Volume 2007 — The Book of Ron Paul

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 1
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Social Security Beneficiary Tax reduction Act And The Senior Citizens’ Tax Elimination Act 4 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 4, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 1:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce two pieces of legislation to reduce taxes on senior citizens. The first bill, the Social Security Beneficiary Tax Reduction Act, repeals the 1993 tax increase on Social Security benefits. Repealing this increase on Social Security benefits is a good first step toward reducing the burden imposed by the federal government on senior citizens. However, imposing any tax on Social Security benefits is unfair and illogical. This is why I am also introducing the Senior Citizens’ Tax Elimination Act, which repeals all taxes on Social Security benefits.

2007 Ron Paul 1:2
Since Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another example of double taxation. Furthermore, “taxing” benefits paid by the government is merely an accounting trick, a shell game which allows Members of Congress to reduce benefits by subterfuge. This allows Congress to continue using the Social Security trust fund as a means of financing other government programs, and masks the true size of the federal deficit.

2007 Ron Paul 1:3
Instead of imposing ridiculous taxes on senior citizens, Congress should ensure the integrity of the Social Security trust fund by ending the practice of using trust fund monies for other programs. This is why I am also introducing the Social Security Preservation Act, which ensures that all money in the Social Security trust fund is spent solely on Social Security. At a time when Congress’ inability to control spending is once again threatening the Social Security trust fund, the need for this legislation has never been greater. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise.

2007 Ron Paul 1:4
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to help free senior citizens from oppressive taxation by supporting my Senior Citizens’ Tax Elimination Act and my Social Security Beneficiary Tax Reduction Act. I also urge my colleagues to ensure that moneys from the Social Security trust fund are used solely for Social Security benefits and not wasted on frivolous government programs.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 2
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Senior’s Health Care Freedom Act 4 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 4, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 2:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Seniors’ Health Care Freedom Act. This act protects seniors’ fundamental right to make their own health care decisions by repeal federal laws that interfere with seniors’ ability to form private contracts for medical services. This bill also repeals laws which force seniors into the Medicare program against their will. When Medicare was first established, seniors were promised that the program would be voluntary. In fact, the original Medicare legislation explicitly protected a senior’s right to seek out other forms of medical insurance. However, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 prohibits any physician who forms a private contract with a senior from filing any Medicare reimbursement claims for two years. As a practical matter, this means that seniors cannot form private contracts for health care services.

2007 Ron Paul 2:2
Seniors may wish to use their own resources to pay for procedures or treatments not covered by Medicare, or to simply avoid the bureaucracy and uncertainly that comes when seniors must wait for the judgment of a Center from Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) bureaucrat before finding out if a desired treatment is covered.

2007 Ron Paul 2:3
Seniors’ right to control their own health care is also being denied due to the Social Security Administration’s refusal to give seniors who object to enrolling Medicare Part A Social Security benefits. This not only distorts the intent of the creators of the Medicare system; it also 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 an additional government program!

2007 Ron Paul 2:4
At a time when the fiscal solvency of Medicare is questionable, to say the least, it seems foolish to waste scarce Medicare funds on those who would prefer to do without Medicare. Allowing seniors who neither want nor need to participate in the program to refrain from doing so will also strengthen the Medicare program for those seniors who do wish to participate in it. Of course, my bill does not take away Medicare benefits from any senior. It simply allows each senior to choose voluntarily whether or not to accept Medicare benefits or to use his own resources to obtain health care.

2007 Ron Paul 2:5
Forcing seniors into government programs and restricting their ability to seek medical care free from government interference infringes on the freedom of seniors to control their own resources and make their own health care decisions. A woman who was forced into Medicare against her wishes summed it up best in a letter to my office, “. . . I should be able to choose the medical arrangements I prefer without suffering the penalty that is being imposed.” I urge my colleagues to protect the right of seniors to make the medical arrangements that best suit their own needs by cosponsoring the Seniors’ Health Care Freedom Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 3
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Social Security For American Citizens Only Act 4 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 4, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 3:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, today I introduce the Social Security for American Citizens Only Act. This act forbids the federal government from providing Social Security benefits to non-citizens. It also ends the practice of totalization. Totalization is where the Social Security Administration takes into account the number of year’s an individual worked abroad, and thus was not paying payroll taxes, in determining that individual’s eligibility for Social Security benefits!

2007 Ron Paul 3:2
Hard as it may be to believe, the United States Government already provides Social Security benefits to citizens of 17 other countries. Under current law, citizens of those countries covered by these agreements may have an easier time getting Social Security benefits than public school teachers or policemen!

2007 Ron Paul 3:3
Obviously, this program provides a threat to the already fragile Social Security system, and the threat is looming larger. The administration’s totalization proposal, a version of which passed the other body in the 109th Congress, actually allows thousands of foreigners who would qualify for U.S. Social Security benefits actually came to the United States and worked here illegally. Adding insult to injury, the federal government may even give Social Security benefits to non-citizens who worked here for as little as 18 months.

2007 Ron Paul 3:4
That’s right: the federal government may actually allow someone who came to the United States illegally, worked for less than the required number of years to qualify for Social Security, and then returned to Mexico for the rest of his working years, to collect full U.S. Social Security benefits while living in Mexico. That is an insult to the millions of Americans who pay their entire working lives into the system and now face the possibility that there may be nothing left when it is their turn to retire.

2007 Ron Paul 3:5
The proposed agreement is nothing more than a financial reward to those who have willingly and knowingly violated our own immigration laws. Talk about an incentive for illegal immigration! How many more would break the law to come to this country if promised U.S. government paychecks for life? Is creating a global welfare state on the back of the American taxpayer a good idea? The program also establishes a very disturbing precedent of U.S. foreign aid to individual citizens rather than to states.

2007 Ron Paul 3:6
Estimates of what this latest totalization proposal would cost top one billion dollars per year. As the system braces for a steep increase in those who will be drawing from the Social Security trust fund while policy makers seriously consider cutting Social Security benefits to American seniors and raising payroll taxes on American workers, it makes no sense to expand Social Security into a global welfare system. Social Security was designed to provide support for retired American citizens who worked in the United States. We should be shoring up the system for those Americans who have paid in for decades, not expanding it to cover foreigners who have not.

2007 Ron Paul 3:7
It is long past time for Congress to stand up to the internationalist bureaucrats and start looking out for the American worker. I therefore call upon my colleagues to stop the use of the Social Security Trust Fund as yet another vehicle for foreign aid by cosponsoring the Social Security for American Citizens Only Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 4
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Social Security Preservation Act 4 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 4, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 4:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to protect the integrity of the Social Security trust fund by introducing the Social Security Preservation Act. The Social Security Preservation Act is a rather simple bill which states that all monies raised by the Social Security trust fund will be spent in payments to beneficiaries, with excess receipts invested in interest-bearing certificates of deposit. This will help keep Social Security trust fund monies from being diverted to other programs, as well as allow the fund to grow by providing for investment in interest- bearing instruments.

2007 Ron Paul 4:2
The Social Security Preservation Act ensures that the government will keep its promises to America’s seniors that taxes collected for Social Security will be used for Social Security. When the government taxes Americans to fund Social Security, it promises the American people that the money will be there for them when they retire. Congress has a moral obligation to keep that promise.

2007 Ron Paul 4:3
With federal deficits reaching historic levels the pressure from special interests for massive new raids on the trust fund is greater than ever. Thus it is vital that Congress act now to protect the trust fund from big spending, pork- barrel politics. Social Security reform will be one of the major issues discussed in this Congress and many of my colleagues have different ideas regarding how to best preserve the long-term solvency of the program. However, as a medical doctor, I know the first step in treatment is to stop the bleeding, and the Social Security Preservation Act stops the bleeding of the Social Security trust fund. I therefore call upon all my colleagues, regardless of which proposal for long-term Social Security reform they support, to stand up for America’s seniors by cosponsoring the Social Security Preservation Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 5
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Prescription Drug Affordability Act 4 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 4, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 5:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Prescription Drug Affordability Act. This legislation ensures that millions of Americans, including seniors, have access to affordable pharmaceutical products. My bill makes pharmaceuticals more affordable to seniors by reducing their taxes. It also removes needless government barriers to importing pharmaceuticals and it protects Internet pharmacies, which are making affordable prescription drugs available to millions of Americans, from being strangled by federal regulation.

2007 Ron Paul 5:2
The first provision of my legislation provides seniors a tax credit equal to 80 percent of their prescription drug costs. While Congress did add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare in 2003, many seniors still have difficulty affording the prescription drugs they need in order to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle. One reason is because the new program creates a “doughnut hole,” where seniors lose coverage once their prescription expenses reach a certain amount and must pay for their prescriptions above a certain amount out of their own pockets until their expenses reach a level where Medicare coverage resumes. This tax credit will help seniors cover the expenses provided by the doughnut hole. This bill will also help seniors obtain prescription medicines that may not be covered by the Medicare prescription drug program.

2007 Ron Paul 5:3
In addition to making prescription medications more affordable for seniors, my bill lowers the price for prescription medicines by reducing barriers to the importation of FDA-approved pharmaceuticals. Under my bill, anyone wishing to import a drug simply submits an application to the 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. This process will make safe and affordable imported medicines affordable to millions of Americans. Madam Speaker, letting the free market work is the best means of lowering the cost of prescription drugs.

2007 Ron Paul 5:4
I need not remind my colleagues that many senior citizens and other Americans impacted by the high costs of prescription medicine have demanded Congress reduce the barriers which prevent American consumers from purchasing imported pharmaceuticals. Congress has responded to these demands by repeatedly passing legislation liberalizing the rules governing the importation of pharmaceuticals. However, implementation of this provision has been blocked by the federal bureaucracy. It is time Congress stood up for the American consumer and removed all unnecessary regulations on importing pharmaceuticals.

2007 Ron Paul 5:5
The Prescription Drug Affordability Act also protects consumers’ access to affordable medicine by forbidding the Federal Government from regulating any Internet sales of FDA-approved pharmaceuticals by state-licensed pharmacists.

