
Under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) physicians who work in emergency rooms are required to provide care, regardless of a person’s ability to pay, to anyone who comes into an emergency room. Hospitals are also required by law to bear the full costs of providing free care to anyone who seeks emergency care. Thus, EMTALA forces medical professionals and hospitals to bear the entire cost of caring for the indigent. According to the June 2/9, 2003 edition of AM News, emergency physicians lose an average of $138,000 in revenue per year because of EMTALA. EMTALA also forces physicians and hospitals to follow costly rules and regulations. Physicians can be fined $50,000 for technical EMTALA violations!

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.

2006 Ron Paul 7:4
Ironically, the perceived need to force doctors to provide medical care is itself the result of prior government interventions into the health care market. When I began practicing medicine, it was common for doctors to provide uncompensated care as a matter of charity. However, laws and regulations inflating the cost of medical services and imposing unreasonable liability standards on medical professionals even when they where acting in a volunteer capacity made offering free care cost prohibitive. At the same time, the increasing health care costs associated with the government- facilitated overreliance on third party payments priced more and more people out of the health care market. Thus, the government responded to problems created by its interventions by imposing the EMTALA mandate on physicians, in effect making health care professionals scapegoats for the harmful consequences of government health care polices.

2006 Ron Paul 7:5
EMTALA could actually decrease the care available for low-income Americans at emergency rooms. This is because EMTALA discourages physicians from offering any emergency care. Many physicians in my district have told me that they are considering curtailing their practices, in part because of the costs associated with the EMTALA mandates. Many other physicians are even counseling younger people against entering the medical profession because of the way the Federal Government treats medical professionals. The tax credits created in the Treat Physicians Fairly Act will help mitigate some of the burden government policies place on physicians.

2006 Ron Paul 7:6
The Treat Physicians Fairly Act does not remove any of EMTALA’s mandates; it simply provides that physicians can receive a tax credit for the costs of providing uncompensated care. This is a small step toward restoring fairness to physicians. Furthermore, by providing some compensation in the form of tax credits, the Treat Physicians Fairly Act helps remove the disincentives to remaining active in the medical profession built into the current EMTALA law. I hope my colleagues will take the first step toward removing the unconstitutional burden of providing uncompensated care by cosponsoring the Treat Physicians Fairly Act.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 8
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Sunlight Rule 2 March 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, March 2, 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.

2006 Ron Paul 8:2
My proposed rule requires that no piece of legislation, including conference reports, can be brought before the House of Representatives unless it has been available to Members and staff in both print and electronic version for at least 10 days. My bill also requires that a manager’s amendment that makes substantive changes to a bill be available in both printed and electronic forms at least 72 hours before being voted on. While manager’s amendments are usually reserved for technical changes, oftentimes manager’s amendments contain substantive additions to or subtractions from bills. Members should be made aware of such changes before being asked to vote on a bill.

2006 Ron Paul 8:3
The sunlight rule provides the people the opportunity to be involved in enforcing the rule by allowing a citizen to move for censure of 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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 9
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

S. 2271 Fails To Address The Constitutional Flaws In The PATRIOT Act 7 March 2006

2006 Ron Paul 9:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, contrary to its proponents’ claims, S. 2271 fails to address the constitutional flaws in the PATRIOT Act or protect innocent Americans against future abuses of their civil liberties. Rather, passing this bill makes the permanent authorization of most of the act inevitable. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote against S. 2271 in order to force the House and Senate to craft a new legislation giving the government the tools necessary to fight terrorism without sacrificing constitutional liberties.

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.

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?”

2006 Ron Paul 9:4
Among S. 2271’s flaws are provisions restricting recipients of a “gag” order regarding government seizure of private records from seeking judicial review of such orders for a year and requiring that recipients prove government officials acted in “bad faith,” a ridiculously high standard, simply to be able to communicate that the government has ordered them to turn over private records. The bill also requires that recipients of National Security Letters, which can be abused to sidestep the requirements of the Fourth Amendment, provide the FBI with the names of any attorneys from whom they have sought legal counsel from. S. 2271 would thus prohibit a National Security Letter recipient from even asking a lawyer for advice on complying with the letter without having to report it to the FBI. In fact, S. 2271 requires National Security Letter recipients to give the FBI the names of anyone they tell about the letter. This provision will likely have a chilling effect on a recipient of a National Security Letters ability to seek legal advice or other assistance in challenging or even complying with the National Security Letter.

2006 Ron Paul 9:5
Madam Speaker, S. 2271 does not address the fundamental constitutional problems with the PATRIOT Act. To the contrary, S. 2271 will make most of the PATRIOT Act’s dramatic expansions of federal power a permanent feature of American life. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and work to ensure government can effectively fight terrorism without sacrificing the liberty of law-abiding Americans.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 10
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Sunshine In Monetary Policy Act 7 March 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, March 7, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 10:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Sunshine in Monetary Policy Act, which requires the Federal Reserve to resume reporting the monetary measure known as M3. M3 consists of M1 (M1 is currency in circulation plus travelers’ checks, demand deposits, Negotiable Order of Withdrawal (NOW) accounts, and similar interest-earning checking account balances) plus M2 (M2 is M1 plus household holdings of savings deposits, small time deposits, and retail money market mutual funds balances except for balances held in IRA and Keogh accounts) plus institutional money market mutual fund balances and managed liabilities of deposits consisting of large time deposits, repurchase agreements, and Eurodollars.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 10:3
The Federal Reserve Board has claimed neither policymakers nor the Federal Reserve staff closely track M3. Even if M3 is not used by Federal Reserve Board economists or legislators, many financial services professionals whose livelihoods depend on their ability to obtain accurate information about the money supply rely on M3. For example, my office has been contacted by a professional money manger complaining that the Federal Reserve Board’s discontinuing M3 reports will make it difficult for him to do his job.

2006 Ron Paul 10:4
Whatever lack of interest policymakers are currently displaying in M3 is no doubt related to the mistaken perception that the Federal Reserve Board has finally figured out how to effectively manage a fiat currency. This illusion exists largely because the effects of the Fed’s inflationary polices are concentrated in malinvestments in specific sectors of the economy, leading to “bubbles” such as the one that occurred in the stock market in the late nineties and the bubble that many believe is occurring in the current real estate market. When monetary inflation is reflected in sector- specific bubbles, it is easier to pretend that the bubbles are caused by problems specific to those sectors, instead of reflecting the problems inherent in a fiat currency system. Once the damage to our economy done by our reliance on fiat currency becomes clear, I am certain that policymakers will once again take more interest in M3.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 10:7
Mr. Speaker, knowledge of the money supply is one of the keys to understanding the state of the economy. The least the American people should expect from the Federal Reserve Board is complete and accurate information regarding the money supply. I urge my colleagues to ensure that the American people can obtain that information by cosponsoring the Sunshine in Monetary Policy Act.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 11
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Illegal Drug Problem — Part 1 9 March 2006

2006 Ron Paul 11:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows: Amendment No. 12 printed in House Report 109–387 offered by Mr. PAUL:

At the end of the bill, add the following new section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

SEC. 20. SUNSET.
After section 716, as redesignated by section 14 of this Act, insert the following:

“SEC. 717. SUNSET.

“This Act shall not be in effect after September 30, 2011.”.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 713, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. SOUDER) each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.

2006 Ron Paul 11:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 1/2 minutes.

(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

2006 Ron Paul 11:3
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very simple. I thought it would be very noncontroversial, because it merely sunsets our provision. We have just gone through a period of time of 2 years where there has been no authorizations, but we have done appropriations as necessary.

2006 Ron Paul 11:4
The amendment merely says, this act shall not be in effect after September 30, 2011. So that is 5 years, which I think is very adequate. But I would want to express my agreement with the authors of this particular bill, because we do have a very serious problem in this country with drugs.

2006 Ron Paul 11:5
I, as a physician, am very much aware of the seriousness of it. I also agree that prescription drugs are probably every bit as bad or much worse, because there is so much dependency on psychotropic drugs.

2006 Ron Paul 11:6
But, nevertheless, I come down on the side of saying no matter how good legislation like this is, it backfires; there are too many unintended consequences. In such a short period of time, all I can suggest to my colleagues is that prohibition in the ultimate sense was tried with alcohol.

2006 Ron Paul 11:7
And alcohol is still now a severe problem in this country. And we knew that Prohibition produced many more problems than the alcohol itself. I think that is true with drugs. I think we have allowed ourselves to be carried away, to a large degree, because now we have laws that lack compassion. We do know, in the medical field, that marijuana can be helpful to cancer patients and AIDS patients can be helped where our drugs are not helpful; and to me this is just sad that we override State laws that permit it.

2006 Ron Paul 11:8
The overwhelming number of people in the country now are saying that we ought to allow marijuana to be used for very sick patients. Not too long ago, just this week, I had a meeting with a student that came from a central Asian country. He was an exchange student. He says the big subject at his school was, what is the age limit when I can drink alcohol? They would ask him that and he said, there is no age limit.

2006 Ron Paul 11:9
So I asked him, I said, is there a drinking problem in your country? And he says no. He says it is uneventful. It is the excitement of something being illegal that actually makes the problem a lot worse.

2006 Ron Paul 11:10
And even in our country, we had a grand experiment from the beginning of our country up until about 35 years ago. We had very few of these laws. Yet all we can notice now is that we have spent, in today’s dollars, over $200 billion in the last 35 years, and we do not have a whole lot to show for it.

2006 Ron Paul 11:11
So I would grant you there is a serious problem. We should do whatever we can to help. I just do not think more legislation is required.

2006 Ron Paul 11:12
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 12
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Yields Time To Ms. Waters 9 March 2006

2006 Ron Paul 12:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 3/4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. WATERS).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 13
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Illegal Drug Problem — Part 2 9 March 2006

2006 Ron Paul 13:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas has 3 minutes remaining.

2006 Ron Paul 13:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

2006 Ron Paul 13:3
Mr. Chairman, earlier I mentioned that prohibition was a total failure with alcohol and that it is very similar, and I think the gentleman from Indiana helped make my point. He is a bit frustrated with the enforcement of the laws on the books, and for what reason I do not know, but we certainly ought to be frustrated with the results. But the laws are difficult to enforce and I understand and sense his frustration with this.

2006 Ron Paul 13:4
One of the major reasons why I object to this approach is not only the cost. The cost is pretty important and I think it is pretty important to realize it does not work very well, if at all; but we also ought to look at the damage done with our mistaken thoughts that this is doing a lot of good.

2006 Ron Paul 13:5
Once a war is declared, whether it is a war overseas or whether it is a domestic war on some evil here, that is when the American people should look out for their civil liberties. There, the issue of privacy is attacked. So now we have a war on terrorism and we have the PATRIOT Act and all these other things that intrude on the civil rights and civil liberties of Americans, and, at the same time, not achieving a whole lot of good results.

2006 Ron Paul 13:6
This is what happens when there is a war on. Those people who are trying to avoid taxes, all law-abiding citizens have to obey all these laws. So as soon as there is a war, look out for your civil liberties and your privacy. The war on drugs has done a great deal of harm to our right of privacy.

2006 Ron Paul 13:7
Once again, I agree with the argument, there are a great deal of problems in this country with the illegal use of drugs, but what I am saying is it does not help to have this type of a war on drugs because it tends to distort things. It raises prices artificially high. It causes all kind of ramifications that actually cause more killing and dying. This is why prohibition of alcohol was stopped, because people died from drinking bad alcohol, and the gangs sold the alcohol. The same thing happens today.

2006 Ron Paul 13:8
Like I mentioned, that student that lived in the country, and he was 16 years old, and there were no rules or laws against teenagers drinking beer or alcohol and there was no problem. Kids did not drink. It was not exciting to do it. So there is a certain element of truth to that. Kids smoking cigarettes is against the law. You sneak off and smoke cigarettes. That happens to be what teenagers do.

2006 Ron Paul 13:9
So no matter how well-intended legislation like this is, it tends to have too many unintended consequences, it costs too much money. And we fail to realize that we in this country live with a greater amount of personal liberty and respect for State and local law enforcement, we had less drug problems. Think about it. Through the latter part of the 18th century, the 19th century, the early part of the 20th century, essentially no laws, and we had a lot less problems.

2006 Ron Paul 13:10
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 14
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Demands Recorded Vote 9 March 2006

The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the noes appeared to have it.

2006 Ron Paul 14:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will be postponed.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 15
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Opposes Supplemental Spending Bill 15 March 2006

2006 Ron Paul 15:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this legislation, which makes “emergencies” out of non-emergencies and fails to provide assistance to my home State of Texas, which did suffer an emergency in the form of Hurricane Rita last summer.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 15:3
Is it really an emergency to send $1.2 billion to pay off our allies for their help in Afghanistan? Won’t these countries in close proximity presumably benefit more than even we will from the stability that we are told U.S. troops will provide? Perhaps these countries should be paying us for stabilizing their neighborhood. But no, it is always the U.S. taxpayer who ends up paying.

2006 Ron Paul 15:4
Is $36 million more for taxpayer-funded broadcasting programs overseas really an emergency?

2006 Ron Paul 15:5
Is $30 million to build roads in Liberia an emergency, when roads in Texas are still unrepaired after Hurricane Rita?

2006 Ron Paul 15:6
Mr. Chairman, I am offering an amendment to this “emergency” supplemental that reduces some of the non-emergency “emergencies” by $500 million and allocates that money for the recovery of the State of Texas from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Additionally, my amendment will take another half-billion dollars from the non-emergency portions of this bill and apply it toward the Federal deficit.

2006 Ron Paul 15:7
The real emergency is the rate that this government is spending money we do not have on policies that we cannot afford while ignoring what should be our real priorities.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 16
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To Harry Browne 15 March 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, March 15, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 16:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, America lost a great champion of liberty when Harry Browne passed away on March 1, at the age of 72. Harry had a passion for liberty and knowledge of a wide variety of subjects. His communication style, as he himself so marvelously put it, focused on converting his opponents rather than winning the argument. These attributes helped make him one of the most effective proponents of the freedom philosophy I have had the privilege of knowing. Harry’s numerous books and columns, his radio and Internet broadcasts, and his speeches educated millions in sound economics and the benefits of a free society. Harry motivated many people to become activists in the movement to restore American liberties.

2006 Ron Paul 16:2
Harry first came to public attention in the 1970 when he penned a best-selling investment book, How You Can Profit From the Coming Devaluation, which foresaw President Richard Nixon’s abandonment of the gold standard and the ways the American economy would be damaged by the inevitable resulting inflation. Harry’s book helped many Americans survive, and even profit, during the economic troubles of the seventies. It also introduced millions of people to the insights developed by followers of the Austrian school of economics regarding the dangers fiat currency poses to both prosperity and liberty posed by fiat. How You Can Profit From the Coming Devaluation is generally recognized as the founding document of the hard money movement, which combined the insights of the Austrian economists with a practical investment strategy.

2006 Ron Paul 16:3
Harry’s third book, You Can Profit from a Monetary Crisis, reached number one on the New York Times bestseller list. Other popular books by Harry include How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World, The Great Libertarian Offer, and Why Government Doesn’t Work. I was pleased to write the foreword for one of Harry’s books, Liberty A–Z: Libertarian Soundbites You Can Use Right Now, a collection of direct, thought-provoking, and often humorous responses to the questions advocates of the freedom philosophy face.

2006 Ron Paul 16:4
During the nineties, Harry worked to advance liberty as a presidential candidate, columnist, radio talk-show host, and columnist. He also hosted an internet-based talk show and founded DownsizeDC, a grassroots advocacy group whose goals are accurately summed up in its title. Even while struggling with Lou Gehrig’s disease, Harry maintained a full schedule of writing, hosting his radio show, and speaking around the country.

2006 Ron Paul 16:5
Harry’s efforts were not limited to the economic realm. He understood the threat to liberty and prosperity posed by global crusades for democracy, as well as the importance of opposing restrictions on civil liberties. Harry’s outspoken defense of civil liberties and the Framers’ foreign policy of nonintervention took on added importance in the last years of his life when too many self-styled advocates of liberty attempted to curry favor with the political establishment by focusing solely on issues of economic liberty or combined advocacy of low taxes and regulations with active support for militarism and restrictions on personal liberty.

2006 Ron Paul 16:6
In all his educational, financial, and political work Harry served as a model for everyone who works for the free society. Harry was principled and uncompromising in message, while temperate and respectful of differing opinions in delivery. He avoided the histrionics too common in our today’s talk show culture, and he never personalized his arguments. Even when an opponent resorted to ad hominem attacks, Harry always kept his presentation on the high ground of ideas and principles. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I extend my sympathy to Harry Browne’s wife, Pamela, and daughter Auburn, as well as the many he befriend in his years in the freedom movement, and I pay tribute to Harry Browne for his lifelong efforts on behalf of individual liberty.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 17
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Amendment No. 9 Offered By Mr. Paul — Part 1 16 March 2006

2006 Ron Paul 17:1
AMENDMENT NO. 9 OFFERED BY MR. PAUL Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 18
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Amendment No. 9 Offered By Mr. Paul — Part 2 16 March 2006

Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday March 15, 2006, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.

2006 Ron Paul 18:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

2006 Ron Paul 18:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is offered in an attempt to save some money. If my amendment were to pass, we would cut $500 million from this appropriation. Everybody knows that this is a huge appropriations bill and that it is a supplemental. It does not fall under the category of the budget rules. It is $92 billion. It involves the finances of our military approach to our foreign policy around the world, which is two-thirds of this funding. The other third, 19 or $20 billion is for domestic use. It is a huge sum of money. And we are doing this at a time when we are running a deficit, our national debt at least is going up over $600 billion a year, and we are concerned this week about raising the national debt limit to over $9 trillion.

2006 Ron Paul 18:3
It is unfortunate that’s the way the system works around here. It is very difficult to cut anything. My amendment is an attempt to seriously consider the problems that we have in reining in the spending and living within our means.

2006 Ron Paul 18:4
The major point I make here is by cutting $1 billion from the military portion of the bill it makes the point that we spend way too much on military operations. We spend more on military operations around the world than all the other countries of the world put together. And we do not have a lot to show for it. When you think about what has happened in Afghanistan, the problems there, what is happening in Iraq and the potential problems that are coming in Iran; yet the money is continuing to be spent in this reckless manner.

2006 Ron Paul 18:5
So I propose we cut a billion dollars out of that which would be easily done, because it should be cut a lot more. I would then take $500 million of this and I would put it into some areas of the country that have been neglected from some of the hurricane damage that has existed in the south, in particular, in Texas.

2006 Ron Paul 18:6
So to me, this is an approach to emphasize the importance of foreign policy, that this notion that we are in the business of nation-building, and that we are the policemen of the world, and that we should reconsider that and save money. At the same time, we could reduce our deficit while actually increasing funding for some of the serious problems that we have in this country. So to me, it sounds rather logical to do this. To cut things from, say, building roads in Liberia. Yes, Liberia needs money, but what about the people that have been hit by the hurricanes? They need some money, too. And the way we do it always involves deficit financing.

2006 Ron Paul 18:7
My approach emphasizes the need to cut in the places less important than any other places, spend the money here at home, and end up actually cutting back on the deficit financing. Otherwise we are going to continue with this process. I see no serious attempt whatsoever, when we bring up supplemental appropriations bills like this, to rein in the spending and even to pretend that we are cutting. This whole idea of putting domestic spending together with military spending is not a ploy to maybe reduce spending. It is the ploy to make sure that people are trapped into voting for both and nobody can vote against the domestic spending, and nobody can vote against the military spending. And yet, of course, spending is excessive in both areas.

2006 Ron Paul 18:8
But my amendment, the way it works, emphasizes mostly cutting the militarism and the type of foreign policy that we finance around the world that has so many ramifications and unintended consequences and so much blow-back, that it literally hurts our national defense and ends up costing us so much more money.

2006 Ron Paul 18:9
Long term, to come up with a solution, it will not occur with tinkering with the budget. It will not happen today, nor tomorrow. The only way that we can make any sense out of our spending in this country and on this floor will be to reassess our policies. We must ask: Do we want to continue to be the policemen of the world? Do we really believe we can nation-build around the world and that we can spread democracy by force? The result is then, if we do not like the results of the democratic elections then we say, well, it did not work. We cannot support that democratically elected leader.

2006 Ron Paul 18:10
So it is a change in policy, at least a reconsideration of what we think we should be doing around the world. At the same time, we have to reconsider the domestic spending.

2006 Ron Paul 18:11
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 19
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Making The World Safe For Christianity 28 March 2006

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) is recognized for 5 minutes.

2006 Ron Paul 19:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, the top neoconservative of the 20th century was Woodrow Wilson. His supposed idealism, symbolized in the slogan, “Make the world safe for democracy,” resulted in untold death and destruction across the world for many decades.

2006 Ron Paul 19:2
His deceit and manipulation of the prewar intelligence from Europe dragged America into an unnecessary conflict that cost the world and us dearly. Without the disastrous Versailles Treaty, World War II could have been averted and the rise to power of Communists around the world might have been halted.

2006 Ron Paul 19:3
We seem to never learn from our mistakes. Today’s neocons are as idealistically misled and aggressive in remaking the Middle East as the Wilsonian do-gooders. Even given the horrendous costs of the Iraq War and the unintended consequences that plague us today, the neocons are eager to expand their regime-change policy to Iran by force.

2006 Ron Paul 19:4
The obvious shortcomings of our regime change and occupation of Afghanistan are now readily apparent. The Taliban was ousted from power, but they have regrouped and threaten the delicate stability that now exists in that country. Opium drug production is once again a major operation with drug lords controlling a huge area of the country outside of Kabul. And now the real nature of the government we created has been revealed in the case of Abdul Rahman, the Muslim who faced a possible death sentence from the Karzai administration for converting to Christianity. Even now that Mr. Rahman is free due to Western pressure his life remains in danger.

2006 Ron Paul 19:5
Our bombs and guns have not changed the fact that the new puppet Afghan Government still follows Sharia law. The same loyalty to Sharia exists in Iraq where we are trying hard to stabilize things, and all this is done in the name of spreading democracy.

2006 Ron Paul 19:6
The sad fact is that even under the despicable rule of Saddam Hussein, Christians were safer in Iraq than they are today. Saddam Hussein’s foreign minister was a practicing Christian. Today, thousands of Christians have fled Iraq following our occupation to countries like Jordan and Syria. Those Christians who have remained in Iraq fear for their lives every day. That should tell us something about the shortcomings of a policy that presumes to make the world safe for democracy.

2006 Ron Paul 19:7
The Muslim world is not fooled by our talk of spreading democracy and values. The evidence is too overwhelming that we do not hesitate to support dictators and install puppet governments when it serves our interests. When democratic elections result in the elevation of a leader or a party not to our liking, we do not hesitate for a minute to undermine that government.

2006 Ron Paul 19:8
This hypocrisy is rarely recognized by the American people. It is much more comfortable to believe in slogans, to believe that we are defending our goodness and spreading true liberty. We accept this and believe strongly in the cause, strongly enough to sacrifice many of our sons and daughters and stupendous amounts of money to spread our ideals through force.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 19:10
The toughest task is analyzing what we do from their perspective. We should try harder to place ourselves in the shoes of those who live in the Arab countries where our efforts currently are concentrated. We are outraged by a Muslim country that would even consider the death penalty for a Christian convert, but many Muslims see all that we do as a reflection of Western Christianity which, to them, includes Europe and America. They see everything in terms of religion.

2006 Ron Paul 19:11
When our bombs and sanctions kill hundreds of thousands of their citizens, they see it as an attack on their religion by Christians. To them our actions represent a crusade to change their culture and their political systems. They do not see us as having noble intentions. Cynicism and realism tell them that we are involved in the Middle East to secure the oil that we need.

2006 Ron Paul 19:12
Our occupation and influence in the holy lands of the Middle East will always be suspect. This includes all the countries of the Arabian Peninsula, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. Naively believing otherwise will guarantee continuing hostility in Iraq.

2006 Ron Paul 19:13
Our meddling will remain an incitement for radicals to strike us here at home in future terrorist attacks. All the intelligence gathering in the world will serve little purpose if we do not come to understand exactly why they hate us despite the good intentions that many Americans hold dear.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 20
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

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.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 20:4
Instead of fostering open dialog and wide- ranging intellectual inquiry, the main effect of the Academic Bill of Rights will be to further stifle debate about controversial topics. This is because many administrators will order their professors not to discuss contentious and divisive subjects in order to avoid a possible confrontation with the Federal Government. Those who doubt this should remember that many TV and radio stations minimized political programming in the 60s and 70s in order to avoid running afoul of the Federal “fairness doctrine.”

2006 Ron Paul 20:5
I am convinced that some promoters of the Academic Bill of Rights would be unhappy if, instead of fostering greater debate, this bill silences discussion of certain topics. Scan the websites of some of the organizations promoting the Academic Bill of Rights and you will also find calls for silencing critics of the Iraq war and other aspects of American foreign policy.

2006 Ron Paul 20:6
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 609 expands Federal control over higher education; in particular through an Academic Bill of Rights which could further stifle debate and inquiry on America’s college campuses. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 21
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Foxx). Under the Speaker’s announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) is recognized for half the time remaining until midnight.

2006 Ron Paul 21:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, it has been 3 years since the U.S. launched its war against Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. Of course, now almost everybody knows there were no weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein posed no threat to the United States. Though some of our soldiers serving in Iraq still believe they are there because Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11, even the administration now acknowledges that there was no connection.

2006 Ron Paul 21:2
Indeed, no one can be absolutely certain why we invaded Iraq. The current excuse, also given for staying in Iraq, is to make it a democratic state friendly to the United States. There are now fewer denials that securing oil supplies played a significant role in our decision to go into Iraq and stay there. That certainly would explain why the U.S. taxpayers are paying such a price to build and maintain numerous, huge, permanent military bases in Iraq. There are also funding a new $1 billion embassy, the largest in the world.

2006 Ron Paul 21:3
The significant question we must ask ourselves is, what have we learned from these 3 years in Iraq? With plans now being laid for regime change in Iran, it appears we have learned absolutely nothing. There still are plenty of administration officials who daily paint a rosy picture of the Iraq we have created. But I wonder, if the past 3 years were nothing more than a bad dream and our Nation suddenly awakened, how many would for national security reasons urge the same invasion? Or would we instead give a gigantic sigh of relief that it was only a bad dream, that we need not relive the 3- year nightmare of death, destruction, chaos and stupendous consumption of tax dollars? Conceivably, we would still see oil prices under $30 a barrel, and, most importantly, 20,000 severe U.S. casualties would not have occurred. My guess is 99 percent of all Americans would be thankful it was only a bad dream and would never support the invasion knowing what we know today.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:5
Though Iran is hardly a perfect democracy, its system is far superior to most of our Arab allies, about which we never complain. Already the coordinated propaganda has galvanized the American people against Iran for the supposed threat it poses to us with weapons of mass destruction that are no more present than those Saddam Hussein was alleged to have had.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:7
Since 2001, we have spent over $300 billion and occupied two Muslim nations, Afghanistan and Iraq. We are poorer, but certainly not safer, for it. We invaded Afghanistan to get Osama bin Laden, the ringleader behind 9/11. This effort has been virtually abandoned. Even though the Taliban was removed from power in Afghanistan, most of the country is now occupied and controlled by warlords who manage a drug trade bigger than ever before. Removing the Taliban from power in Afghanistan actually served the interests of Iran, the Taliban’s arch- enemy, more than our own.

2006 Ron Paul 21:8
The long time neocon goal to remake Iraq prompted us to abandoned the search for Osama bin Laden. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was hyped as a noble mission, justified by misrepresentation of intelligence concerning Saddam Hussein and his ability to attack us and his neighbors. This failed policy has created the current chaos in Iraq, chaos that many describe as a civil war.

2006 Ron Paul 21:9
Saddam Hussein is out of power, and most people are pleased. Yet some Iraqis who dream of stability long for his authoritarian rule. But, once again, Saddam Hussein’s removal benefited the Iranians, who considered Saddam Hussein an arch-enemy.

2006 Ron Paul 21:10
Our obsession with democracy, which is clearly conditional when one looks at our response to the recent Pakistani elections, will allow the majority Shia to claim leadership title if Iraq’s election actually leads to an organized government. This delights the Iranians, who are close allies of the Iraqi Shia.

2006 Ron Paul 21:11
Talk about unintended consequences. This war has produced chaos, civil war, death and destruction and huge financial costs. It has eliminated two of Iran’s worst enemies and placed power in Iran’s best friends.

2006 Ron Paul 21:12
Even this apparent failure of policy does nothing to restrain the current march towards a similar confrontation with Iran. What will it take for us to learn from our failures? Common sense tells us the war in Iraq soon will spread to Iran. Fear of imaginary nuclear weapons or an incident involving Iran, whether planned or accidental, will rally the support needed for us to move on Muslim country number three.

2006 Ron Paul 21:13
All the past failures and unintended consequences will be forgotten. Even with deteriorating support for the Iraq war, new information, well-planned propaganda, or a major incident will override the skepticism and heartache of our frustrating fight. Vocal opponents of an attack on Iran again will be labeled unpatriotic, unsupportive of the troops, and sympathetic to Iran’s radicals.

2006 Ron Paul 21:14
Instead of capitulating to these charges, we should point out that those who maneuver us into war do so with little concern for our young people serving in the military and theoretically think little of their own children if they have any. It is hard to conceive that political supporters of the war would consciously claim that a preemptive war for regime change where young people are sacrificed is only worth it if the deaths and the injuries are limited to other people’s children. This I am sure would be denied, which means their own children are technically available for the sacrifice that is so often praised and glorified for the benefit of families who have lost so much. If so, they should think more of their own children. If this is not so and their children are not available for such sacrifice, the hypocrisy is apparent. Remember, most neocon planners fall into the category of chicken hawks.

2006 Ron Paul 21:15
For the past 3 years, it has been inferred that, if one is not in support of the current policy, one is against the troops and supports the enemy. Lack of support for the war in Iraq was said to be supportive of Saddam Hussein and his evil policies. This is an insulting and preposterous argument. Those who argued for the containment of the Soviets were never deemed sympathetic to Stalin or Kruschev. Lack of support for the Iraq war should never be used as an argument that one was sympathetic to Saddam Hussein. Containment and diplomacy are far superior to confront an enemy, and are less costly and far less dangerous, especially when there is no evidence that our national security is being threatened.

2006 Ron Paul 21:16
Although a large percentage of the public now rejects the various arguments for the Iraq war 3 years ago, they were easily persuaded by the politicians and media to fully support the invasion. Now, after 3 years of terrible pain for so many, even the troops are awakening from their slumber and sensing the fruitlessness of our failing effort. Seventy-two percent of our troops now serving in Iraq say it is time to come home. Yet, the majority still cling to the propaganda that they are there because of the 9/11 attacks, something even the administration has ceased to claim. Propaganda is pushed on our troops to exploit their need to believe in a cause that is worth the risk to life and limb.

2006 Ron Paul 21:17
I smell an expanded war in the Middle East and pray that I am wrong. I sense that circumstances will arise that demand support regardless of the danger and the cost. Any lack of support once again will be painted as being soft on terrorism and al Qaeda. We will be told we must support Israel, support patriotism, support the troops, defend freedom. The public too often only smells the stench of war after the killing starts. Public objection comes later on, but eventually it helps to stop the war.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:19
It is astonishing that after 3 years of bad results and tremendous expense there is little indication, we will reconsider our traditional non-interventionist foreign policy. Unfortunately, regime change, nation-building, policing the world, protecting our oil still constitutes an acceptable policy by the leaders of both major parties. It is already assumed by many in Washington I talk to that Iran is dead serious about obtaining a nuclear weapon and is a much more formidable opponent than Iraq. Besides, Mahmud Ahmadinejad threatened to destroy Israel, and that cannot stand. Washington sees Iran as a greater threat than Iraq ever was, a threat that cannot be ignored.

2006 Ron Paul 21:20
Iran’s history is being ignored just as we ignored Iraq’s history. This ignorance or deliberate misrepresentation of our recent relationship to Iraq and Iran is required to generate the fervor needed to attack once again a country that poses no threat to us. Our policies toward Iran have been more provocative than those toward Iraq. Yes, President Bush labeled Iran part of the axis of evil and unnecessarily provoked their anger at us. But our mistakes with Iran started a long time before this President took office. In 1953, our CIA, with the help of the British, participated in overthrowing the democratic- elected leader, Mohammed Mossadegh. We placed in power the Shah. He ruled ruthlessly but protected our oil interests, and for that, we protected him. That is, until 1979. We even provided him with Iran’s first nuclear reactor.

2006 Ron Paul 21:21
Evidently, we did not buy the argument that his oil supplies precluded a need for civilian nuclear energy. From 1953 to 1979, his authoritarian rule served to incite a radical opposition led by the Ayatollah Khomeini who overthrew the Shah and took our hostages in 1979. This blow-back event was slow in coming, but Muslims have long memories. The hostage crisis and overthrow of the Shah by the Ayatollah was a major victory for the radical Islamists. Most Americans either never knew about or easily forgot about our unwise meddling in the internal affairs in Iran in 1953.