2007 Ron Paul 5:6
As I am sure my colleagues are aware, the Internet makes pharmaceuticals and other products more affordable and accessible for millions of Americans. However, the federal government has threatened to destroy this option by imposing unnecessary and unconstitutional regulations on web sites that sell pharmaceuticals. Any federal regulations would inevitably drive up prices of pharmaceuticals, thus depriving many consumers of access to affordable prescription medications.

2007 Ron Paul 5:7
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to make pharmaceuticals more affordable and accessible by lowering taxes on senior citizens, removing barriers to the importation of pharmaceuticals and protecting legitimate Internet pharmacies from needless regulation by cosponsoring the Prescription Drug Affordability Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 6
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Make College Affordable Act 4 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 4, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 6:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to help millions of Americans afford higher education by introducing the Make College Affordable Act of 2007, which makes college tuition tax deductible. Today the average cost of education at a state university is $12,796 per year, and the cost of education at a private university is $30,367 per year! These high costs have left many middle class American families struggling to afford college for their children, who are often ineligible for financial aid. Therefore, middle class students have no choice but to obtain student loans, and thus leave college saddled with massive debt.

2007 Ron Paul 6:2
Even families who plan and save well in advance for their children’s education may have a difficult time because their savings are eroded by taxation and inflation. The Make College Affordable Act will help these middle class students by allowing them, or their parents or guardians who claim them as dependents, to deduct the cost of college tuition as well as the cost of student loan repayments.

2007 Ron Paul 6:3
The Make College Affordable Act will also help older or nontraditional students looking to improve their job skills or prepare for a career change, by pursuing higher education. In today’s economy, the average American worker can expect to change jobs, and even careers, several times during his or her working life, making it more important than ever that working Americans be able to devote their resources to continuing their educations.

2007 Ron Paul 6:4
Helping the American people use their own money to ensure every qualified American can receive a college education is one of the best investments this Congress can make in the future. I therefore urge my colleagues to help strengthen America by ensuring more Americans can obtain college educations by cosponsoring the Make College Affordable Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 7
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

The War In Iraq 5 January 2007

2007 Ron Paul 7:1
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL) is recognized for 5 minutes.

2007 Ron Paul 7:2
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Saddam Hussein is dead. So are 3,000 Americans. The regime in Iraq has been changed; yet victory will not be declared. Not only does the war go on; it is about to escalate. Obviously, the turmoil in Iraq is worse than ever and most Americans no longer are willing to tolerate the costs, both human and economic, associated with this war.

2007 Ron Paul 7:3
We have been in Iraq for 45 months. Many more Americans have been killed in Iraq than were killed in the first 45 months in Vietnam. I was in the U.S. Air Force in 1965, and I remember well when President Johnson announced a troop surge in Vietnam to hasten victory. That war went on for another decade. And by the time we finally finished that war and got out, 60,000 Americans had died. We obviously should have gotten out 10 years sooner. Troop surge then meant serious escalation.

2007 Ron Paul 7:4
The election is over and Americans have spoken: enough is enough. They want the war ended and our troops brought home. But the opposite is likely to occur. With bipartisan support, up to 50,000 troops may well be sent. The goal no longer is to win. Now it is simply to secure Baghdad. So much has been spent with so little to show for it.

2007 Ron Paul 7:5
Who possibly benefits from escalating chaos in Iraq? Neoconservatives unabashedly have written about how chaos presents opportunities for promoting their goals. Certainly Osama bin Laden has benefited from the turmoil in Iraq, as have Iranian Shiites who are now in a better position to take control of southern Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 7:6
Yes, Saddam Hussein is dead, and only Sunnis mourn. The Shiites and Kurds celebrate his death, as do the Iranians and especially bin Laden, all enemies of Saddam Hussein. We have performed a tremendous service for both bin Laden and Ahmadinejad, and it will cost us plenty. The violent reaction to our complicity in the execution of Saddam Hussein is yet to come.

2007 Ron Paul 7:7
Three thousand American military personnel are dead. More than 22,000 are wounded, and tens of thousands will be psychologically traumatized by their tours of duty in Iraq. Little concern is given to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed in this war. We have spent $400 billion so far with no end in sight. This money we do not have. It is all borrowed from countries like China that increasingly succeed in the global economy while we drain wealth from our citizens through heavy taxation and insidious inflation. Our manufacturing base is now nearly extinct. Where the additional U.S. troops in Iraq will come from is anybody’s guess, but surely they won’t be redeployed from Japan, Korea, or Europe.

2007 Ron Paul 7:8
We at least must pretend that our bankrupt empire is intact, but then again, the Soviet empire appeared intact in 1988. Some Members of Congress intent on equitably distributing the suffering among all Americans want to bring back the draft. Administration officials vehemently deny making any concrete plans for a draft.

2007 Ron Paul 7:9
But why should we believe this? Look what happened when so many believed the reasons given for our preemptive invasion of Iraq. Selective Service officials admit running a check of their list of available young men. If the draft is reinstated, we probably will include young women as well to serve the God of equality. Conscription is slavery, plain and simple, and it was made illegal under the 13th amendment, which prohibits involuntary servitude. One may well be killed as a military draftee, which makes conscription a very dangerous kind of enslavement.

2007 Ron Paul 7:10
Instead of testing the efficacy of the Selective Service System and sending more troops off to a war that we are losing, we ought to revive our love of liberty. We should repeal the Selective Service Act. A free society should never depend on compulsory conscription to defend itself.

2007 Ron Paul 7:11
We get into trouble by not following the precepts of liberty or obeying the rule of law. Preemptive, undeclared wars fought under false pretenses are a road to disaster. If a full declaration of war by Congress had been demanded as the Constitution requires, this war never would have been fought.

2007 Ron Paul 7:12
If we did not create credit out of thin air, as the Constitution prohibits, we never would have convinced taxpayers to support this war directly by increased taxation. How long this financial charade can go on is difficult to judge, but when the end comes, it will not go unnoticed by any American.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 8
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Identity Theft Protection Act 5 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 4, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 8:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, today I introduce the Identity Theft Prevention Act. This act protects the American people from government- mandated uniform identifiers that facilitate private crime as well as the abuse of liberty. The major provision of the Identity Theft Prevention Act halts the practice of using the Social Security number as an identifier by requiring the Social Security Administration to issue all Americans new Social Security numbers within 5 years after the enactment of the bill. These new numbers will be the sole legal property of the recipient, and the Social Security Administration shall be forbidden to divulge the numbers for any purposes not related to Social Security administration. Social Security numbers issued before implementation of this bill shall no longer be considered valid federal identifiers. Of course, the Social Security Administration shall be able to use an individual’s original Social Security number to ensure efficient administration of the Social Security system.

2007 Ron Paul 8:2
Madame Speaker, Congress has a moral responsibility to address this problem because it was Congress that transformed the Social Security number into a national identifier. Thanks to Congress, today no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get a driver’s license without presenting his Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license!

2007 Ron Paul 8:3
One of the most disturbing abuses of the Social Security number is the congressionally- authorized rule forcing parents to get a Social Security number for their newborn children in order to claim the children as dependents. Forcing parents to register their children with the State is more like something out of the nightmares of George Orwell than the dreams of a free republic that inspired this nation’s founders.

2007 Ron Paul 8:4
Congressionally-mandated use of the Social Security number as an identifier facilitates the horrendous crime of identity theft. Thanks to Congress, an unscrupulous person may simply obtain someone’s Social Security number in order to access that person’s bank accounts, credit cards, and other financial assets. Many Americans have lost their life savings and had their credit destroyed as a result of identity theft. Yet the Federal Government continues to encourage such crimes by mandating use of the Social Security number as a uniform ID!

2007 Ron Paul 8:5
This act also forbids the Federal Government from creating national ID cards or establishing any identifiers for the purpose of investigating, monitoring, overseeing, or regulating private transactions among American citizens. In 2005, this body established a de facto national ID card with provisions buried in the “intelligence” reform bill mandating Federal standards for drivers” licenses, and mandating that Federal agents only accept a license that conforms to these standards as a valid ID.

2007 Ron Paul 8:6
Nationalizing standards for drivers’ licenses and birth certificates creates a national ID system pure and simple. Proponents of this scheme claim they are merely creating new standards for existing State IDs. However, imposing Federal standards in a Federal bill creates a federalized ID regardless of whether the ID itself is still stamped with the name of your State.

2007 Ron Paul 8:7
The national ID will be used to track the movements of American citizens, not just terrorists. Subjecting every citizen to surveillance diverts resources away from tracking and apprehending terrorists in favor of needless snooping on innocent Americans. This is what happened with “suspicious activity reports” required by the Bank Secrecy Act. Thanks to BSA mandates, Federal officials are forced to waste countless hours snooping through the private financial transactions of innocent Americans merely because those transactions exceeded $10,000.

2007 Ron Paul 8:8
Turning State-issued drivers licenses into federally controlled national ID cards is yet another Federal usurpation of State authority and another costly unfunded mandate imposed on the States. According to a report issued by the National Conference of State Legislators, turning drivers licenses into national ID cards will cost the States more than $11 billion.

2007 Ron Paul 8:9
Madam Speaker, no wonder there is a groundswell of opposition to this mandate. There is even a movement in several State legislatures to refuse to comply with this mandate! The Identity Theft Prevention Act not only repeals those sections of the Federal law creating a national UD, it forbids the Federal Government from using Federal funds to blackmail States into adopting uniform Federal identifiers. Passing the Identity Theft Prevention Act is thus an excellent way for this Congress to show renewed commitment to federalism and opposition to imposing unfunded mandates on the States.

2007 Ron Paul 8:10
This legislation not only repeals those sections of Federal law creating the national ID, it also repeals those sections of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 that require the Department of Health and Human Services to establish a uniform standard health identifier — an identifier which could be used to create a national database containing the medical history of all Americans. As an OB/GYN with more than 30 years in private practice, I know the importance of preserving the sanctity of the physician-patient relationship. Oftentimes, effective treatment depends on a patient’s ability to place absolute trust in his or her doctor. What will happen to that trust when patients know that any and all information given to their doctors will be placed in a government accessible database?

2007 Ron Paul 8:11
By putting an end to government-mandated uniform IDs, the Identity Theft Prevention Act will prevent millions of Americans from having their liberty, property, and privacy violated by private and public sector criminals.

2007 Ron Paul 8:12
Some members of Congress will claim that the Federal Government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that, in a constitutional republic, the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the jobs of government officials easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient.

2007 Ron Paul 8:13
Madam Speaker, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure that citizens’ rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the only effective privacy protection is to forbid the Federal Government from mandating national identifiers. Legislative “privacy protections” are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for a couple of reasons.

2007 Ron Paul 8:14
First, it is simply common sense that repealing those Federal laws that promote identity theft is more effective in protecting the public than expanding the power of the Federal police force. Federal punishment of identity thieves provides cold comfort to those who have suffered financial losses and the destruction of their good reputations as a result of identity theft.

2007 Ron Paul 8:15
Federal laws are not only ineffective in stopping private criminals, but these laws have not even stopped unscrupulous government officials from accessing personal information. After all, laws purporting to restrict the use of personal information did not stop the well-publicized violations of privacy by IRS officials or the FBI abuses of the Clinton and Nixon administrations.

2007 Ron Paul 8:16
In one of the most infamous cases of identity theft, thousands of active-duty soldiers and veterans had their personal information stolen, putting them at risk of identity theft. Imagine the dangers if thieves are able to obtain the universal identifier, and other personal information, of millions of Americans simply by breaking, or hacking, into one government facility or one government database?

2007 Ron Paul 8:17
Second, the Federal Government has been creating proprietary interests in private information for certain State-favored special interests. Perhaps the most outrageous example of phony privacy protection is the “medical privacy’ ” regulation, that allows medical researchers, certain business interests, and law enforcement officials access to health care information, in complete disregard of the Fifth Amendment and the wishes of individual patients! Obviously, “privacy protection” laws have proven greatly inadequate to protect personal information when the government is the one seeking the information.

2007 Ron Paul 8:18
Any action short of repealing laws authorizing privacy violations is insufficient primarily because the Federal Government lacks constitutional authority to force citizens to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any Federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the Federal Government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advice and “bind (the Federal Government) down with the chains of the Constitution.”

2007 Ron Paul 8:19
Madam Speaker, those members who are not persuaded by the moral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Identity Theft Prevention Act should consider the American people’s opposition to national identifiers. The numerous complaints over the evergrowing uses of the Social Security number show that Americans want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Furthermore, according to a survey by the Gallup company, 91 percent of the American people oppose forcing Americans to obtain a universal health ID.

2007 Ron Paul 8:20
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I once again call on my colleagues to join me in putting an end to the Federal Government’s unconstitutional use of national identifiers to monitor the actions of private citizens. National identifiers threaten all Americans by exposing them to the threat of identity theft by private criminals and abuse of their liberties by public criminals, while diverting valuable law enforcement resources away from addressing real threats to public safety. In addition, national identifiers are incompatible with a limited, constitutional government. I, therefore, hope my colleagues will join my efforts to protect the freedom of their constituents by supporting the Identity Theft Prevention Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 9
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing We The People 5 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, January 5, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 9:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the We the People Act. The We the People Act forbids federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from adjudicating cases concerning state laws and polices relating to religious liberties or “privacy,” including cases involving sexual practices, sexual orientation or reproduction. The We the People Act also protects the traditional definition of marriage from judicial activism by ensuring the Supreme Court cannot abuse the equal protection clause to redefine marriage. In order to hold federal judges accountable for abusing their powers, the act also provides that a judge who violates the act’s limitations on judicial power shall either be impeached by Congress or removed by the president, according to rules established by the Congress.

2007 Ron Paul 9:2
The United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to establish and limit the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts and limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Founders intended Congress to use this authority to correct abuses of power by the federal judiciary.

2007 Ron Paul 9:3
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.

2007 Ron Paul 9:4
In recent years, we have seen numerous abuses of power by Federal courts. Federal judges regularly strike down state and local laws on subjects such as religious liberty, sexual orientation, family relations, education, and abortion. This government by Federal judiciary causes a virtual nullification of the Tenth Amendment’s limitations on federal power. Furthermore, when federal judges impose their preferred polices on state and local governments, instead of respecting the polices adopted by those elected by, and thus accountable to, the people, republican government is threatened. Article IV, section 4 of the Untied States Constitution guarantees each state a republican form of government. Thus, Congress must act when the executive or judicial branch threatens the republican governments of the individual states. Therefore, Congress has a responsibility to stop Federal judges from running roughshod over state and local laws. The Founders would certainly have supported congressional action to reign in Federal judges who tell citizens where they can and can’t place manger scenes at Christmas.

2007 Ron Paul 9:5
Madam 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 policies 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 policies regarding issues such as marriage and school prayer.

2007 Ron Paul 9:6
Unless Congress acts, a state’s authority to define and regulate marriage may be the next victim of activist judges. After all, such a decision would simply take the Supreme Court’s decision in the Lawrence case, which overturned all state sodomy laws, to its logical conclusion. Congress must launch a preemptive strike against any further federal usurpation of the states’ authority to regulate marriage by removing issues concerning the definition of marriage from the jurisdiction of federal courts.

2007 Ron Paul 9:7
Although marriage is licensed and otherwise regulated by the states, government did not create the institution of marriage. Government regulation of marriage is based on state recognition of the practices and customs formulated by private individuals interacting in civil institutions, such as churches and synagogues. Having federal officials, whether judges, bureaucrats, or congressmen, impose a new definition of marriage on the people is an act of social engineering profoundly hostile to liberty.

2007 Ron Paul 9:8
It is long past time that Congress exercises its authority to protect the republican government of the states from out-of-control federal judges. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the We the People Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 10
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Against Raising The Minimum Wage 10 January 2007

2007 Ron Paul 10:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, the announced purpose of H.R. 2 is to raise living standards for all Americans. This is certainly an admirable goal, however, to believe that Congress can raise the standard of living for working Americans by simply forcing employers to pay their employees a higher wage is equivalent to claiming that Congress can repeal gravity by passing a law saying humans shall have the ability to fly.

2007 Ron Paul 10:2
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?

2007 Ron Paul 10:3
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.

2007 Ron Paul 10:4
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.”

2007 Ron Paul 10:5
Mr. Speaker, I do not wish my opposition to this bill to be misconstrued as counseling inaction. Quite the contrary, Congress must enact an ambitious program of tax cuts and regulatory reform to remove government-created obstacles to job growth. However, Mr. Speaker, opponents of H.R. 2 should not fool themselves into believing that adding a package of tax cuts to the bill will compensate for the damage inflicted on small businesses and their employees by the minimum wage increase. Saying that an increase in the minimum wage is acceptable if combined with tax cuts assumes that Congress is omnipotent and thus can strike a perfect balance between tax cuts and regulations so that no firm, or worker, in the country is adversely affected by Federal policies. If the 20th Century taught us anything it was that any and all attempts to centrally plan an economy, especially one as large and diverse as America’s, are doomed to fail.

2007 Ron Paul 10:6
In conclusion, I would remind my colleagues that while it may make them feel good to raise the Federal minimum wage, the real life consequences of this bill will be vested upon those who can least afford to be deprived of work opportunities. Therefore, rather than pretend that Congress can repeal the economic principles, I urge my colleagues to reject this legislation and instead embrace a program of tax cuts and regulatory reform to strengthen the greatest producer of jobs and prosperity in human history: the free market.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 11
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Governmental Funding Of Embryonic Stem Cell Research 11 January 2007

2007 Ron Paul 11:1
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.

2007 Ron Paul 11:2
The main question that should concern Congress today is does the United States Government have the constitutional authority to fund any form of stem cell research. The clear answer to that question is no. A proper constitutional position would reject federal funding for stem cell research, while allowing the individual states and private citizens to decide whether to permit, ban, or fund this research.

2007 Ron Paul 11:3
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.

2007 Ron Paul 11:4
In order to promote private medical research, I will introduce the Cures Can Be Found Act. The Cures Can Be Found Act 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.

2007 Ron Paul 11:5
The Cures Can Be Found Act 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.

2007 Ron Paul 11:6
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.

2007 Ron Paul 11:7
Mr. Speaker, there is no question that forcing taxpayers to subsidize embryonic stem cell research violates basic constitutional principles. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote against HR 3, and support the Cures Can Be Found Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 12
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Escalation Is Hardly The Answer 11 January 2007

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

2007 Ron Paul 12:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, a military victory in Iraq is unattainable, just as it was in the Vietnam War. At the close of the Vietnam War in 1975, a telling conversation took place between a North Vietnamese colonel named Tu and an American colonel named Harry Summers. Colonel Summers said to Tu, You know, you never beat us on the battlefield. And Tu replied, That may be so, but it is also irrelevant.

2007 Ron Paul 12:2
It is likewise irrelevant to seek military victory in Iraq. As conditions deteriorate in Iraq, the American people are told more blood must be spilled to achieve just such a military victory. 21,000 additional troops and another $100 billion are needed for a surge, yet the people remain rightfully skeptical.

2007 Ron Paul 12:3
Though we have been in Iraq for nearly 4 years, the meager goal today simply is to secure Baghdad. This hardly shows that the mission is even partly accomplished.

2007 Ron Paul 12:4
Astonishingly, American taxpayers now will be forced to finance a multi- billion dollar jobs program in Iraq. Suddenly the war is about jobs. We export our manufacturing jobs to Asia, and now we plan to export our welfare jobs to Iraq, all at the expense of the poor and the middle class here at home.