2006 Ron Paul 21:22
During the 1980s, we further antagonized Iran by supporting the Iraqis in their invasion of Iran. This made our relationship with Iran worse, while sending a message to Saddam Hussein that invading a neighboring country is not all that bad. When Hussein got the message from our State Department that his plan to invade Kuwait was not of much concern to the United States, he immediately preceded to do so. We, in a way, encouraged him to do it almost like we encouraged him to go into Iran. Of course, this time our reaction was quite different, and all of a sudden, our friendly ally, Saddam Hussein, became our arch enemy.

2006 Ron Paul 21:23
The American people may forget this flip-flop, but those who suffered from it never forgot. And the Iranians remember well our meddling in their affairs. Labeling the Iranians part of the axis of evil further alienated them and contributed to the animosity directed toward us.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:25
There is no evidence of a threat to us by Iran and no reason to plan and initiate a confrontation with her. There are many reasons not to do so: Iran does not have a nuclear weapon and there is no evidence that she is working on one, only conjecture. Even if Iran had a nuclear weapon, why would this be different from Pakistan, India, and North Korea having one? Why does Iran have less right to a defensive weapon than these other countries? If Iran had a nuclear weapon, the odds of her initiating an attack against anybody, which would guarantee her own annihilation are zero, and the same goes for the possibility she would place weapons in the hands of a nonstate terrorist group.

2006 Ron Paul 21:26
Pakistan has spread nuclear technology throughout the world, and in particular, to the North Koreans. They flaunt international restrictions on nuclear weapons, but we reward them just as we reward India. We needlessly and foolishly threaten Iran, even though they have no nuclear weapons, but listen to what a leading Israeli historian, Martin van Creveld had to say about this: “Obviously we do not want Iran to have a nuclear weapon, and I do not know if they are developing them. But if they are not developing them, they are crazy.”

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:28
We forget that the weapons we feared Saddam Hussein had were supplied to him by the United States, and we refused to believe U.N. inspectors and the CIA that he no longer had them. Likewise, Iran received her first nuclear reactor from us; now we are hysterically wondering if some day she might decide to build a bomb in self-interest. Anti-Iran voices beating the drums of confrontation distort the agreement made in Paris and the desire of Iran to restart the enrichment process. Their suspension of the enrichment process was voluntary and not a legal obligation. Iran has an absolute right under the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty to develop and use nuclear power for peaceful purposes, and this is now said to be an egregious violation of the NPT. It is the U.S. and her allies that are distorting and violating the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.

2006 Ron Paul 21:29
Likewise, our proliferation of nuclear material to India is a clear violation of the nuclear proliferation treaty as well.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:31
Serious plans are being laid for the next distraction which will further spread this war in the Middle East. The unintended consequences of this effort surely will be worse than any of the complications experienced in the 3- year occupation of Iraq.

2006 Ron Paul 21:32
Our offer of political and financial assistance to foreign and domestic individuals who support the overthrow of the current Iranian government is fraught with danger and saturated with arrogance. Imagine how Americans citizens would respond if China supported similar efforts here in the United States to bring about regime change. How many of us would remain complacent if someone like Timothy McVeigh had been financed by a foreign power? Is it any wonder the Iranian people resent us and the attitude of our leaders?

2006 Ron Paul 21:33
Even though ElBaradei and his IAEA investigations have found no violations of the NPT required IAEA safeguard agreement, the Iran Freedom Support Act still demands that Iran prove they have no nuclear weapons, refusing to acknowledge that proving a negative is impossible. Let there be no doubt, though, the words “regime change” are not found in the bill. That is precisely what they are talking about. Neoconservative Michael Ladine, one of the architects of the Iraq fiasco, testifying before the International Relations Committee in favor of the Iraq Freedom Support Act stated it plainly. “I know some members would prefer to dance around the explicit declaration of regime change as the policy of this country, but anyone looking closely at the language and the context of the Iraq Freedom Support Act and its close relative in the Senate can clearly see that this is, in fact, the essence of the matter.

2006 Ron Paul 21:34
You can’t have freedom in Iran without bringing down the mulahs.”

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:36
Secretary of State Rice recently signaled a sharp shift toward confrontation in Iran’s policy as she insisted on $75 million to finance propaganda, through TV and radio broadcasts into Iran. She expressed this need because of the so-called “aggressive” policies of the Iranian government. We are 7,000 miles from home, telling the Iraqis and the Iranians what kind of government they will have, backed up by the use of our military force, and we call them the aggressors? We fail to realize the Iranian people, for whatever faults they may have, have not in modern times invaded any neighboring country. This provocation is so unnecessary, costly and dangerous.

2006 Ron Paul 21:37
Just as the invasion of Iraq inadvertently served the interests of the Iranians, military confrontation with Iran will have unintended consequences. The successful alliance engendered between the Iranians and the Iraqi majority Shiia will prove a formidable opponent for us in Iraq as that civil war spreads. Shipping in the Persian Gulf through the Straits of Hormuz may well be disrupted by the Iranians in retaliation for any military confrontation. Since Iran would be incapable of defending herself by conventional means, it seems logical that they might well resort to terrorist attacks on us here at home. They will not passively lie down, nor can they be easily destroyed.

2006 Ron Paul 21:38
One of the reasons given for going into Iraq was to secure our oil supplies. This backfired badly. Production in Iraq is down 50 percent, and world oil prices have more than doubled to $60 per barrel. Meddling with Iran could easily have a similar result. We could see oil at $120 a barrel and gasoline at $6 a gallon. The obsession the neo-cons have with remaking the Middle East is hard to understand. One thing that is easy to understand is none of those who plan these wars expect to fight in them, nor do they expect their children to die in some IED explosion.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:40
Interestingly, many early supporters of the Iraq War are now highly critical of the President, having been misled as to reasons for the invasion and occupation. But these same people are only too eager to accept the same flawed arguments for our need to undermine the Iranian government.

2006 Ron Paul 21:41
The President’s 2006 National Security Strategy, just released, is every bit as frightening as the one released in 2002 endorsing preemptive war. In it he claims, “We face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran.” He claims the Iranians have for 20 years hidden key nuclear activities, though the IAEA makes no such assumption, nor has the Security Council in at least 20 years ever sanctioned Iran. The clincher in the National Security Strategy document is if diplomatic efforts fail, confrontation will follow. The problem is the diplomatic effort, if one wants to use that term, is designed to fail by demanding the Iranians prove an unprovable negative. The West, led by the U.S., is in greater violation by demanding Iran not pursue any nuclear technology, even peaceful, that the NPT guarantees is their right.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:44
Madam Speaker, there are reasons for my concern and let me list those. Most Americans are uninterested in foreign affairs until we get mired down in a war that costs too much, lasts too long, and kills too many U.S. troops. Getting out of a lengthy war is difficult, as I remember all too well with Vietnam while serving in the U.S. Air Force in 1963 to 1968. Getting into war is much easier.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:46
If we accepted the traditional American and constitutional foreign policy of nonintervention across the board, there would be no temptation to go along with these unnecessary military operations. A foreign policy of intervention invites all kinds of excuses for spreading ourselves around the world. The debate shifts from nonintervention versus intervention, to where and for what particular reason should we involve ourselves. Most of the time, it is for less than honorable reasons. Even when cloaked in honorable slogans, like making the world safe for democracy, the unintended consequences and the ultimate costs cancel out the good intentions.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:48
Arguing over the relative merits of each intervention is not a true debate, because it assumes that intervention per se is both moral and constitutional. Arguing for a Granada-type intervention because of its success and against the Iraq War because of its failure and cost is not enough. We must once again, understand the wisdom of rejecting entangling alliances and rejecting Nation building. We must stop trying to police the world and, instead, embrace noninterventionism as the proper moral and constitutional foreign policy of our country.

2006 Ron Paul 21:49
The best reason to oppose interventionism is that people die, needlessly, on both sides. We have suffered over 20,000 American casualties in Iraq already, and Iraqi civilian deaths probably number over 100,000 by all reasonable counts.

2006 Ron Paul 21:50
The next best reason is that the rule of law is undermined, especially when military interventions are carried out without a declaration of war. Whenever a war is ongoing, civil liberties are under attack at home. The current war in Iraq and the misnamed war on terror have created an environment here at home that affords little constitutional protection of our citizens’ rights. Extreme nationalism is common during war. Signs of this are now apparent.

2006 Ron Paul 21:51
Prolonged wars, as this one has become, have profound consequences. No matter how much positive spin is put on it, war never makes a society wealthier. World War II was not a solution to the Depression, as many claim. If $1 billion is spent on weapons of war, the GDP records positive growth in that amount, but the expenditure is consumed by destruction of the weapons or bombs it bought, and the real economy is denied $1 billion to produce products that would have raised someone’s standard of living.

2006 Ron Paul 21:52
Excessive spending to finance the war causes deficits to explode. There are never enough tax dollars available to pay the bills, and since there are not enough willing lenders and dollars available, the Federal Reserve must create new money out of thin air and new credit for buying Treasury bills to prevent interest rates from rising too rapidly. Rising rates would tip off everyone that there are not enough savings or taxes to finance the war.

2006 Ron Paul 21:53
This willingness to print whatever amount of money the government needs to pursue the war is literally inflation. Without a fiat monetary system, wars would be very difficult to finance since the people would never tolerate the taxes required to pay for it. Inflation of the money supply delays and hides the real cost of war. The result of the excessive creation of new money leads to the higher cost of living everyone decries and the Fed denies. Since taxes are not levied, the increase in prices that results from printing too much money is technically the tax required to pay for the war.

2006 Ron Paul 21:54
The tragedy is that the inflation tax is borne more by the poor and the middle class than the rich. Meanwhile, the well-connected rich, the politicians, the bureaucrats, the bankers, the military industrialists and the international corporations reap the benefits of war profits.

2006 Ron Paul 21:55
A sound economic process is disrupted with a war economy and monetary inflation. Strong voices emerge blaming the wrong policies for our problems, prompting an outcry for protectionist legislation. It is always easier to blame foreign producers and savers for our inflation, our lack of savings, excessive debt and loss of industrial jobs. Protectionist measures only make economic conditions worse. Inevitably these conditions, if not corrected, lead to a lower standard of living for most of our citizens.

2006 Ron Paul 21:56
Careless military intervention is also bad for the civil disturbance that results. The chaos in the streets of America in the 1960s while the Vietnam War raged, aggravated by the draft, was an example of domestic strife caused by an ill-advised unconstitutional war that could not be won. The early signs of civil discord are now present. Hopefully, we can extricate ourselves from Iraq and avoid a conflict in Iran before our streets explode, as they did in the 1960s.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 21:58
Though many Americans are starting to feel the economic pain of paying for this war through inflation, the real pain has not yet arrived. We generally remain fat and happy with a system of money and borrowing that postpones the day of reckoning. Foreigners, in particular the Chinese and Japanese, gladly participate in the charade. We print the money and they take it, as do the OPEC Nations, and provide us with consumer goods and oil. Then they loan the money back to us at low interest rates, which we use to finance the war and our housing bubble and excessive consumption. This recycling and perpetual borrowing of inflated dollars allow us to avoid the pain of high taxes to pay for our war and welfare spending. It is fine until the music stops and the real costs are realized, with much higher interest rates and significant price inflation. That is when outrage will be heard and the people will realize we cannot afford the humanitarianism of the neo-conservatives.

2006 Ron Paul 21:59
The notion that our economic problems are principally due to the Chinese is nonsense. If the protectionists were to have it their way, the problem of financing the war would become readily apparent and have immediate ramifications, none good.

2006 Ron Paul 21:60
Today’s economic problems, caused largely by our funny money system, won’t be solved by altering exchange rates to favor us in the short run or by imposing high tariffs. Only sound money with real value will solve the problems of competing currency devaluations and protectionist measures.

2006 Ron Paul 21:61
Economic interests almost always are major reasons for wars being fought. Noble and patriotic causes are easier to sell to a public who must pay and provide cannon fodder to defend the financial interests of a privileged class. The fact that Saddam Hussein demanded Euros for oil in an attempt to undermine the U.S. dollar is believed by many to be one of the ulterior motives for our invasion and occupation of Iraq. Similarly, the Iranian oil burse now about to open may be seen as a threat to those who depend on maintaining the current monetary system with the dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

2006 Ron Paul 21:62
The theory and significance of “peak oil” is believed to be an additional motivating factor for the United States and Great Britain wanting to maintain firm control over the oil supplies in the Middle East. The two nations have been protecting our oil interests in the Middle East for nearly 100 years. With diminishing supplies and expanding demands, the incentive to maintain a military presence in the Middle East is quite strong. Fear of China and Russia moving in to this region to consume more control alarms those who don’t understand how a free market can develop substitutes to replace diminishing resources. Supporters of the military efforts to maintain control over large regions of the world to protect oil fail to count the real cost of energy once the DOD budget is factored in. Remember, invading Iraq was costly and oil prices doubled. Confrontation in Iran may evolve differently, but we can be sure it will be costly and oil prices will rise significantly.

2006 Ron Paul 21:63
There are long-term consequences or blowback from our militant policies of intervention around the world. They are unpredictable as to time and place. 9/11 was a consequence of our military presence on Muslim holy lands; the Ayatollah Khomeini’s success in taking over the Iranian government in 1979 was a consequence of our CIA overthrowing Mossadech in 1953. These connections are rarely recognized by the American people and never acknowledged by our government. We never seem to learn how dangerous interventionism is to us and to our security.

2006 Ron Paul 21:64
There are some who may not agree strongly with any of my arguments, and instead believe the propaganda Iran and her President, Mahmoud Almadinejad, are thoroughly irresponsible and have threatened to destroy Israel. So all measures must be taken to prevent Iran from getting nukes, thus the campaign to intimidate and confront Iran.

2006 Ron Paul 21:65
First, Iran doesn’t have a nuke and it is nowhere close to getting one, according to the CIA. If they did have one, using it would guarantee almost instantaneous annihilation by Israel and the United States. Hysterical fear of Iran is way out of proportion to reality. With a policy of containment, we stood down and won the Cold War against the Soviets and their 30,000 nuclear weapons and missiles. If you are looking for a real kook with a bomb to worry about, North Korea would be high on the list. Yet we negotiate with Kim Jong Il. Pakistan has nukes and was a close ally of the Taliban up until 9/11. Pakistan was never inspected by the IAEA as to their military capability. Yet we not only talk to her, we provide economic assistance, though someday Musharraf may well be overthrown and a pro-al Qaeda government put in place. We have been nearly obsessed with talking about regime change in Iran, while ignoring Pakistan and North Korea. It makes no sense and it is a very costly and dangerous policy.

2006 Ron Paul 21:66
The conclusion we should derive from this is simple. It is in our best interest to pursue a foreign policy of nonintervention. A strict interpretation of the Constitution mandates it. The moral imperative of not imposing our will on others, no matter how well intentioned, is a powerful argument for minding our own business. The principle of self-determination should be respected. Strict nonintervention removes the incentives for foreign powers and corporate interests to influence and control our policies overseas. We can’t afford the cost that intervention requires, whether through higher taxes or inflation. If the moral arguments against intervention don’t suffice for some, the practical arguments should.

2006 Ron Paul 21:67
Intervention just doesn’t work. It backfires and ultimately hurts the American citizens both at home and abroad. Spreading ourselves too thin around the world actually diminishes our national security through a weakened military. As the only superpower of the world, a constant interventionist policy is perceived as arrogant, and greatly undermines our ability to use diplomacy in a positive manner.

2006 Ron Paul 21:68
Conservatives, libertarians, constitutionalists, and many of today’s liberals have all at one time or another endorsed a less interventionist foreign policy. There is no reason a coalition of these groups might not once again present the case for a pro-American nonmilitant noninterventionist foreign policy dealing with all nations. A policy of trade and peace, and a willingness to use diplomacy is far superior to the foreign policy that has evolved over the past 60 years. It is time for a change.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 22
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Motion To Adjourn 5 April 2006

2006 Ron Paul 22:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 23
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Gold And The U.S. Dollar 25 April 2006

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. FOXX). Under the Speaker’s announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) is recognized for half the remaining time until midnight.

2006 Ron Paul 23:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, the financial press and even the network news shows have begun reporting the price of gold regularly.

2006 Ron Paul 23:2
For 20 years, between 1980 and 2000, the price of gold was rarely mentioned. There was little interest, and the price was either falling or remaining steady. Since 2001, however, interest in gold has soared along with its price.

2006 Ron Paul 23:3
With the price now over $600 an ounce, a lot more people are becoming interested in gold as an investment and an economic indicator. Much can be learned by understanding what the rising dollar price of gold means.

2006 Ron Paul 23:4
The rise in gold prices, from $250 per ounce in 2001 to over $600 today has drawn investors and speculators into precious metals markets. Though many already have made handsome profits, buying gold, per se, should not be touted as a good investment. After all, gold earns no interest, and its quality never changes. It is static and does not grow as sound investments should.

2006 Ron Paul 23:5
It is more accurate to say that one might invest in a gold or silver mining company, where management, labor costs, and the nature of new discoveries all play a vital role in determining the quality of the investment and the profits made.

2006 Ron Paul 23:6
Buying gold and holding it is somewhat analogous to converting one’s saving into $100 bills and hiding them under the mattress, yet not exactly the same. Both gold and dollars are considered money, and holding money does not qualify as an investment. There is a big difference between the two, however, since by holding paper money, one loses purchasing power. The purchasing power of commodity money, that is gold, however, goes up if the government devalues the circulating paper currency.

2006 Ron Paul 23:7
Holding gold is protection or insurance against government’s proclivity to debase the currency. The purchasing power of gold goes up not because it is a so-called good investment. It goes up in value only because the paper currency goes down in value. In our current situation, that means the dollar.

2006 Ron Paul 23:8
One of the characteristics of commodity money, one that originated naturally in the marketplace, is that it must serve as a store of value. Gold and silver meet the test; paper does not. Because of this profound difference, the incentive and wisdom of holding emergency funds in the form of gold becomes attractive when the official currency is being devalued. It is more attractive than trying to save wealth in the form of a fiat currency, even when earning some nominal interest.

2006 Ron Paul 23:9
The lack of earned interest on gold is not a problem once people realize the purchasing power of their currency is declining faster than the interest rates they might earn. The purchasing power of gold can rise even faster than increases in the cost of living.

2006 Ron Paul 23:10
The point is that most who buy gold do so to protect against the depreciating currency, rather than as an investment in the classical sense. Americans understand this less than citizens of other countries. Some nations have suffered from severe monetary inflation that literally led to the destruction of their national currency.

2006 Ron Paul 23:11
Though our inflation, that is the depreciation of the U.S. dollar, has been insidious, average Americans are unaware of how this occurs. For instance, few Americans know nor seem concerned that the 1913 pre-Federal Reserve dollar is now worth only 4 cents. Officially, our central bankers and our politicians express no fear that the course on which we are set is fraught with great danger to our economy and to our political system.

2006 Ron Paul 23:12
The belief that money created out of thin air can work economic miracles if only properly managed is pervasive in the District of Columbia. In many ways, we should not be surprised about this trust in such an unsound system. For at least four generations our government- run universities have systematically preached a monetary doctrine justifying the so-called wisdom of paper money over the foolishness of sound money.

2006 Ron Paul 23:13
Not only that, paper money has worked surprisingly well in the past 35 years, the years the world has accepted pure paper money as currency. Alan Greenspan bragged that central bankers in these decades have gained the knowledge necessary to make paper money respond as if it were gold.

2006 Ron Paul 23:14
This, they argue, removes the problem of obtaining gold to back the currency and hence frees the politician from the rigid discipline a gold standard imposes. Many central bankers in the last 15 years became so confident they had achieved this milestone that they sold off large hordes of their gold reserves. At other times they tried to prove that paper works better than gold by artificially propping up the dollar by suppressing the market price of gold.

2006 Ron Paul 23:15
This recent deception failed just as it did in the 1960s when our government tried to hold gold artificially low at $35 an ounce. But since they could not truly repeal the economic laws regarding money, just as many central bankers sold, others bought. It is fascinating that the European central banks sold gold while the Asian central banks bought it over the last several years.

2006 Ron Paul 23:16
Since gold has proven to be the real money of the ages, we see once again a shift in wealth from the West to the East, just as we saw a loss of our industrial base in the same direction.

2006 Ron Paul 23:17
Though Treasury officials deny any U.S. sales or loans of our official gold holdings, no audits are permitted, so no one can be certain. The special nature of the dollar as the reserve currency of the world has allowed this gain to last longer than it would have otherwise.

2006 Ron Paul 23:18
But the fact that gold has gone from $250 an ounce to over $600 an ounce means there is concern about the future of the dollar. The higher the price of gold the greater the concern for the dollar. But instead of dwelling on the dollar price of gold, we should be talking about the depreciation of the dollar.

2006 Ron Paul 23:19
In 1934, a dollar was worth one-twentieth of an ounce of gold. $20 to buy one ounce. Today a dollar is worth one-six- hundredth of an ounce, meaning it takes $600 to buy one once of gold.

2006 Ron Paul 23:20
The number of dollars created by the Federal Reserve and through the fractional reserve banking system is crucial in determining how the market assesses the relationship of the dollar and gold.

2006 Ron Paul 23:21
Though there is a strong correlation, it is not instantaneous or perfectly predictable. There are many variables to consider. But in the long term, the dollar price of gold represents past inflation of the money supply. Equally important, it represents the anticipation of how much new money will be created in the future.

2006 Ron Paul 23:22
This introduces the factor of trust and confidence in our monetary authorities and our politicians, and these days the American people are casting a vote of no confidence in this regard and for good reasons.

2006 Ron Paul 23:23
The incentive for central bankers to create new money out of thin air is two-fold. One is to practice central planning through the manipulation of interest rates. The second is to monetize the escalated Federal debt politicians create and thrive on.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 23:25
Most knowledgeable people therefore assume that inflation of the money supply is not only going to continue, but accelerate. This anticipation, plus the fact that many new dollars have been created over the past 15 years that have not yet been fully discounted, guarantees the future depreciation of the dollar in terms of gold.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 23:28
Though M3 is the most helpful statistic to track Fed activity, it by no means tells us everything we need to know about trends in monetary policy. Total bank credit, still available to us, gives us indirect information reflecting the Fed’s inflationary policies. But ultimately the markets will figure out exactly what the Fed is up to, and then individuals, financial institutions, governments and other central bankers will act accordingly.

2006 Ron Paul 23:29
The fact that our money supply is rising significantly cannot be hidden from the markets. The response in time will drive the dollar down while driving interest rates and commodity prices up.

2006 Ron Paul 23:30
Already we see this trend developing, which surely will accelerate in the not- too-distant future. Part of this reaction will be from those who seek a haven to protect their wealth, not invest, by treating gold and silver as universal and historic money. This means holding fewer dollars that are decreasing in value while holding gold as it increases in value.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 23:32
Denying us statistical information, manipulating interest rates, and artificially trying to keep gold prices in check won’t help in the long run. If the markets are fooled only on the short term, it only means the adjustments will be much more dramatic later on, and in the meantime other market imbalances develop.

2006 Ron Paul 23:33
The Fed tries to keep the consumer spending spree going, not through hard work and savings, but by creating artificial wealth in stock market bubbles and housing bubbles. When these distortions run these courses and are discovered, the corrections will be quite painful as was witnessed with the collapse of the NASDAQ bubble. Likewise a fiat monetary system encourages speculation and unsound borrowing.

2006 Ron Paul 23:34
As problems develop, scapegoats are sought and frequently found in foreign nations. This prompts many to demand altering exchange rates and protectionist measures. The sentiment for this type of solution is growing each day. Though everyone decries inflation, trade imbalances, economic downturns and Federal deficits, few attempt a closer study of our monetary system and how these events are interconnected.

2006 Ron Paul 23:35
Even if it were recognized that a gold standard without monetary inflation would be advantageous, few in Washington would accept the political disadvantages of living with the discipline of gold since it serves as a check on government size and power. This is a sad commentary on the politics of today.

2006 Ron Paul 23:36
The best analogy to our affinity for government spending, borrowing and inflating is that of a drug addict who knows if he doesn’t quit, he will die, yet he can’t quit because of the heavy price required to overcome the dependency.

2006 Ron Paul 23:37
The right choice is very difficult, but remaining addicted to drugs guarantees the death of the patient, while our addiction to deficit spending, debt and inflation guarantees the collapse of our economy.

2006 Ron Paul 23:38
Special interest groups, who vigorously compete for Federal dollars, want to perpetuate the system rather than admit to a dangerous addiction. Those who champion welfare for the poor, entitlements for the middle class or war contracts for the military industrial complex all agree on the so- called benefits bestowed by the Fed’s power to counterfeit fiat money.

2006 Ron Paul 23:39
Bankers who benefit from our fractional reserve system likewise never criticize the Fed, especially since it is the lender of last resort that bails out financial institutions when crises arise. It is true, special interest and bankers do benefit from the Fed and may well get bailed out, just as we saw with the long-term capital management fund crisis a few years ago.

2006 Ron Paul 23:40
In the past, companies like Lockheed and Chrysler benefited as well. But what the Fed cannot do is guarantee the market will maintain trust in the worthiness of the dollar. Current policy guarantees that the integrity of the dollar will be undermined. Exactly when this will occur, and the extent of the resulting damage to the financial system, cannot be known for sure, but it is coming. There are plenty of indications already on the horizon.

2006 Ron Paul 23:41
Foreign policy plays a significant role in the economy and the value of the dollar. A foreign policy of militarism and empire building cannot be supported through direct taxation. The American people would never tolerate the taxes required to pay immediately for overseas wars under the discipline of a gold standard. Borrowing and creating new money is much more politically palatable. It hides and delays the real costs of the war. The people are lulled into complacency, especially since the wars we fight are couched in terms of patriotism, spreading the ideas of freedom and stamping out terrorism. Unnecessary wars and fiat currencies go hand in hand, while a gold standard encourages a sensible foreign policy.

2006 Ron Paul 23:42
The cost of war is enormously detrimental. It significantly contributes to the economic instability of the Nation by boosting spending, deficits and inflation. Funds used for war are funds that could have remained in the productive economy to raise the standard of living of Americans now unemployed, underemployed or barely living on the margin.

2006 Ron Paul 23:43
Yet even these costs may be preferable to paying for war with huge tax increases. This is because although fiat dollars are theoretically worthless, value is imbued by the trust placed in them by the world’s financial community. Subjective trust in a currency can override objective knowledge about government policies, but only for a limited time.

2006 Ron Paul 23:44
Economic strength and military power contributes to the trust in a currency. In today’s world trust in the U.S. dollar is not earned, and, therefore, fragile. The history of the dollar, being as good as gold up until 1971, is helpful in maintaining an artificially higher value for the dollar than deserved.

2006 Ron Paul 23:45
Foreign policy contributes to the crisis when the spending to maintain our worldwide military commitments become prohibitive, and inflationary pressures accelerate. But the real crisis hits when the world realizes the king has no clothes in that the dollar has no backing, and we face a military setback even greater than we already are experiencing in Iraq. Our token friends may quickly transform into vocal enemies once the attack on the dollar begins.

2006 Ron Paul 23:46
False trust placed in the dollar once was helpful to us, but panic and rejection of the dollar will develop into a real financial crisis. Then we will have no other option but to tighten our belts, go back to work, stop borrowing, start saving, and rebuild our industrial base while adjusting to a lower standard of living for most Americans. Counterfeiting the Nation’s money is a serious offense.

2006 Ron Paul 23:47
The Founders were especially adamant about avoiding the chaos, inflation and destruction associated with the continental dollar. That is why the Constitution is clear that only gold and silver should be legal tender in the United States. In 1792, the Coinage Act also authorized the death penalty for any private citizen who counterfeited the currency. Too bad they weren’t explicit that counterfeiting by government officials is just as detrimental to the economy and the value of the dollar.

2006 Ron Paul 23:48
In wartime many nations actually operated counterfeiting programs to undermine the dollar, but never to a disastrous level. The enemy knew how harmful excessive creation of new money could be to the dollar and our economy. But it seems we never learned the dangers of creating new money out of thin air. We don’t need an Arab nation or the Chinese to undermine our system with a counterfeiting operation. We do it to ourselves with the all the disadvantages that would occur if others did it to us.

2006 Ron Paul 23:49
Today we hear threats from some Arab, Muslim and some Far Eastern countries about undermining the dollar system not by dishonest counterfeiting, but by initiating an alternative monetary system based on gold. Wouldn’t that be ironic? Such an event theoretically could do great harm to us. This day may well come not so much as a direct political attack on the dollar system, but out of necessity to restore confidence in money once again.

2006 Ron Paul 23:50
Historically paper money never has lasted for long periods of time, while gold has survived thousands of years of attacks by political interests and big government. In time the world once again will restore trust in the monetary system by making some currency as good as gold.

2006 Ron Paul 23:51
Gold or any acceptable market commodity money is required to preserve liberty. Monopoly control by government of a system that creates fiat money out of thin air guarantees the loss of liberty. No matter how well intended our militarism is portrayed or how happily the promises of wonderful programs for the poor are promoted, inflating the money supply to pay these bills makes government bigger.

2006 Ron Paul 23:52
Empires always fail, and expenses always exceed projections. Harmful unintended consequences are the rule, not the exception. Welfare for the poor is inefficient and wasteful. The beneficiaries are rarely the poor themselves, but, instead, the politicians, the bureaucrats or the wealthy. The same is true of all foreign aid. It is nothing more than a program that steals from the poor in a rich country and gives to the rich leaders of a poorer country.

2006 Ron Paul 23:53
Whether it is war or welfare payments, it always means higher taxes, inflation and debt. Whether it is the extraction of wealth from the productive economy, the distortion of the market by interest rate manipulation or spending for war and welfare, it can’t happen without infringing upon personal liberty.

2006 Ron Paul 23:54
At home the war on poverty, terrorism, drugs or foreign rulers provide an opportunity for authoritarians to rise to power, individuals who think nothing of violating the people’s rights to privacy and freedom of speech. They believe their role is to protect the secrecy of government rather than protect the privacy of citizens.

2006 Ron Paul 23:55
Unfortunately, that is the atmosphere under which we live today with essentially no respect for the Bill of Rights. Though great economic harm comes from a government monopoly, fiat monetary system, the loss of liberty associated with it is equally troubling.

2006 Ron Paul 23:56
Just as empires are self-limiting in terms of money and manpower, so, too, is a monetary system based on illusion and fraud.

2006 Ron Paul 23:57
When the end comes, we will be given an opportunity to choose once again between honest money and liberty on one hand, chaos, poverty and authoritarianism on the other. The economic harm done by a fiat monetary system is pervasive, dangerous and unfair.

2006 Ron Paul 23:58
Though runaway inflation is injurious to almost everyone, it is more insidious for certain groups. Once inflation is recognized as a tax, it becomes clear that tax is regressive in nature, penalizing the poor and the middle class more than the rich and the politically privileged. Price inflation, a consequence of inflating the money supply by the central bank, hits poor and marginal workers first and foremost. It especially penalizes savers, retirees, those on fixed incomes, and anyone who trusts government promises.

2006 Ron Paul 23:59
Small businesses and individual enterprises suffer more than the financial elite, who borrow large sums before the money loses value. Those who are on the receiving end of government contracts, especially in the military industrial complex during wartime, receive undeserved benefits.

2006 Ron Paul 23:60
It is a mistake to blame high gasoline and oil prices on price gouging. If we impose new taxes or fix prices while ignoring monetary inflation, corporate subsidies and excessive regulations, shortages will result. The market is the only way to determine the best price for any commodity. The law of supply and demand cannot be repealed. The real problems arise when government planners give subsidies to energy companies and favor one form of energy over another.

2006 Ron Paul 23:61
Energy prices are rising for many reasons: inflation, increased demand from China and India, decreased supply resulting from our invasion into Iraq, anticipated disruption of supplies as we push regime change in Iran, regulatory restrictions on gasoline production, government interference in the free market development of alternative fuels, and subsidies to Big Oil, such as free leases and grants for research and development.

2006 Ron Paul 23:62
Interestingly, the cost of oil and gas is actually much higher than we pay at the retail level. Much of the DOD budget is spent protecting “our” oil supplies; and if such spending is factored in, gasoline probably costs us more than $5 a gallon. The sad irony is that the military efforts to secure cheap oil supplies inevitably backfire and actually curtail supplies and boost prices at the pump. The waste and fraud in issuing contracts to large corporations for work in Iraq only adds to price increases.

2006 Ron Paul 23:63
When problems arise under conditions that exist today, it is a serious error to blame the little bit of the free market that still functions. Last summer, the market worked efficiently after Katrina. Gasoline hit $3 a gallon, but soon supplies increased, usage went down, and the price returned to $2. In the 1980s, market forces took oil from $40 a barrel down to $10 a barrel, and no one cried for the oil companies that went bankrupt. Today’s increases are for the reasons mentioned above. It is natural for labor to seek its highest wage and businesses to strive for the greatest profits. That is the way the market works. When the free market is allowed to work, it is the consumer who ultimately determines price and quality, with labor and businesses accommodating consumer choices. Once this process is distorted by government, prices rise excessively, labor costs and profits are negatively affected, and problems emerge.