2007 Ron Paul 12:5
Plans are being made to become more ruthless in achieving stability in Iraq. It appears Muqtada al Sadr will be on the receiving end of our military efforts, despite his overwhelming support among large segments of the Iraqi people.

2007 Ron Paul 12:6
It is interesting to note that one excuse given for our failure is leveled at the Iraqis themselves: they have not done enough, we are told, and are difficult to train. Yet no one complains that the Mahdi or the Kurdish militias, the Badr Brigade, the real Iraqi Government, not our appointed government, are not well trained. Our problems obviously have nothing to do with training Iraqis to fight, but instead with loyalties and motivations.

2007 Ron Paul 12:7
We claim to be spreading democracy in Iraq. But al Sadr has far more democratic support with the majority Shiites than our troops enjoy. The problem is not a lack of democratic consensus; it is the antipathy among most Iraqis.

2007 Ron Paul 12:8
In real estate, the three important considerations are: location, location, location. In Iraq, the three conditions are: occupation, occupation, occupation. Nothing can improve in Iraq until we understand that our occupation is the primary source of the chaos and killing. We are a foreign occupying force strongly resented by the majority of Iraqi citizens.

2007 Ron Paul 12:9
Our inability to adapt to the tactics of fourth-generation warfare compounds our military failure. Unless we understand this, even doubling our troop strength will not solve the problems created by our occupation.

2007 Ron Paul 12:10
The talk of a troop surge and jobs program in Iraq only distracts Americans from the very real possibility of an attack on Iran. Our growing naval presence in the region and our harsh rhetoric towards Iran are unsettling. Securing the Horn of Africa and sending Ethiopian troops into Somalia do not bode well for world peace, yet these developments are almost totally ignored by Congress.

2007 Ron Paul 12:11
Rumors are flying about when, not if, Iran will be bombed by either Israel or the United States, possibly with nuclear weapons. Our CIA says Iran is 10 years away from producing a nuclear bomb and has no delivery system, but this does not impede our plans to keep everything on the table when dealing with Iran.

2007 Ron Paul 12:12
We should remember that Iran, like Iraq, is a third world nation without a significant military. Nothing in history hints that she is likely to invade a neighboring country, let alone do anything to America or Israel.

2007 Ron Paul 12:13
I am concerned, however, that a contrived Gulf of Tonkin type incident may well occur to gain popular support for an attack on Iran. Even if such an attack is carried out by Israel over U.S. objections, we will be politically and morally culpable, since we provided the weapons and dollars to make it possible.

2007 Ron Paul 12:14
Mr. Speaker, let’s hope I am wrong about this one.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 13
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of Legislation To Repeal The Selective Service Act And Related Parts Of The United States Code 11 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 11, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 13:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am today introducing legislation to repeal the Selective Service Act and related parts of the United States Code. The Department of Defense, in response to calls to reinstate the draft, has confirmed that conscription serves no military need.

2007 Ron Paul 13:2
In his December confirmation hearings, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated his opposition to a military draft. Secretary Gates’ immediate predecessor, Donald Rumsfield, also publicly opposed reinstating the draft. The opposition of the two most recent Defense Secretaries is only the most recent confirmation that the draft serves no military purpose.

2007 Ron Paul 13:3
Obviously, if there is no military need for the draft, then there is no need for Selective Service registration. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, Selective Service registration is an outdated and outmoded system, which has been made obsolete by technological advances.

2007 Ron Paul 13:4
In fact, in 1993, the Department of Defense issued a report stating that registration could be stopped “with no effect on military mobilization and no measurable effect on the time it would take to I mobilize, and no measurable effect on military recruitment.” Yet the American taxpayer has been forced to spend over $500 million dollars on an outdated system “with no measurable effect on military mobilization!”

2007 Ron Paul 13:5
Shutting down Selective Service will give taxpayers a break without adversely affecting military efforts. Shutting down Selective Service will also end a program that violates the very principals of individual liberty our Nation was founded upon. The moral case against the draft was eloquently expressed by former President Ronald Regan in the publication Human Events in 1979: “. . . it [conscription] rests on the assumption that your kids belong to the state. If we buy that assumption then it is for the state — not for parents, the community, the religious institutions or teachers — to decide who shall have what values and who shall do what work, when, where and how in our society. That assumption isn’t a new one. The Nazis thought it was a great idea.”

2007 Ron Paul 13:6
I hope all my colleagues join me in working to shut down this un-American relic of a bygone era and help realize the financial savings land the gains to individual liberties that can be achieved by ending Selective Service registration.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 14
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Reform Medicare To Give Seniors More Choice 12 January 2007

2007 Ron Paul 14:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4 gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services the authority to engage in direct negotiations with pharmaceutical companies regarding the prices the companies will charge Medicare when the companies provide drugs through the Part D program. Contrary to the claims of its opponents, this bill does not interfere with a free market by giving the government new power to impose price controls. Before condemning this bill for creating “price controls” or moving toward “socialized medicine,” my colleagues should keep in mind that there is not, and cannot be, a free market price for a government-subsidized good.

2007 Ron Paul 14:2
Members concerned about preserving a free market in pharmaceuticals should have opposed the legislation creating Part D in 2003. It is odd to hear champions of the largest, and most expensive, federal entitlement program since the Great Society pose as defenders of the free market.

2007 Ron Paul 14:3
The result of subsidizing the demand for prescription drugs through Part D was to raise prices above what they would be in a free market. This was easily foreseeable to anyone who understands basic economics. Direct negotiation is a means of ensuring that the increase in demand does not unduly burden taxpayers and that, pharmaceutical companies, while adequately compensated, they do not obtain an excessive amount of Medicare funds.

2007 Ron Paul 14:4
The argument that direct negotiations will restrict Medicare beneficiaries’ access to the prescription drugs of their choice assumes that the current Part D system gives seniors control over what pharmaceuticals they can use. However, under Part D, seniors must enroll in HMO-like entities that decide for them what drugs they can and cannot obtain. My district office staff has heard from numerous seniors who are unable to obtain their drugs of choice from their Part D providers. Mr. Speaker, I favor reforming Medicare to give seniors more control and choice in their health care, and, if H.R. 4 were a threat to this objective, I would oppose it.

2007 Ron Paul 14:5
Federal spending on Part D is expected to grow by $100 billion in 2007. It would be fiscally irresponsible for this Congress not to act to address those costs. I recognize that giving the Department of Health and Human Services the authority to engage in direct negotiations neither fixes the long-term problems with Medicare nor does empowers senior to control their own health care. However, we are not being given the opportunity to vote for a true pro-freedom, pro-senior alternative today. Instead, we are asked to choose between two flawed proposals — keeping Part D as it is or allowing the Department of Health and Human Services to negotiate prescription drug prices for the Part D program. Since I believe that direct negotiations will benefit taxpayers and Medicare beneficiaries by reducing the costs of prescription drugs, I intend to vote for this bill.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 15
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Sunlight Rule 12 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, January 12, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 15:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously said, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” In order to shine sunlight on the practices of the House of Representatives, and thus restore public trust and integrity to this institution, I am introducing the sunlight rule, which amends House rules to ensure that members have adequate time to study a bill before being asked to vote on it. One of the chief causes of increasing public cynicism regarding Congress is the way major pieces of legislation are brought to the floor without members having an opportunity to read the bills. For example, concerns have been raised that in the opening days of the 110th Congress, legislation dealing with important topics such as national security are being brought to the floor before members have had an opportunity to adequately study the legislation.

2007 Ron Paul 15:2
In past Congresses, it was all-too-common to see large Appropriations bills rushed to the floor of the House in late-night sessions at the end of the year. For example, the House voted on the Fiscal Year 2006 Defense Appropriations Conference Report at approximately 4 a.m. — just four hours after the report was filed. Yet, the report contained language dealing with avian flu, including controversial language regarding immunity liability for vaccine manufacturers, that was added in the House- Senate conference on the bill. Considering legislation on important issues in this manner is a dereliction of our duty as the people’s elected representatives.

2007 Ron Paul 15:3
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 ten 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 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.

2007 Ron Paul 15:4
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.

2007 Ron Paul 15:5
Madam Speaker, the practice of rushing bills to the floor before individual members have had a chance to study the bills is one of the major factors contributing to public distrust of Congress. Voting on bills before members have had time to study them makes a mockery of representative government and cheats the voters who sent us here to make informed decisions on public policy. Adopting the sunlight rule is one of, if not the, most important changes to the House rules this Congress could make to restore public trust in, and help preserve the integrity of, this institution. I hope my colleagues will support this change to the House rules.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 16
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Cures Can be Found Act 12 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, January 12, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 16:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Cures Can Be Found Act. This legislation promotes medical research by providing a tax credit for investments and donations to promote adult and umbilical cord blood stem cell research, and provides a $2,000 tax credit to new parents for the donation of umbilical cord blood that can be used to extract stem cells.

2007 Ron Paul 16:2
Madam Speaker, stem cell research has the potential to revolutionize medicine. Stem cells could hold the keys to curing many diseases afflicting millions of Americans, such as diabetes and Alzheimer’s. Umbilical cord blood stem cells have already been used to treat 67 diseases, including sickle cell disease, leukemia, and osteoporosis. Umbilical cord blood stem cells have also proven useful in treating spinal cord injuries and certain neurological disorders. Adult stem cells have shown promise in treating a wide variety of diseases ranging from brain, breast, testicular, and other types of cancers to multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s, heart damage, and rheumatoid arthritis. Just this week, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times ran major stories on the progress made in obtaining stem cells from amniotic fluid, which is easily obtainable from a pregnant woman during routine pre-natal tests.

2007 Ron Paul 16:3
By providing tax incentives for adult and umbilical cord blood stem cell research, 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 formally incurable diseases.

2007 Ron Paul 16:4
By encouraging private medical research, the Cures Can Be Found Act enhances a 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. I urge my colleagues to help the American people support the efforts of future Jonas Salks by cosponsoring the Cures Can Be Found Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 17
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Happy Birthday To Muhammad Ali 17 January 2007

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my distinguished colleague from the State of Texas (Mr. PAUL).

(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding this time to me.

2007 Ron Paul 17:1
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 58. I saw Muhammad Ali as a man of great courage, and I admired him for this, not because of the courage that it took to get in a ring and fight men bigger than he, but because of his stance in 1967.

2007 Ron Paul 17:2
In 1967, he was 25 years old. He was the heavyweight champion of the world, and for religious beliefs, he practiced what Martin Luther King made popular, civil disobedience, because he disagreed with the war. I thought his comments were rather astute at the time and were not complex, but he merely said, I have no quarrel with the Viet-Cong. He said the Viet- Cong never called him a name, and because of his religious convictions, he said he did not want to serve in the military. He stood firm, a man of principle, and I really admired this as a quality.

2007 Ron Paul 17:3
He is known, of course, for his athletic skills and his humanitarian concerns, and these are rightly mentioned in a resolution like this. But I do want to emphasize this because, to me, it was so important and had such impact, in reality, what Muhammad Ali did eventually led to getting rid of the draft, and yet we as a people and we as a Congress still do not have the conviction that Muhammad Ali had, because we still have the selective service; we say, let us not draft now, but when the conditions are right, we will bring back the draft and bring back those same problems that we had in the 1960s.

2007 Ron Paul 17:4
I see what Muhammad Ali did as being very great. He deserves this recognition, but we should also praise him for being a man of principle and willing to give up his title for 3 years at the age of 25 at the prime of his career. How many of us give up something to stand on principle? He was a man of principle. He believed it and he stood firm, so even those who may disagree with his position may say at least he stood up for what he believed in. He suffered the consequences and fortunately was eventually vindicated.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 18
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones 17 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, January 17, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 18:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I would like to place the following article written by eminent conservative commentator Patrick Buchanan into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. In this fine op-ed, Mr. Buchanan makes reference to the recent efforts by my colleague and good friend, Rep. WALTER JONES, JR, to derail the march to war with Iran. I am very pleased to have been an original co-sponsor of the legislation referenced by Mr. Buchanan, H.J. Res. 14, which puts forth the very simple idea that if we are going to have a war with Iran we must follow the Constitution. The resolution clarifies the fact that the President shall consult with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant to law from Congress, prior to initiating any use of military force against Iran. I hope my colleagues will read this article closely and consider what Mr. Buchanan has written — and what Rep. JONES is trying to do.

2007 Ron Paul 18:2
JANUARY 16, 2007.
MR. BUSH, MEET WALTER JONES
(By Patrick J. Buchanan) America is four years into a bloody debacle in Iraq not merely because Bush and Cheney marched us in, or simply because neocon propagandists lied about Saddam’s nuclear program and WMD, and Iraqi ties to al- Qaeda, anthrax attacks, and 9/11.

2007 Ron Paul 18:3
We are there because a Democratic Senate voted to give Bush a blank check for war. Democrats in October 2002 wanted the war vote behind them so they could go home and campaign as pro-war patriots.

2007 Ron Paul 18:4
And because they did, 3,000 Americans are dead, 25,000 are wounded, perhaps 100,000 Iraqis have lost their lives, 1.6 million have fled, $400 billion has been lost, and America stands on the precipice of the worst strategic defeat in her history.

2007 Ron Paul 18:5
Yet, Sens. Clinton, Biden, Kerry, and Edwards — all of whom voted to give Bush his blank check — are now competing to succeed him. And how do they justify what they did?

2007 Ron Paul 18:6
“If only we had known then what we know now,” they plead, “we would never have voted for the war.” They are thus confessing to dereliction in the highest duty the Founding Fathers gave Congress. They voted to cede to a president their power to take us to war.

2007 Ron Paul 18:7
Now they wash their hands of it all and say, “It’s Bush’s war!” And now George Bush has another war in mind.

2007 Ron Paul 18:8
In his Jan. 11 address, Bush said that to defend the “territorial integrity” of Iraq, the United States must address “Iran and Syria.”

2007 Ron Paul 18:9
“These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.”

2007 Ron Paul 18:10
The city sat bolt upright. If Bush was talking about Iranian agents inside Iraq, he has no need of a second aircraft carrier in the Gulf, nor for those Patriot missiles he is sending to our allies.

2007 Ron Paul 18:11
But does Bush have the authority to take us to war against Iran?

2007 Ron Paul 18:12
On ABC last Sunday, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, while denying Bush intends to attack Iran, nonetheless did not deny Bush had the authority to escalate the war — right into Iran.

2007 Ron Paul 18:13
George Stephanopoulos: “So you don’t believe you have the authority to go into Iran?”

2007 Ron Paul 18:14
Stephen Hadley: “I didn’t say that. That is another issue. Any time you have questions about crossing international borders, there are legal questions.”

2007 Ron Paul 18:15
Any doubt how Attorney General Gonzales would come down on those “legal questions”? Any doubt how the Supreme Court would rule?

2007 Ron Paul 18:16
Biden sputters that should Bush attack Iran, a constitutional crisis would ensue.

2007 Ron Paul 18:17
I don’t believe it. If tomorrow Bush took out Iran’s nuclear facilities, would a Senate that lacks the courage to cut funds for an unpopular war really impeach him for denying a nuclear capability to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Bush’s lawyers would make the same case Nixon made for the 1970 “incursion” into Cambodia — and even a Nixon- hating Democratic House did not dare to impeach him for that.

2007 Ron Paul 18:18
Bush’s contempt for Congress is manifest and, frankly, justified.

2007 Ron Paul 18:19
Asked if Congress could stop him from surging 21,500 troops into Iraq, Bush on 60 Minutes brushed aside Congress as irrelevant.

2007 Ron Paul 18:20
“I fully understand [the Congress] could try to stop me from doing it. But I’ve made my decision. And we’re going forward.” Asked if he had sole authority “to put the troops in there no matter what the Congress wants to do,” Bush replied, “In this situation I do, yeah.”

2007 Ron Paul 18:21
Is Congress then impotent, if it does not want war on Iran?

2007 Ron Paul 18:22
Enter Rep. Walter Jones, Republican of North Carolina.

2007 Ron Paul 18:23
The day after Bush’s threat to Iran, Jones introduced a Joint Resolution, “Concerning the Use of Military Force by the United States Against Iran.” Under HJR 14, “Absent a national emergency created by attack by Iran, or a demonstrably imminent attack by Iran, upon the United States, its territories, possessions, or its armed forces, the President shall consult with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant to law from Congress, prior to initiating any use of force on Iran.”

2007 Ron Paul 18:24
Jones’ resolution further declares, “No provision of law enacted before the date of the enactment of this joint resolution shall be construed to authorize the use of military force by the United States against Iran.”

2007 Ron Paul 18:25
If we are going to war on Iran, Jones is saying, we must follow the Constitution and Congress must authorize it.

2007 Ron Paul 18:26
If Biden, Kerry, Clinton, and Obama refuse to sign on to the Jones resolution, they will be silently conceding that Bush indeed does have the power to start a war on Iran. And America should pay no further attention to the Democrats’ wailing about being misled on the Iraq war.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 19
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

College Student Relief Act Of 2007 17 January 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, January 17, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 19:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, anyone who knows a recent college graduate is well aware of the way many young people struggle to pay their student loans. By slightly reducing the interest rate on student loans, H.R. 5, while far from perfect, will help ease this burden. A commendable feature of this bill is that, instead of placing new burdens on taxpayers, it pays for the reduction in interest rates by reducing subsidies to financial institutions. Thus, the bill does not increase the deficit, taxes, or the size or scope of government.

2007 Ron Paul 19:2
All-too-often, government programs, which the taxpaying public believes help lower-income Americans, actually provide government subsidies for politically powerful business interests. For example, in the student loan program under discussion today, taxpayer dollars are provided to financial institutions in return for those institutions agreeing to provide student loans under terms set by the government. By reducing subsidies for financial institutions in order to benefit recent graduates, H.R. 5 takes a step toward ensuring the student loan program actually focuses on helping students and recent graduates, instead of using taxpayer dollars for a disguised form of corporate welfare.

2007 Ron Paul 19:3
In addition to passing H.R. 5, Congress should also help more Americans afford college by passing my Make College Affordable Act, H.R. 193, that makes college tuition tax deductible. There has been talk of bringing legislation like H.R. 193 to the floor later this year. I hope all my colleagues — regardless of their positions on the bill before us today — can unite behind helping middle- and working- class Americans afford college by supporting my Make College Affordable Act or similar legislation.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 20
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Everyone Supports The Troops 18 January 2007

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

2007 Ron Paul 20:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I have never met anyone who did not support our troops. Sometimes, however, we hear accusations that someone or some group does not support the men and women serving in our Armed Forces. But this is pure demagoguery, and it is intellectually dishonest. The accusers play on emotions to gain support for controversial policies, implying that those who disagree are unpatriotic. But keeping our troops out of harm’s way, especially when the war is unnecessary, is never unpatriotic. There is no better way to support the troops.

2007 Ron Paul 20:2
Since we now know that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and was not threatening anyone, we must come to terms with 3,000 American deaths and 23,000 American casualties. It is disconcerting that those who never believed the justifications given for our invasion and who, now, want the war ended, are still accused of not supporting the troops. This is strange, indeed.

2007 Ron Paul 20:3
Instead of questioning who has the best interest of our troops at heart, we should be debating which policy is best for our country. Defensive wars to preserve our liberties, fought only with proper congressional declarations are legitimate. Casualties under such circumstances still are heartbreaking, but they are understandable. Casualties that occur in undeclared, unnecessary wars, however, are bewildering. Why must so many Americans be killed or hurt in Iraq when our security and our liberty were never threatened?

2007 Ron Paul 20:4
Cliches about supporting the troops are designed to distract from failed policies, policies promoted by powerful special interests that benefit from war, anything to steer the discussion away from the real reasons the war in Iraq will not end anytime soon.