2006 Ron Paul 23:64
Instead of fixing the problem, politicians and demagogues respond by demanding windfall profits taxes and price controls, while never questioning how previous government interference caused the whole mess in the first place. Never let it be said that high oil prices and profits cause inflation. Inflation of the money supply causes higher prices.

2006 Ron Paul 23:65
Since keeping interest rates below market levels is synonymous with new money creation by the Fed, the resulting business cycle, higher cost of living and job losses all can be laid at the doorstep of the Fed. This burden hits the poor the most, making Fed taxation by inflation the worst of all regressive taxes. Statistics about revenues generated by the income tax are grossly misleading. In reality, much harm is done by our welfare-warfare system supposedly designed to help the poor and tax the rich. Only sound money can rectify the blatant injustice of this destructive system.

2006 Ron Paul 23:66
The Founders understood this great danger and voted overwhelmingly to reject “emitting bills of credit,” the term they used for paper money or fiat currency. It is too bad the knowledge and advice of our Founders and their mandate in the Constitution are ignored, and it is ignored at great peril. The current surge in gold prices, which reflects our dollar’s devaluation, is warning us to pay closer attention to our fiscal, monetary, entitlement, and foreign policy.

2006 Ron Paul 23:67
A recent headline in the financial press announced that gold prices surged over concern that confrontation with Iran will further push oil prices higher. This may well reflect the current situation, but higher gold prices mainly reflect monetary expansion by the Federal Reserve. Dwelling on current events and their effect on gold prices reflects concern for symptoms rather than an understanding of the actual cause of these price increases. Without an enormous increase in the money supply over the past 35 years and a worldwide paper monetary system, this increase in the price of gold would not have occurred.

2006 Ron Paul 23:68
Certainly geopolitical events in the Middle East under a gold standard would not alter its price, though they could affect the supply of oil and cause oil prices to rise. Only under conditions created by excessive paper money would one expect all or most prices to rise. This is a mere reflection of the devaluation of the dollar.

2006 Ron Paul 23:69
Here are a few particular things that we should remember: if one endorses small government and maximum liberty, one must support commodity money.

2006 Ron Paul 23:70
One of the strongest restraints against unnecessary war is a gold standard.

2006 Ron Paul 23:71
Deficit financing by government is severely restricted by sound money.

2006 Ron Paul 23:72
The harmful effects of the business cycle are virtually eliminated with an honest gold standard.

2006 Ron Paul 23:73
Saving and thrift are encouraged by gold standard and discouraged by paper money.

2006 Ron Paul 23:74
Price inflation, with generally rising price levels, is characteristic of paper money. Reports that the Consumer Price Index and the Producer Price Index are rising are distractions. The real cause of inflation is the Fed’s creation of new money.

2006 Ron Paul 23:75
Interest rate manipulation by central banks helps the rich, the banks, the government, and the politicians.

2006 Ron Paul 23:76
Paper money permits the regressive inflation tax to be passed off on the poor and the middle class.

2006 Ron Paul 23:77
Speculative financial bubbles are characteristic of paper money, not gold.

2006 Ron Paul 23:78
Paper money encourages economic and political chaos, which subsequently causes a search for scapegoats rather than blaming the central bank.

2006 Ron Paul 23:79
Dangerous protectionist measures frequently are implemented to compensate for the dislocations caused by paper money.

2006 Ron Paul 23:80
Paper money, inflation, and the conditions they create contribute to the problems of illegal immigration.

2006 Ron Paul 23:81
The value of gold is remarkably stable.

2006 Ron Paul 23:82
The dollar price of gold reflects dollar depreciation.

2006 Ron Paul 23:83
Holding gold helps preserve and store wealth; but technically, gold is not a true investment.

2006 Ron Paul 23:84
Since 2001, the dollar has been devalued by over 60 percent. In 1934, FDR devalued the dollar by 41 percent. In 1971, Nixon devalued the dollar by 7.9 percent. In 1973, Nixon devalued the dollar by 10 percent.

2006 Ron Paul 23:85
These were momentous monetary events, and every knowledgeable person worldwide paid close attention. Major changes were endured in 1979 and 1980 to save the dollar from disintegration. This involved a severe recession, interest rates over 21 percent, and general price inflation of 15 percent.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 23:87
Will we one day complain about false intelligence, as we have with the Iraq war? Will we complain about not having enough information to address monetary policy after it is too late?

2006 Ron Paul 23:88
If ever there was a time to get a handle on what sound money is and what it means, that time is today. Inflation, as exposed by high gold prices, transfers wealth from the middle class to the rich, as real wages decline while the salaries of CEOs, movie stars, and athletes skyrocket, along with the profits of the military industrial complex, the oil industry, and other special interests.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 23:90
Ultimately, the gold price is a measurement of trust in the currency and the politicians who run the country. It has been that way for a long time, and it is not about to change.

2006 Ron Paul 23:91
If we care about the financial system, the tax system, and the monumental debt we are accumulating, we must start talking about the benefits and discipline that come only with a commodity standard of money: money the government and central banks absolutely cannot create out of thin air.

2006 Ron Paul 23:92
Economic law dictates reform at some point, but should we wait until the dollar is 1/1000 of an ounce of gold or 1/2000 of an ounce of gold? The longer we wait, the more people will suffer and the more difficult reforms become. Runaway inflation inevitably leads to political chaos, something numerous countries have suffered throughout the 20th century. The worst example, of course, was the German inflation of the 1920s that led to the rise of Hitler.

2006 Ron Paul 23:93
Even the Communist takeover of China was associated with runaway inflation brought on by the Chinese nationalists.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 24
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Plan Colombia 25 April 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, April 25, 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.”

2006 Ron Paul 24:2
[From the Houston Chronicle, April 16, 2006]
COCA CROP JUMPS DESPITE U.S. AID
(By John Otis) BOGOTA, COLOMBIA. — In a blow to the United States’ anti-drug campaign here, which cost more than $4 billion, new White House estimates indicate that Colombia’s coca crop expanded by nearly 21 percent last year.

2006 Ron Paul 24:3
Figures released late Friday by the Office of National Drug Control Policy indicate Colombian farmers last year grew 355,680 acres of coca, the raw material for cocaine. That represents a jump of nearly 74,000 acres from 2004 even though U.S. funded cropdusters destroyed record amounts of coca plants in 2005.

2006 Ron Paul 24:4
Washington has provided the Bogota government with more than $4 billion, mostly in anti-drug aid since 2000 for a program known as Plan Colombia — which was supposed to cut coca cultivation by half within six years.

2006 Ron Paul 24:5
Yet according to the new figures, more coca is now being grown here than when Plan Colombia started. “This is going to turn heads” on Capitol Hill, said Adam Isacson, a Colombia expert at the Center for International Policy in Washington and a longtime critic of U.S. counterdrug strategies in Latin America.

2006 Ron Paul 24:6
“You’re talking about $4.7 billion spent on Plan Colombia, and this is all we have to show for it?”

2006 Ron Paul 24:7
The Bush administration downplayed the significance of the coca crop survey, an annual study of parts of Colombia carried out by the CIA using satellite imagery and on- the-ground inspections.

2006 Ron Paul 24:8
Rather than an increase in the crop’s size, the higher numbers may reflect a more thorough job of surveying the Colombian countryside, the White House said in a news release.

2006 Ron Paul 24:9
The statement said the area of Colombia sampled for the 2005 coca estimate was 81 percent larger than in 2004.

2006 Ron Paul 24:10
“Because of this uncertainty and the significantly expanded survey area, a direct year-to-year comparison (of the size of the coca crop) is not possible,” said the statement.

2006 Ron Paul 24:11
However, when year-to-year drug crop comparisons have reflected positive trends, U.S. officials have loudly touted the numbers as clear proof of success.

2006 Ron Paul 24:12
In 2002, for example, the CIA survey showed a drop in coca production and White House drug czar John Walters declared: “These figures capture the dramatic improvement. . . . Our anti-drug efforts in Colombia are now paying off.”

2006 Ron Paul 24:13
But some U.S. officials and drug policy analysts claim that Colombia has likely been producing far more coca over the past five years than the CIA surveys have indicated.

2006 Ron Paul 24:14
“The cultivation numbers, wherever they seem to be headed, need to be taken with a grain of salt,” said Joy Olson, director of the Washington Office on Latin America, a think tank. “In reality, coca cultivation and cocaine production exceed the official estimates, perhaps by wide margins.”

2006 Ron Paul 24:15
What’s more, she said, cheap, potent cocaine remains readily available on U.S. streets, indicating that the drug war in Colombia is having little real impact.

2006 Ron Paul 24:16
Some U.S. officials have forecast a gradual reduction in assistance for Colombia, starting in 2008. This year, Washington will send about $750 million in aid to Colombia, the source of 90 percent of the cocaine sold on U.S. streets.

2006 Ron Paul 24:17
The centerpiece of the U.S. anti-drug strategy here is a controversial aerial-eradication program in which crop-dusters, escorted by helicopter gunships, bombard coca plants with chemical defoliants. But the program costs about $200 million annually and many critics say the money would be better spent elsewhere. The idea of eradication is to persuade peasant farmers to give up growing coca and to plant legal crops. But funding by the U.S. and Colombian governments for crop-substitution programs pale in comparison to the eradication budget and most efforts to develop alternatives have failed.

2006 Ron Paul 24:18
Part of the problem is that coca is often grown in remote jungles and mountains that are controlled by Marxist guerrillas, contain few roads or markets, and have almost no government presence. Thus, even as crop- dusters have killed off record amounts of coca, farmers stay a step ahead of the spray planes by pushing deeper into the wilderness to grow more.

2006 Ron Paul 24:19
In 2000, Colombian farmers attempted to grow about 450,000 acres of coca, about one- third of which was wiped out by the spray planes, according to U.S. government figures. Last year, by contrast, they tried to grow a whopping 780,000 acres. “People with no economic alternatives have not been deterred by fumigation,” said Isacson of the Center for International Policy. “Fumigating an area is no substitute for governing it.”

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.

2006 Ron Paul 24:21
Beyond the drug war, Patterson said, the overall U.S. aid program “has benefited Colombia in ways we had not anticipated.”

2006 Ron Paul 24:22
She cited better security conditions in the cities and the countryside, where the number of kidnappings and murders has dropped, as well as recent blows to the nation’s narcotics traffickers and guerrilla groups.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 25
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Requests Opposition Time 26 April 2006

2006 Ron Paul 25:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I request the time in opposition if neither gentleman is opposed to the bill.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 26
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Disadvantages To Intervention 26 April 2006

2006 Ron Paul 26:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.

2006 Ron Paul 26:2
Madam Speaker, I sought the time in opposition mainly because it is a very opportune time to talk about our foreign policy and the disadvantages that intervention poses for us.

2006 Ron Paul 26:3
There are two types of foreign policy we can have: interventionism, where we tell other people what to do; and the more traditional American foreign policy of nonintervention and not using force to tell other people what to do. The policy of foreign intervention has been around a long time, and it is not only one party that endorses it. In 1998 we had a similar bill come up to the floor. It was called the Iraqi Freedom Act. And that was the preliminary stages of leading to a war, which is a very unpopular, very expensive, and deadly war going on right now in Iraq. So this is a similar bill moving in that direction.

2006 Ron Paul 26:4
The 1998 resolution, which required regime change and laid the plans out for regime change, did not come up under this administration. That occurred with the previous administration.

2006 Ron Paul 26:5
But I have no qualms about the goals of the authors of this legislation. They would like to see freedom in Iran. I would, too. It is just that I believe the use of force backfires on us, and when we use force such as sanctions and subsidizing and giving money to dissidents, what we really do is the opposite of what we want. Those individuals who are trying to promote more freedom in Iran actually are forced to ally themselves with the radicals, so instead of undermining the system, it has made it worse. It is always argued that they will welcome us when we march in as liberators, and Iraq proved that that was not the case. Iran won’t be much better.

2006 Ron Paul 26:6
But let me just say a few things about interventionism. Interventionism, which is essentially something that was gradually developed over the 20th century, led to a century of war and killing and was very expensive to the American people in costs. It means that we assume the moral right and the constitutional authority to be involved in the internal affairs of other nations, and yet there is no moral right for us to get involved in the internal affairs of other countries, and there is no constitutional authority for us to do so.

2006 Ron Paul 26:7
We are not designated as “the nation builder.” No matter how well-intended it is, it doesn’t work, and we don’t have this authority to do this. We have not been designated the “policeman of the world,” although we have assumed that role more so every year, and that has been going on for several decades.

2006 Ron Paul 26:8
There are always more costs than anybody imagines. Iraq was supposed to cost $50 billion. It is now hundreds of billions of dollars. There is economic harm done. There is inflation that it causes. Yet it continues, and instead of coming to an end, it tends to spread. That is why I fear this so much.

2006 Ron Paul 26:9
I see the way we are dealing with Iran as just spreading a problem that we contributed to in the Middle East. Too many innocent lives are lost, innocent American lives, GIs that go over and are killed so needlessly, especially since we don’t achieve the goal of bringing freedom and liberty and democracy to these countries.

2006 Ron Paul 26:10
Interventionism endorses the principle that we have this authority to change regimes. We have been doing it for more than 50 years through activities of the CIA in a secret manner, and now we are doing it in a much more open manner where we literally invade countries. We initiate the force. We start the war because we believe that we have a monopoly on goodness that we can spread and teach other people to understand and live with.

2006 Ron Paul 26:11
There are too many unintended consequences, too much blow-back. It comes back to harm us in the long run. At one time we were an ally of Saddam Hussein. At one time we were an ally of Osama bin Laden. These things don’t work out the way we think they are going to.

2006 Ron Paul 26:12
The one thing that interventionism endorses, which I strongly disagree with, it really deemphasizes diplomacy. It deemphasizes it to the point where if we don’t feel like it, we are not willing to talk to people. When we feel like it, we might demagogue it and pretend we are talking. But it really doesn’t encourage diplomacy.

2006 Ron Paul 26:13
Another reason why interventionism is so bad for us, it encourages special interests to get behind our foreign policy and endorse what we are doing and influence what we are doing, possibly another country and possibly some industry that might influence us.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 27
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Lesson From History 26 April 2006

2006 Ron Paul 27:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 20 seconds for a quick quote, and then I am going to yield to the gentleman from Oregon.

2006 Ron Paul 27:2
The quote: “The people of England have been led in Mesopotamia into a trap from which it will be hard to escape with dignity and honor. They have been tricked into it by a steady withholding of information. The Baghdad communiques are belated, insincere, incomplete. Things have been far worse than we have been told, our administration more bloody and inefficient than the public knows. We are today not far from a disaster.”

2006 Ron Paul 27:3
This comes from Lawrence of Arabia, 1920. We should learn from our mistakes and other countries’ mistakes.

2006 Ron Paul 27:4
Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. BLUMENAUER).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 28
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Bill Authorizes Use Of Force 26 April 2006

2006 Ron Paul 28:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, this bill authorizes strong sanctions as well as funding to dissident groups inside Iraq to overthrow that government. In my interpretation that is the use of force, and I yield 6 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 29
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Iran Has A Right To Enrich Uranium 26 April 2006

2006 Ron Paul 29:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute before I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.

2006 Ron Paul 29:2
I want to quote from Article IV of the NonProliferation Treaty of which Iran is a signator: “Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production, and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination.”

2006 Ron Paul 29:3
Our position is that they do not have the right to enrich. Those who deny the right to enrich are more in violation of the NPT Treaty than Iran itself.

2006 Ron Paul 29:4
What do we do for those who are totally in defiance to international law in the NPT Treaty, like India and Pakistan? We reward them and subsidize them. At the same time, there is no proof that there has been any violation of this treaty by Iran, and yet the rewards go to those who are in total defiance.

2006 Ron Paul 29:5
Madam Speaker, I would yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. LEACH).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 30
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Bombing Iran 26 April 2006

2006 Ron Paul 30:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, there has been talk in the media and elsewhere about the necessity of bombing Iran, and we are talking today about regime change, which is an act of force, yet some of us believe we are acting too hastily. Others deny that; that something imminently is going to happen. But I want to read a little quote here from John Negroponte, Director of National Intelligence. He says, “Our assessment at the moment is that even though we believe that Iran is determined to acquire a nuclear weapon, we believe that it is still a number of years before they are likely to have enough fissile material to assemble into or put into a nuclear weapon; perhaps into the next decade. So I think it is important that this issue be kept in perspective.” This is John Negroponte. And I think those who are so eager to pass this legislation and move toward regime change are moving in the wrong direction too hastily, and there are a lot of analogies to this and to Iraq, so we caution you about that.

2006 Ron Paul 30:2
Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. BLUMENAUER).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 31
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Bill Would Authorize Force 26 April 2006

2006 Ron Paul 31:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.

2006 Ron Paul 31:2
Madam Speaker, there has been a lot of talk here about what this bill is doing and that it does not authorize the use of force. As a matter of fact, the language in the bill says this does not authorize the use of force. But my contention is it is a contradiction to the bill itself because the bill itself does authorize the use of force. No, not tanks and airplanes and bombs yet, but we know that all these options are still on the table.

2006 Ron Paul 31:3
But what it does authorize is something that is equivalent to force, and that is sanctions. Sanctions are used as an act of war.

2006 Ron Paul 31:4
Also, this bill has money in it, and it is open-ended, an authorization of appropriation. There is authorized to be appropriated to the Department of State such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section. And what is this section talking about? Subsidies and funding of dissident groups to go in there and undermine the Iranian government.

2006 Ron Paul 31:5
Yes, we quote Ahmadinejad about his vitriolic statements, and they are horrible, but how do you think they interpret other statements when we say we are going to wipe their regime off the face of the Earth? We are going to have regime change. So from their viewpoint we are saying the same thing, and we should not be blinded to that and pretend, because our language is not quite as violent. We are saying the same thing, because look at the result of the violence in Iraq as a result of our efforts of regime change.

2006 Ron Paul 31:6
Now, one of the major authors of the Iraqi war, a leader of the neoconservative movement, came before the committee when this resolution was debated and when we had hearings on it. I want to read a quote from him because it clarifies this issue. The quote comes from Michael Ledeen, and he wants regime change. This is what he had to say. “There is much that is praiseworthy in the Iran Freedom Support Act. I think it can be improved by more openly embracing a policy of regime change in Iran and allocating an adequate budget to demonstrate our seriousness in this endeavor. I know some Members would prefer to dance around the explicit declaration of regime change as the policy of this country, but anyone looking closely at the language, and that is what I have done, and content of the Iran Freedom Support Act and its close relative in the Senate can clearly see that it is, in fact, the essence of the matter. You can’t have freedom in Iran, that is, we can’t have our way, without bringing down the mullahs.”

2006 Ron Paul 31:7
That is an outright threat. That is the testimony of a neoconservative who led us and promoted and pushed the war in Iraq, and nothing would please him and others who are behind this type of resolution to see regime change. There is no denial of that.

2006 Ron Paul 31:8
The question is how do we do it? Are we going to do it pussyfooting around? Or are we going to use force and violence? We did, we used bombs for a long time against Iraq. But we had a bill in 1998 that said explicitly we are going to get rid of the Iraqi government, and it took a few years to get the war going.

2006 Ron Paul 31:9
Both parties are involved in this. It is not just this administration that has promoted this type of foreign policy, which, quite frankly, I see is not in the best interest of our country. This is why I am a strong advocate of minding our own business. Don’t get involved in nation building. Don’t police the world. Don’t get involved in the internal affairs of the other nations. Otherwise, we have a big job ahead of us.

2006 Ron Paul 31:10
What about the fact that Kim Jong Il is still in power? We are talking to him. We talked to Qadaffi. Mao was in power, and he had nuclear weapons. What did we do; did we attack him? No. What did we do with Stalin? Stalin and Khrushchev had 30,000 nuclear weapons. Were we ready to use force and intimidation and yelling and screaming? And Khrushchev was ready to wipe us off the face of the Earth also.

2006 Ron Paul 31:11
But I am asking you to reconsider the fact that moving in this direction is the same thing as we did against Iraq, and it won’t do us any good. It is going to cost us a lot of money, and it is going to cost a lot of lives, and it is un-American. It is not constitutional. It is not moral. We should not pursue this type of foreign policy. We should take care of ourselves, and we should be more friendly with nations. We should be willing to trade. And if you are concerned about the world, why not set a good example? When our house is clean, when we have a good democracy and a worthy Republic, and we do well, believe me, they will want to emulate us.

2006 Ron Paul 31:12
But attacking and intimidating other nations, the way we go at it now, literally backfires on us. What is it doing to the dissidents, those who would love to overthrow the Islamic radicals in Iran right now? It unifies them. Did we become unified in this country when we were attacked on 9/11? Do you think Republicans and Democrats were divided on 9/11 and 9/12? No, it brings them together. So this policy does exactly the opposite of what you pretend that you want to do, and that is encourage those people who don’t like their government. But by doing it this way, you literally are doing the very opposite.

2006 Ron Paul 31:13
So I just plead with you to be more cautious. Negroponte says there is no rush. Take some time. They are not about to have a nuclear weapon. And whether or not that is their plan or not probably at this moment is irrelevant. I mean, if we stood down all these nations and all these nuclear weapons in the past, why can’t we practice more diplomacy to resolve our differences. I was talking to somebody the other day and they said, well, maybe in 10 years they might have a nuclear weapon, so we must act now. Get the bombs ready. They are talking about a nuclear attack on Iran in order to stop them from producing a nuclear bomb. It is time to step back and look at the policy. The policy of nonintervention and peaceful relations with the world and peaceful trade is the American way to go, and it will lead to peace and prosperity.

2006 Ron Paul 31:14
I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Ohio.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 32
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

What To Do About Soaring Oil Prices 2 May 2006

2006 Ron Paul 32:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim my 5 minutes at this time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.

There was no objection.

2006 Ron Paul 32:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, gasoline prices are soaring and the people are screaming, and they want something done about it now.

2006 Ron Paul 32:3
$100 rebate checks to American motorists will not cut it, nor will mandatory mileage requirements for new vehicles. Taxing oil profits will only force prices higher. But there are some very important things we can do immediately to help.

2006 Ron Paul 32:4
First, we must reassess our foreign policy and announce some changes. One of the reasons we went into Iraq was to secure our oil. Before the Iraq war, oil was less than $30 a barrel. Today it is over $70. The sooner we get out of Iraq and allow the Iraqis to solve their own problems the better. Since 2002, oil production in Iraq has dropped 50 percent. Pipeline sabotage and fires are routine, and we have been unable to prevent them. Soaring gasoline prices are a giant, unintended consequence of our invasion, pure and simple.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 32:6
We must quickly announce we do not seek war with Iran, remove the economic sanctions against her, and accept her offer to negotiate a diplomatic solution to the impacts. An attack on Iran, coupled with our continued presence in Iraq, could hike gas prices to $5 or $6 per gallon here at home. By contrast, a sensible approach to Iran could quickly lower oil prices by $20 a barrel.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 32:8
Once this is recognized, prices rise, some more rapidly than others. That is what we see today with the cost of energy.

2006 Ron Paul 32:9
Exploding deficits due to runaway entitlement spending and the cost of dangerous militarism create pressure for the Fed to inflate the money supply. This contributes greatly to the higher prices we all claim to oppose. If we want to do something about gas prices, we should demand and vote for greatly reduced welfare and military spending, a balanced budget, and fewer regulations that interfere with the market development of alternative fuels. We also should demand a return to a sound commodity monetary standard. All subsidies and special benefits to energy companies should be ended; and, in the meantime, let’s eliminate Federal gas taxes at the pump.

2006 Ron Paul 32:10
Oil prices are at a level where consumers reduce consumption voluntarily. The market will work if we let it. But as great as the market economy is, it cannot overcome a foreign policy that is destined to disrupt oil supplies and threaten the world with an expanded and dangerous conflict in the Middle East.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 33
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

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.”

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.

2006 Ron Paul 33:3
This legislation further violates the First Amendment by setting up a means of secretly applying unconstitutional campaign finance laws to “Section 527” organizations. This is done by a provision in the rule under which this bill is brought before us that automatically attaches the “527” legislation to H.R. 4975 if H.R. 4975 passes the House and is sent to the Senate for a conference.

2006 Ron Paul 33:4
H.R. 4975 also contains minor reforms of the appropriation process to bring greater transparency to the process of “earmarking,” where members seek funding for specific projects in their respective district. I have no objection to increased transparency, and I share some of the concerns raised by opponents of the current earmarking process.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 33:6
Earmarks, like most of the problems H.R. 4975 purports to deal with, are a symptom of the problem, not the cause. The real problem is that the United States government is too big, spends too much, and has too much power. When the government has the power to make or break entire industries by changing one regulation or adding or deleting one paragraph in an appropriation bill it is inevitable that people will seek to manipulate that power to their advantage. Human nature being what it is, it is also inevitable that some people seeking government favors will violate basic norms of ethical behavior. Thus, the only way to effectively address corruption is to reduce the size of government and turn money and power back to the people and the several states.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 34
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To Calhoun High School 11 May 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, May 11, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 34:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Calhoun High School (CHS) of Port Lavaca, Calhoun County, TX. On January 6– 7, 2006 the CHS advanced government class, taught by Gennie Westbrook, traveled to Austin to participate in the Texas State final meet for We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution. Calhoun High School ranked second of the seven schools participating in the meet, which is the highest rank yet achieved by a CHS class. In 1995, 2002, and 2003, the CHS class placed third. Students participating in the state contest were Holly Batchelder, Matthew Boyett, Ryan Cardona, Kenneth Chang, Karl Chen, Andrew Delgado, Carlos Galindo, Julio Herrera, Paul Jenkins, Brian Kao, Dustin Lambden, Kayla Meyer, Jake Prejean, and Thomas Reagan.

2006 Ron Paul 34:2
Twenty-two CHS juniors accompanied the group as observers. We the People alumnae who also accompanied the group to assist as guest judges for practice times were Jessica Davenport, John Westbrook, Bobby Van Borssum, Redford Hong, William Krause, and Jason Fite.

2006 Ron Paul 34:3
Local community members who helped the class in their weekly practice sessions after school were Connie Hunt and Assistant District Attorney Shannon Salyer, who have worked with each year’s class for several years. Others who assisted the class in preparation this year included District Attorney Dan Heard, Assistant District Attorney Pat Brown, and Texas A&M aerospace PhD student Darren Hartl.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 34:5
In 2001, the Center for Civic Education conducted a survey of We the People alumnae, focusing on voting and civic participation. Among the former students, 82 percent reported that they voted in the November 2000 election. In addition, 77 percent had voted in previous elections. By contrast, the National Election Studies reported 48 percent turnout in the November 2000 election by other respondents aged 18–30. Research also indicates that participation in We the People programs helps encourage greater interest in politics and public affairs, increased involvement in government decision making at all levels, greater willingness to respect the opinions and rights of others, and better preparation for the privileges and responsibilities of democratic citizenship. More information about the program may be found at the Center for Civic Education website, http://www.civiced.org/ wethepeople.php.

2006 Ron Paul 34:6
We the People: the Citizen and the Constitution is the Advanced U.S. Government class available every fall to Calhoun High School seniors. The first place team from each state traveled to Washington, D.C. for the National Final Competition on April 29–May 1, 2006. McAllen’s Lamar Academy team, taught by LeAnna Morse, won first place this year in Texas, and her class often receives Honorable Mention as one of the top 10 schools at the national final meet.

2006 Ron Paul 34:7
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate teacher Gennie Westbrook, the students of Calhoun High School and all the others participating in this important effort.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 35
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2007 11 May 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, May 11, 2006

The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 5122) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2007 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2007, and for other purposes:

2006 Ron Paul 35:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this enormous defense authorization bill. At $512.9 billion, this defense authorization is $2.7 billion more than the president’s request.

2006 Ron Paul 35:2
What concerns me most about this authorization, however, is that it seems to focus more on defending other nations than on defending the United States. U.S. troops are based in more than 100 countries overseas, in many cases guarding foreign borders and ports while our own borders and ports remain almost completely unguarded.

2006 Ron Paul 35:3
The hundreds of billions of dollars spent overseas by this bill will do very little to defend the United States against attack. In fact, our interventionist foreign policy that is funded to a good degree by this bill actually makes the United States less popular overseas and may even unintentionally make the United States more of a terrorist target. At any rate, it definitely makes us less secure.

2006 Ron Paul 35:4
This bill sends overseas hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign aid. For example, this bill will send almost $400 million as aid to Russia. Additionally, the bill will send $200 million to help build additional NATO bases overseas, even though the Cold War has been over for more than 15 years.

2006 Ron Paul 35:5
This legislation will send almost two billion American taxpayer dollars to Central and South America in the hopes that the production of drugs overseas will be curtailed. We do know that much of the money spent on Plan Colombia and similar programs over the past few years has not made much of a dent on drug cultivation, but that much of it is likely being skimmed off by corrupt leaders overseas. There must be a better — and less expensive — way to deal with this problem than sending this much money overseas.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 36
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Congratulations To The Cheerleaders Of Victoria Memorial High School In Victoria, Texas 15 May 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 15, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 36:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Cheerleaders of the Victoria Memorial High School in Victoria, Texas for their many recent accomplishments during the school year that is about to be completed.

2006 Ron Paul 36:2
Not only did these Cheerleaders win 1st place at the Universal Cheerleaders Association Regional Championship on December 11th, 2005, earning a bid to the National High School Cheerleading Championship in Orlando, Florida. They also won 1st place at the Universal Cheerleaders Association State Championship on January 29, 2006.

2006 Ron Paul 36:3
Moreover, they won 1st place at the Universal Cheerleaders Association National High School Cheerleading Championship in Orlando, Florida on February 12, 2006. The squad competed against 52 of the top cheerleading squads from across the Nation in the Small Varsity Division. The Memorial High School Cheerleading squad worked their way to the top spot in the Nation by placing among the top ten squads in the Nation since 2001.

2006 Ron Paul 36:4
In addition to their cheerleading duties, which include cheering at numerous athletic events held by their school and a rigorous practice schedule, each of these girls must maintain an overall grade average of 80 or above. They also participate in numerous community service activities, such as the American Cancer Society’s Relay for Life, The American Heart Association’s Heart Walk, and Red Ribbon Week. Additionally, they work with elementary and middle schools, building and promoting school spirit.

2006 Ron Paul 36:5
I want to congratulate Amanda Dunn and Spencer Streetman, Co-Head Cheerleaders as well as the rest of the squad, including: Caitlin Klare, Shelley Frerich, Ashley Blackburn, Marlee Mize, Syndal Brown, Brittney Morris, Sheina Farooqui, Kelcey Newell, Jordan Payne, Stephanie Bess, Ashton Bland, and Kay Boles.

2006 Ron Paul 36:6
I also wish to commend Head Coach Denise Neel, Choreographer Missy DeLuna and Assistant Coaches Ricky Contreras, Lindsay Neel, Bennie Cunningham, and Sarah Jambers.

2006 Ron Paul 36:7
Again, Mr. Speaker, my heartfelt congratulations to all those associated with the Cheerleaders of the Victoria Memorial High School in Victoria, Texas on a job well done.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 37
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Amendment No. 4 Offered By Mr. Paul — Part 1 23 May 2006

2006 Ron Paul 37:1
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. 4 offered by Mr. PAUL:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following new sections: SEC. ll. None of the funds made available in this Act may be used to implement or administer the National Animal Identification System.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.

2006 Ron Paul 37:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

2006 Ron Paul 37:3
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very simple. It says none of the funds made available in this act may be used to implement or administer a National Animal Identification System. I think at this time one thing that this country doesn’t need is another huge bureaucracy tracing and following every animal in the country.

2006 Ron Paul 37:4
That is exactly what this new program will do. It means that each animal will be tagged with a radio frequency ID, all cattle, swine, sheep, goats, horses poultry, bison, deer, elk, lamas and alpacas.

2006 Ron Paul 37:5
For one, what you own on your farm should be your property, and that information should be private unless there is some type of a subpoena. There is a fourth amendment issue here.

2006 Ron Paul 37:6
Also, there is the issue of just why this is being done. A lot of people have claimed, and I agree with this, that this is a benefit to the large agribusiness farmers, and it is a great detriment to the small farmers who will be burdened with this great effort to accumulate data which will be of benefit to some private big companies.

2006 Ron Paul 37:7
Actually, the database will be controlled by private companies. It will be said that this is a voluntary program, but it has also been told me by the Agriculture Department that if it isn’t 100 percent agreed to by the year 2008, it will become mandatory. So it is a little bit of 1984 newspeak about exactly how voluntary it is.

2006 Ron Paul 37:8
But we certainly don’t need this type of program. We already have plenty of programs that trace and monitor movement. There are health requirements and brands and all the other efforts. This, to me, is a bureaucratic boondoggle that we don’t need.

2006 Ron Paul 37:9
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. HEFLEY).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 38
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Amendment No. 4 Offered By Mr. Paul — Part 2 23 May 2006

2006 Ron Paul 38:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that if the gentleman from Georgia does not want another huge bureaucracy, he must support my amendment, because that is what he is going to get. It has already been funded. Even though there is pretense that there is a restraint on funding, it has already been funded, so it is in motion.

2006 Ron Paul 38:2
Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. HOSTETTLER).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 39
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Amendment No. 4 Offered By Mr. Paul — Part 3 23 May 2006

2006 Ron Paul 39:1
Mr. PAUL. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

2006 Ron Paul 39:2
I just want to urge an “aye” vote to try to slow up at least a brand new bureaucracy that is going to play havoc with our small farmers.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 40
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Amendment No. 4 Offered By Mr. Paul — Part 4 23 May 2006

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL).

The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes appeared to have it.

2006 Ron Paul 40:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will be postponed.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 41
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Praise For U.S. Coast Guard In Texas 24 May 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, May 24, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 41:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to place in the RECORD, the following report submitted by Anthony Marcos, Command Senior Chief, Air Station Houston, Texas in recognition of the men and women of the United States Coast Guard in Texas who performed with great courage and made 723 rescues under very adverse circumstances during hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005.

2006 Ron Paul 41:2
On the morning of 29 August, two HH65B helicopters from Air Station Houston arrived at Air Station New Orleans for post Hurricane Katrina operations. The arrival of these crews marked the beginning of an unprecedented period of search and rescue operations, and aviation engineering and logistical support by Air Station Houston.

2006 Ron Paul 41:3
For nearly two weeks, Air Station Houston provided a continuous complement of three HH65B’s affording uninterrupted support of Katrina’s rescue/response operations. This support culminated in more than 164 flight hours, 106 sorties, and most importantly, 691 saved lives by Air Station Houston-based aircraft and crews.

2006 Ron Paul 41:4
Recognizing a critical need by rescue personnel for water, energy drinks, MRE’s and comfort items, Air Station Houston collected and shipped over 170,000 pounds of donated items on Coast Guard and DOD logistics flights for response personnel and the victims of Katrina.

2006 Ron Paul 41:5
Air Station Houston utilized valuable Coast Guard Auxiliary and other volunteer personnel in a vital information gathering effort by serving as a conduit between the Red Cross and Search and Rescue controllers for the forwarding of time-critical information on missing or evacuated Katrina victims and refugees stranded or relocated somewhere in the New Orleans area or out of state.

2006 Ron Paul 41:6
In addition to its legacy area of responsibility (AOR) Air Station Houston instituted a plan to relieve Air Station New Orleans of its non-Katrina SAR responsibilities west of the Mississippi River throughout the Katrina response effort, thereby increasing Houston’s AOR by more than 18,000 square miles. With two aircraft and crews deployed to New Orleans, Air Station Houston crews responded to a report on 6 September of a civilian helicopter missing 20 miles south of Sabine, Texas. Although already engaged in nearly around-the-clock operations in New Orleans, Air Station Houston’s outstanding readiness posture permitted two unit helicopters, manned by crews recently returned from Hurricane Katrina, to be launched in a search for the 12 persons reported aboard the overdue helicopter. All 12 persons were quickly located and then successfully recovered during this multi-unit case by the two Air Station Houston helicopters in a daring nighttime offshore rescue.

2006 Ron Paul 41:7
The possibility of a category five hurricane hitting the Houston-Galveston metropolitan area set in motion a massive response effort from the Coast Guard Area Commanders. Within 48 hours of Rita’s early morning landfall on 24 September, over 125 contingency aircrew personnel along with 15 additional Coast Guard aircraft arrived at Air Station Houston to commence operations.

2006 Ron Paul 41:8
During the Houston-based response operation for Hurricane Rita, the Air Station coordinated over 61 missions and 123 sorties resulting in 205 mishap-free flight hours and the saving of 32 lives in a one week period. During this time, Air Station Houston also provided invaluable support to Gulf Coast based cutters including CGC Cypress, which allowed them to quickly fix the position of displaced waterway buoys, enabling the reopening of vital waterways and the free-flow of commerce in and out of the Gulf.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 42
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Amending Title 49, United States Code 6 June 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, June 6, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 42:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5449 changes the rules under which the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) negotiates with Federal employees unions, such as the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA), to make the FAA abide by the exact same process that other government agencies do when they negotiate with Federal employees unions. Contrary to the claims of its opponents, H.R. 5449 does not allow NATCA to indefinitely prolong negotiations. H.R. 5449 allows the FAA to act to end negotiations and bring their case before a Federal mediation board who has power to resolve the dispute. H.R. 5449 would prevent the FAA from unilaterally imposing a contract on the air traffic controllers. In contrast, the current system may provide the FAA with the opportunity to drag out negotiations, so it can ultimately declare an impasse and impose a contract. Thus, the changes made in H.R. 5449 seem reasonable.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 42:3
Some opponents of H.R. 5449 complain that the air traffic controllers are overpaid. However, since the air traffic control system is government controlled and government financed, the wages of air traffic controllers are not set by the market. Instead, these wages are set by political and bureaucratic fiat. Absent a market, it is imposable to say the air traffic controllers’ wages are too high or too low. In fact, given the importance of air traffic control, it is possible that, in a free market, some air traffic controllers may have higher incomes than they do now. One thing I can say for sure is that air traffic controllers would still have their jobs if the Federal government were limited to its constitutional functions since air traffic controllers perform a function that would be necessary in a free market.

2006 Ron Paul 42:4
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5449 reasonably changes the process under which the FAA negotiates with Federal employees unions. H.R. 5449 does not favor one party over another, and, contrary to the claims of its opponents, H.R. 5449 does not preordain the conclusion of the negotiations between the FAA and NATCA.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 43
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Conference Report On H.R. 4939, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act For Defense, The Global War On Terror, And Hurricane Recovery, 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 12, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 43:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Conference Report of the “Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006.” This is the largest supplemental spending bill in the history of the United States — and all of this spending is off the books. All supplemental bills by definition are deemed “off-budget” and thus the dollars spent are not counted by the General Accounting Office when compiling annual deficit figures, nor are they included in annual budget figures. They thus obscure the true levels of spending and debt, and much of the “emergency” spending is not at all in response to any emergency.

2006 Ron Paul 43:2
When this bill was first before the House, I offered an amendment to redirect to Texas for Hurricane Rita recovery some $546 million from such non-emergency “emergency” items funded in this bill as the State Department “Democracy Fund,” aid to foreign military forces, international broadcasting funds, and others. This spending was not in any way a response to legitimate emergencies and therefore I believed it would be better spent helping the Texas victims of Hurricane Rita. I also redirected some of this nonemergency spending to go toward our crippling deficit. Unfortunately this amendment was not allowed. Thus, recovery from true emergencies that have caused terrible destruction to the lives and property of American citizens is woefully underfunded while pork-barrel projects and wasteful foreign aid are funded most generously.

2006 Ron Paul 43:3
Mr. Speaker, our priorities in this are really backward. We need to look seriously at this incredible — unimaginable — level of spending. We are driving this country toward bankruptcy and it is bills like this that put us in the fast lane.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 44
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Steel Financing Fairness Act 15 June 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 15, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 44:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Steel Financing Fairness Act. This bill helps our Nation’s beleaguered steel industry by stopping the government from forcing American steel workers to subsidize their foreign competitors. Specifically, the bill prohibits the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) and the Export-Import Bank (EXIMBANK) from providing any assistance to countries that subsidize their steel industries. The Steel Financing Fairness Act also instructs the Secretary of the Treasury to reduce America’s contribution to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) by a prorated share of the IMF’s assistance to countries that subsidize their steel industries.

2006 Ron Paul 44:2
One of the problems facing America’s domestic steel industry is that it must compete with foreign industries that receive subsidies from their governments. Some of these subsidies are explicitly intended to provide these companies with a non-market advantage over American steel producers. The U.S. Government further compounds the damage caused by these subsidies by forcing the domestic steel producers to support their major competitors through taxpayer-funded programs.

2006 Ron Paul 44:3
For example, according to the most recent figures available, the five countries with the greatest EXIMBANK exposure are all among the top ten exporters of steel and/or steel products to the United States. In fact, EXIMBANK has provided almost $20 billion of U.S. taxpayer support to these countries.

2006 Ron Paul 44:4
Meanwhile, OPIC has provided almost $6 billion of the taxpayers’ money to leading steel exporters. Thus, the American taxpayer has provided at least $26 billion worth of support to the countries that are the leading competitors of the domestic steel industry. This does not count the funds provided these countries by the IMF. Since money is fungible, the practical effect of providing aid to countries which practice industrial policy is to free up resources these governments can use to further subsidize their steel industries. Thus, taxpayer dollars sent to foreign governments and industries can benefit foreign steel manufacturers even if American taxpayer money is not sent to directly benefit those industries.

2006 Ron Paul 44:5
However, hard as it may be to believe, organizations funded by American taxpayers actually use American tax dollars to directly assist foreign steel producers! For example, among the projects funded by EXIMBANK in recent years is an $18 million loan guarantee to expand steel manufacturing in Red China.

2006 Ron Paul 44:6
Ironically, many of the supporters of these foreign giveaways claim to be promoters of free trade. This claim makes as much sense as a supporter of higher taxes and spending claiming to be a fiscally conservative supporter of limited government. Free trade is the peaceful exchange of goods and services across borders unhampered by government interference. Taxing American workers to support their overseas competitors is not free trade. Instead, it is corporatism designed to benefit certain politically powerful interests at the expense of American entrepreneurs and workers.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 45
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Resolution To Finish Job In Iraq 16 June 2006

2006 Ron Paul 45:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 861. The resolution declares that “the United States is committed to the completion of the mission to create a sovereign, free, secure and united Iraq.” That’s a big job. Ask the British, who tried and failed to do this in the 20th century, what a big job it is. While President Bush has said repeatedly that when the Iraqis stand up we will stand down, this resolution asserts that our troops will remain in Iraq indefinitely. That is unfortunate.

2006 Ron Paul 45:2
A group of Republicans and Democrats tried to offer a more concrete and meaningful alternative to this resolution, which would have substituted the essence of H.J. Res. 55 for H. Res. 861. This is in line with every benchmark set by President Bush. Unfortunately, we were not allowed to offer an amendment.

2006 Ron Paul 45:3
Our approach is so reasonable that I believe 75 percent of the American public would strongly support it. Our amendment would simply require the President to develop and implement a plan for the withdrawal of U.S. Armed Forces from Iraq in a reasonable time frame. It does not give a specific date to complete a withdrawal. It does not say to be out in 30 days or else. It just says try to define an end point for the benefit of everybody. This is exactly in line with what the President himself has stated; it supports his statements.

2006 Ron Paul 45:4
We are not taking a radical approach. It is a very modest approach, a very mild approach. The reason that there was not a vote on our amendment is that we would have won. So this entire exercise is designed for politics. And men are dying. Women are dying! And we’re going broke — we spend $300 million every single day in Iraq, at the same time programs here at home are being denied. So we’re going to have a financial crisis, and we’ll have a political crisis.

2006 Ron Paul 45:5
I I would like to see this effort taken out of the political realm and put it into the realm of policy discussions. We need to look for real solutions rather than just making political statements.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 46
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Too Much Waste In Defense Appropriation Bill 20 June 2006

2006 Ron Paul 46:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this legislation. This bill is unfortunately very short on real defense spending and very generous with spending enormous amounts on expensive military equipment that is ultimately of very little use to defend our country. This bill will not do much to help our military troops. In fact, it gives the troops a pay raise lower than civilian federal employees. It shortchanges them.

2006 Ron Paul 46:2
The bill is very generous with spending on grossly over-budget acquisition of military equipment of questionable value in our current times. Over the past 5 years, the Defense Department has doubled spending on new weapons systems from about $700 billion to nearly $1.4 trillion. However a recent Pentagon report found significant cost overruns — 50 percent over original cost projections — in 36 major weapons systems. These programs benefit well-connected defense contractors, but they do not benefit the taxpayer and they do not benefit the soldiers who risk their lives.

2006 Ron Paul 46:3
The bill manages to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on foreign aid — $372 million to Russia, for example — and the failed drug war, but it fails to address the real problems of a military force that has been seriously stretched and challenged by an unprecedented level of sustained deployment overseas. I urge my colleagues to support a defense spending bill that really puts defense of the United States first.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 47
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

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.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 47:4
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, the Legislative Line Item Veto Act upsets the constitutional balance of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government. Increasing the power of the executive branch will likely increase the size and power of the federal government. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and instead simply vote against all unconstitutional spending.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 48
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Agreeing To Talk To Iran Unconditionally 22 June 2006

2006 Ron Paul 48:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim my 5 minutes at this time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.

There was no objection.

2006 Ron Paul 48:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am encouraged by recent news that the administration has offered to put an end to our 26-year-old policy of refusing to speak with the Iranians. While this is a positive move, I am still concerned about the preconditions set by the administration before it will agree to begin talks.

2006 Ron Paul 48:3
Unfortunately, the main U.S. precondition is that the Iranians abandon their uranium enrichment program. But this is exactly what the negotiations are meant to discuss. How can a meaningful dialogue take place when one side demands that the other side abandon its position before the talks begin?

2006 Ron Paul 48:4
Is this offer designed to fail so as to clear the way for military action while being able to claim that diplomacy was attempted? If the administration wishes to avoid this perception, it would be wiser to abandon preconditions and simply agree to talk to Iran.

2006 Ron Paul 48:5
By demanding that Iran give up its uranium enrichment program, the United States is unilaterally changing the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. We must remember that Iran has never been found in violation of the Nonproliferation Treaty. U.N. inspectors have been in Iran for years, and International Atomic Energy Agency Director ElBaradei has repeatedly reported that he can find no indication of diversion of source or special nuclear material to a military purpose.

2006 Ron Paul 48:6
As a signatory of the Nonproliferation Treaty, Iran has, according to the treaty, the “inalienable right to the development, research and production of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination.”

2006 Ron Paul 48:7
Yet, the United States is demanding that Iran give up that right even though, after years of monitoring, Iran has never been found to have diverted nuclear material from peaceful to military use.

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?

2006 Ron Paul 48:9
So some may argue that it does not matter whether the U.S. operates under double standards. We are the lone superpower, and we can do as we wish, they argue. But this is a problem of the rule of law. Are we a Nation that respects the rule of law? What example does it set for the rest of the world, including rising powers like China and Russia, when we change the rules of the game whenever we see it? Won’t this come back to haunt us?

2006 Ron Paul 48:10
We need to remember that decisionmaking power under Iran’s Government is not entirely concentrated in the President. We are all familiar with the inflammatory rhetoric of President Ahmadinejad, but there are others, government bodies in Iran, that are more moderate and eager for dialogue. We have already spent hundreds of billions of dollars on a war in the Middle East. We cannot afford to continue on the path of conflict over dialogue and peaceful resolution. Unnecessarily threatening Iran is not in the interest of the United States and is not in the interest of world peace.

2006 Ron Paul 48:11
I am worried about pre-conditions that may well be designed to ensure that the talks fail before they start. Let us remember how high the stakes are and urge the administration to choose dialogue over military conflict.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 49
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Society For Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications 29 June 2006

2006 Ron Paul 49:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am not sure that the federal government’s program examine records of international financial transactions collected by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) is worth all the sound and fury that has surrounded the program since its existence was revealed last week. For one thing, this program appears to threaten civil liberties less than the already widely known “Know Your Customer” program or the requirement that American financial institutions file suspicious activity reports whenever a transaction’s value exceeds $10,000. However, the program’s defenders should consider the likelihood that having federal bureaucrats wade through mountains of SWIFT-generated data will prove as ineffective in protecting the American people as other government programs that rely on sifting through mountains of financial data in hopes of identifying “suspicious transactions.”

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.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 50
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Nonintervention 29 June 2006

2006 Ron Paul 50:1
Mr. PAUL. I thank the gentleman, and I certainly appreciate your contribution. And I certainly appreciate your character, because you have been willing to admit something and change your position, which is sometimes very, very difficult for most people.

2006 Ron Paul 50:2
I have, of course, great concern, as I expressed earlier, about the war that is going on. But war in general is so dangerous to the cause of liberty, because it is in time of war that people are more willing to sacrifice their liberties. Today, we are told constantly that we have to do such-and-such here in this country because we are at war. Yet, we haven’t declared a war. The war has not been declared.

2006 Ron Paul 50:3
We went to war without a declaration. And instead of being precise on just who the enemy is, we have a war against terrorism, yet terrorism is nothing more than a technique. There are all kinds of terror, terrorist acts, and all kinds of different people. So you really can’t have a war against terrorism. So we should be much more precise.

2006 Ron Paul 50:4
But why I have, for as long as I can remember, been preaching the doctrine of the Founding Fathers on foreign policy is because I think it would be so much better for us. We would fight fewer wars, we would be a lot wealthier, there would be a lot less killing, and it would be so much better for us, and that is simply a policy of nonintervention. And as I stated in my prepared remarks, this is a good moral position, it is a good constitutional position, and it is a good practical position.

2006 Ron Paul 50:5
Wars that are fought indiscriminately and without declaration and without everybody being together and fighting for a quick victory, they linger and they just never have good resolve. And that is essentially what has happened since World War II. So I will continue to talk about nonintervention. I believe my allies, the Founding Fathers of this country, and the Constitution, should be enough reason for everybody to at least give consideration to nonintervention.

2006 Ron Paul 50:6
And I am convinced that our liberties would be better protected, our financial circumstances would be so much better off, and certainly we wouldn’t have the burden and the heavy heart that Mr. JONES certainly bears about seeing so many young people needlessly losing their legs and dying in a battle that is so difficult to understand and has not come to resolve.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 51
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The We The People Act 29 June 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 29, 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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 51:3
Some may claim that an activist judiciary that strikes down state laws at will expands individual liberty. Proponents of this claim overlook the fact that the best guarantor of true liberty is decentralized political institutions, while the greatest threat to liberty is concentrated power. This is why the Constitution carefully limits the power of the federal government over the states.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 51:5
Mr. Speaker, even some supporters of liberalized abortion laws have admitted that the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, which overturned the abortion laws of all fifty states, is flawed. The Supreme Court’s Establishment Clause jurisdiction has also drawn criticism from across the political spectrum. Perhaps more importantly, attempts to resolve, by judicial fiat, important issues like abortion and the expression of religious belief in the public square increase social strife and conflict. The only way to resolve controversial social issues like abortion and school prayer is to restore respect for the right of state and local governments to adopt polices that reflect the beliefs of the citizens of those jurisdictions. I would remind my colleagues and the federal judiciary that, under our Constitutional system, there is no reason why the people of New York and the people of Texas should have the same polices regarding issues such as marriage and school prayer.

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.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 52 Why Are Americans So Angry? June 29, 2006 HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
Before the U.S. House of Representatives  


2006 Ron Paul 52:1
I have been involved in politics for over 30 years and have never seen the American people so angry.   It’s not unusual to sense a modest amount of outrage, but it seems the anger today is unusually intense and quite possibly worse than ever.   It’s not easily explained, but I have some thoughts on this matter.   Generally, anger and frustration among people are related to economic conditions; bread and butter issues.   Yet today, according to government statistics, things are going well. We have low unemployment, low inflation, more homeowners than ever before, and abundant leisure with abundant luxuries.   Even the poor have cell phones, televisions, and computers.   Public school is free, and anyone can get free medical care at any emergency room in the country. Almost all taxes are paid by the top 50% of income earners.   The lower 50% pay essentially no income taxes, yet general dissatisfaction and anger are commonplace.   The old slogan “It’s the economy, stupid,” just doesn’t seem to explain things

2006 Ron Paul 52:2
Some say it’s the war, yet we’ve lived with war throughout the 20 ^th century. The bigger they were the more we pulled together.   And the current war, by comparison, has fewer American casualties than the rest.   So it can’t just be the war itself.

2006 Ron Paul 52:3
People complain about corruption, but what’s new about government corruption?   In the 19 ^th century we had railroad scandals; in the 20 ^th century we endured the Teapot Dome scandal, Watergate, Koreagate, and many others without too much anger and resentment.   Yet today it seems anger is pervasive and worse than we’ve experienced in the past.

2006 Ron Paul 52:4
Could it be that war, vague yet persistent economic uncertainty, corruption, and the immigration problem all contribute to the anger we feel in America?   Perhaps, but it’s almost as though people aren’t exactly sure why they are so uneasy.   They only know that they’ve had it and aren’t going to put up with it anymore.

2006 Ron Paul 52:5
High gasoline prices make a lot of people angry, though there is little understanding of how deficits, inflation, and war in the Middle East all contribute to these higher prices.

2006 Ron Paul 52:6
Generally speaking, there are two controlling forces that determine the nature of government: the people’s concern for their economic self interests; and the philosophy of those who hold positions of power and influence in any particular government.   Under Soviet Communism the workers believed their economic best interests were being served, while a few dedicated theoreticians placed themselves in positions of power.   Likewise, the intellectual leaders of the American Revolution were few, but rallied the colonists to risk all to overthrow a tyrannical king.

2006 Ron Paul 52:7
Since there’s never a perfect understanding between these two forces, the people and the philosophical leaders, and because the motivations of the intellectual leaders vary greatly, any transition from one system of government to another is unpredictable.   The communist takeover by Lenin was violent and costly; the demise of communism and the acceptance of a relatively open system in the former Soviet Union occurred in a miraculous manner.   Both systems had intellectual underpinnings.

2006 Ron Paul 52:8
In the United States over the last century we have witnessed the coming and going of various intellectual influences by proponents of the free market, Keynesian welfarism, varieties of socialism, and supply-side economics.   In foreign policy we’ve seen a transition from the founder’s vision of non-intervention in the affairs of others to internationalism, unilateral nation building, and policing the world.   We now have in place a policy, driven by determined neo-conservatives, to promote American “goodness” and democracy throughout the world by military force — with particular emphasis on remaking the Middle East.

2006 Ron Paul 52:9
We all know that ideas do have consequences.   Bad ideas, even when supported naively by the people, will have bad results.   Could it be the people sense, in a profound way, that the policies of recent decades are unworkable — and thus they have instinctively lost confidence in their government leaders?   This certainly happened in the final years of the Soviet system.   Though not fully understood, this sense of frustration may well be the source of anger we hear expressed on a daily basis by so many.

2006 Ron Paul 52:10
No matter how noble the motivations of political leaders are, when they achieve positions of power the power itself inevitably becomes their driving force.   Government officials too often yield to the temptations and corrupting influences of power.

2006 Ron Paul 52:11
But there are many others who are not bashful about using government power to do “good.”   They truly believe they can make the economy fair through a redistributive tax and spending system; make the people moral by regulating personal behavior and choices; and remake the world in our image using armies.   They argue that the use of force to achieve good is legitimate and proper for government — always speaking of the noble goals while ignoring the inevitable failures and evils caused by coercion.

2006 Ron Paul 52:12
Not only do they justify government force, they believe they have a moral obligation to do so.

2006 Ron Paul 52:13
Once we concede government has this “legitimate” function and can be manipulated by a majority vote, the various special interests move in quickly.   They gain control to direct government largesse for their own benefit.   Too often it is corporate interests who learn how to manipulate every contract, regulation and tax policy.   Likewise, promoters of the “progressive” agenda, always hostile to property rights, compete for government power through safety, health, and environmental initiatives.   Both groups resort to using government power — and abuse this power — in an effort to serve their narrow interests.   In the meantime, constitutional limits on power and its mandate to protect liberty are totally forgotten.

2006 Ron Paul 52:14
Since the use of power to achieve political ends is accepted, pervasive, and ever expanding, popular support for various programs is achieved by creating fear.   Sometimes the fear is concocted out of thin air, but usually it’s created by wildly exaggerating a problem or incident that does not warrant the proposed government “solution.”   Often government caused the problem in the first place.   The irony, of course, is that government action rarely solves any problem, but rather worsens existing problems or creates altogether new ones.

2006 Ron Paul 52:15
Fear is generated to garner popular support for the proposed government action, even when some liberty has to be sacrificed.   This leads to a society that is systemically driven toward fear — fear that gives the monstrous government more and more authority and control over our lives and property.

2006 Ron Paul 52:16
Fear is constantly generated by politicians to rally the support of the people.

2006 Ron Paul 52:17
Environmentalists go back and forth, from warning about a coming ice age to arguing the grave dangers of global warming.

2006 Ron Paul 52:18
It is said that without an economic safety net — for everyone, from cradle to grave — people would starve and many would become homeless.

2006 Ron Paul 52:19
It is said that without government health care, the poor would not receive treatment.   Medical care would be available only to the rich.

2006 Ron Paul 52:20
Without government insuring pensions, all private pensions would be threatened.

2006 Ron Paul 52:21
Without federal assistance, there would be no funds for public education, and the quality of our public schools would diminish — ignoring recent history to the contrary.

2006 Ron Paul 52:22
It is argued that without government surveillance of every American, even without search warrants, security cannot be achieved.   The sacrifice of some liberty is required for security of our citizens, they claim.

2006 Ron Paul 52:23
We are constantly told that the next terrorist attack could come at any moment.   Rather than questioning why we might be attacked, this atmosphere of fear instead prompts giving up liberty and privacy.   9/11 has been conveniently used to generate the fear necessary to expand both our foreign intervention and domestic surveillance.

2006 Ron Paul 52:24
Fear of nuclear power is used to assure shortages and highly expensive energy.

2006 Ron Paul 52:25
In all instances where fear is generated and used to expand government control, it’s safe to say the problems behind the fears were not caused by the free market economy, or too much privacy, or excessive liberty.

2006 Ron Paul 52:26
It’s easy to generate fear, fear that too often becomes excessive, unrealistic, and difficult to curb.   This is important: It leads to even more demands for government action than the perpetrators of the fear actually anticipated.

2006 Ron Paul 52:27
Once people look to government to alleviate their fears and make them safe, expectations exceed reality.   FEMA originally had a small role, but its current mission is to centrally manage every natural disaster that befalls us.  This mission was exposed as a fraud during last year’s hurricanes; incompetence and corruption are now FEMA’s legacy.   This generates anger among those who have to pay the bills, and among those who didn’t receive the handouts promised to them quickly enough.

2006 Ron Paul 52:28
Generating exaggerated fear to justify and promote attacks on private property is commonplace.   It serves to inflame resentment between the producers in society and the so-called victims, whose demands grow exponentially.

2006 Ron Paul 52:29
The economic impossibility of this system guarantees that the harder government tries to satisfy the unlimited demands, the worse the problems become.   We won’t be able to pay the bills forever, and eventually our ability to borrow and print new money must end.   This dependency on government will guarantee anger when the money runs out.   Today we’re still able to borrow and inflate, but budgets are getting tighter and people sense serious problems lurking in the future.   This fear is legitimate.   No easy solution to our fiscal problems is readily apparent, and this ignites anger and apprehension.  

2006 Ron Paul 52:30
Disenchantment is directed at the politicians and their false promises, made in order to secure reelection and exert power that so many of them enjoy.

2006 Ron Paul 52:31
It is, however, in foreign affairs that governments have most abused fear to generate support for an agenda that under normal circumstances would have been rejected.   For decades our administrations have targeted one supposed “Hitler” after another to gain support for military action against a particular country.   Today we have three choices termed the axis of evil: Iran, Iraq or North Korea.

2006 Ron Paul 52:32
We recently witnessed how unfounded fear was generated concerning Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction to justify our first ever pre-emptive war.   It is now universally known the fear was based on falsehoods.   And yet the war goes on; the death and destruction continue.  

2006 Ron Paul 52:33
This is not a new phenomenon.   General Douglas MacArthur understood the political use of fear when he made this famous statement:

2006 Ron Paul 52:34
“Always there has been some terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it.”

2006 Ron Paul 52:35
We should be ever vigilant when we hear the fear mongers preparing us for the next military conflict our young men and women will be expected to fight.   We’re being told of the great danger posed by Almadinejad in Iran and Kim Jung Il in North Korea.   Even Russia and China bashing is in vogue again.   And we’re still not able to trade with or travel to Cuba.   A constant enemy is required to expand the state.   More and more news stories blame Iran for the bad results in Iraq.   Does this mean Iran is next on the hit list?

2006 Ron Paul 52:36
The world is much too dangerous, we’re told, and therefore we must be prepared to fight at a moment’s notice, regardless of the cost.   If the public could not be manipulated by politicians’ efforts to instill needless fear, fewer wars would be fought and far fewer lives would be lost.

2006 Ron Paul 52:37
Fear and Anger over Iraq Though the American people are fed up for a lot of legitimate reasons, almost all polls show the mess in Iraq leads the list of why the anger is so intense.

2006 Ron Paul 52:38
Short wars, with well-defined victories, are tolerated by the American people even when they are misled as to the reasons for the war.   Wars entered into without a proper declaration tend to be politically motivated and not for national security reasons.   These wars, by their very nature, are prolonged, costly, and usually require a new administration to finally end them.   This certainly was true with the Korean and Vietnam wars.   The lack of a quick military success, the loss of life and limb, and the huge economic costs of lengthy wars precipitate anger.   This is overwhelmingly true when the war propaganda that stirred up illegitimate fears is exposed as a fraud.   Most soon come to realize the promise of guns and butter is an illusion.   They come to understand that inflation, a weak economy, and a prolonged war without real success are the reality.

2006 Ron Paul 52:39
The anger over the Iraq war is multifaceted.   Some are angry believing they were lied to in order to gain their support at the beginning.   Others are angry that the forty billion dollars we spend every year on intelligence gathering failed to provide good information.   Proponents of the war too often are unable to admit the truth.   They become frustrated with the progress of the war and then turn on those wanting to change course, angrily denouncing them as unpatriotic and un-American.

2006 Ron Paul 52:40
Those accused are quick to respond to the insulting charges made by those who want to fight on forever without regard to casualties.   Proponents of the war do not hesitate to challenge the manhood of war critics, accusing them of wanting to cut and run.   Some war supporters ducked military service themselves while others fought and died, only adding to the anger of those who have seen battle up close and now question our campaign in Iraq.

2006 Ron Paul 52:41
When people see a $600 million embassy being built in Baghdad, while funding for services here in the United States is hard to obtain, they become angry.   They can’t understand why the money is being spent, especially when they are told by our government that we have no intention of remaining permanently in Iraq.

2006 Ron Paul 52:42
The bickering and anger will not subside soon, since victory in Iraq is not on the horizon and a change in policy is not likely either.

2006 Ron Paul 52:43
The neoconservative instigators of the war are angry at everyone: at the people who want to get out of Iraq; and especially at those prosecuting the war for not bombing more aggressively, sending in more troops, and expanding the war into Iran.

2006 Ron Paul 52:44
As our country becomes poorer due to the cost of the war, anger surely will escalate.  Much of it will be justified.

2006 Ron Paul 52:45
It seems bizarre that it’s so unthinkable to change course if the current policy is failing.   Our leaders are like a physician who makes a wrong diagnosis and prescribes the wrong medicine, but because of his ego can’t tell the patient he made a mistake.   Instead he hopes the patient will get better on his own.   But instead of improving, the patient gets worse from the medication wrongly prescribed.   This would be abhorrent behavior in medicine, but tragically it is commonplace in politics.

2006 Ron Paul 52:46
If the truth is admitted, it would appear that the lives lost and the money spent have been in vain.   Instead, more casualties must be sustained to prove a false premise.  What a tragedy!  If the truth is admitted, imagine the anger of all the families that already have suffered such a burden.   That burden is softened when the families and the wounded are told their great sacrifice was worthy, and required to preserve our freedoms and our Constitution.

2006 Ron Paul 52:47
But no one is allowed to ask the obvious.   How have the 2,500 plus deaths, and the 18,500 wounded, made us more free?   What in the world does Iraq have to do with protecting our civil liberties here at home?   What national security threat prompted America’s first pre-emptive war?   How does our unilateral enforcement of UN resolutions enhance our freedoms?

2006 Ron Paul 52:48
These questions aren’t permitted.   They are not politically correct.   I agree that the truth hurts, and these questions are terribly hurtful to the families that have suffered so much.   What a horrible thought it would be to find out the cause for which we fight is not quite so noble.

2006 Ron Paul 52:49
I don’t believe those who hide from the truth and refuse to face the reality of the war do so deliberately.   The pain is too great. Deep down, psychologically, many are incapable of admitting such a costly and emotionally damaging error.   They instead become even greater and more determined supporters of the failed policy.

2006 Ron Paul 52:50
I would concede that there are some — especially the die-hard neoconservatives, who believe it is our moral duty to spread American goodness through force and remake the Middle East — who neither suffer regrets nor are bothered by the casualties.   They continue to argue for more war without remorse, as long as they themselves do not have to fight. Criticism is reserved for the wimps who want to “cut and run.”

2006 Ron Paul 52:51
Due to the psychological need to persist with the failed policy, the war proponents must remain in denial of many facts staring them in the face.

2006 Ron Paul 52:52
They refuse to accept that the real reason for our invasion and occupation of Iraq was not related to terrorism.

2006 Ron Paul 52:53
They deny that our military is weaker as a consequence of this war.

2006 Ron Paul 52:54
They won’t admit that our invasion has served the interests of Osama Bin Laden.   They continue to blame our image problems around the world on a few bad apples.

2006 Ron Paul 52:55
They won’t admit that our invasion has served the interests of Iran’s radical regime.

2006 Ron Paul 52:56
The cost in lives lost and dollars spent is glossed over, and the deficit spirals up without concern.

2006 Ron Paul 52:57
They ridicule those who point out that our relationships with our allies have been significantly damaged.