2007 Ron Paul 20:5
Many now agree that we must change our policy and extricate ourselves from the mess in Iraq. They cite a mandate from the American people for a new direction. This opinion is now more popular and, thus, now more wildly held by politicians in Washington. But there is always a qualifier. We can’t simply stop funding the war because we must support the troops. I find this conclusion bizarre. It means one either believes the support-the-troops propaganda put out by the original promoters of the war, or that one actually is for the war after all, despite the public protestations.

2007 Ron Paul 20:6
In reality, support for the status quo and the President’s troop surge in Iraq means expanding the war to include Syria and Iran. The naval buildup in the region and the proxy war we just fought to take over Somalia demonstrate the administration’s intention to escalate our current war into something larger.

2007 Ron Paul 20:7
There is just no legitimacy to the argument that voting against funding the war somehow harms our troops. Perpetuating and escalating the war only serves those whose egos are attached to some claimed victory in Iraq and those with a determination to engineer regime change in Iran.

2007 Ron Paul 20:8
Don’t believe for a minute that additional congressional funding is needed so our troops can defend themselves or extricate themselves from the war zone. That is nonsense. The DOD has hundreds of billions of dollars in the pipeline available to move troops anywhere on Earth, including home.

2007 Ron Paul 20:9
We shouldn’t forget that the administration took $600 million from the war in Afghanistan and used it in Iraq before any direct appropriations were made for the invasion of Iraq. Funds are always available to put troops in harm’s way. They, likewise, are always available for leaving a war zone.

2007 Ron Paul 20:10
Those in Congress who claim they want the war ended, yet feel compelled to keep funding it, are badly misguided. They either are wrong in their assessment that cutting funds would hurt the troops, or they need to be more honest about supporting a policy destined to dramatically increase the size and the scope of this war. Rest assured, one can be patriotic and truly support the troops by denying funds to perpetuate and spread this ill-advised war.

2007 Ron Paul 20:11
The sooner we come to this realization, the better it will be for all of us.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 21
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Don’t Do It, Mr. President 6 February 2007

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

2007 Ron Paul 21:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, if the President were to ask me for advice on foreign affairs, this is what I would say: Don’t do it, Mr. President. It is a bad idea. There is no need for it. There is great danger in doing it. America is against it, and Congress should be. The United Nations is against it. The Russians, the Chinese, the Indians, the Pakistanis are against it. The whole world is against it. Our allies are against it. Our enemies are against it. The Arabs are against it. The Europeans are against it. The Muslims are against it.

2007 Ron Paul 21:2
We don’t need to do this. The threat is overblown. The plan is a hysterical reaction to a problem that does not yet exist. Hysteria is never a good basis for foreign policy. Don’t we ever learn? Have we already forgotten Iraq?

2007 Ron Paul 21:3
The plan defies common sense. If it is carried out, the Middle East and possibly the world will explode. Oil will soar to over $100 a barrel, and gasoline will be over $5 a gallon.

2007 Ron Paul 21:4
Despite what some think, it won’t serve the interests of Israel. Besides, it is illegal. It is unconstitutional. And, Mr. President, you have no moral authority to do it.

2007 Ron Paul 21:5
We don’t need it. We don’t want it. So, Mr. President, don’t do it. Don’t bomb Iran.

2007 Ron Paul 21:6
The moral of the story, Mr. Speaker, is this: If you don’t have a nuclear weapon, we will threaten to attack you. If you do have a nuclear weapon, we will leave you alone. In fact, we will probably subsidize you. What makes us think Iran does not understand this?

2007 Ron Paul 21:7
Mr. Speaker, I would like now to yield to my friend from North Carolina (Mr. JONES).

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 22
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Thanks Rep. Jones 6 February 2007

Mr. JONES. I want to thank you, RON PAUL, for always being a spokesman and a protector of the Constitution.

2007 Ron Paul 22:1
Mr. PAUL. I thank you very much for those comments.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 23
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Does Anybody Care? Has Anybody Noticed? 7 February 2007

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

2007 Ron Paul 23:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, does anybody care, has anybody noticed, that:

2007 Ron Paul 23:2
Our policy toward Iran is hostile and provocative, and thus war seems inevitable?

2007 Ron Paul 23:3
That we have seized Iranians in Iraq, who claim they are diplomats, and now we have announced that any Iranians found in Iraq may be shot?

2007 Ron Paul 23:4
Has anybody noticed that large numbers of Iranians go back and forth into Iraq for many reasons, including family, religious and medical reasons, and probably for their own security as well?

2007 Ron Paul 23:5
Iraq Prime Minister Maliki has expressed opposition to the surge of U.S. troops?

2007 Ron Paul 23:6
That the violence in Iraq has sharply escalated since Saddam Hussein was hanged?

2007 Ron Paul 23:7
That the American electorate voted for deescalation of the war, and yet the war is being expanded with no new strategic goals?

2007 Ron Paul 23:8
That Iraqi officials, from the government we installed, have held conciliatory talks with Iranian officials, something we refuse to do?

2007 Ron Paul 23:9
That our own CIA acknowledges that Iran is not likely to have a nuclear weapon for at least 10 more years?

2007 Ron Paul 23:10
That Iran has a right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, yet we claim they do not? By denying this right to Iran, we actually are violating the NPT.

2007 Ron Paul 23:11
The neoconservative propagandists promote the idea that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaks for the Iranian people and her government, even though he lacks real power, in order to stir up hatred and generate popular support for an attack on Iran?

2007 Ron Paul 23:12
We completely ignore the leaders of Iran’s National Security Council who have made reasonable statements about the United States and are open to direct talks with us?

2007 Ron Paul 23:13
That our threats and sanctions against Iran compound the problem by unifying the Iranians against us and undermining the moderates who are favorable toward America?

2007 Ron Paul 23:14
The latest accusations against Iran sound like a replay of the same charges against Iraq 5 years ago?

2007 Ron Paul 23:15
But not only does Iran not have a nuclear weapon, it has no significant military power; it is a Third World nation that could be wiped off the face of the Earth by the U.S. or by Israel if it ever attempted hostilities toward us?

2007 Ron Paul 23:16
One thing for sure, the Iranians are not suicidal?

2007 Ron Paul 23:17
But our policies toward Pakistan, India and North Korea serve as a great incentive for nations to seek a nuclear weapon, and thus gain respect at home and abroad while greatly lessening the odds of being attacked by us?

2007 Ron Paul 23:18
The promoters of military confrontation, who glibly criticize those who do not support preemptive, aggressive war are themselves the most extreme diplomatic isolationists, refusing any dialogue with our enemies or potential enemies?

2007 Ron Paul 23:19
There is no definition for victory in Iraq, and our goals are constantly changing, while the supporters of the war refuse to recognize that a war without purpose, by definition, cannot be won?

2007 Ron Paul 23:20
That it is now argued that after 4 years of killing, we cannot leave Iraq because a worse chaos would ensue?

2007 Ron Paul 23:21
That the U.S. naval buildup in the Persian Gulf has ominous overtones, none peaceful?

2007 Ron Paul 23:22
The world is preparing for a significant escalation of hostilities in the region, but are the American people prepared?

2007 Ron Paul 23:23
Most Americans in the November election asked for something quite different?

2007 Ron Paul 23:24
Our proxy war to bring about regime change in Somalia and gain control of the Horn of Africa scarcely has been noticed by the American public or the politicians in Washington?

2007 Ron Paul 23:25
That few observers noticed that we have placed in power some of the same warlords who humiliated us in 1993 in Mogadishu?

2007 Ron Paul 23:26
That the empty slogan “War on Terror” has no meaning and, therefore, it has no end?

2007 Ron Paul 23:27
That it serves as an excuse for endless war, anyplace, anytime.

2007 Ron Paul 23:28
That terrorism is a mere tactic and does not describe the nature of the enemy?

2007 Ron Paul 23:29
That acts by criminal gangs do not justify remaking the Middle East and Central Asia?

2007 Ron Paul 23:30
The careless support for this international war on terrorism has permitted the U.S. to intervene militarily and to bring about regime change in three countries: Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia. Now we are provoking Iran so we can have an excuse to do the same thing there. But who knows, maybe we will have to deal with a regime change in Pakistan first, a regime change that will not be to our liking.

2007 Ron Paul 23:31
Let us hope Congress comes to its senses soon and starts to defund our interventionist policies before we go broke. Time is short.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 24
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Liberty Amendment 7 February 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 7, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 24:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Liberty Amendment, which repeals the 16th Amendment, thus paving the way for real change in the way government collects and spends the people’s hard-earned money. The Liberty Amendment also explicitly forbids the federal government from performing any action not explicitly authorized by the United States Constitution.

2007 Ron Paul 24:2
The 16th Amendment gives the federal government a direct claim on the lives of American citizens by enabling Congress to levy a direct income tax on individuals. Until the passage of the 16th amendment, the Supreme Court had consistently held that Congress had no power to impose an income tax.

2007 Ron Paul 24:3
Income taxes are responsible for the transformation of the federal government from one of limited powers into a vast leviathan whose tentacles reach into almost every aspect of American life. Thanks to the income tax, today the federal government routinely invades our privacy, and penalizes our every endeavor.

2007 Ron Paul 24:4
The Founding Fathers realized that “the power to tax is the power to destroy,” which is why they did not give the federal government the power to impose an income tax. Needless to say, the Founders would be horrified to know that Americans today give more than a third of their income to the federal government.

2007 Ron Paul 24:5
Income taxes not only diminish liberty, they retard economic growth by discouraging work and production. Our current tax system also forces Americans to waste valuable time and money on complacence with an ever-more complex tax code. The increased interest in flat-tax and national sales tax proposals, as well as the increasing number of small businesses that questioning the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) “withholding” system provides further proof that America is tired of the labyrinthine tax code. Americans are also increasingly fed up with an IRS that continues to ride roughshod over their civil liberties, despite recent “pro-taxpayer” reforms.