2006 Ron Paul 52:58
We have provided a tremendous incentive for Russia and China, and others like Iran, to organize through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.   They entertain future challenges to our plans to dominate South East Asia, the Middle East, and all its oil.

2006 Ron Paul 52:59
Radicalizing the Middle East will in the long term jeopardize Israel’s security, and increase the odds of this war spreading.

2006 Ron Paul 52:60
War supporters cannot see that for every Iraqi killed, another family turns on us — regardless of who did the killing. We are and will continue to be blamed for every wrong done in Iraq: all deaths, illness, water problems, food shortages, and electricity outages.  

2006 Ron Paul 52:61
As long as our political leaders persist in these denials, the war won’t end. The problem is that this is the source of the anger, because the American people are not in denial and want a change in policy.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 52:64
Our undeclared wars over the past 65 years have dragged on without precise victories. We fight to spread American values, to enforce UN resolutions, and to slay supposed Hitlers.   We forget that we once spread American values by persuasion and setting an example — not by bombs and preemptive invasions.   Nowhere in the Constitution are we permitted to go to war on behalf of the United Nations at the sacrifice of our national sovereignty.   We repeatedly use military force against former allies, thugs we helped empower—like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden—even when they pose no danger to us.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 52:66
Constitutional questions aside, the American people should have demanded more answers from their government before they supported the invasion and occupation of a foreign country.

2006 Ron Paul 52:67
Some of the strongest supporters of the war declare that we are a Christian nation, yet use their religious beliefs to justify the war. They claim it is our Christian duty to remake the Middle East and attack the Muslim infidels. Evidently I have been reading from a different Bible.   I remember something about “Blessed are the peacemakers.”

2006 Ron Paul 52:68
My beliefs aside, Christian teaching of nearly a thousand years reinforces the concept of “The Just War Theory.” This Christian theory emphasizes six criteria needed to justify Christian participation in war. Briefly the six points are as follows:

1. War should be fought only in self defense;
2. War should be undertaken only as a last resort;
3. A decision to enter war should be made only by a legitimate authority;
4. All military responses must be proportional to the threat;
5. There must be a reasonable chance of success; and
6. A public declaration notifying all parties concerned is required.

2006 Ron Paul 52:69
The war in Iraq fails to meet almost all of these requirements. This discrepancy has generated anger and division within the Christian community.

2006 Ron Paul 52:70
Some are angry because the war is being fought out of Christian duty, yet does not have uniform support from all Christians.   Others are angry because they see Christianity as a religion as peace and forgiveness, not war and annihilation of enemies.

2006 Ron Paul 52:71
Constitutional and moral restraints on war should be strictly followed.   It is understandable when kings, dictators, and tyrants take their people into war, since it serves their selfish interests — and those sent to fight have no say in the matter.   It is more difficult to understand why democracies and democratic legislative bodies, which have a say over the issue of war, so readily submit to the executive branch of government.   The determined effort of the authors of our Constitution to firmly place the power to declare war in the legislative branch has been ignored in the decades following WWII.

2006 Ron Paul 52:72
Many members have confided in me that they are quite comfortable with this arrangement.   They flatly do not expect, in this modern age, to formally declare war ever again.   Yet no one predicts there will be fewer wars fought.   It is instead assumed they will be ordered by the executive branch or the United Nations — a rather sad commentary.

2006 Ron Paul 52:73
What about the practical arguments against war, since no one seems interested in exerting constitutional or moral restraints?   Why do we continue to fight prolonged, political wars when the practical results are so bad?   Our undeclared wars since 1945 have been very costly, to put it mildly.   We have suffered over one hundred thousand military deaths, and even more serious casualties.   Tens of thousands have suffered from serious war-related illnesses. Sadly, we as a nation express essentially no concern for the millions of civilian casualties in the countries where we fought.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 52:75
When the people object to a new adventure, the propaganda machine goes into action to make sure critics are seen as unpatriotic Americans or even traitors.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 52:77
That’s when we will be forced to reassess the spending spree, both at home and abroad.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 52:79
We must move quickly toward a more traditional American foreign policy of peace, friendship, and trade with all nations; entangling alliances with none.   We must reject the notion that we can or should make the world safe for democracy.   We must forget about being the world’s policeman. We should disengage from the unworkable and unforgiving task of nation building.   We must reject the notion that our military should be used to protect natural resources, private investments, or serve the interest of any foreign government or the United Nations. Our military should be designed for one purpose: defending our national security.   It’s time to come home now, before financial conditions or military weakness dictates it.

2006 Ron Paul 52:80
The major obstacle to a sensible foreign policy is the fiction about what patriotism means. Today patriotism has come to mean blind support for the government and its policies. In earlier times patriotism meant having the willingness and courage to challenge government policies regardless of popular perceptions.

2006 Ron Paul 52:81
Today we constantly hear innuendos and direct insults aimed at those who dare to challenge current foreign policy, no matter how flawed that policy may be.   I would suggest it takes more courage to admit the truth, to admit mistakes, than to attack others as unpatriotic for disagreeing with the war in Iraq.

2006 Ron Paul 52:82
Remember, the original American patriots challenged the abuses of King George, and wrote and carried out the Declaration of Independence.

2006 Ron Paul 52:83
Yes Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of anger in this country.   Much of it is justified; some of it is totally unnecessary and misdirected.   The only thing that can lessen this anger is an informed public, a better understanding of economic principles, a rejection of foreign intervention, and a strict adherence to the constitutional rule of law.   This will be difficult to achieve, but it’s not impossible and well worth the effort.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 53
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act 11 July 2006

Ms. HOOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL).

(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

2006 Ron Paul 53:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation. It is not easy to oppose this legislation because it is assumed that proponents of the bill are on the side of the moral high ground. But there is a higher moral high ground in the sense that protecting liberty is more important than passing a bill that regulates something on the Internet.

2006 Ron Paul 53:2
The Interstate Commerce Clause originally was intended to make sure there were no barriers between interstate trade. In this case, we are putting barriers up.

2006 Ron Paul 53:3
I want to make the point that prohibition, as a general principle, is a bad principle because it doesn’t work. It doesn’t solve the problem because it can’t decrease the demand. As a matter of fact, the only thing it does is increase the price. And there are some people who see prohibitions as an enticement, and that it actually increases the demand.

2006 Ron Paul 53:4
But once you make something illegal, whether it is alcohol or whether it is cigarettes or whether it is gambling on the Internet, it doesn’t disappear because of this increased demand. All that happens is, it is turned over to the criminal element. So you won’t get rid of it.

2006 Ron Paul 53:5
Sometimes people say that this prohibition that is proposed is designed to protect other interests because we certainly aren’t going to get rid of gambling, so we might get rid of one type of gambling, but actually enhance the other.

2006 Ron Paul 53:6
But one of the basic principles, a basic reason why I strongly oppose this is, I see this as a regulation of the Internet, which is a very, very dangerous precedent to set.

2006 Ron Paul 53:7
To start with, I can see some things that are much more dangerous than gambling. I happen to personally strongly oppose gambling. I think it is pretty stupid, to tell you the truth.

2006 Ron Paul 53:8
But what about political ideas? What about religious fanaticism? Are we going to get rid of those? I can think of 1,000 things worse coming from those bad ideas. But who will come down here and say, Just think of the evil of these bad ideas and distorted religions, and therefore we have to regulate the Internet?

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.

2006 Ron Paul 53:10
In addition to being unconstitutional, H.R. 4411 is likely to prove ineffective at ending Internet gambling. Instead, this bill 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, H.R. 4411 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.

2006 Ron Paul 53:11
In conclusion, H.R. 4411 violates the constitutional limits on Federal power. Furthermore, laws such as H.R. 4411 are ineffective in eliminating the demand for vices such as Internet gambling; instead, they ensure that these enterprises will be controlled by organized crime. Therefore I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 4411, the Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 54
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To Bruce Farmer 12 July 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, July 12, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 54:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I wish to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Mr. Bruce J. Farmer, Sr., a remarkable man who passed away on June 28. I also respectfully request unanimous consent to insert the printed version of a eulogy for Mr. Farmer.

2006 Ron Paul 54:2
Mr. Farmer, a resident of Galveston, Texas, was a husband, father of four sons, entrepreneur, and community leader. Mr. Farmer’s career exemplifies the best features of American capitalism. Mr. Farmer was CEO of Farmer’s Copper Ltd., which he founded in 1978 as Farmer’s Copper and Industrial Supply. Under his leadership, Farmer’s Copper Ltd. grew into one of the nation’s largest privately owned copper and brass distributors, employing approximately 185 people in Galveston. Mr. Farmer began working in the metal fabrication business at the age of 14, when he went to work for Farmer’s Marine Copper Works, an engineering and fabrication firm founded by his father and uncle. Mr. Farmer was also CEO of the Four Winds Investments and a director of Moody National Bank

2006 Ron Paul 54:3
Mr. Farmer first demonstrated his commitment to serving his community and country at the age of 16 when he enlisted in the U.S. Merchant Marines in order to serve his country at the height of World War II. Throughout his life, Mr. Farmer did not allow the demands of growing his business to distract him from becoming involved in various local and national organizations. For example, he served on the Methodist Foundation Board and on other boards of the Methodist Church. An avid outdoorsman who loved fishing, hunting, golfing, and skiing, Mr. Farmer also served as past President of the Galveston Propeller Club and received the Maritime Man of the Year award.

2006 Ron Paul 54:4
Mr. Speaker, I am honored to be able to pay tribute to this fine man, and I hope all my colleagues join me in sending my deepest condolences to his family. I hope Mr. Farmer’s family is comforted by the knowledge that the whole community of Galveston joins them in mourning his passing.

2006 Ron Paul 54:5
“MY BELOVED SONS”
AUTHOR UNKNOWN
There’s a feeling apart
In a father’s heart
For his son.
A certain pride
Down deep inside
For this special one.
When there are two
Its twice come true
And life grows richer still.
A third little boy
Is a brand new joy,
And all seems perfect until;
You add one more
To make it four,
And life takes on a new zest,
To share life’s joys
With four little boysIs living at its best.

2006 Ron Paul 54:6
Bruce kept that poem in his desk at work. I think that says a lot about the man and his philosophy. His family was part of his work and his work was part of his family. I have had the honor and privilege of working with Bruce for the past twenty five years. Notice I said with and not for. No one worked for him.

2006 Ron Paul 54:7
Everyone at Farmer’s Copper is part of a team, part of the family. We all knew that there was not a job Bruce could not do, would not do or had not done. He was a man that led by example.

2006 Ron Paul 54:8
Every morning he would make his rounds through the offices ostensibly to check on the staff and see how business was doing. The real reason was that he wanted to mooch hugs from all of the ladies.

2006 Ron Paul 54:9
Bruce would also make his rounds through the warehouse. He would stop in the different departments to see how the equipment was running, how the men were doing and what the day’s workload looked like. He would offer his opinion or make a suggestion and then tell them to “carry on”. Funny, I never remember him mooching hugs down there.

2006 Ron Paul 54:10
Bruce really valued his employees and truly treated them as family. There were dozens of times when he quietly and privately helped an employee through their personal tragedies and hardships. Me included.

2006 Ron Paul 54:11
He always kept his door open and would gladly listen to any employees concerns, complaints or suggestions. Bruce always had time to help.

2006 Ron Paul 54:12
Under his leadership, Farmer’s Copper grew from a tiny almost afterthought division of Farmer’s Marine into a leader of the metals industry. Farmer’s Copper is known both nationally and internationally as the premier source for copper based metals.

2006 Ron Paul 54:13
His unique vision and courage to stay on the forefront of technological advances in both equipment and material is what makes us a leader today and for the last twenty five years.

2006 Ron Paul 54:14
His willingness to invest in equipment, inventory and especially people has assured our success. His boundless energy and ever present optimism inspired us all. During industry downturns when others saw troubles, Bruce found opportunity. When everyone else was in the dark, Bruce found the light. That is how in a volatile and cyclical industry we have always prospered.

2006 Ron Paul 54:15
On a personal note, I have lost one of my best friends, a fishing buddy and hunting partner. But most of all, I’ve lost my second father. I have known Bruce all of my life. The older we got, the closer we got. He meant more to me than words can say. And I know without a doubt that he felt the same towards me.

2006 Ron Paul 54:16
That’s how it was with Bruce. When you were his friend, you felt it deep down in your heart. And if you were not his friend, that just meant that you had not met him yet.

2006 Ron Paul 54:17
I guess the highest honor he gave me was when I became a member of the “Old Fart Hunting Club.” Every year on the second weekend of deer season Bruce would round up the “Old Farts” and we head out to the Rock Island ranch.

2006 Ron Paul 54:18
This group consisted of Bruce’s oldest and dearest friends. Members included Buddy Benson, Jimmy Regan, Bill Glenn, Gene Morris and of course the late Nat Pepper. There were dozens of other honorary members who attended through the years. You always knew that things would get exciting when Joe Cantini made the trip. And you always had make sure there was just a little bourbon for when Kenneth Nance would drop by.

2006 Ron Paul 54:19
Last year I was the only participant under retirement age that had not had a heart attack. The trips were exciting for me every year. Sitting around the fire or on the front porch with these guys have been some of the best times of my life. Listening to stories of their past: the obstacles faced, the friends lost and the achievements accomplished made me proud to be included. It also made me a better man. Of course some of the tails were pretty tall and then there was the always present practical jokes.

2006 Ron Paul 54:20
I think my favorite included Nat. Nat always enjoyed his Saturday night bath. As the story goes, one such night Bruce called out to Nat that he had drawn a bath for him. Nat thanked him and proceeded to the giant old cast iron, clawed foot tub. After he disrobed and prepared to enter the tub he saw it. A small bass swimming in circles trying to find its way out.

2006 Ron Paul 54:21
Bruce had caught the fish earlier and placed it in the tub. I don’t know who was more shocked. Nat or the bass. Like the bass we must find our way now. Everyone here is a better person for having known Bruce. We as friends, family and coworkers must now “carry on”.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 55
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To NASA On Space Shuttle “Discovery” Mission 12 July 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, July 12, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 55:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce a resolution commending the people of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for the latest mission of the Space Shuttle Discovery . Successfully launched on July 4 this mission, known as STS–121, marks the second mission on the Return to Flight sequence. STS–121 originally was scheduled to perform just two space walks. However, due to the overall success of the launch, the mission was extended from 12 to 13 days, allowing for an additional space walk.

2006 Ron Paul 55:2
Among the other tasks that will be preformed on this mission are tests of shuttle safety improvements to build on findings from Discovery ’s flight last year, including a redesign of the shuttle’s external fuel tank’s foam insulation, in-flight inspection of the shuttle’s heat shield, improved imagery during launch and the ability to launch a shuttle rescue mission. The External Tank, which underwent work prior to the mission to reduce foam loss, performed well this time especially early in the flight when a light weight piece of foam could severely damage the tile or wing leading edge, but nothing like that happened this time. The five instances of foam loss that were experienced all occurred after the critical release time. The largest foam loss on the mission, which occurred in front of one of the ice/frost ramps on the external tank, was calculated to be .055 pounds. The mass limit in that area is .25 pounds, meaning that the loss was not even a quarter of the way to the limit. NASA is very pleased with the performance of the tank, as it is a great improvement from last year’s STS–114 mission.

2006 Ron Paul 55:3
The STS–121 mission will also bolster the International Space Station by making a key repair and delivering more than 28,000 pounds of equipment and supplies, as well as adding a third crew member to the Space Station.

2006 Ron Paul 55:4
STS–121 is NASA’s most photographed mission in shuttle history as more than 100 high definition, digital, video, and film cameras are helping to assess whether any debris comes off the external tank during the shuttle’s launch, while four new video added to the solid rocket boosters.

2006 Ron Paul 55:5
Mr. Speaker, the success of STS–121 is a tribute to the skills and dedication of all NASA employees, especially the Space Shuttle Discovery’s crew of Colonel Steve Lindsey; Commander Mark Kelly; Piers Sellers, PhD; Lt. Colonel Mike Fossum; Commander Lisa Nowak; Stephanie Wilson; and Thomas Reiter.

2006 Ron Paul 55:6
What philosopher Ayn Rand wrote of the moon landing in 1969 applies to the STS–121 and all of NASA’s missions: “Think of what was required to achieve that mission: think of the unpitying effort; the merciless discipline; the courage; the responsibility of relying on one’s judgment; the days, nights and years of unswerving dedication to a goal; the tension of the unbroken maintenance of a full, clear mental focus; and the honesty. It took the highest, sustained acts of virtue to create in reality what had only been dreamt of for millennia.” I encourage all of my colleagues and all Americans to join me in commending NASA for completing STS–121 mission, and all of NASA’s work.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 56
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Bilingual Ballots 13 July 2006

2006 Ron Paul 56:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, it is shameful that Americans were once routinely denied the ability to vote on account of their skin color. All Americans should celebrate the Voting Rights Act’s role in vindicating the constitutional rights of all citizens to vote free of racial discrimination. Therefore, I was hoping I could support reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act. However, I cannot support H.R. 9 because it extends the unfunded bilingual ballots mandate.

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?

2006 Ron Paul 56:3
Of course, Mr. Chairman, I have no desire to deny any American citizens the ability to vote. Contrary to the claims of its opponents, Mr. KING’s amendment does not deny any American the ability to vote. Under Mr. KING’s amendment, Americans will still have a legal right to bring translators to the polls to assist them in voting, and States could still choose to print bilingual ballots if the King amendment passes. All the King amendment did is repeal a costly Federal mandate.

2006 Ron Paul 56:4
In conclusion, while I recognize the continuing need for protection of voting rights, I cannot support this bill before us since it extends the costly and divisive bilingual ballot mandate.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 57
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Alternative Pluripotent Stem cell Therapies Enhancement Act 18 July 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, July 18, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 57:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, the issue of government funding of embryonic stem cell research is one of the most divisive issues facing the country. While I sympathize with those who see embryonic stem cell research as providing a path to a cure for the dreadful diseases that have stricken so many Americans, I strongly object to forcing those Americans who believe embryonic stem cell research is immoral to subsidize such research with their tax dollars.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 57:3
Unfortunately, many opponents of embryonic stem cell research are disregarding the Constitution by supporting S. 2754, an “acceptable” alternative that funds non-embryonic 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 S. 2754.

2006 Ron Paul 57:4
Federal funding of medical research guarantees the politicization of decisions about what types of research for what diseases will be funded. Thus, scarce resources will be allocated according to who has the most effective lobby rather than allocated on the basis of need or even likely success. Federal funding will also cause researchers to neglect potential treatments and cures that do not qualify for federal funds.

2006 Ron Paul 57:5
In order to promote private medical research, I have introduced the Cures Can Be Found Act (H.R. 3444). H.R. 3444 promotes medical research by providing a tax credit for investments and donations to promote adult and umbilical cord blood stem cell research and providing a $2,000 tax credit to new parents for the donation of umbilical cord blood from which to extract stem cells. The Cures Can Be Found Act will ensure greater resources are devoted to this valuable research. The tax credit for donations of umbilical cord blood will ensure that medical science has a continuous supply of stem cells. Thus, this bill will help scientists discover new cures using stem cells and, hopefully, make routine the use of stem cells to treat formerly incurable diseases.

2006 Ron Paul 57:6
H.R. 3444 will benefit companies like Prime Cell, which is making great progress in transforming non-embryonic stem cells into any cell type in the body. Prime Cell is already talking to health care practitioners about putting its findings to use to help cure diseases.

2006 Ron Paul 57:7
Companies like Prime Cell are continuing the great American tradition of private medical research that is responsible for many medical breakthroughs. For example, Jonas Salk, discoverer of the polio vaccine, did not receive one dollar from the federal government for his efforts.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 58
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Marriage Protection Amendment 18 July 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, July 18, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 58:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, while I oppose federal efforts to redefine marriage as something other than a union between one man and one woman, I do not believe a constitutional amendment is either a necessary or proper way to defend marriage.

2006 Ron Paul 58:2
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 and their creator, not with receiving their marriage license, thus being joined in the eyes of the state.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 58:4
Having studied this issue and consulted with leading legal scholars, including an attorney who helped defend the Boy Scouts against attempts to force the organization to allow gay men to serve as scoutmasters, I am convinced that both the Defense of Marriage Act and the Marriage Protection Act can survive legal challenges and ensure that no state is forced by a federal court’s or another state’s actions to recognize same sex marriage. Therefore, while I am sympathetic to those who feel only a constitutional amendment will sufficiently address this issue, I respectfully disagree. I also am concerned that the proposed amendment, by telling the individual states how their state constitutions are to be interpreted, is a major usurpation of the states’ power. The division of power between the federal government and the states is one of the virtues of the American political system. Altering that balance endangers self-government and individual liberty. However, if federal judges wrongly interfere and attempt to compel a state to recognize the marriage licenses of another state, that would be the proper time for me to consider new legislative or constitutional approaches.

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:

2006 Ron Paul 58:6
“The very fact that the FMA [Federal Marriage Amendment] was introduced said that conservatives believed it was okay to amend the Constitution to take power from the states and give it to Washington. That is hardly a basic principle of conservatism as we used to know it. It is entirely likely the left will boomerang that assertion into a future proposed amendment that would weaken gun rights or mandate income redistribution.”

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.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 58:10
Because of the dangers to liberty and traditional values posed by the unexpected consequences of amending the Constitution to strip power from the states and the people and further empower Washington, I cannot in good conscience support the marriage amendment to the United States Constitution. Instead, I plan to continue working to enact the Marriage Protection Act and protect each state’s right not to be forced to recognize a same-sex marriage.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 59
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

National Aeronautics And Spaca Administration 19 July 2006

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL), the author of this resolution and a great supporter of the great work of NASA.

(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

2006 Ron Paul 59:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

2006 Ron Paul 59:2
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to sponsor H.Con.Res 448, a resolution commending the people of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for the latest mission of the Space Shuttle Discovery, and I thank the Science Committee and the House leadership for their assistance in bringing this resolution to the floor.

2006 Ron Paul 59:3
Successfully launched on July 4th, this mission, known as STS–121, marks the second mission of the return-to- flight sequence. STS–121 originally was scheduled to perform just two space walks. However, due to the overall success of the launch, the mission was extended from 12 days to 13 days, allowing for an additional space walk.

2006 Ron Paul 59:4
Among the tasks that were performed on this mission are tests of shuttle safety improvements to build on findings from Discovery’s flight last year, including a redesign of the shuttle’s external fuel tank’s foam insulation, inflight inspection of the shuttle’s heat shield, improved imagery during launch, and the ability to launch a shuttle rescue mission. The external tank, which underwent work during the mission to reduce foam loss, performed well this time, especially early in the flight.

2006 Ron Paul 59:5
The STS–121 mission also bolstered the international space station by making a key repair and delivering more than 28,000 pounds of equipment and supplies, as well as adding a third crew member to the space station.

2006 Ron Paul 59:6
STS–121 was NASA’s most photographed mission in shuttle history, as more than 100 high definition, digital, video and film cameras assessed whether any debris comes off the external tank during the shuttle’s launch.

2006 Ron Paul 59:7
Mr. Speaker, the success of STS–121 is a tribute to the skills and dedication of all NASA employees, especially the Space Shuttle Discovery crew of Colonel Steve Lindsey, Commander Mark Kelly, Piers Sellers, Ph.D., Lieutenant Colonel Mike Fossum, Commander Lisa Nowak, Stephanie Wilson and Thomas Reiter.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 59:9
But nevertheless, it just happened that NASA was her favorite government agency, and therefore after the Moon landing in 1979 she wrote very favorably about NASA, which in some ways contradicted her philosophy, but it also spoke to the tremendous brilliance and success of the Moon exploration program.

2006 Ron Paul 59:10
That author that I want to quote is the author of Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand, who wrote this shortly after the Moon landing in 1969. And although this is written in praise of the Moon landing, it applies to all those individuals who participated in STS–121.

2006 Ron Paul 59:11
The quote goes this way: “Think of what was required to achieve that mission. Think of the unpitying effort; the merciless discipline; the courage; the responsibility of relying on one’s judgment; the days, nights and years of unswerving dedication to a goal; the tension of an unbroken maintenance of a full, clear mental focus and honesty. It took the highest, sustained acts of virtue to create in realty what had only been dreamt of for millennia.”

2006 Ron Paul 59:12
I encourage all my colleagues and all Americans to join me in commending NASA for completing this mission and all of NASA’s work.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 60
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Requests Opposition Time 19 July 2006

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. HYDE) and the gentleman from California (Mr. LANTOS) each will control 20 minutes.

2006 Ron Paul 60:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, if neither gentlemen is opposed to the bill, I request the time in opposition.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman from California opposed to the motion?

Mr. LANTOS. I strongly support this legislation, Mr. Speaker.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman from Texas opposed to the motion?

2006 Ron Paul 60:2
Mr. PAUL. I am opposed to it.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under clause 1 of rule XV, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) will control 20 minutes in opposition.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 61
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Noninterventionist Policy — Part 1 19 July 2006

2006 Ron Paul 61:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

2006 Ron Paul 61:2
Mr. Speaker, I have taken the time in opposition to this resolution because I very sincerely believe that resolutions of this sort actually do more harm than good. I know that it is very good to condemn the violence, and I certainly do agree with that.

2006 Ron Paul 61:3
But I am convinced that when we get involved and send strong messages, such as this resolution will, that it ends up expanding the war rather than diminishing the conflict, and that ultimately it comes back to haunt us.

2006 Ron Paul 61:4
Generally speaking, I follow a policy in foreign affairs called noninterventionism. It is not generally acceptable in this current time that we do this, but I think there is every reason to consider it. It certainly was something that the founders talked about.

2006 Ron Paul 61:5
The Constitution really doesn’t authorize us to be the policemen of the world. And for this reason, we should talk about it. And that is why I take this opportunity to do so, with the sincere belief that we would be better off with less intervention overseas.

2006 Ron Paul 61:6
The founders talked about that, about rejecting entangling alliances. And we have been involved in a lot of entangling alliances since World War I, especially after World War II, and we have been doing a lot of things, losing a lot of men and women and costing a lot of money; and too often, these events have come back to haunt us. There is blow-back from our policy.

2006 Ron Paul 61:7
The policy of interventionism, which I object to, really doesn’t work. It is well intended, and we have these grandiose plans and schemes to solve the problems of the world, but if you are really honest with yourself and you look at the success and failure, it doesn’t have a good record. I mean, are you going to defend the great victory in Korea, the great victory in Vietnam? And on and on. The great victory in Iraq?

2006 Ron Paul 61:8
And I see resolutions like this step in the wrong direction. Actually, I believe it is going to expand the war in the Middle East.

2006 Ron Paul 61:9
The other reason why I strongly object to interventionism is it costs a lot of money. And someday we will have to deal with that. Supplemental bills come up now to the tune of tens of billions, and next year, already, they are planning to come up with another $100 billion for our intervention overseas. But it is off the regular budgetary process, so it doesn’t meet the budgetary restraints that we are supposed to follow. So it becomes emergency funding, although we have been in Iraq for 3 years, and with plans to stay endlessly. We are building permanent bases in Iraq. So there is a lot of cost, and eventually that will come home to haunt us, and it already has.

2006 Ron Paul 61:10
And then there is the problem of unintended consequences. We went into Iraq for all kinds of reasons, some disproven, and all well intended, and who knows what the real motivations were. But one thing was that we would gain access to oil, and oil would be produced and would help pay the bills. Yet oil, when we went into Iraq was $28 a barrel. Now it is $75 a barrel. That is an unintended consequence.

2006 Ron Paul 61:11
We have done more to fall into the trap of what Osama bin Laden wanted in Iraq than anything else. And actually we have helped Iran. Iran is stronger. They have probably already more influence with the grass roots, the democratic process in Iraq, than we do. Those are the kind of unintended consequences that, on principle, I strongly object to.

2006 Ron Paul 61:12
I believe that the founders were correct in advocating avoiding entangling alliances, to have a strong national defense, to defend this country, I believe that is just plain common sense. Most Americans, if you just flat-out put it to them, think we should not be the policemen of the world. Do you think we should be involved in the internal affairs of other nations? People say no. We shouldn’t do this. The Constitution doesn’t give us the authority to do it.

2006 Ron Paul 61:13
And we now are in the business of maintaining an empire. A noninterventionist foreign policy concedes up front that is not our goal. We are not supposed to be going overseas and building permanent bases and staying there endlessly. Even the election campaign of 2000 was won partially on the foreign policy issue that, you know, it was said that we shouldn’t be the policemen of the world and we shouldn’t be in nation building.

2006 Ron Paul 61:14
I think those are good ideas and the American people agree. They didn’t object to it. But each step along the way we dig a deeper hole for ourselves. And that is the general philosophic reasons why I believe nonintervention is beneficial. Intervention is very, very dangerous. Later there will be a lot of specifics that I would like to mention.

2006 Ron Paul 61:15
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 62
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Yields Time To Mr. LaHood 19 July 2006

2006 Ron Paul 62:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 8 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LAHOOD).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 63
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Noninterventionist Policy — Part 2 19 July 2006

2006 Ron Paul 63:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

2006 Ron Paul 63:2
Mr. Speaker, I would like to comment just briefly on the comments made by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LAHOOD), because I think his point is well taken about the emphasis on this legislation, and to deny that would be just trying to fool one’s self.

2006 Ron Paul 63:3
It is very clear that if one were objective and read this resolution, all the terrorists are on one side and all the victims and the innocents are on the other side, which I, quite frankly, find unfair, especially coming from the position that I want to advocate, neutrality, rather than picking sides.

2006 Ron Paul 63:4
But he also mentioned the fact about trying to change the resolution. I would like to emphasize also that being on the International Relations Committee, I was anxious to see the resolution, but characteristically it was very difficult to get. We didn’t hold hearings and we didn’t debate it and we didn’t get a chance to have amendments to it, and even last night I couldn’t receive it. There were some news articles very early this morning. Lo and behold, they had copies of it. It took me until about 9 o’clock this morning to get it.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 63:6
Mr. Speaker, I yield 8 minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. RAHALL).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 64
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Noninterventionist Policy — Part 3 19 July 2006

2006 Ron Paul 64:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

2006 Ron Paul 64:2
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from California (Mr. LANTOS) derogatorily said there is no room to talk about neutrality, as if it were a crime. I would suggest there is room for an open mind to another type of policy that may save American lives.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 64:4
Then, after the marines were killed, he had a reassessment of the policy. When he wrote his autobiography a few years later after leaving the Presidency, he wrote this.

2006 Ron Paul 64:5
He says, “Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines’ safety that it should have.”

2006 Ron Paul 64:6
In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today.

2006 Ron Paul 64:7
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. BOUSTANY).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 65
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Noninterventionist Policy — Part 4 19 July 2006

2006 Ron Paul 65:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

2006 Ron Paul 65:2
I just want to make a couple of comments before yielding. It has been well advertised about the three prisoners that have been taken, the three Israeli prisoners. Everybody in the country knows about it. What I find a bit interesting is that some people estimate between 8,000 and 10,000 Palestinians and Lebanese are in prisons and under the authority of the Israeli police and government.

2006 Ron Paul 65:3
It is also known that one-third of the Cabinet of Palestine have been arrested and held hostage by the Israeli Government, and once again, I think this is a distortion of what is going on. It is hard to get the information out to find out exactly what is happening in this area.

2006 Ron Paul 65:4
Also, I would like to make one additional point that it is very easy to criticize the Government of Lebanon for not doing more about Hezbollah. I object to everything Hezbollah does because I am a strong opponent to all violence on both sides. So I object, too, but I also object to the unreasonable accusations that the Government of Lebanon has not done enough, when we realize that Israel was there for 18 years, and Hezbollah did not get any weaker, and they are stronger than ever. So I think, again, a little bit of balance is worth considering.

2006 Ron Paul 65:5
Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. ISSA).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 66
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

19 July 2006

2006 Ron Paul 66:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

2006 Ron Paul 66:2
Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of accusations made about who precipitated the crisis, the charges made that it all occurred because three prisoners were taken, and that Hezbollah and Hamas deliberately provoked the situation. And it may well be true. I have no idea exactly what is true.

2006 Ron Paul 66:3
But there are others who have indicated that they believe that it was precipitated mainly with the intent of our foreign policy, along with Israel’s foreign policy, as an initial step to go into Iran. We have talked about Iran around the House and around Washington, and there are a lot of people very, very concerned. Our administration talks about it all the time; taking out Iran, taking out the nuclear sites. But to do that, the theory is that these missiles had to be removed and, in a practical military sense, that seems very reasonable. So there could be the deliberateness of Hamas and Hezbollah precipitating the crisis for whatever gain they think, or deliberately precipitated by both the United States and Israel with the intent to follow up with bombing in Iran. And I am frightened about that. I think that may well occur.

2006 Ron Paul 66:4
I have talked to a lot of military people, a lot of CIA people, who actually believe this is a possibility within months. And this is the reason I have such great concern about what is happening in this area of the country, because if us going into Iraq didn’t go so well, can anybody imagine what is going to happen when the bombs start to fall on Iran? I think it is going to be catastrophic. And there has been talk on television this past weekend, the beginning of World War III. And this war is about to spread, and this is the reason that I oppose this resolution, because, deep down in my heart, I believe that what we do here helps to provoke things and agitate things and bring us closer to a greater conflict. And I am just arguing that there is an alternative other than violence to settle some of these problems.

2006 Ron Paul 66:5
Now, a lot of bombs have fallen on both sides, and of course, if they are coming from Lebanon, Syria and Iran are blamed, and they may well deserve the blame. But we haven’t talked about who gets the blame for the other side. More people are getting killed on the other side. And as we mentioned before, innocent people are killed, and a lot of nonmilitary targets have been hit, farms and buildings and electrical plants and airports that have nothing to do with the military.

2006 Ron Paul 66:6
And yet the reason I believe this is going to be worse is because we see it in this country the way we want to see it. And we have no willingness to think about how it might be seen elsewhere, like how is it going to be seen by 1 billion Muslims around the world? And you know, quite frankly, every single bomb that is dropped by Israel, by their calculation, and they have reason to believe so, those are U.S. bombs. Those are our airplanes. We paid for them. And they get the money to buy these weapons. So whether it is deliberate or whatever, it doesn’t matter. It is the perception by the Muslims who are radicalized by this.

2006 Ron Paul 66:7
You can’t deny it. There are more radicals today than there were 2 or 3 years ago. And the reason why I am worried about this is we are now getting the information about the reaction to 9/11. 9/11 occurred, and the immediate response by many of our leaders and the administration said, let’s go to Iraq. People would say, well, why Iraq? Well, we have been planning on it all along. This is the opportunity.

2006 Ron Paul 66:8
As soon as this crisis built, we heard very similar comments. Let’s go to Iran, you know, to go forward.

2006 Ron Paul 66:9
There are others who suggest that this crisis has come about not out of our strength, but out of our weakness. If Hezbollah and Hamas has deliberately done this, they might have calculated we have been stretched fairly thin around the world and with Iraq, and know that a lot of the American people and the taxpayers are getting tired of the war, so they may have seen this as a sign of weakness on our part. But then the “neocons” say, yeah, that may well be true, that is why we have to be tougher than ever. We have got to unleash the bombs. We have got to consider nuclear weapons, and back and forth and back and forth, until one day we are going to get ourselves in such a fix that World War III will be here and it will be irrevocable.

2006 Ron Paul 66:10
And there are some people who sort of like this idea. There are some “neocons” who thrive on chaos, because their theory is they want regime change. They want regime change in Syria, and they want regime change in Iran. They wanted it in Iraq. And we are, by gosh, we are going to have regime change, and they are going to be our friends and they are going to be democrats. We are going to have democratic elections.

2006 Ron Paul 66:11
So we go to war and our men and women die. We spend all this money, and we have elections. And then sometimes we don’t like the results of the elections, so we ignore them.

2006 Ron Paul 66:12
What if we had elections in Saudi Arabia? What if we had elections in Egypt? And then what if their radicals were elected?

2006 Ron Paul 66:13
So we are fighting and dying to spread democracy. And it is probably one of the most dangerous things for us with our current foreign policy, is that when they do vote and elect Hezbollah and Hamas, then we have to reject the principle of democracy.

2006 Ron Paul 66:14
Self-determination is a great principle, and we should permit it and encourage self-determination. But encouraging elections under these circumstances, and by force, in hopes that we get our man in charge just doesn’t work.

2006 Ron Paul 66:15
I think we are going to have regime changes, a lot more regime changes than most people want around here. I think the regime changes are coming in Saudi Arabia, and I think there will be a regime change maybe in Egypt. Who knows? In Libya. And you are going to be very unhappy with those regime changes.

2006 Ron Paul 66:16
So, yes, it was well intended to have regime change in Iraq. But what has it gotten us?

2006 Ron Paul 66:17
And now we want to spread that philosophy and have more regime changes, and who knows what the results are going to be? They are not going to be good. They are going to backfire on us.

2006 Ron Paul 66:18
You know, when Osama bin Laden responded to why, he had a list of reasons on why he encouraged or directed the attack on 9/11. And the one thing that he listed we shouldn’t ignore, because as bad as that individual is, and as violent as he is, nobody has ever proven he tells lies. Nobody has ever proven this. Nobody says he is a liar. So we ought to listen to what he says.

2006 Ron Paul 66:19
And one of the reasons that he listed for this was back in 1982, back to the problems we had in Lebanon, there were 18,000 Lebanese and Palestinians killed. And who knows whose bombs and who was doing it? But you know, we were in there, although our troops weren’t fighting and we left, but Israel was involved, 18,000. But regardless of whether or not we directed it or wanted it is irrelevant. The conclusion was that we were participants, and it rallied his troops and helped him organize to get people so hateful that they were willing to commit suicide terrorism and come here.

2006 Ron Paul 66:20
Now, we can ignore it and say, well, he is a liar. That is not the reason they did it. But we do that at our own peril.

2006 Ron Paul 66:21
Now, one of the reasons why I believe that it wouldn’t be difficult to put the label USA on these weapons, obviously the airplanes have been built here. But what about the money? How much money have we given for weapons?

2006 Ron Paul 66:22
Between 1997 and 2004, and that doesn’t even count the last 2 years, we gave over $7 billion in weapons grants. It wasn’t a loan. It was a weapons grant.

2006 Ron Paul 66:23
Now, the neat thing about this, this was an economic deal because it was beneficial because under the foreign military financing program that we have, Israel is required to spend 74 percent of that back here. So you are talking about a military-industrial complex, a pretty good deal. You know, we subsidize them, send the money over here, it comes over here, and our arms manufacturers make even more money and then dig a bigger hole for us in foreign policy and contribute to the many problems that we have. And that amount of money, they get $2.3 billion of these military grants, and they automatically increase it $60 million per year. So it is locked in place.

2006 Ron Paul 66:24
Now, you say, well, that is money for our ally. And fine, if it was used for defense, maybe. But if it is used to antagonize 1 billion Muslims and there is no willingness to even consider the fact that we should look at it in a balanced way, and instead it is ridiculed and said, oh, this is ridiculous to think of neutrality or balance and think about both sides, and the innocent people dying on both sides should be considered.

2006 Ron Paul 66:25
So we are moving toward a major crisis, a major crisis financially and a major crisis in our foreign policy. I don’t believe we can maintain this.

2006 Ron Paul 66:26
So even if you totally disagree with our aggressive empire building and policing the world, let me tell you, I am going to win the argument, because we are running out of money. We are in big debt, and we are borrowing it. We borrowed $3 billion a day from countries like China and Japan and Saudi Arabia to finance this horrendous debt. And it won’t be, it can’t be continued. The dollar will eventually weaken. You are going to have horrendous inflation. Interest rates are going to go up, and it is going to be worse than the stagflation of the 1970s.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 66:28
So we are facing a crisis that is liable to escalate and get out of control in the Middle East. At the same time, it has a bearing on our finances, because when it contributes to the deficit, there is a limit to how much foreigners will loan to us. We have to print the money. We have to go to the Fed, create new money. That is the inflation.

2006 Ron Paul 66:29
And what does it do to the cost of oil? Inflation pushes the cost of oil up. That should be a concern to everybody. And at the same time, the production of the oil didn’t work. I mean, the oil production went down in Iraq.

2006 Ron Paul 66:30
What happens if this happens to be true? I actually pray that I am completely wrong about this. And you can say, well, you are, so don’t sweat it. But what if I am right? It is frightening, because if this leads to bombing in Iran, look for oil at $150 a barrel. Then the American people will wake up. They will say, hey, what’s going on here? Why is gasoline so expensive? It is expensive because we have less production out of Iraq, and it is expensive because the value of the dollar is going down. And it is expensive because they are anticipating that this crisis is not going away, and what we do are antagonizing the world.

2006 Ron Paul 66:31
So, once again, I come to this from a slightly different viewpoint than those who like to pick sides. There is nothing wrong with considering the fact that we don’t have to be involved in every single fight. That was the conclusion that Ronald Reagan came to, and he was not an enemy of Israel. He was a friend of Israel. But he concluded that that is a mess over there. Let me just repeat those words that he used. He said, he came to the conclusion, “The irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there.”

2006 Ron Paul 66:32
I would like you to rethink our policy, not only there, but the kind of policy that led to 60,000 people dying in Vietnam and then walking away. And what happened after we walked away? We are better off than ever. We had a naval ship going into Vietnam just recently. We trade with them. We do deals with them. Yet it was a total fiasco and a total loss because of the way we went to war.

2006 Ron Paul 66:33
And this is also the reason that I am determined to persist that if we take our country to war, that we ought to be responsible. We should never send these kids and young people to war without a declaration, win the war, and get it over with. When we don’t declare it, it goes on and on and on. We don’t win them.

2006 Ron Paul 66:34
And literally, this Persian Gulf War, and this Iraqi war, it has been going on since 1990. We never stopped bombing Iraq, never stopped bugging them, and antagonizing them and inciting them.

2006 Ron Paul 66:35
So it is not a sign of weakness to talk about neutrality. It is a sign of strength that you have a little bit of courage and you believe in your own system. If we want to spread our values, it is a good way to do it. Set a good example. Put our financial house in order. Treat people evenly, and trade with people, and talk to people and travel.

2006 Ron Paul 66:36
But don’t think that we can force our values at the point of a gun, and think they are all going to be democratic elected governments that we are going to be pleased with. It is not going to happen.

2006 Ron Paul 66:37
So there is reason to reconsider the total policy that has been followed in this country essentially for 100 years. And it hasn’t been productive for us. Essentially, Woodrow Wilson started it. We are going to make the world safe for democracy. And look how safe the world has been since Woodrow Wilson introduced that. We are less safe than ever. And our financial condition is worse than ever.

2006 Ron Paul 66:38
And we are running our program, whether it is our domestic welfare program or our foreign policy, it is being run on borrowed money. It is borrowed money from overseas, and it is also from inflated currency. And we can get away with it for a while longer, but let me tell you, there is a crisis coming, and it is going to be dealing with the dollar and it is going to involve our foreign policy. And then we will, as a sign of weakness, we will have to come home. We will have to come home because we can’t afford the empire. It is not wise to have it, and we should have more confidence and more belief that what we have in this country, and what America used to stand for, that we should spread that message more by setting an example and through a voluntary approach. And when that time comes, I think that maybe more people will reconsider it.

2006 Ron Paul 66:39
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 67
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Yields To Mr. Rahall 19 July 2006

2006 Ron Paul 67:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am going to yield 3 minutes to Mr. RAHALL, but first I would ask how much time I have left after I yield the 3 minutes.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. CAMPBELL of California). The gentleman from Texas has 25 1/2 minutes remaining.

2006 Ron Paul 67:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 25 1/2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN) and ask unanimous consent that she be allowed to control that time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?

There was no objection.

2006 Ron Paul 67:3
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Dr. Paul for yielding me that time, and I yield 12 3/4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. LANTOS) and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control that time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Florida?

There was no objection.

2006 Ron Paul 67:4
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. RAHALL).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 68
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Condemning The Recent Attacks Against The State Of Israel 19 July 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, July 19, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 68:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution, which I sincerely believe will do more harm than good.

2006 Ron Paul 68:2
I do agree with the resolution’s condemnation of violence. But I am convinced that when we get involved in foreign conflicts and send strong messages, such as this resolution will, it ends up expanding the war rather than diminishing the conflict, and that ultimately comes back to haunt us.

2006 Ron Paul 68:3
Madam Speaker, I follow a policy in foreign affairs called non-interventionism. I do not believe we are making the United States more secure when we involve ourselves in conflicts overseas. The Constitution really does not authorize us to be the policemen of the world, much less to favor one side over another in foreign conflicts. It is very clear, reading this resolution objectively, that all the terrorists are on one side, and all the victims and the innocents are on the other side. I find this unfair, particularly considering the significantly higher number of civilian casualties among Lebanese civilians. I would rather advocate neutrality rather than picking sides, which is what this resolution does.

2006 Ron Paul 68:4
Some would say that there is no room to talk about neutrality, as if neutrality were a crime. I would suggest there should be room for an open mind to consider another type of policy that may save American lives.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 68:6
Ronald Reagan, when he sent the troops in, said he would never turn tail and run. Then, after the Marines were killed, he had a reassessment of the policy. When he wrote his autobiography a few years later after leaving the Presidency, he wrote this:

2006 Ron Paul 68:7
Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines’ safety that it should have.

2006 Ron Paul 68:8
In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today.

2006 Ron Paul 68:9
It is very easy to criticize the Government of Lebanon for not doing more about Hezbollah. I object to terrorism committed by Hezbollah because I am a strong opponent to all violence on all sides. But I also object to the unreasonable accusations that the Government of Lebanon has not done enough, when we realize that Israel occupied southern Lebanon for 18 years and was not able to neutralize Hezbollah.

2006 Ron Paul 68:10
Madam Speaker, there is nothing wrong with considering the fact that we don’t have to be involved in every single fight. That was the conclusion that Ronald Reagan came to, and he was not an enemy of Israel. He was a friend of Israel. But he concluded that that is a mess over there. Let me just repeat those words that he used. He said, he came to the conclusion, “The irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there.” I believe these words are probably more valid now even than when they were written.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 69
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

H.R. 5068, the Export-Import Reauthorization Act 25 July 2006

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL).

(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

2006 Ron Paul 69:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me time.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 69:3
The vast majority of Ex-Im Bank funds benefit Enron-like outfits that must rely on political connections and government subsidies to survive and/or multinational corporations who can afford to support their own efforts without relying on the American taxpayers.

2006 Ron Paul 69:4
In fact, according to journalist Robert Novak, Enron itself received over $640 million in taxpayer-funded assistance from Ex-Im. The taxpayer-provided largess no doubt helped postpone Enron’s inevitable day of reckoning. It is not only bad economics to force working American small businesses and entrepreneurs to subsidize the exports of large corporations; it is also immoral.

2006 Ron Paul 69:5
Redistribution from the poor and middle class to the wealthy is the most indefensible aspect of the welfare state, yet it is the most accepted form of welfare.

2006 Ron Paul 69:6
Mr. Speaker, it never ceases to amaze me how Members who criticize welfare for the poor on moral and constitutional grounds see no problem with the even more objectionable programs that provide welfare for the rich.

2006 Ron Paul 69:7
The moral case against Ex-Im is strengthened when one considers that one of the governments which benefits most from Ex-Im funds is Communist China. In fact, Ex-Im actually underwrites joint ventures with firms owned by the Chinese Government. Whatever one’s position is on trading with China, I would hope all of us would agree that it is wrong to force taxpayers to subsidize in any way this regime.

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?

2006 Ron Paul 69:9
One project funded by Ex-Im in China is an $18 million loan guarantee to expand steel manufacturing. This is not an isolated example of how Ex-Im helps foreign steel producers. According to the most recent figures available, the five countries with the greatest Ex-Im exposure are all among the top 10 exporters of steel and of steel-to-products to the United States.

2006 Ron Paul 69:10
In fact, Ex-Im provides almost $20 billion of U.S. taxpayer support to these countries. Mr. Speaker, I find it hard to see how taxing American steel producers to benefit their foreign competitors strengthens the American economy.

2006 Ron Paul 69:11
Proponents of continued American support for the Ex-Im Bank claim that the bank creates jobs and promotes economic growth. However, this is a fallacy worth looking in to.

2006 Ron Paul 69:12
However, this claim rests on a version of what the great economist Henry Hazlitt called the “broken window” fallacy. When a hoodlum throws a rock through a store window, it can be said he has contributed to the economy, as the storeowner will have to spend money having the window fixed. The benefits to those who repaired the window are visible for all to see, therefore it is easy to see the broken window as economically beneficial. However, the “benefits” of the broken window are revealed as an illusion when one takes into account what is not seen: the businesses and workers who would have benefited had the store owner not spent money repairing a window, but rather had been free to spend his money as he chose.

2006 Ron Paul 69:13
Similarly, the beneficiaries of Eximbank are visible to all. What is not seen is the products that would have been built, the businesses that would have been started, and the jobs that would have been created had the funds used for the Eximbank been left in the hands of consumers. Leaving the resources in the private sector ensures the resources will be put to the use most highly valued by individual consumers. In contrast, when the government diverts resources into the public sector via programs such as the Eximbank, their use is determined by bureaucrats and politically powerful special interests, resulting in a distorted market and a misallocation of resources. By distorting the market and preventing resources from achieving their highest valued use, Eximbank actually costs Americans jobs and reduces America’s standard of living!

2006 Ron Paul 69:14
Some supporters of this bill equate supporting Eximbank with supporting “free trade,” and claim that opponents are “protectionists” and “isolationists.” Mr. Speaker, this is nonsense, Eximbank has nothing to do with free trade. True free trade involves the peaceful, voluntary exchange of goods across borders, not forcing taxpayers to subsidize the exports of politically powerful companies. Eximbank is not free trade, but rather managed trade, where winners and losers are determined by how well they please government bureaucrats instead of how well they please consumers.

2006 Ron Paul 69:15
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my colleagues that there is simply no constitutional justification for the expenditure of funds on programs such as Eximbank. In fact, the drafters of the Constitution would be horrified to think the Federal Government was taking hard-earned money from the American people in order to benefit the politically powerful.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 70
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Yeas And Nays Refused 25 July 2006

The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of those present have voted in the affirmative.

2006 Ron Paul 70:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were refused.

So (two-thirds having voted in favor thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 71
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To UTMB 26 July 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, July 26, 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.

2006 Ron Paul 71:2
Working closely with UTMB as I do, I am not surprised that it is in the forefront of both nursing education and efforts to improve the lives of commuters. The people of UTMB are consistently working to improve the lives and health of Texans and all Americans.

2006 Ron Paul 71:3
UTMB is one of the major centers of medical research in Texas and in the Nation. UTMB features a multidisciplinary environment that enables scientists and clinicians to work on projects that often have immediate application to patient care. Among UTMB’s areas of strength are neuroscience; pain management and stroke treatment; gastrointestinal health; environmental health and asthma; infectious diseases; vaccine development; cancer; molecular medicine; aging; and diabetes. Among its numerous activities, UTMB hosts summer science programs for middle school, high school, and undergraduate students to help encourage and develop the research work force of tomorrow.

2006 Ron Paul 71:4
A recent, and particularly noteworthy, UTMB program is Center for Biodefense and Emerging Infectious Diseases, a key component in the efforts to protect the American people from the threat of bioterroism. Established in 2002, the center has two main objectives: (1) To reduce the vulnerability of the U.S. and other nations to the use of biological weapons for warfare and terrorism, and (2) to alleviate suffering from emerging and tropical infectious diseases through application of basic, applied, and field research, and education.

2006 Ron Paul 71:5
While UTMB’s research program is impressive, many Texans primarily think of UTMB as a leading provider of quality health care. This is because UTMB offers services ranging from primary to specialized diagnostic care. Particularly impressive is UTMB’s pioneering telemedicine programs. For example, UTMB has recently begun a new telemedicine program to bring medical services to the residents of Jamaica Beach, Texas. UTMB has established telemedicine connections for special-needs children in east Texas, for workers on offshore oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico, for employees of a Galveston-based insurance company, and for passengers of a cruise ship that will travel worldwide.

2006 Ron Paul 71:6
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston being named one of the best workplaces for commuters and for receiving funding for seven nursing fellowships from the Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need grant program. I also extend my gratitude, on behalf of all the people of my district, for all that the people of UTMB are doing in both the field of medical research and in delivering quality health care to the people of Texas.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 72
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Health Information Technology Promotion Act Of 2006 27 July 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, July 27, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 72:1
The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4157) to amend the Social Security Act to encourage the dissemination, security, confidentiality, and usefulness of health information technology:

2006 Ron Paul 72:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, as an OB–GYN with over 40 years experience in medical practice, I understand the need to improve the health care system’s efficiency by increasing the use of electronic medical records. However, H.R. 4157 is neither a constitutional nor a wise means of achieving this worthy goal.

2006 Ron Paul 72:3
Creating a new federal department to develop a “national strategic plan” for the use of electronic health care records will inevitably lead to the imposition of a “one-size-fits all” standard and will discourage private parties from exploring other more innovative means of storing medical records electronically. By stifling private sector innovation, H.R. 4157 guarantees that the American people will have an inferior health information technology system. Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues: when has a government system ever performed as well as a system developed by the private sector? In fact, Mr. Chairman, based on my 40 years of experience, I would say a major reason the health profession lags behind other professions in using information technology is the excessive government intervention in, and control of, America’s health care system!

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.

2006 Ron Paul 72:5
The so-called “medical privacy” regulation not only reduce individuals” ability to determine who has access to their personal medical information, but actually threatens medical privacy and constitutionally protected liberties. For example, these regulations allow law enforcement and other government officials’ access to a citizen’s private medical record without having to obtain a search warrant.

2006 Ron Paul 72:6
Allowing government officials to access a private person’s medical records without a warrant is a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which protects American citizens from warrantless searches by government officials. The requirement that law enforcement officials obtain a warrant from a judge before searching private documents is one of the fundamental protections against abuse of the government’s power to seize an individual’s private documents. While the Fourth Amendment has been interpreted to allow warrantless searches in emergency situations, it is hard to conceive of a situation where law enforcement officials would be unable to obtain a warrant before electronic medical records would be destroyed.

2006 Ron Paul 72:7
By creating a new federal bureaucracy to establish a “national strategic plan” for the adoption of electronic health care records, H.R. 4157 discourages private sector innovation and expands government control of the medical profession. H.R. 4157 also facilities the violation of medical privacy. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 73
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

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.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 73:4
Economic principles dictate that when government imposes a minimum wage rate above the market wage rate, it creates a surplus “wedge” between the supply of labor and the demand for labor, leading to an increase in unemployment. Employers cannot simply begin paying more to workers whose marginal productivity does not meet or exceed the law- imposed wage. The only course of action available to the employer is to mechanize operations or employ a higher-skilled worker whose output meets or exceeds the “minimum wage.” This, of course, has the advantage of giving the skilled worker an additional (and government-enforced) advantage over the unskilled worker. For example, where formerly an employer had the option of hiring three unskilled workers at $5 per hour or one skilled worker at $16 per hour, a minimum wage of $6 suddenly leaves the employer only the choice of the skilled worker at an additional cost of $1 per hour. I would ask my colleagues, if the minimum wage is the means to prosperity, why stop at $6.65 — why not $50, $75, or $100 per hour?

2006 Ron Paul 73:5
Those who are denied employment opportunities as a result of the minimum wage are often young people at the lower end of the income scale who are seeking entry-level employment. Their inability to find an entry-level job will limit their employment prospects for years to come. Thus, raising the minimum wage actually lowers the employment opportunities and standard of living of the very people proponents of the minimum wage claim will benefit from government intervention in the economy!

2006 Ron Paul 73:6
Furthermore, interfering in the voluntary transactions of employers and employees in the name of making things better for low wage earners violates citizens’ rights of association and freedom of contract as if to say to citizens “you are incapable of making employment decisions for yourself in the marketplace.”

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 74
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Big-Government Solutions Don’t Work 7 september 2006

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker’s announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) is recognized for 60 minutes.

2006 Ron Paul 74:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, politicians throughout history have tried to solve every problem conceivable to man, always failing to recognize that many of the problems we face result from previous so-called political solutions.

2006 Ron Paul 74:2
Government cannot be the answer to every human ill. Continuing to view more government as the solution to problems will only make matters worse.

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.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 74:6
It is up to us to demand radical change from our failed policy of foreign military interventionism. Robotic responses to cliches of Big Government intervention in our lives are unbecoming to Members who are elected to offer ideas and solutions. We must challenge the status quo of our economic and political system.

2006 Ron Paul 74:7
Many things have contributed to the mess we are in. Bureaucratic management can never compete with the free market in solving problems.

2006 Ron Paul 74:8
Central economic planning doesn’t work. Just look at the failed systems of the 20th century. Welfarism is an example of central economic planning. Paper money, money created out of thin air to accommodate welfarism and government deficits, is not only silly; it is unconstitutional. No matter how hard the big spenders try to convince us otherwise, deficits do matter. But lowering the deficit through higher taxes won’t solve anything.

2006 Ron Paul 74:9
Nothing will change in Washington until it is recognized that the ultimate driving force behind most politicians is obtaining and holding power, and money from special interests drives the political process.

2006 Ron Paul 74:10
Money and power are important only because the government wields power not granted by the Constitution. A limited constitutional government would not tempt special interests to buy the politicians who wield power. The whole process feeds on itself. Everyone is rewarded by ignoring constitutional restraints while expanding and complicating the entire bureaucratic state.

2006 Ron Paul 74:11
Even when it is recognized that we are traveling down the wrong path, the lack of political courage and the desire for reelection results in ongoing support for the pork-barrel system that serves special interests.

2006 Ron Paul 74:12
A safe middle ground, a don’t-rock- the-boat attitude, too often is rewarded in Washington, while meaningful solutions tend to offend those who are in charge of the gigantic PAC lobbyist empire that calls the shots in Washington.

2006 Ron Paul 74:13
Most Members are rewarded by reelection for accommodating and knowing how to work the system. Though there is little difference between the two parties, the partisan fights are real. Instead of debates about philosophy, though, the partisan battles are about who will wield the gavels. True political debates are rare. Power struggles are real and ruthless, and yet we all know that power corrupts.

2006 Ron Paul 74:14
Both parties agree on monetary, fiscal, foreign and entitlement policies. Unfortunately, neither party has much concern for civil liberties. Both parties are split over trade, with mixed debates between outright protections and those who endorse government-managed trade agreements that masquerade as free trade.

2006 Ron Paul 74:15
It is virtually impossible to find anyone who supports hands-off free trade defended by the moral right of all citizens to spend their money as they see fit without being subject to any special interest.

2006 Ron Paul 74:16
The Big Government nanny state is based on the assumption that free markets cannot provide the maximum good for the largest number of people. It assumes people are not smart or responsible enough to take care of themselves, and thus their needs must be filled through the government’s forcible redistribution of wealth.

2006 Ron Paul 74:17
Our system of intervention assumes that politicians and bureaucrats have superior knowledge and are endowed with certain talents that produce efficiency. These assumptions don’t seem to hold much water, of course, when we look at agencies like FEMA. Still, we expect the government to manage monetary and economic policy, the medical system and the educational system, and then wonder why we have problems with the cost and efficiency of all these programs.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 74:19
Conferences were meant to compromise two different positions in the House and Senate, not to slip in new material that had not been mentioned in either bill.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 74:21
Huge omnibus spending bills introduced at the end of legislative years are passed without scrutiny. No one individual knows exactly what is in the bill. In the process, legitimate needs and constitutional responsibilities are frequently ignored. Respect for private property rights is ignored. Confidence in the free market is lost or misunderstood. Our tradition of self-reliance is mocked as archaic.

2006 Ron Paul 74:22
Lack of real choice in economic and personal decisions is commonplace. It seems that too often the only choice we are given is between prohibitions and subsidies. Never is it said, let the people decide on things like stem cell research or alternative medical treatments.

2006 Ron Paul 74:23
Nearly everyone endorses exorbitant taxation. The only debate is about who should pay. Either tax the producers and the rich, or tax the workers and the poor through inflation and outsourcing jobs.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 74:26
Since we are not on the verge of mending our ways, the problems will worsen and the blame game will get much more vicious. Shortchanging a large segment of our society surely will breed conflict that could get out of control.

2006 Ron Paul 74:27
This is a good reason for us to cast aside politics as usual and start finding some reliable answers to our problems. Politics as usual is aided by the complicity of the media. Economic ignorance, bleeding heart emotionalism, and populist passion pervade our major networks and cable channels.

2006 Ron Paul 74:28
This is especially noticeable when the establishment seeks to unify the people behind an illegal, unwise war. The propaganda is well coordinated by the media, government and military- industrial complex. This collusion is worse than when state-owned media do the same thing.

2006 Ron Paul 74:29
In countries where everyone knows the media produces government propaganda, people remain wary of what they hear.

2006 Ron Paul 74:30
In the United States, the media are considered free and independent. Thus, the propaganda is accepted with less questioning.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 74:32
There should be no distinction between commercial speech and political speech with no consistent moral defense of true liberty. The continued erosion of personal property rights is inevitable.

2006 Ron Paul 74:33
This careless disregard for liberty, our traditions and the Constitution, have brought us disaster with a foreign policy of military interventionism supported by the leadership of both parties. Hopefully, some day, this will be radically changed.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 74:35
They keep hoping there will be less harmful complications from the solution that they are currently supporting. Free market economics teaches us that for every government action to solve an economic problem, two new ones are created. The same unwanted results occur with foreign policy meddling. The law of opposites is just a variation of the law of unintended consequences. When we attempt to achieve a certain goal, like, say, make the world safe for democracy, a grandiose scheme of World War I, one can be sure the world will become less safe and less democratic regardless of the motivation. The First World War was sold to the American people as the war to end all wars.

2006 Ron Paul 74:36
Instead, history shows it was the war that caused the 20th Century to be the most war-torn century in all of history. Our entry into World War I helped lead us into World War II, the Cold War, the Korean War and the Vietnam War. Even our current crisis in the Middle East can be traced to the great wars of the 20th Century.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 74:38
We went into Vietnam and involved ourselves unnecessarily in the civil war to bring peace and harmony to that country. We lost 60,000 troops and spent hundreds of billions of dollars, yet failed to achieve victory. Ironically, since losing in Vietnam, we now have a better relationship with them than ever. We now trade, invest, travel and communicate with a unified Western- leaning country that is catching on quickly to capitalist ways. This policy, not military confrontation, is exactly what the Constitution permits and the Founders encouraged in our relationship with others.

2006 Ron Paul 74:39
This policy should apply to both friends and perceived enemies. Diplomacy and trade can accomplish goals that military intervention cannot, and they certainly are a lot less costly.

2006 Ron Paul 74:40
In both instances, Korea and Vietnam, neither country attacked us, and neither country posed a threat to our national security.

2006 Ron Paul 74:41
In neither case did we declare war. All of the fighting and killing was based on lies, miscalculations and the failure to abide by constitutional restraint with regard to war.

2006 Ron Paul 74:42
When goals are couched in terms of humanitarianism, sincere or not, the results are inevitably bad. Foreign interventionism requires the use of force. First, the funds needed to pursue a particular policy required that taxes be forcibly imposed on the American people either directly or indirectly through inflation. Picking sides in foreign countries only increases the chances of antagonism toward us.

2006 Ron Paul 74:43
Too often, foreign economic and military support means impoverishing the poor in America and enhancing the rich ruling classes in poor countries. When sanctions are used against one undesirable regime, it squelches the resistance to the very regimes we are trying to undermine.

2006 Ron Paul 74:44
Forty years of sanctions against Castro have left him in power and fomented continued hatred and blame from the Cuban people directed at us. Trade with Cuba likely would have accomplished the opposite, as it has in Vietnam, China and even the Eastern Bloc nations of the old Soviet empire.

2006 Ron Paul 74:45
We spend billions of dollars in Afghanistan and Colombia to curtail drug production. No evidence exists that it helps. In fact, drug production and corruption have increased in both countries. We close our eyes to it because the reasons we are in Colombia and Afghanistan are denied.

2006 Ron Paul 74:46
Obviously, we are not putting forth the full effort required to capture Osama bin Laden. Instead, our occupation of Afghanistan further inflames the Muslim radicals that came of age with their fierce resistance to the Soviet occupation of a Muslim country. Our occupation merely serves as a recruiting device for al Qaeda, which has promised retaliation for our presence in their country.

2006 Ron Paul 74:47
We learn nothing, after first allying ourselves with Osama bin Laden when he applied the same logic towards the Soviets. The net result of our invasion and occupation in Afghanistan has been to miss capturing Osama bin Laden, assist al Qaeda’s recruitment, stimulate more drug production and lose hundreds of American lives and allow spending of billions of American taxpayers dollars with no end in sight.

2006 Ron Paul 74:48
Bankruptcy seems to be the only way we will reconsider the foolishness of this type of occupation. It is time for us to wake up.

2006 Ron Paul 74:49
Our policy toward Iran for the past 50 years is every bit as disconcerting. It makes no sense, however, unless one concedes that our government is manipulated by those who seek physical control over the vast riches of the Middle East and egged on by Israel’s desires. We have attacked the sovereignty of Iran on two occasions and are in the process of threatening her for the third time.

2006 Ron Paul 74:50
In 1953, the U.S. and British overthrew the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh and installed the Shah. His brutal regime lasted for over 25 years and ended with the Ayatollah taking power in 1979. Our support for the Shah incited the radicalization of the Shiite clerics in Iran, resulting in the hostage takeover.

2006 Ron Paul 74:51
In the 1980s, we provided weapons, including poisonous gas, to Saddam Hussein, as we supported his invasion of Iran. These events are not forgotten by the Iranians, who, once again, see us looking for another confrontation with them.

2006 Ron Paul 74:52
We insist that the U.N. ignore the guarantees under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that grants countries like Iran the right to enrich uranium. The pressure on the U.N. and the threats we cast toward Iran are quite harmful to the cause of peace. They are entirely unnecessary and serve no useful purpose. Our policy toward Iran is much more likely to result in her getting a nuclear weapon than preventing it.