2007 Ron Paul 24:6
Madam Speaker, America survived and prospered for 140 years without an income tax, and with a federal government that generally adhered to strictly constitutional functions, operating with modest excise revenues. The income tax opened the door to the era (and errors) of Big Government. I hope my colleagues will help close that door by cosponsoring the Liberty Amendment.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 25
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Industrial Hemp Farming Act 13 February 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, February 13, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 25:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Industrial Hemp Farming Act. The Industrial Hemp Farming Act requires the Federal Government to respect State laws allowing the growing of industrial hemp.

2007 Ron Paul 25:2
Seven States — Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Montana, North Dakota, and West Virginia — allow industrial hemp production or research in accord with State laws. However, Federal law is standing in the way of farmers in these States growing what may be a very profitable crop. Because of current federal law, all hemp included in products sold in the United States must be imported instead of being grown by American farmers.

2007 Ron Paul 25:3
Since 1970, the Federal Controlled Substances Act’s inclusion of industrial hemp in the schedule one definition of marijuana has prohibited American farmers from growing industrial hemp despite the fact that industrial hemp has such a low content of THC (the psychoactive chemical in the related marijuana plant) that nobody can be psychologically affected by consuming hemp. Federal law concedes the safety of industrial hemp by allowing it to be legally imported for use as food.

2007 Ron Paul 25:4
The United States is the only industrialized nation that prohibits industrial hemp cultivation. The Congressional Research Service has noted that hemp is grown as an established agricultural commodity in over 30 nations in Europe, Asia, and North America. My Industrial Hemp Farming Act will relieve this unique restriction on American farmers and allow them to grow industrial hemp in accord with State law.

2007 Ron Paul 25:5
Industrial hemp is a crop that was grown legally throughout the United States for most of our Nation’s history. In fact, during World War II, the Federal Government actively encouraged American farmers to grow industrial hemp to help the war effort. The Department of Agriculture even produced a film “Hemp for Victory” encouraging the plant’s cultivation.

2007 Ron Paul 25:6
In recent years, the hemp plant has been put to many popular uses in foods and in industry. Grocery stores sell hemp seeds and oil as well as food products containing oil and seeds from the hemp plant. Industrial hemp is also included in consumer products such as paper, cloths, cosmetics, and carpet. One of the more innovative recent uses of industrial hemp is in the door frames of about 1.5 million cars. Hemp has even been used in alternative automobile fuel.

2007 Ron Paul 25:7
It is unfortunate that the Federal Government has stood in the way of American farmers, including many who are struggling to make ends meet, competing in the global industrial hemp market. Indeed, the founders of our Nation, some of whom grew hemp, would surely find that Federal restrictions on farmers growing a safe and profitable crop on their own land are inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of a limited, restrained Federal Government. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to stand up for American farmers and cosponsor the Industrial Hemp Farming Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 26
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement On The Iraq War Resolution 14 February 2007

Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL).

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

2007 Ron Paul 26:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in support of the resolution and in opposition to the escalation in Iraq. I want to thank the gentleman from North Carolina for his very determined and principled effort to end this ill-advised and dangerous war, and I am very pleased that he brought together a group of Members today who are representing the traditional conservative position on war and peace and I deeply appreciate that.

2007 Ron Paul 26:2
Mr. Speaker, this grand debate is welcomed, but it could be that this is nothing more than a distraction from the dangerous military confrontation approaching with Iran, which is supported by many in leadership on both sides of the aisle. This resolution, unfortunately, does not address the disaster in Iraq. Instead, it appears to oppose the war while at the same time offering no change of the status quo in Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 26:3
As such, it is not actually a vote against a troop surge. A real vote against a troop surge is a vote against the coming supplemental appropriation which finances it. I hope all my colleagues who vote against this surge today will vote against the budgetary surge when it really counts, when we vote on the supplemental.

2007 Ron Paul 26:4
The biggest red herring in this debate is the constant innuendo that those who don’t support expanding the war are somehow opposing the troops. It is nothing more than a canard to claim that those of us who struggled to prevent the bloodshed and now want it stopped are somehow less patriotic and less concerned about the welfare of our military personnel.

2007 Ron Paul 26:5
Osama bin Laden has expressed sadistic pleasure with the invasion in Iraq and was surprised that we served his interests above and beyond his dreams on how we responded after the 9/11 attacks. His pleasure comes from our policy of folly, getting ourselves bogged down in the middle of a religious civil war 7,000 miles from home that is financially bleeding us to death. Total costs now are recently estimated to exceed $2 trillion. His recruitment of Islamic extremists has been greatly enhanced by our occupation of Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 26:6
Unfortunately, we continue to concentrate on the obvious mismanagement of a war promoted by false information and ignore debating the real issue which is this: Why are we determined to follow a foreign policy of empire building and preemption which is unbecoming of a constitutional republic?

2007 Ron Paul 26:7
Those on the right should recall that the traditional conservative position of nonintervention was their position for most of the 20th century, and they benefited politically from the wars carelessly entered into by the left. Seven years ago, the right benefited politically by condemning the illegal intervention in Kosovo and Somalia. At the time, the right was outraged over the failed policy of nation building.

2007 Ron Paul 26:8
It is important to recall that the left in 2003 offered little opposition to the preemptive war in Iraq, and many are now not willing to stop it by defunding it, or work to prevent an attack on Iran.

2007 Ron Paul 26:9
The catch-all phrase the “war on terrorism” in all honesty has no more meaning than if one wants to wage a war against criminal gangsterism. Terrorism is a tactic. You can’t have a war against a tactic. It is deliberately vague and nondefinable in order to justify and permit perpetual war anywhere and under any circumstances. Don’t forget, the Iraqis and Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with any terrorist attack against us, including that on 9/11.

2007 Ron Paul 26:10
Special interests and the demented philosophy of conquests have driven most wars throughout all of history. Rarely has the cause of liberty, as it was in our own Revolution, been the driving force. In recent decades, our policies have been driven by neoconservative empire radicalism, profiteering in the military-industrial complex, misplaced do-good internationalism, mercantilistic notions regarding the need to control natural resources, and blind loyalty to various governments in the Middle East.

2007 Ron Paul 26:11
For all the misinformation given the American people to justify our invasion, such as our need for national security, enforcing U.N. resolutions, removing a dictator, establishing a democracy, protecting our oil, the argument has been reduced to this: If we leave now, Iraq will be left in a mess; implying the implausible, that if we stay, it won’t be a mess.

2007 Ron Paul 26:12
Since it could go badly when we leave, that blame must be placed on those who took us there, not on those of us who now insist that Americans no longer need be killed or maimed, and that Americans no longer need to kill any more Iraqis. We have had enough of both.

2007 Ron Paul 26:13
Resorting to a medical analogy: A wrong diagnosis was made at the beginning of the war and the wrong treatment was prescribed. Refusing to reassess our mistakes and insisting on just more and more of a failed remedy is destined to kill the patient. In this case, the casualties will be our liberties and prosperity, here at home, and peace abroad.

2007 Ron Paul 26:14
There is no logical reason to reject the restraints placed in the Constitution regarding our engaging in foreign conflicts unrelated to our national security. The advice of the founders and our early Presidents was sound then, and it is sound today.

2007 Ron Paul 26:15
We shouldn’t wait until our financial system is completely ruined and we are forced to change our ways. We should do it as quickly as possible and stop the carnage and the financial bleeding that will bring us to our knees and eventually force us to stop that which we should have never started.

2007 Ron Paul 26:16
We all know in time the war will be defunded one way or another and the troops will come home. So why not now?

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 27
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Teacher Tax Cut Act And The Professional Educators Tax Relief Act 14 February 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 14, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 27:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce two pieces of legislation that raise the pay of teachers and other educators by cutting their taxes. I am sure that all my colleagues agree that it is long past time to begin treating those who have dedicated their lives to educating America’s children with the respect they deserve. Compared to other professionals, educators are under-appreciated and under-paid. This must change if America is to have the finest education system in the world.

2007 Ron Paul 27:2
Quality education is impossible without quality teaching. If we continue to undervalue educators, it will become harder to attract, and keep, good people in the education profession. While educators’ pay is primarily a local issue, Congress can, and should, help raise educators’ take home pay by reducing educators’ taxes.

2007 Ron Paul 27:3
This is why I am introducing the Teachers Tax Cut Act. This legislation provides every teacher in America with a $3,000 tax credit. I am also introducing the Professional Educators Tax Relief Act, which extends the $3,000 tax credit to counselors, librarians, and all school personnel involved in any aspect of the K–12 academic program.

2007 Ron Paul 27:4
The Teacher Tax Cut Act and the Professional Educators Tax Relief Act increase the salaries of teachers and other education professionals without raising federal expenditures. By raising the take-home pay of professional educators, these bills encourage highly qualified people to enter, and remain in, education. These bills also let America’s professional educators know that the American people and the Congress respect their work.

2007 Ron Paul 27:5
I hope all my colleagues join me in supporting our nation’s teachers and other professional educators by cosponsoring the Teacher Tax Cut Act and the Professional Educators Tax Relief Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 28
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Hope Plus Scholarship Act 14 February 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 14, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 28:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Hope Plus Scholarship Act, which expands the Hope Education Scholarship credit to cover K–12 education expenses. Under this bill, parents could use the Hope Scholarship to pay for private or religious school tuition or to offset the cost of home schooling. In addition, under the bill, all Americans could use the Hope Scholarship to make cash or in-kind donations to public schools. Thus, the Hope Scholarship could help working parents send their child to a private school, while other patents could take advantage of the Hope credit to help purchase new computers for their children’s local public school.

2007 Ron Paul 28:2
Reducing taxes so that Americans can devote more of their own resources to education is the best way to improve America’s schools, since individuals are more likely than federal bureaucrats to insist that schools be accountable for student performance. When the federal government controls the education dollar, schools will be held accountable for their compliance with bureaucratic paperwork requirements and mandates that have little to do with actual education. Federal rules and regulations also divert valuable resources away from classroom instruction.