2006 Ron Paul 74:53
Our own effort at democratizing Iran has resulted, instead, in radicalizing a population whose instincts are to like Americans and our economic system. Our meddling these past 50 years has only served to alienate and unify the entire country against us. Though our officials only see Iran as an enemy, as does Israel, our policies in the Middle East these past 5 years have done wonders to strengthen Iran’s political and military position in the region. We have totally ignored serious overtures by the Iranians to negotiate with us before hostilities broke out in Iraq in 2003.

2006 Ron Paul 74:54
Both immediately after 9/11 and especially at the time of our invasion in Iraq in 2003, Iran particularly, partially out of fear and realism, honestly sought reconciliation and offered to help the U.S. in its battle against al Qaeda. They were rebuked outright.

2006 Ron Paul 74:55
Now, Iran is negotiating from a much stronger position, principally as a result of our overall Middle East policy.

2006 Ron Paul 74:56
We accommodated Iran by severely weakening the Taliban in Afghanistan on Iran’s eastern borders. On Iran’s western borders, we helped Iranians by eliminating their arch enemy, Saddam Hussein. Our invasion in Iraq and the resulting chaos have inadvertently delivered up a large portion of Iraq to the Iranians, as the majority Shiites in Iraq ally themselves with the Iranians.

2006 Ron Paul 74:57
The U.S.-Israel plan to hit Hezbollah in Lebanon before taking on Iran’s military has totally backfired. Now Hezbollah, an ally of Iran, has been made stronger than ever with the military failure to route Hezbollah from southern Lebanon.

2006 Ron Paul 74:58
Before the U.S.-Israeli invasion of Lebanon, Hezbollah was supported by 20 percent of the population. Now its revered by 80 percent. A democratic election in Lebanon cannot now serve the interests of the U.S. or Israel; it would only support the cause of radical clerics in Iran.

2006 Ron Paul 74:59
Demanding an election in Palestinian Gaza resulted in enhancing the power of Hamas. The U.S. and Israel promptly rejected the results. So much for our support for democratically elected government. Our support for dictatorial Arab leaders remains a thorn in the side of the large Muslim population in the Middle East and one of the main reasons Osama bin Laden declared war against us.

2006 Ron Paul 74:60
We talk of democracy and self-determination, but the masses of people in the Middle East see through our hypocrisy when we support the Sunni secular dictators in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan and, at one time, Saddam Hussein.

2006 Ron Paul 74:61
In the late 1970s and the late 1980s, the CIA spent over $4 billion on a program called Operation Cyclone. This was our contribution to setting up training schools in Pakistan and elsewhere, including the U.S. itself, to teach sabotage skills. The purpose was to use these individuals in fighting our enemies in the Middle East, including the Soviets. But as one could predict, this effort has come back to haunt us as our radical ally, Osama bin Laden, turned his fury against us after routing the Soviets.

2006 Ron Paul 74:62
It is estimated that over 12,000 fighters were trained in the camps we set up in Afghanistan. They were taught how to make bombs, carry out sabotage and use guerrilla war tactics, and now we are on the receiving end of this U.S.-financed program, hardly a good investment. It is difficult to understand why our policymakers aren’t more cautious in their effort to police the world once they realize how unsuccessful we have been. It seems they always hope that the next time our efforts won’t come flying back in our face.

2006 Ron Paul 74:63
Our failed efforts in Iraq continue to drain our resources, costing us dearly both in lives lost and dollars spent, and there is no end in sight. No consideration is given for rejecting our obsession with a worldwide military presence which rarely, if ever, directly enhances our security.

2006 Ron Paul 74:64
A much stronger case can be made that our policy of protecting our worldwide interest actually does the opposite by making us weaker, alienating our allies, inciting more hatred and provoking our enemies. The more we have interfered in the Middle East the past 50 years, the greater the danger has become for an attack on us.

2006 Ron Paul 74:65
The notion that Arab Muslim radicals are motivated to attack us because of our freedoms and prosperity and not our unwelcome presence in their country is dangerous and silly.

2006 Ron Paul 74:66
We were told we needed to go into Iraq because our old ally, Saddam Hussein, had weapons of mass destruction. Yet no weapons of mass destruction were found. We were told we needed to occupy Iraq to remove al Qaeda, yet al Qaeda was nowhere to be found. And now it is admitted it had nothing to do with 9/11.

2006 Ron Paul 74:67
Yet, today, Iraq is infested with al Qaeda, achieving exactly the opposite of what we sought to do. We were told that we needed to secure our oil to protect our economy and to pay for our invasion and occupation. Instead, the opposite has resulted. Oil production is down. Oil prices are up, and no oil profits have been used to pay the bills. We were told that a regime change in Iraq would help us in our long-time fight with Iran, yet everything we have done in Iraq has served the interests of Iran.

2006 Ron Paul 74:68
We are being told in a threatening and intimidating fashion that if America were to pull out before Iraq could defend itself, the consequences would be absolutely predictable and absolutely disastrous. I am convinced, though, that the law of opposites could well apply here. Going into Iraq we know produced exactly the opposite results of what was predicted. Leaving also likely will have results opposite of those we are being frightened with. Certainly leaving Vietnam at the height of the Cold War did not result in the disaster predicted by the advocates of the domino theory: an inevitable Communist takeover of the entire Far East.

2006 Ron Paul 74:69
We are constantly being told that we cannot abandon Iraq, and we are obligated to stay forever if necessary. This admonition is similar to a rallying cry from a determined religious missionary bent on proselytizing to the world with a particular religious message. Conceding that leaving may not be a panacea for Iraqi tranquility, this assumption ignores two things: One, our preemptive war ignited the Iraqi civil war; and, two, abandoning the Iraqi people is not the question. The real question is whether or not we should abandon the American people by forcing them to pay for an undeclared war with huge economic and human costs while placing our national security in greater jeopardy by ignoring our borders and serious problems here at home.

2006 Ron Paul 74:70
In our attempt to make Iraq a better place, we did great harm to the Iraqi Christians. Before our invasion in 2003, there were approximately 1.2 million Christians living in Iraq. Since then, over half have been forced to leave due to persecution and violence. Many escaped to Syria. With the neocons wanting to attack Syria, how long will they be safe there? The answer to the question, aren’t we better off without Saddam Hussein, is not an automatic “yes” for Iraqi Christians.

2006 Ron Paul 74:71
We have been told for decades that our policy of militarism and preemption in the Middle East is designed to provide security for Israel. Yet a strong case can be made that Israel is more vulnerable now than ever with moderate Muslims being challenged by a growing majority of Islamic radicals. As the invincibility of the American and Israeli military becomes common knowledge, Israel’s security is diminished, and world opinion turns against her, especially after the failed efforts to remove Hezbollah from southern Lebanon.

2006 Ron Paul 74:72
We were told that attacking and eliminating Hezbollah was required to diminish the Iranian threat against Israel. The results again were the opposite. This failed effort has only emboldened Iran. The lack of success of conventional warfare, the U.S. in Vietnam, the Soviets in Afghanistan, the U.S. in Iraq and Afghanistan, Israel in Lebanon, should awaken our policymakers to our failure in war and diplomacy. Yet all we propose are bigger bombs and more military force for occupation rather than working to understand an entirely new generation of modern warfare.

2006 Ron Paul 74:73
Many reasons are given for our preemptive wars and military approach for spreading the American message of freedom and prosperity, which is an obvious impossibility. Our vital interests are always cited for justification, and it is inferred that those who do not support our militancy are unpatriotic. Yet the opposite is actually the case: Wise resistance to one’s own government doing bad things requires a love of country, devotion to idealism and respect for the rule of law.

2006 Ron Paul 74:74
In attempting to build an artificial and unwelcome Iraqi military, the harder we try, the more money we spend and the more lives we lose, the stronger the real armies of Iraq become: The Sunni insurgency, the Badr Brigade, the Sadr Mahdi Army and the Kurdish Militia.

2006 Ron Paul 74:75
The Kurds have already taken a bold step in this direction by hoisting a Kurdish flag and removing the Iraqi flag, a virtual declaration of independence. Natural local forces are winning out over outside political forces.

2006 Ron Paul 74:76
We are looking in all of the wrong places for an Iraqi army to bring stability to that country. The people have spoken, and these troops that represent large segments of the population need no training. It is not a lack of training, weapons or money that hinders our efforts to create a new superior Iraqi military. It is the lack of inspiration and support for such an endeavor that is missing. Developing borders and separating the various factions, which our policy explicitly prohibits, is the basic flaw in our plan for a forced, unified Western-style democracy for Iraq. Allowing self-determination for different regions is the only way to erase the artificial nature of Iraq, an Iraq designed by Western outsiders nearly 80 years ago. It is our obsession with control of the oil in the region and imposing our will on the Middle East and accommodating the demands of Israel that is the problem. And the American people are finally getting sick and tired of all of their sacrifices. It is time to stop the bleeding.

2006 Ron Paul 74:77
Instead we continue to hear the constant agitation for us to confront the Iranians with military action. Reasons to attack Iran make no more sense than our foolish preemptive war against Iraq. Fictitious charges and imaginary dangers are used to frighten the American people into accepting an attack on Iran. First it may only be sanctions, but later it will be bombs and possible ground troops if the neocons have their way. Many of the chicken-hawk neoconservative advisors to the administration are highly critical of our current policy because it is not aggressive enough. They want more troops in Iraq. They want to attack Syria and Iran and escalate the conflict in Lebanon.

2006 Ron Paul 74:78
We have a troop shortage. Morale is low, and our military equipment is in bad shape, yet the neocons would not hesitate to spend, borrow, inflate and reinstate the draft to continue their grandiose schemes in remaking the entire Middle East. Obviously, a victory of this sort is not available no matter what effort is made or how much money is spent.

2006 Ron Paul 74:79
Logic would tell us there is no way we will contemplate taking on Iran at this time, but logic did not prevail with our Iraq policy and look at the mess we have there. Besides, both sides, the neoconservative extremists and the radical Islamists, are driven by religious fervor. Both are convinced that God is on their side, a strange assumption since theologically it is the same God.

2006 Ron Paul 74:80
Both sides of the war in the Middle East are driven by religious beliefs of omnipotence. Both sides endorse an eschatological theory regarding the forthcoming end of time. Both anticipate the return of God personified and as promised to each. Both sides are driven by a conviction of perfect knowledge regarding the Creator, and though we supposedly worship the same God, each sees the other side as completely wrong and blasphemous. The religiously driven Middle East war condemns tolerance of the other’s view. Advocates of restraint and the use of diplomacy are ridiculed as appeasers and equivalent to supporting Nazism and considered un-American and un- Christian.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 74:82
Believing one can have perfect knowledge of God’s will and believing government can manage our lives and world affairs have caused a great deal of problems for man over the ages. When these two elements are combined, they become especially dangerous. Liberty, by contrast, removes power from government and allows total freedom of choice in pursuing one’s religious beliefs. The only solution to controlling political violence is to prohibit the use of force to pursue religious goals and reject government authority to mold the behavior of individuals.

2006 Ron Paul 74:83
Both sides in the Middle East are enamored with the so-called benefit that chaos offers to those promoting revolutionary changes. Both sides in situations like this always underestimate the determination of the opposition and ignore the law of unintended consequences. They never consider that these policies might backfire.

2006 Ron Paul 74:84
Declaring war against Islamic fascism or terrorism is vague and meaningless. The enemy that we are fighting at the expense of our own liberties is purposely indefinable. Therefore the government will exercise wartime powers indefinitely. We have been fully warned to expect a long, long war.

2006 Ron Paul 74:85
The Islamic fascists are almost impossible to identify and cannot be targeted by our conventional weapons. Those who threaten us essentially are unarmed and stateless. Comparing them to Nazi Germany, a huge military power, is ridiculous. Labeling them as a unified force is a mistake. It is critical that we figure out why a growing number of Muslims are radicalized to the point of committing suicide terrorism against us. Our presence in their countries represents a failed policy that makes us less safe, not more.

2006 Ron Paul 74:86
These guerilla warriors do not threaten us with tanks, gunboats, missiles or nuclear weapons, nor do they have a history of aggression against the United States. Our enemies’ credibility depends instead on the popular goal of ending our occupation of their country.

2006 Ron Paul 74:87
We must not forget that the 9/11 terrorists came principally from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, Iran, Lebanon or Syria. Iran has never in modern times invaded her neighbors, yet we worry obsessively that she may develop a nuclear weapon some day. Never mind that a radicalized Pakistan has nuclear weapons and our so-called friend Musharraf won’t lift a finger against bin Laden who most likely is hiding in Pakistan. Our only defense against this emerging nuclear threat has been to use and threaten to use weapons that do not meet the needs of this new and different enemy.

2006 Ron Paul 74:88
Since resistance against the Iraq war is building here at home, hopefully it will not be too long before we abandon our grandiose scheme to rule the entire Middle East through intimidation and military confrontation.

2006 Ron Paul 74:89
But economic law eventually will prevail. Runaway military and entitlement spending cannot be sustained. We can tax the private economy only so much, and borrowing from foreigners is limited by the total foreign debt and our current account deficit. It will be difficult to continue this spending spree without significantly higher interest rates and further devaluation of the dollar. This all spells more trouble for our economy and certainly higher inflation. Our industry base is shattered, and our borders remain open to those who exploit our reeling entitlement system.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 74:91
The overriding goal should then be to rescue our constitutional liberties which have been steadily eroded by those who claim that sacrificing liberties is required and legitimate in times of war, even the undeclared and vague war that we are currently fighting.

2006 Ron Paul 74:92
A real solution to our problems will require a better understanding of and a greater dedication to free markets and private property rights. It can’t be done without restoring a sound asset- backed currency. If we hope to restore any measure of constitutional government, we must abandon the policy of policing the world and keeping troops in the four corners of the earth. Our liberties and our prosperity depend on it.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 75
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Motion To Adjourn 7 september 2006

2006 Ron Paul 75:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 76
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Praising Galveston College’s Strategic Plan 12 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, September 12, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 76:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Galveston College, which is in my district, is in the fifth year of its strategic plan to better help its students meet the challenges of the 21st century by transforming itself into a learning college. The learning college is an exciting new model designed to ensure community colleges respond quickly to internal and external challenges and think creatively about the future.

2006 Ron Paul 76:2
The learning college rests on collaboration between students who are willing and able to take primary responsibility for making their own choices and faculty and staff who are able to empower students with the tools students need to make sound choices. Galveston College helps students develop the attitudes and behaviors necessary for academic and professional success. Galveston College also challenges its employees to work in an environment based on teamwork and a culture open to change and learning.

2006 Ron Paul 76:3
Fundamental to the learning college experience is the creation of different options for learning, including the traditional classroom, laboratory and clinical settings, and Internet coursework. A learning college also assists students in forming and participating in collaborative learning activities.

2006 Ron Paul 76:4
Since adopting the learning college model, Galveston College has made an increased variety of coursework and programs available to students. Many of these programs involve creative uses of technology that enhance the learning process. For example, thanks to collaboration with the Virtual College of Texas, Galveston College has made available a large selection of Internet coursework to its students.

2006 Ron Paul 76:5
Galveston College has also implemented several initiatives to improve its developmental I programs and student services technology. These initiatives include Achieving the Dream funded by the Lumina Foundation; a title V Grant, Developing Hispanic Serving Institutions Program; and the Quality Enhancement Plan. These initiatives will allow the college to implement best practices in student retention.

2006 Ron Paul 76:6
In order to better ensure that it is preparing students for good jobs in the Galveston area, Galveston College has assigned an account executive to work with the Galveston Chamber of Commerce, the Galveston Economic Development Partnership, and the Galveston city government to ensure Galveston College’s course offerings match the needs of the community.

2006 Ron Paul 76:7
Galveston College’s efforts are showing results. On May 18, 2006, CCBenefits, Inc. completed a socioeconomic impact study of Galveston College. The report details how Galveston College benefits the students and the community. According to the study, a student at Galveston College will see an increase of $6.62 in lifetime earnings for each dollar spent at Galveston College. The study also estimated that Galveston’s economy is $107.3 million stronger due to the actions of Galveston College.

2006 Ron Paul 76:8
This year, Galveston College had the largest graduating class in its history. With its commitment to fashioning a 21st century learning college that provides students with a first class education designed to help them meet today’s challenges, I have no doubt Galveston College will remain an asset to the Galveston community and a model for other community colleges to follow.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 77
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

13 September 2006

2006 Ron Paul 77:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant opposition to this resolution, as I strongly feel that we need to be careful about how we commemorate the tragic events of September 11,2001. Several times over the past four years I have voted in favor of these annual 9/ 11 resolutions because they simply commemorated the tragic event and urged our continued vigilance in an increasingly dangerous world. I believe using the event to promote particular legislation or foreign policies, however, denigrates the memory of those who perished in that attack.

2006 Ron Paul 77:2
Much of the legislation referenced in this legislation is legislation that I supported. For example, I voted in favor of the Border Protection, Anti-terrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 and for the SAFE Port Act of 2006. I continue to support measures that help secure our borders and thereby make us less vulnerable to future foreign attack. However, I find it particularly unacceptable to heap praise on the PATRIOT Act, as this bill does. This act expanded the federal government’s power to an unprecedented degree at the expense not of foreign terrorists, but of law-abiding American citizens. It opened average Americans up to wide-ranging government snooping and surveillance in matters completely unrelated to terrorism. For example, the “sneak and peek” provisions of the PATRIOT Act allow law enforcement to enter someone’s home without a warrant, search that property, and never inform that citizen they had been there. Also, libraries and book stores can be forced to provide the government with citizens’ borrowing and purchasing history without showing probable cause. I see no reason to applaud such an un-American piece of legislation.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 78
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

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.

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.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 78:5
Consider the following words of His Holiness:

2006 Ron Paul 78:6
“When September 11 happened, the next day I wrote a letter to President Bush as a friend — because I know him personally. I wrote this letter and expressed, besides my condolences and sadness, a countermeasure to this tragedy: a nonviolent response because that would have been more effective. So this is my stance. And then just before the Iraq crisis started, millions of people from countries like Australia and America expressed their opposition to violence. I really admired and appreciated this.”

2006 Ron Paul 78:7
“When the war started, some people immediately asked me if it was justified or not, whether it was right or wrong. In principle, any resort to violence is wrong.”

2006 Ron Paul 78:8
Consider also these thoughts from the Dalai Lama regarding the terrible pointlessness of war:

2006 Ron Paul 78:9
“We have seen that we cannot solve human problems by fighting. Problems resulting from differences in opinion must be resolved through the gradual process of dialogue. Undoubtedly, wars produce victors and losers; but only temporarily. Victory or defeat resulting from wars cannot be long-lasting. Secondly, our world has become so interdependent that the defeat of one country must impact the rest of the world, or cause all of us to suffer losses either directly or indirectly.”

2006 Ron Paul 78:10
“Today, the world is so small and so interdependent that the concept of war has become anachronistic, an outmoded approach. As a rule, we always talk about reform and changes. Among the old traditions, there are many aspects that are either ill-suited to our present reality or are counterproductive due to their shortsightedness. These, we have consigned to the dustbin of history. War too should be relegated to the dustbin of history.”

2006 Ron Paul 78:11
“Of course, the militaristic tradition may not end easily. But, let us think of this. If there were bloodshed, people in positions of power, or those who are responsible, will find safe places; they will escape the consequent hardship. They will find safety for themselves, one way or the other. But what about the poor people, the defenseless people, the children, the old and infirm. They are the ones who will have to bear the brunt of devastation. When weapons are fired, the result will be death and destruction. Weapons will not discriminate between the innocent and guilty. A missile, once fired, will show no respect to the innocent, poor, defenseless, or those worthy of compassion. Therefore, the real losers will be the poor and defenseless, ones who are completely innocent, and those who lead a hand-to-mouth existence.”

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 79
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Senior Citizens’ Improved Quality Of Life Act 19 September 2006

2006 Ron Paul 79:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support and cosponsor H. Res. 874, a resolution honoring America’s senior citizens for their contributions to American life. I am particularly pleased by the language encouraging young people to seek out and talk to our Nation’s seniors about these seniors’ life experiences. Talking to beloved grandparents, aunts, uncles, or friends about their past is a great way to learn history and gain an understanding of the past that simply cannot be obtained from a textbook.

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:

2006 Ron Paul 79:3
Repealing all taxes on Social Security benefits. Since Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is an example of double taxation. The benefits tax also reduces Social Security benefits by subterfuge.

2006 Ron Paul 79:4
Ensuring that Social Security trust fund money is used only for Social Security. H.R. 5211 requires that all money raised for the Social Security trust fund will be spent in payments to beneficiaries, with excess receipts invested in interest-bearing certificates of deposit. This will keep Social Security trust fund money from being diverted to other programs, as well as allow the fund to grow by providing for investment in interest-bearing instruments. Ending the raid of the Social Security trust fund is a vital first step in any serious Social Security reform plan. Protecting the trust fund also demonstrates our commitment to putting the priorities of the American people ahead of special interest pork barrel spending.

2006 Ron Paul 79:5
Repealing provisions of Federal law that restrict the ability of senior citizens to form private contracts for health care services. This restriction violates the rights of seniors who may wish to use their own resources to obtain procedures or treatments not covered by Medicare, or to simply avoid the bureaucracy and uncertainty that come when seniors must wait for the judgment of a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, bureaucrat before finding out if a desired treatment is covered. H.R. 5211 also stops the Social Security Administration from denying Social Security benefits to seniors who refuse to enroll in Medicare Part A. Forcing seniors to enroll in Medicare Part A as a condition for receiving Social Security violates the promise represented by Social Security. Americans pay taxes into the Social Security trust fund their whole working lives and are promised that Social Security will be there for them when they retire. Yet, today, seniors are told that they cannot receive these benefits unless they agree to join another government program.

2006 Ron Paul 79:6
Allowing seniors who neither want nor need to participate in the Medicare program to refrain from doing so and ensuring seniors have the freedom to use their own resources to obtain quality health care will strengthen the Medicare program for those seniors who do wish to receive Medicare benefits. Of course, H.R. 5211 does not take away Medicare benefits from any senior. It simply allows each senior to choose voluntarily whether or not to accept Medicare benefits.

2006 Ron Paul 79:7
Ensuring that Social Security benefits only go to American citizens. Proposals, such as those contained in the Reid-Kennedy immigration bill, to allow noncitizens, including those who entered the country illegally, to receive Social Security benefits are a slap in the face to America’s workers and seniors. H.R. 5211 ensures that only American citizens who have paid into the Social Security trust fund can receive Social Security benefits.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 79:9
H.R. 5211 also lowers the price of pharmaceuticals by making two changes in the law to create a free market in pharmaceuticals. First, H.R. 5211 allows anyone wishing to import a drug to submit an application to the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, which then must approve the drug unless the FDA finds the drug is either not approved for use in the U.S. or is adulterated or misbranded. Second, H.R. 5211 ensures that lawful internet pharmacies can continue to offer affordable prescription drugs free of Federal harassment.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 80
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To Edward Behne 19 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, September 19, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 80:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I wish to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Major Edward Lee Behne, a decorated military veteran, entrepreneur, husband, and father who passed away on September 8. Major Behne served his country by flying UH–1 Hueys in Vietnam from 1967 to 1970. Major Behne is the Vietnam War’s second-most decorated army pilot, having received two Distinguished Flying Crosses, a Legion of Merit, a VN Cross of Gallantry with Silver Star and Palm, two Silver Stars, six Bronze Stars, VN Service Medal (9 campaigns), two Meritorious Unit Citations, and 80 Air Medals.

2006 Ron Paul 80:2
In 1979, Edward Behne retired from the army to return to his home in Texas, in 1988, he founded Tex-Air Helicopters, Inc. Guided by his vision of a company that would provide customers an unprecedented level of quality, service, and performance in helicopter operations, Major Behne worked for over 20 years to build Tex-Air into one of the major providers of helicopter services in the Gulf Coast region. By 2000, the Tex-Air fleet had grown to thirty aircraft and was the most modern and sophisticated helicopter fleet in the United States. Operations ranged from Florida to Mexico with twelve helicopter bases, fifteen offshore refueling platforms, and two major maintenance facilities. Tex-Air established an extensive offshore radio network for operational control and flight following across the entire Gulf of Mexico using repeaters and a central communications base. In 2003, Major Behne retired from Tex- Air to return to his beloved Texas hill country ranch, where he entertained his best friends and family members, worked and hunted.

2006 Ron Paul 80:3
War hero, entrepreneur, rancher, family man — Major Edward Behne made numerous contributions to the betterment of his country and set an example for us all. I ask my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to Major Edward Lee Behne and extend our condolences to his wife, Mary Lynne; two sons, Mark Behne and Mike Behne; four step children, Jimmy Gonzalez, Mark Gonzalez, Tanya Roland and Robert Hughey; brother, Richard Behne; sister, Gwen Pascal; grandchild, Josephine Behne; and 14 step grandchildren, as well as all of Major Behne’s family and friends.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 81
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of taxpayer Protection From Genetic Discrimination Act 20 september 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, September 20, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 81:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Taxpayer Protection from Genetic Discrimination Act. This bill ensures that no American taxpayer will be denied health care because of his or her genetic history by any agency of the federal government, a state or local government, or a government contractor. Some people have raised concerns that, while recent advances in genetic testing bring much hope of improved medical treatment, the increased use of genetic tests may also result in many people being denied access to health insurance, or even refused employment, because of their genetic history.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 82
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Military Personnel Financial Services Protection Act 20 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, September 20, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 82:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, as a supporter of ensuring our service personnel have access to a wide range of financial products I am concerned with the provision of the Military Personnel Financial Services Protection Act, S. 418, enacting a complete prohibition on so- called contractual or periodic payment mutual funds, which, according to testimony received by the House Committee on Financial Services, are sold voluntarily with full disclosure to officers at individual meetings held off base.

2006 Ron Paul 82:2
This is the first time in recent memory that this committee has ever proposed banning a product that is fully permissible under current law and that — again according to testimony received by the committee — is used by thousands of senior military officials to facilitate their financial security. Specifically, we were told that the clients of First Command Financial Planning, the Texas-based company principally involved in this market, has invested $734.4 million aggregate in these accounts in 2004. The sales charge on that amount was about $44 million, or about six percent. What is the basis for outlawing a product that over half a million individuals, including half the flag officers on active duty at the time, had freely chosen? Do we really believe that individuals charged with the deployment of billions of dollars of military equipment, are not sophisticated enough to make their own financial decisions?

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 82:5
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Enhanced Options for Rural Health Care Act. This legislation allows critical access hospitals to use beds designated for critical access use, but currently not being used for that purpose, for assisted living services financed by private payments.

2006 Ron Paul 82:6
This bill will help improve the financial status of small rural hospitals and extend the health care options available to people living in rural areas without increasing federal expenditures. Currently, fear that rural hospitals will lose critical access status if beds designated for critical access are used for another purpose is causing rural hospitals to allow beds not needed for a critical access purpose to remain unused. This deprives rural hospitals of a much- needed revenue stream and deprives residents of rural areas of access to needed health care services.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 83
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Another NASA Success 21 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, September 21, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 83:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) successfully completed another space shuttle mission with this morning’s landing of the Space Shuttle Atlantis and the completion of the STS–115 mission. Launched on September 9, STS–115 is the 116th space shuttle mission, and the first since 2002 to include work on assembling and expanding the International Space Station. The successful completion of the STS–115 mission puts the space station back on the road to completion.

2006 Ron Paul 83:2
The major accomplishments of the STS–115 mission include the delivery and installation of the massive P3/P4 truss — an integral part of the space station’s backbone — and two sets of solar arrays that will eventually provide one quarter of the space station’s power. The crew’s other accomplishments include preparing an important radiator for later activation, installing a signal processor and transponder that transmit voice and data to the ground, and performing other tasks to upgrade and protect the space station’s systems.

2006 Ron Paul 83:3
The STS–115 mission is the first time a procedure called “camp out” was implemented. A “camp out” is where astronauts sleep in the Quest airlock prior to their space walks. The process shortens the “prebreathe” time during which nitrogen is purged from the astronauts’ systems and air pressure is lowered so the space walkers avoid the condition known as the bends. The “camp out” procedure enabled the astronauts to perform more than the number of scheduled activities on each of the mission’s three space walks.

2006 Ron Paul 83:4
The Atlantis ’s crew preformed unprecedented robotics work on this mission. The crew used the shuttle’s arm in a delicate maneuver to hand off the school bus-sized truss to the space station’s arm, and also moved the space station’s robotic arm to a position where it will assist in the next phase of station construction. Perhaps most significantly, the Atlantis crew preformed the first full fly around of the space station since before the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. Thanks to the fly around, ground crews now have a better perspective on the space station’s environment and overall exterior health.

2006 Ron Paul 83:5
Coming less than 2 months after the successful mission of the Space Shuttle Discovery , the Atlantis mission is another demonstration of the skills and dedication of all NASA personal. I therefore urge all my colleagues join me in extending congratulations to NASA for the successful completion of the Atlantis mission. And extend a special thank you to Atlantis ’s crew of Commander Brent Jett, Mission Specialist Joe Tanner, Mission Specialist Steve MacLean, Pilot Chris Ferguson, Mission Specialist Dan Burbank, and Mission Specialist Heide Stefanyshyn-Piper, and the ground team that worked with the shuttle crew to make this mission a success.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 84
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To Lee College 25 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, September 25, 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.

2006 Ron Paul 84:2
The consortium began working on the project in 2000, after the Telecommunications Infrastructure Fund board authorized Community Network Grants in order to fund internet access for undersevered areas. Lee College applied for a $500,000 grant on behalf of the consortium. The consortium was one of the few groups that were awarded the full grant of $550,000 — the amount applied for plus a 10% match by the consortium.

2006 Ron Paul 84:3
Among the technical challenges fadng the consortium was constructing four 150-foot towers, wiring ten buildings, and coordinating with the governmental agencies involved. Once those challenges where resolved, the consortium faced the challenge of finding a company to maintain the system. Fortunately, the consortium was able to contract with TeleShare Communications Services.

2006 Ron Paul 84:4
TeleShare was looking for opportunities to expand, and, according to Mark Ocker, Tele- Share’s president,” . . . the opportunity to use an existing network by partnering with Chambers County and Lee College came up, and it proved to be a great match for both TeleShare and the consortium.”

2006 Ron Paul 84:5
I am pleased to take this opportunity to extend my congratulations and thanks to Lee College and all the members of the consortium for their efforts to improve the lives of the residents of Chambers County and Baytown.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 85
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Enhanced Options For Rural Health Care Act 25 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, September 25, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 85:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, September 21, I introduced the Enhanced Options for Health Care Act (H.R. 6154). This legislation allows critical access hospitals to use beds designated for critical access use, but currently not being used for that purpose, for assisted living services financed by private payments.

2006 Ron Paul 85:2
This bill will help improve the financial status of small rural hospitals and extend the health care options available to people living in rural areas without increasing federal expenditures. Currently, fear that rural hospitals will lose critical access status if beds designated for critical access are used for another purpose is causing rural hospitals to allow beds not needed for a critical access purpose to remain unused. This deprives rural hospitals of a much- needed revenue stream and deprives residents of rural areas of access to needed health care services.

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).

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 86
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

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.

2006 Ron Paul 86:2
As an obstetrician of almost 40 years, I have personally delivered more than 4,000 children. During such time, I have not performed a single abortion. On the contrary, I have spoken and written extensively and publicly condemning this “medical” procedure. At the same time, I have remained committed to upholding the constitutional procedural protections which leave the police power decentralized and in control of the States. In the name of protecting parental rights, this bill usurps States’ rights by creating yet another Federal crime.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 86:5
This federalizing may have the effect of nationalizing a law with criminal penalties which may be less than those desired by some States. To the extent the Federal and State laws could co-exist, the necessity for a Federal law is undermined and an important bill of rights protection is virtually obliterated. Concurrent jurisdiction crimes 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.

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.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 86:8
It is important to be reminded of the benefits of federalism as well as the costs. There are sound reasons to maintain a system of smaller, independent jurisdictions. An inadequate Federal law, or an “adequate” Federal law improperly interpreted by the Supreme Court, preempts States’ rights to adequately address public health concerns. Roe v. Wade should serve as a sad reminder of the danger of making matters worse in all States by federalizing an issue.

2006 Ron Paul 86:9
It is my erstwhile hope that parents will become more involved in vigilantly monitoring the activities of their own children rather than shifting parental responsibility further upon the Federal Government. There was a time when a popular bumper sticker read” It’s ten o’clock; do you know where your children are?” I suppose we have devolved to the point where it reads” It’s ten o’clock; does the Federal Government know where your children are.” Further socializing and burden shifting of the responsibilities of parenthood upon the Federal Government is simply not creating the proper incentive for parents to be more involved.

2006 Ron Paul 86:10
For each of these reasons, among others, I must oppose the further and unconstitutional centralization of police powers in the national government and, accordingly, S. 403.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 87
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement In Support Of NAIS 26 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, September 26, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 87:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I recently become a cosponsor of H.R. 6042, offered by my colleague Mrs. Emerson. This bill prohibits the federal government from implementing the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). It also provides some privacy protections for framers and ranchers who choose to participate in a voluntary identification system. I hope all of my colleagues join me in supporting this bill.

2006 Ron Paul 87:2
NAIS is a proposal to force all farmers and ranchers to “tag” their livestock with a radio frequency identification device tag (RFID) or a similar item so information on the animals’ locations can be stored in a federal database. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is currently implementing the program through state premise registration plans. Participation in the NAIS is currently voluntary, but my office has been informed that the USDA will likely make NAIS mandatory by 2009.

2006 Ron Paul 87:3
Small, family farmers and ranchers will be forced to spend thousands of dollars, as well as comply with new paperwork and monitoring regulations, to implement and operate NAIS. These farmers and ranchers will be paying for a massive assault on their property and privacy rights as NAIS forces farmers and ranchers to provide detailed information about their private property to the government. In addition, the NAIS system empowers the Federal government to enter and seize property from farmers and ranchers without a warrant. Mr. Speaker, this is a blatant violation of the Fourth Amendment-protected right to be free of arbitrary searches and seizures.

2006 Ron Paul 87:4
NAIS is unnecessary since most states already have identification systems to identify and track animals and virtually all stockyards issue a health certification for each animal that is sold. Furthermore, the NAIS “trace back” procedures only begin after an incident has been reported, which could be days, weeks, or even months after the harm has occurred. Since most contamination happens after the animal has left the farm or ranch and entered the food chain, tracing animals back to the farm will not help identify the source of the problem — although farmers and ranchers could be held legally liable if any of their animals becomes diseased after leaving their possession. According to a 1998 Harvard study, preventive measures already in place can protect the American people from dangers such as mad cow disease.

2006 Ron Paul 87:5
Bell Bellinger, vice-chairman of the Australian Beef Association, said of Australia’s National Livestock Identification System that “Financial costs like the NLIS . . . are seriously eroding our competitive advantage supplying an increasing contested world beef market.”

2006 Ron Paul 87:6
Dairy Farmer and Rancher Bob Parker best stated the case against NAIS: “We currently have the systems in place to track animals, as has just happened with the recent ‘mad cow’ in Alabama. Sacrificing our freedoms for security is not a good trade off, in my opinion. Our Founding Fathers knew the dangers of Government becoming too big. This plan is too intrusive, to costly, and will be devastating to small farmers and ranchers.” I urge my colleagues to listen to Mr. Parker and protect America’s small farmers and ranchers from being burdened with a costly, intrusive and unnecessary NAIS program by cosponsoring H.R. 6042.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 88
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

President Would Define Enemy Combatants 27 September 2006

2006 Ron Paul 88:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strongest opposition to this ill-conceived legislation. Once again, the House of Representatives is abrogating its Constitutional obligations and relinquishing its authority to the executive branch of government.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 88:3
Additionally, the bill gives the President the exclusive authority to interpret parts of the Geneva Convention relating to treatment of detainees, to determine what does and does not constitute a violation of that Convention. The President’s decision on this matter would not be reviewable by either the legislative or judicial branch of government. This provision has implications not only for the current administration, but especially for any administration, Republican or Democrat, that may come to power in the future.

2006 Ron Paul 88:4
This legislation eliminates habeas corpus for alien unlawful enemy combatants detained under this act. Those thus named by the President will have no access to the courts to dispute the determination and detention. We have already seen numerous examples of individuals detained by mistake, who were not involved in terrorism or anti-American activities. This legislation will deny such individuals the right to challenge their detention in the court. Certainly we need to prosecute those who have committed crimes against the United States, but we also need to be sure that those we detain are legitimately suspect.

2006 Ron Paul 88:5
I am also concerned that sections in this bill dealing with protection of U.S. personnel from prosecution for war crimes and detainee abuse offenses are retroactively applied to as far back as 1997.

2006 Ron Paul 88:6
Mr. Speaker, this bill will leave the men and women of our military and intelligence services much more vulnerable overseas, which is one reason many career military and intelligence personnel oppose it. We have agreed to recognize the Geneva Convention because it is a very good guarantee that our enemy will do likewise when U.S. soldiers are captured. It is in our own interest to adhere to these provisions. Unilaterally changing the terms of how we treat those captured in battle will signal to our enemies that they may do the same. Additionally, scores of Americans working overseas as aid workers or missionaries who may provide humanitarian assistance may well be vulnerable to being named “unlawful combatants” by foreign governments should those countries adopt the criteria we are adopting here. Should aid workers assist groups out of favor or struggling against repressive regimes overseas, those regimes could well deem our own citizens “unlawful combatants.” It is a dangerous precedent we are setting.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 89
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

28 September 2006

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL).

(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

2006 Ron Paul 89:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill, and let me give you a few reasons why.

2006 Ron Paul 89:2
In the introduction to the bill, it says that its purpose is to hold the current regime in Iran accountable for its threatening behavior and to support a transition of its government; and I would just ask one question: Could it be possible that others around the world and those in Iran see us as participating in “threatening behavior?” We should make an attempt to see things from other people’s view as well.

2006 Ron Paul 89:3
I want to give you three quick reasons why I think we should not be going at it this way:

2006 Ron Paul 89:4
First, this is a confrontational manner of dealing with a problem. A country that is powerful and self-confident should never need to resort to confrontation. If one is confident, one should be willing to use diplomacy whether dealing with our friends or our enemies; I think the lack of confidence motivates resolutions of this type.

2006 Ron Paul 89:5
The second reason that I will give you for opposing this is that this is clearly seeking regime change in Iran. We are taking it upon ourselves that we do not like the current regime. I don’t like Almadinyad, but do we have the responsibility and the authority to orchestrate regime change? We approach this by doing two things: Sanctions to penalize, at the same time giving aid to those groups that we expect to undermine the government. Do you know if somebody came into this country and paid groups to undermine our government, that is illegal? Yet here we are casually paying money, millions of dollars, unlimited sums of money to undermine that government. This is illegal.

2006 Ron Paul 89:6
The third point. This bill rejects the notion of the nonproliferation treaty. The Iranians have never been proven to be in violation of the nonproliferation treaty; and this explicitly says that they cannot enrich, uranium even for private and commercial purposes.

2006 Ron Paul 89:7
For these three reasons we obviously should reconsider and not use this confrontational approach. Why not try diplomacy? Oppose this resolution.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 90
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

National Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day 28 September 2006

2006 Ron Paul 90:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support H. Con. Res. 222, a resolution commending the goals and ideals of National Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day. As a practicing OB/GYN for almost 40 years, I know there are few things more devastating than losing a child to medical complications such as a miscarriage or a stillbirth. Americans should take every opportunity to provide comfort and support to people who have suffered such a grievous loss.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 90:3
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I once again urge my colleagues to support this bill. I also extend my thanks to Mrs. Robyn Bear for all her efforts to help parents who have lost a child due to a miscarriage, stillbirth, or other medical complications.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 91
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

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.

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.

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.”

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.

2006 Ron Paul 91:5
The requirement that, except in extraordinary circumstances, a warrant be obtained from the FISA court does not obstruct legitimate surveillance efforts. It is my understanding that FISA judges act very quickly to consider applications for search warrants, even if the applications are faxed to their houses at three in the morning. Applications for FISA warrants are rarely rejected. In 2005, the administration applied for 2,074 warrants from the FISA court. Of those 2 where voluntarily withdrawn and 63 where approved with modifications; the rest were approved. The FISA court only rejected four applications for warrants in the past four years; and one of those rejected warrants was subsequently partially approved.

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.

2006 Ron Paul 91:7
In conclusion Mr. Speaker, because H.R. 5825 sacrifices liberty for the illusion of security, I must oppose this bill. I urge my colleagues to do the same.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 92
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Taxpayer Protection From Frivolous Litigation Act 28 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, September 28, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 92:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Physicians and Taxpayers’ Protection from Frivolous Litigation Act. This bill provides protection from frivolous lawsuits for physicians in cases involving Medicare and Medicaid, and in cases where physicians are obligated to provide treatment under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA).

2006 Ron Paul 92:2
Among the legal reforms contained in this act are a loser pays rule providing for physicians to be reimbursed for costs incurred in defending against frivolous lawsuits; a tightening of statutes of limitations to ensure lawsuits are not just attempts to extort money for conditions that arose years after treatment was delivered; reforms of how putative damages are calculated in order to ensure the damages bear a relationship to the harm suffered, limitations on contingent fee contracts which encourage the filing of frivolous lawsuits, reforms to calculations of joint and several liability so a defendant is only liable for the harm he actually caused, and limitation of damages in cases where the plaintiff has already received compensation.

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!

2006 Ron Paul 92:4
EMTALA imposes additional burdens on physicians. EMTALA forces physicians and hospitals to bear l00% of the costs of providing care to anyone who enters an emergency room, regardless of the person’s ability to pay. According to the June 29, 2003 edition of AM News, emergency physicians lose an average of $138,000 in revenue per year because of EMTALA. EMTALA also forces physicians and hospitals to follow costly rules and regulations. A physician can be fined $50,000 for a technical EMTALA violation.

2006 Ron Paul 92:5
The combined effect of excessive regulations, inadequate reimbursements, and the risk of being subjected to unreasonable malpractice awards is endangering the most vulnerable people’s access to health care. I am aware of several physicians who have counseled young people not to enter the health care profession because of lawsuits, federal regulations, and low federal reimbursement rates. Other physicians are withdrawing from the Medicare and Medicaid programs and cutting their ties with emergency rooms in order to avoid the EMTALA mandates. Protecting physicians from frivolous lawsuits who are participating in federal programs or acting to fulfill federal mandates is an important step in removing federally created disincentives to providing care to elderly and low income people. I therefore call upon my colleagues to stand up for heath care providers, low income people, senior citizens, and taxpayers by cosponsoring the Physicians and Taxpayers’ Protection from Frivolous Litigation Act.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 93
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Congratulations To Point Comfort Elementary School 28 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, September 28, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 93:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Point Comfort Elementary School, of the Calhoun County Independent School District, is among the 26 Texas schools that have recently received the Department of Education’s prestigious Blue Ribbon Schools award.

2006 Ron Paul 93:2
The No Child Left Behind-Blue Ribbon Schools Program recognizes outstanding public and private schools that are either academically superior or have demonstrated dramatic and consistent gains in student achievement. The Department of Education selects Blue Ribbon Schools based on nominations submitted by the states. My colleagues may be interested to know that every school nominated by Texas received a Blue Ribbon Schools award.

2006 Ron Paul 93:3
Schools can be nominated for a Blue Ribbon Schools Award if at least forty percent of their disadvantaged students show dramatic improvement over three years on state tests in reading or English language arts and mathematics. Schools whose student bodies rank in the top ten percent on state tests in reading or English language arts and mathematics may also be nominated for a Blue Ribbon Schools Award.

2006 Ron Paul 93:4
In addition to these two criteria, Blue Ribbon Schools must meet Adequate Yearly Progress requirements in reading or English language arts and mathematics, must not have been identified as a “Persistently Dangerous” school within the last two years, and must comply with other Department of Education requirements.

2006 Ron Paul 93:5
Point Comfort’s designation as a Blue Ribbon School is a tribute to the schools’ teachers, administrators, and other employees’ dedication to providing students with a quality education. It also is a reflection of the students and parents’ commitment to the pursuit of educational excellence. I am therefore pleased to offer my congratulations to Point Comfort Elementary School for being one of the 26 Texas schools designated as Blue Ribbon Schools by the Department of Education.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 94
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

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.

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!

2006 Ron Paul 94:3
In conclusion, the ban on internet gambling violates the constitutional limits on federal power. Furthermore, laws such as this are ineffective in eliminating the demand for vices such as internet gambling; instead, they ensure that these enterprises will be controlled by organized crime. It is a shame to clutter an important and good piece of legislation like the Safe Ports Act with a blatantly unconstitutional power grab over the internet like the Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 95
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Congratulations To Brazosport Independent School District 29 september 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, September 29, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 95:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Brazosport Independent School District, located in my home county of Brazoria, has received a $458,369 Smaller Learning Communities Program grant from the Department of Education. The Smaller Learning Communities Program promotes academic achievement through the creation or expansion of small, safe, and successful learning environments in large public high schools to help ensure that all students graduate with the knowledge and skills necessary to make successful transitions to colleges and careers.

2006 Ron Paul 95:2
Brazosport High School will use the Smaller Learning Communities Program grant to build on past efforts by implementing and expanding successful strategies and activities. Among the projects the grant will help Brayosport High School implement are extensive development activities for the faculty and staff, advisory periods, accelerated curriculum, after- school classes, ninth grade transition activities, and task force committees.

2006 Ron Paul 95:3
Brazosport High School’s project goals include: (1) increasing the academic performance of all students and reducing the gap in achievement among students of different racial and economic backgrounds; (2) ensuring that the Smaller Learning Communities are environments where students feel safe, known, supported and motivated to succeed; (3) and ensuring that students attain the strong academic knowledge and skills necessary for a successful college career.

2006 Ron Paul 95:4
Mr. Speaker, I have no doubt that the same commitment to education excellence that enabled Brazosport Independent School District to obtain this grant will enable the school to achieve all of its goals. I am therefore pleased to extend my congratulations to Brazosport Independent School District for obtaining a Smaller Learning Communities Program grant.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 96
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Congratulations To Katy Elementary 29 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, September 29, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 96:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Katy Elementary School, of the Katy Independent School District, is among the 26 Texas schools that have recently received the Department of Education’s prestigious Blue Ribbon Schools award.

2006 Ron Paul 96:2
The No Child Left Behind-Blue Ribbon Schools Program recognizes outstanding public and private schools that are either academically superior or have demonstrated dramatic and consistent gains in student achievement. The Department of Education selects Blue Ribbon Schools based on nominations submitted by the states. My colleagues may be interested to know that every school nominated by Texas received a Blue Ribbon Schools award.

2006 Ron Paul 96:3
Schools can be nominated for a Blue Ribbon Schools Award if at least forty percent of their disadvantaged students show dramatic improvement over three years on state tests in reading or English language arts and mathematics. Schools whose student bodies rank in the top ten percent on state tests in reading or English language arts and mathematics may also be nominated for a Blue Ribbon Schools Award.

2006 Ron Paul 96:4
In addition to these two criteria, Blue Ribbon Schools must meet Adequate Yearly Progress requirements in reading or English language arts and mathematics, must not have been identified as a “Persistently Dangerous” school within the last two years, and must comply with other Department of Education requirements.

2006 Ron Paul 96:5
Katy Elementary’s designation as Blue Ribbon Schools is a tribute to the schools’ teachers, administrators, and other employees’ dedication to providing students with a quality education. It also is a reflection of the students and parents’ commitment to the pursuit of educational excellence. I am therefore pleased to offer my congratulations to Katy Elementary School for being one of the 26 Texas schools designated as Blue Ribbon Schools by the Department of Education.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 97
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of Legislation Repealing Two Unconstitutional And Paternalistic Federal Financials Regulations 29 September 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, September 29, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 97:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce legislation repealing 2 unconstitutional and paternalistic federal financial regulations. First, this legislation repeals a federal regulation that limits the number of withdrawals someone can make from a savings account in a month’s time without being assessed financial penalties. As hard as it is to believe, the Federal Government actually forces banks to punish people for accessing their own savings too many times in a month. This bill also repeals a regulation that requires bank customers to receive a written monthly financial statement from their banks, regardless of whether the customer wants such a communication.

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.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 98
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To Dr. Victor Rodriguez 13 November 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, November 13, 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.

2006 Ron Paul 98:2
For nine years, Victor Rodriguez woke up at 4 a.m. and jogged two miles to the church to ring the bell before the 5 a.m. mass. While this was obviously a difficult responsibility for a child, Dr. Rodriguez later said that he “came to accept ringing that bell as an honor . . . whenever I was tired and didn’t feel like getting out of bed, I remembered my mom’s encouragement. She used to say that if you do something, do it to the very best of your ability.”

2006 Ron Paul 98:3
The importance of hard work, endurance, and dedication that Victor Rodriguez learned as a bell ringer stayed with him throughout his life. Dr. Rodriguez was a star athlete who set many records and won numerous trophies at Edna High School, Victoria College, and North Texas State University. After earning his Ph.d, Dr. Rodriguez began a successful career as a teacher and as a coach of several championship track teams. In his work as a teacher and coach, Dr. Rodriguez inspired his students to strive to achieve their goals and dreams.

2006 Ron Paul 98:4
During Dr. Rodriguez’s 12 years as superintendent of the San Antonio School District, the dropout rate was reduced from 50 percent to less than 10 percent. Applying the lessons in perseverance he learned as a young bell ringer, then superintendent-elect Dr. Rodriguez promised San Antonio School District’s kindergarten class that he would stay as superintendent as long as they were in school. Of course, Dr. Rodriguez kept that promise, not retiring until 1994 when the kindergartners of 1981 were seniors in high school.

2006 Ron Paul 98:5
During his tenure as superintendent, Dr. Rodriguez won numerous awards and honors, including an achiever award from the Alamo Area Council of the Boy Scouts of America, representative from Texas in the 1989 National Superintendent of the Year Award Program sponsored by the American Association of School Administrators and the Service-Master Company, induction into the National Hispanic Sports Hall of Fame; and honoree in Ford Motor Company’s Hispanic Salute recognizing San Antonio Hispanics for outstanding contributions to education and literacy. Executive Educator magazine twice named Dr. Rodriguez one of the Hundred Top School Executives in the nation. Just last month, Dr. Rodriguez was honored by his alma mater by being named a 2006 inductee into the University of North Texas’s Athletic Hall of Fame.

2006 Ron Paul 98:6
Dr. Rodriguez’s application of the lessons he learned, as a young church bell ringer should serve an example to all of us. It is a pleasure to offer my congratulations and thanks to Dr. Victor Rodriguez for all of his efforts to help Texas schoolchildren.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 99
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement On Helen Chenoweth-Hage 13 November 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, November 13, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 99:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, with the passing last month of Helen Chenoweth-Hage, America has lost one of its true champions of liberty and constitutional government, and I have lost a valued friend and colleague. When Helen served in the House of Representatives, she gained a national following for her principled and uncompromising defense of private property, the Second Amendment, American sovereignty, and limited federal government.

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. “

2006 Ron Paul 99:3
I will always cherish my memories of the time Helen and I served together in the House, and I thank the Lord for enriching my life and the lives of so many others by granting us the opportunity to know Helen. I hope that knowledge of how many freedom-lovers across the country join Helen’s family in mourning her loss provides some measure of comfort to Helen’s family.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 100
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Milton Friedman 6 December 2006

2006 Ron Paul 100:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support H. Res. 1089, a resolution honoring Milton Friedman. Milton Friedman was one of America’s greatest champions of liberty. Launching a career as a public intellectual at a time when dissenters from the reigning Keynesian paradigm where viewed as the equivalent of members of the Flat Earth Society, Milton Friedman waged an oftentimes lonely intellectual battle on behalf of free markets and individual liberty in the fifties and sixties. As the economic crisis of the seventies caused by high taxes, high spending, and inflation vindicated Friedman’s critiques of interventionism, his influence grew — not because he moved to the mainstream but because the mainstream moved toward him. Friedman served as an advisor to Presidents Nixon and Ford and as a member of President Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisors. In 1976, Friedman was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics.

2006 Ron Paul 100:2
Milton Friedman’s most notable contributions to economic theory where in the area of monetary policy. His 1963 work A Monetary History of the United States 1857–1960, coauthored with Anna Schwartz, was among the first works to emphasize the role Federal Reserve policy played in causing the Great Depression. As Friedman said, “The Great Depression, like most other periods of severe unemployment, was produced by government mismanagement rather than by any inherent instability of the private economy.”

2006 Ron Paul 100:3
Friedman’s work showed that inflation is not a result of markets but is, as he memorably put it, “always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.” Friedman was the major originator and theoretician of monetarism. Friedman recommended restricting the Federal Reserve’s authority to increasing the quantity of money by a fixed yearly amount. While monetarism is far from the ideal free-market monetary system, Milton Friedman deserves credit for focusing the attention of economists on the Federal Reserve’s responsibility for inflation.

2006 Ron Paul 100:4
While he is mainly known for his contributions to economic theory and his advocacy of free markets, Milton Friedman considered his advocacy against the draft, cumulating in his work as a member of President Nixon’s Commission on an All-Volunteer Force, his major policy achievement. Milton Friedman’s opposition to the draft was in part based on economic principles, but was mainly motivated by his moral commitment to freedom. I ask unanimous consent to insert the attached article, “Milton Friedman: A Tribute,” by David R. Henderson, which details Milton Friedman’s efforts against the draft, into the record.

2006 Ron Paul 100:5
Unlike many free market economists who downplay their opposition to government of encroachments on personal liberty in order to appear “respectable,” Friedman never hesitated to take controversial stands in favor of liberty. Thus Friedman was one of the most outspoken critics of the federal war on drugs and an early critic of government licensing of professionals. Friedman also never allowed fear of losing access to power stop him from criticizing politicians who betrayed economic liberty. For example, his status as an advisor to President Richard Nixon did not stop him from criticizing Nixon’s imposition of wage and price controls.

2006 Ron Paul 100:6
Milton Friedman’s greatest contribution to liberty may have been his work to educate the public about free market economics. Milton Friedman’s 1962 work Capitalism and Freedom, introduced millions of people to the freedom philosophy, and it remains one of the most popular, and influential, pro-freedom books in the world.

2006 Ron Paul 100:7
In 1980, Milton Friedman collaborated with his wife Rose on a television series, Free to Choose. The series, and the accompanying best-selling book, remain among the best introductions to the benefits of economic liberty, and rivals Capitalism and Freedom in popularity. One of my favorite moments of the show is when Milton Friedman compares the robust free market economy of Hong Kong with the then stagnant economy of communist China.

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 . . .”

2006 Ron Paul 100:9
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to pay tribute to Milton Friedman’s tireless efforts on behalf of human liberty, and I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Res. 1089.

2006 Ron Paul 100:10
[From ANTIWAR.COM, Nov. 20, 2006]
MILTON FRIEDMAN: A TRIBUTE “In the course of his [General Westmoreland’s] testimony, he made the statement that he did not want to command an army of mercenaries. I [Milton Friedman] stopped him and said, ‘General, would you rather command an army of slaves?’ He drew himself up and said, ‘I don’t like to hear our patriotic volunteers referred to as mercenaries.’ But I went on to say, ‘If they are mercenaries, then I, sir, am a mercenary professor, and you, sir, are a mercenary general; we are served by mercenary physicians, we use a mercenary lawyer, and we get our meat from a mercenary butcher.’ That was the last that we heard from the general about mercenaries.” — Milton and Rose Friedman, Two Lucky People, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998, p. 380.

2006 Ron Paul 100:11
In May 1970, a few days after graduating from the University of Winnipeg with a major in mathematics, I flew to Chicago to look into getting a Ph.D. in economics at the University of Chicago. While there, I went to visit Milton Friedman and he invited me into his office. I had a sense that he had been through this routine before — talking to an idealistic young person showing up and wanting an autograph on his copy of Capitalism and Freedom and, beyond that, simply wanting to meet and talk to him. But he didn’t treat our meeting as routine; we had a real talk for about 10 minutes. When I told him that I’d initially been attracted to libertarianism by reading Ayn Rand, he told me that while Rand was well worth reading, there were many other people worth reading too, and I shouldn’t get stuck on her. He also stated, “Make politics an avocation, not a vocation.” Both were good pieces of advice.

2006 Ron Paul 100:12
The advice didn’t stop there. I ended up getting my Ph.D. at UCLA and going to my first academic job as an assistant professor at the University of Rochester’s Graduate School of Management. From then on, I wrote Milton a couple of times a year and he always wrote back, sometimes writing in the margins of my letter to comment on my questions and thoughts. When I contemplated my first major career change — leaving academia to work at a think tank — he advised me strongly against it (I didn’t take this advice), referring to himself as my “Dutch uncle.” I had never heard the term before and didn’t bother to look it up until writing this piece, but I understood what he meant from the context: a Dutch uncle is someone who gives you tough love, holding you to high standards because of a benevolent regard for your well-being.

2006 Ron Paul 100:13
But here’s the bigger point: with his steady and passionate work to end the military draft, Milton Friedman was the Dutch uncle of every young man in the United States. Or even better, he was like a favorite uncle that they’d never even met. He cared more for them than any president, any general, or any defense secretary has ever cared. How so? Because he wanted every young man to be free to choose whether to join the military or not.

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:

2006 Ron Paul 100:15
“When a young man is forced to serve at $45 a week, including the cost of his keep, of his uniforms, and his dependency allowances, and there are many civilian opportunities available to him at something like $100 a week, he is paying $55 a week in an implicit tax. . . . And if you were to add to those taxes in kind, the costs imposed on universities and colleges; of seating, housing, and entertaining young men who would otherwise be doing productive work; if you were to add to that the costs imposed on industry by the fact that they can only offer young men who are in danger of being drafted stopgap jobs, and cannot effectively invest money in training them; if you were to add to that the costs imposed on individuals of a financial kind by their marrying earlier or having children at an earlier stage, and so on; if you were to add all these up, there is no doubt at all in my mind that the cost of a volunteer force, correctly calculated, would be very much smaller than the amount we are now spending in manning our Armed Forces.”

2006 Ron Paul 100:16
Reading through the whole Sol Tax volume, with all the papers and transcripts of the discussion, I had the sense that there was a coalescing of views over the four days, as people from various parts of the ideological spectrum found that they had in common a strong antipathy to the draft and found also that the economists made a surprisingly strong economic case. Both Friedman’s speech and his various comments at the conference still make compelling reading. One of his best rhetorical flourishes was his criticism of the charge that those who advocate ending the draft are advocating a “mercenary” army. You’ll recognize the same kind of argument he used against Westmoreland in the lead quote of this article. Friedman said:

2006 Ron Paul 100:17
“Now, when anybody starts talking about this [an all-volunteer force] he immediately shifts language. My army is ‘volunteer,’ your army is ‘professional,’ and the enemy’s army is ‘mercenary.’ All these three words mean exactly the same thing. I am a volunteer professor, I am a mercenary professor, and I am a professional professor. And all you people around here are mercenary professional people. And I trust you realize that. It’s always a puzzle to me why people should think that the term ‘mercenary’ somehow has a negative connotation. I remind you of that wonderful quotation of Adam Smith when he said, ‘You do not owe your daily bread to the benevolence of the baker, but to his proper regard for his own interest.’ And this is much more broadly based. In fact, I think mercenary motives are among the least unattractive that we have.” (p. 366)

2006 Ron Paul 100:18
In the margin of my 35-year-old, dog-eared copy of the Sol Tax book containing this passage, I wrote one word: “Wow!” This is rhetoric at its best, a tight argument passionately stated. When I read this at about age 18, just a year before meeting Friedman in his office, I felt cared-for. Fortunately, being Canadian, I wasn’t vulnerable to the draft. But I had the thought that if I had grown up in United States, I would be so thankful that here was this man, himself well beyond draft age and who could probably figure out how to get his son out of the draft, and yet who cared enough to be out in front on this issue.

2006 Ron Paul 100:19
Two of Friedman’s comments about this conference are worth noting. Writing some 30 years later, Friedman noted that the 74 invited participants “included essentially everyone who had written or spoken at all extensively on either side of the controversy about the draft, as well as a number of students.” (Two Lucky People, p. 377.) Friedman’s other comment is also worth citing:

2006 Ron Paul 100:20
“I have attended many conferences. I have never attended any other that had so dramatic an effect on the participants. A straw poll taken at the outset of the conference recorded two-thirds of the participants in favor of the draft; a similar poll at the end, two- thirds opposed. I believe that this conference was the key event that started the ball rolling decisively toward ending the draft.” (p. 378.)

2006 Ron Paul 100:21
Friedman didn’t stop there. He wrote a number of articles in his tri-weekly column in Newsweek making the case against the draft. Friedman was one of 15 people chosen for Nixon’s Commission on the All-Volunteer Force. By his estimate, five started off being against the draft, five in favor, and five on the fence. By the end, the Commission was able to come out with a 14–0 consensus in favor of ending the draft. Black leader Roy Wilkins, in a Feb. 6, 1970 letter to Nixon, stated he had been unable to attend many of the meetings due to a major illness and, therefore, could not support its specific recommendations; Wilkins did state, however, that he endorsed the idea of moving toward an all-volunteer armed force. (The Report of the President’s Commission on an All-Volunteer Armed Force, New York: Collier Books, 1970; letter from Roy Wilkins.)

2006 Ron Paul 100:22
It was at one of these meetings that Friedman put Westmoreland on the spot with his comeback about slaves. Knowing that Friedman was persuasive and focused and also a warm human being, I credit him with having swung at least a few of the Commission members in his direction. And although Nixon took his sweet time acting on the recommendations, finally, at the start of his second term, he let the draft expire.

2006 Ron Paul 100:23
Friedman kibitzed in his Newsweek column, never letting up. He once wrote that the draft “is almost the only issue on which I have engaged in any extensive personal lobbying with members of the House and Senate.” (Milton Friedman, An Economist’s Protest, 2nd ed., Glen Ridge, N.J.: Thomas Horton and Daughters, 1975, p. 188.)

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.

2006 Ron Paul 100:25
In 1980, in response to the threat from Sam Nunn, I wrote and circulated the following “Economists’ Statement in Opposition to the Draft”:

2006 Ron Paul 100:26
“We, the undersigned, oppose moves toward the reimposition of the draft. The draft would be a more costly way of maintaining the military than an all-volunteer force. Those who claim that a draft costs less than a volunteer military cite as a savings the lower wages that the government can get away with paying draftees. But they leave out the burden imposed on the draftees themselves. Since a draft would force many young people to delay or forego entirely other activities valuable to them and to the rest of society, the real cost of military manpower would be substantially more than the wages draftees would be paid. Saying that a draft would reduce the cost of the military is like saying that the pyramids were cheap because they were built with slave labor.”

2006 Ron Paul 100:27
Friedman’s speed at signing made it much easier, I’m sure, to get the signatures of almost 300 other prominent and not-so-prominent economists, including Kenneth Boulding, Harold Demsetz, David Friedman, Alan Greenspan, Donald McCloskey, William Meckling, Allen H. Meltzer, James C. Miller III, William A. Niskanen, Mancur Olson, Sam Peltzman, Murray Rothbard, Jeremy J. Siegel, Vernon Smith, Beryl W. Sprinkel, Jerome Stein, and James L. Sweeney.

2006 Ron Paul 100:28
The statement, with about 150 signatures, was published as a full-page ad in Libertarian Review, Inquiry, and The Progressive.

2006 Ron Paul 100:29
Milton Friedman and I had our differences about foreign policy. I tried, in vain, to persuade him to be against the first Gulf war. Even there, though, he publicly supported, in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, my economic argument against the war. He stated, “Henderson’s analysis is correct. There is no justification for intervention on grounds of oil” (Jonathan Marshall, “Economists Say Iraq’s Threat to U.S. Oil Supply Is Exaggerated,” San Francisco Chronicle, Oct. 29, 1990.) Friedman did oppose the second Gulf war, as evidenced in an interview in the Wall Street Journal, in which he called it, correctly, “aggression.” (Tunku Varadarajan, “The Romance of Economics,” Wall Street Journal, July 22, 2006; page A10).

2006 Ron Paul 100:30
As far as I know, though, Friedman did not oppose the second Gulf war publicly when it mattered most — that is, before the March 2003 invasion. But on the draft, Friedman never wavered. For that, many young American men owe him a lot.

2006 Ron Paul 100:31
Two weeks ago, I attended a conference in Guatemala at which it was announced that Friedman had had a bad fall and was in the hospital. The person who announced it, Bob Chitester, producer of the Friedmans’ 1980 television series, Free to Choose, handed out buttons that read, “Have you thanked Milton Friedman today?” Thanks, Uncle Miltie.

2006 Ron Paul Chapter 101
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Various Foreign Policy Suspension Bills At the End Of The 109th Congress 6 December 2006

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, December 6, 2006

2006 Ron Paul 101:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my concern about the House of Representatives at the last minute rushing to the floor dozens of bills spending tens of millions of dollars and interfering in the affairs of foreign countries. Mr. Speaker, we woke up this morning with the surprise announcement that we would face at least 35 of these suspension bills. Suspension bills are customarily noncontroversial — naming post offices and the like. I can hardly think of anything more controversial than sending tens of millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars overseas to interfere in the affairs of foreign countries.

2006 Ron Paul 101:2
The suspension calendar is being used to pass the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank, which funnels millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to foreign governments. For example, through the Export-Import Bank, Americans are forced to subsidize China’s economic growth with some $4 billion dollars per year. Is this not controversial?

2006 Ron Paul 101:3
Additionally, today’s suspension bills will turn an additional 52 million dollars in foreign aid over to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Is this not controversial?

2006 Ron Paul 101:4
Possibly more damaging in today’s “noncontroversial” suspension bills are the several bills that seek to meddle in the affairs of foreign countries. Today’s suspension bills, whether they regard Lebanon, Iran, Congo, or Nepal, make it clear that we still have not learned the lessons we should have learned from Iraq and all of our previous interventions that have gone awry. Mr. Speaker, it is bad enough that Congress acts as if its jurisdiction extends across the entire globe, must we add insult to injury by treating this as simply run of the mill, noncontroversial legislation?