2007 Ron Paul 28:3
The only way to reform America’s education system is through restoring control of the education dollar to the American people so they can ensure schools provide their children a quality education. I therefore ask all of my colleagues to help improve education by returning education resources to the American people by cosponsoring the Hope Plus Scholarship Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 29
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Family Education Freedom Act 14 february 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 14, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 29:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Family Education Freedom Act, a bill to empower millions of working and middle- class Americans to choose a non-public education for their children, as well as making it easier for parents to actively participate in improving public schools. The Family Education Freedom Act accomplishes its goals by allowing American parents a tax credit of up to $5,000 for the expenses incurred in sending their child to private, public, parochial, other religious school, or for home schooling their children.

2007 Ron Paul 29:2
The Family Education Freedom Act returns the fundamental principal of a truly free economy to America’s education system: what the great economist Ludwig von Mises called “consumer sovereignty”. Consumer sovereignty simply means consumers decide who succeeds or fails in the market. Businesses that best satisfy consumer demand will be the most successful. Consumer sovereignty is the means by which the free market maximizes human happiness.

2007 Ron Paul 29:3
Currently, consumers are less than sovereign in the education “market.” Funding decisions are increasingly controlled by the federal government. Because “he who pays the piper calls the tune,” public, and even private schools, are paying greater attention to the dictates of federal “educrats” while ignoring the wishes of the parents to an evergreater degree. As such, the lack of consumer sovereignty in education is destroying parental control of education and replacing it with state control. Loss of control is a key reason why so many of America’s parents express dissatisfaction with the educational system.

2007 Ron Paul 29:4
According to a poll by McLaughlin and Associates, two-thirds of Americans believe education tax credits would have a positive effect on American education. This poll also found strong support for education tax credits among liberals, moderates, conservatives, low-income individuals, and African-Americans. This is just one of numerous studies and public opinion polls showing that Americans want Congress to get the federal bureaucracy out of the schoolroom and give parents more control over their children’s education.

2007 Ron Paul 29:5
Today, Congress can fulfill the wishes of the American people for greater control over their children’s education by simply allowing parents to keep more of their hard-earned money to spend on education rather than force them to send it to Washington to support education programs reflective only of the values and priorities of Congress and the federal bureaucracy.

2007 Ron Paul 29:6
The $5,000 tax credit will make a better education affordable for millions of parents. Madame Speaker, many parents who would choose to send their children to private, religious, or parochial schools are unable to afford the tuition, in large part because of the enormous tax burden imposed on the American family by Washington.

2007 Ron Paul 29:7
The Family Education Freedom Act also benefits parents who choose to send their children to public schools. Parents of children in public schools may use this credit to help improve their local schools by helping finance the purchase of educational tools such as computers or to ensure their local schools can offer enriching extracurricular activities such as music programs. Parents of public school students may also wish to use the credit to pay for special services, such as tutoring, for their children.

2007 Ron Paul 29:8
Increasing parental control of education is superior to funneling more federal tax dollars, followed by greater federal control, into the schools. According to a Manhattan Institute study of the effects of state policies promoting parental control over education, a minimal increase in parental control boosts students’ average SAT verbal score by 21 points and students’ SAT math score by 22 points! The Manhattan Institute study also found that increasing parental control of education is the best way to improve student performance on the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) tests.

2007 Ron Paul 29:9
Clearly, enactment of the Family Education Freedom Act is the best thing this Congress could do to improve public education. Furthermore, a greater reliance on parental expenditures rather than government tax dollars will help make the public schools into true community schools that reflect the wishes of parents and the interests of the students.

2007 Ron Paul 29:10
The Family Education Freedom Act will also aid those parents who choose to educate their children at home. Home schooling has become an increasingly popular, and successful, method of educating children. Home schooled children out-perform their public school peers by 30 to 37 percentile points across all subjects on nationally standardized achievement exams. Home schooling parents spend thousands of dollars annually, in addition to the wages forgone by the spouse who forgoes outside employment, in order to educate their children in the loving environment of the home.

2007 Ron Paul 29:11
Ultimately, Madam Speaker, this bill is about freedom. Parental control of child rearing, especially education, is one of the bulwarks of liberty. No nation can remain free when the state has greater influence over the knowledge and values transmitted to children than the family.

2007 Ron Paul 29:12
By moving to restore the primacy of parents to education, the Family Education Freedom Act will not only improve America’s education, it will restore a parent’s right to choose how best to educate one’s own child, a fundamental freedom that has been eroded by the increase in federal education expenditures and the corresponding decrease in the ability of parents to provide for their children’s education out of their own pockets. I call on all my colleagues to join me in allowing parents to devote more of their resources to their children’s education and less to feed the wasteful Washington bureaucracy by supporting the Family Education Freedom Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 30
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Education Improvement Tax Cut Act 14 February 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 14, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 30:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Education Improvement Tax Cut Act. This act, a companion to my Family Education Freedom Act, takes a further step toward returning control over education resources to private citizens by providing a $5,000 tax credit for donations to scholarship funds to enable low-income children to attend private schools. It also encourages private citizens to devote more of their resources to helping public schools, by providing a $5,000 tax credit for cash or in-kind donations to public schools to support academic or extra curricular programs.

2007 Ron Paul 30:2
Education remains one of the top priorities of the American people. Unfortunately, most proposals to address the American people’s demand for education reform either expand federal control over education or engage in the pseudo-federalism of block grants. Many proposals that claim to increase local control over education actually extend federal power by holding schools “accountable” to federal bureaucrats and politicians. Of course, schools should be held accountable for their results, but they should be held accountable to parents and school boards not to federal officials. Therefore, I propose we move in a different direction and embrace true federalism by returning control over the education dollar to the American people.

2007 Ron Paul 30:3
One of the major problems with centralized control over education funding is that spending priorities set by Washington-based Representatives, staffers, and bureaucrats do not necessarily match the needs of individual communities. In fact, it would be a miracle if spending priorities determined by the wishes of certain politically powerful representatives or the theories of Education Department functionaries match the priorities of every community in a country as large and diverse as America. Block grants do not solve this problem as they simply allow states and localities to choose the means to reach federally-determined ends.

2007 Ron Paul 30:4
Returning control over the education dollar for tax credits for parents and for other concerned citizens returns control over both the means and ends of education policy to local communities. People in one community may use this credit to purchase computers, while children in another community may, at last, have access to a quality music program because of community leaders who took advantage of the tax credit contained in this bill.

2007 Ron Paul 30:5
Children in some communities may benefit most from the opportunity to attend private, parochial, or other religious schools. One of the most encouraging trends in education has been the establishment of private scholarship programs. These scholarship funds use voluntary contributions to open the doors of quality private schools to low-income children. By providing a tax credit for donations to these programs, Congress can widen the educational opportunities and increase the quality of education for all children.

2007 Ron Paul 30:6
Furthermore, privately-funded scholarships raise none of the concerns of state entanglement raised by publicly-funded vouchers.

2007 Ron Paul 30:7
There is no doubt that Americans will always spend generously on education, the question is, “who should control the education dollar — politicians and bureaucrats or the American people?” Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in placing control of education back in the hands of citizens and local communities by sponsoring the Education Improvement Tax Cut Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 31
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Sanctity Of Life Act And The Taxpayer Freedom Of Conscience Act 15 February 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 15, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 31:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce two bills relating to abortion. These bills stop the federal government from promoting abortion. My bills accomplish this goal by prohibiting federal funds from being used for population control or “family planning” through exercising Congress’s constitutional power to restrict federal court’s jurisdiction by restoring each state’s authority to protect unborn life.

2007 Ron Paul 31:2
Abortion on demand is no doubt the most serious sociopolitical problem of our age. The lack of respect for life that permits abortion significantly contributes to our violent culture and our careless attitude toward liberty. Whether a civilized society treats human life with dignity or contempt determines the outcome of that civilization. Reaffirming the importance of the sanctity of life is crucial for the continuation of a civilized society. There is already strong evidence that we are on the slippery slope toward euthanasia and non-consensual human experimentation. Although the real problem lies within people’ hearts and minds, the legal problems of protecting life stem from the ill-advised Roe v. Wade ruling, where the court usurped the state’s authority over abortion.

2007 Ron Paul 31:3
One of the bills I am introducing today, the Sanctity of Life Act of 2005, reverses some of the damage done by Roe v. Wade. The Sanctity of Life Act provides that the federal courts of the United States, up to and including the Supreme Court, do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases. Congress must use the authority granted to it in Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution to rein in rogue federal judges from interfering with a state’s ability to protect unborn life.

2007 Ron Paul 31:4
In addition to restricting federal court jurisdiction over abortion, Congress must stop the unconstitutional practice of forcing Americans to subsidize abortion providers. It is not enough to say that “family planning” groups may not use federal funds to perform or promote abortion. After all, since money is fungible, federal funding of any activities of these organizations forces taxpayers to underwrite the organizations abortion activities. This is why I am also introducing the Taxpayer Freedom of Conscience Act. The Taxpayer Freedom of Conscience Act prohibits any federal official from expending any federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, it is “sinful and tyrannical” to force the American taxpayers to subsidize programs and practices they find morally abhorrent.

2007 Ron Paul 31:5
Madam Speaker, it is my hope that my colleagues will join me in support of these two bills. By following the Constitution and using the power granted to the Congress by the Constitution, we can restore respect for freedom of conscience and the sanctity of human life.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 32
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement for Hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, “Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy” 15 February 2007

2007 Ron Paul 32:1
Transparency in monetary policy is a goal we should all support. I’ve often wondered why Congress so willingly has given up its prerogative over monetary policy. Astonishingly, Congress in essence has ceded total control over the value of our money to a secretive central bank. Congress created the Federal Reserve, yet it had no constitutional authority to do so. We forget that those powers not explicitly granted to Congress by the Constitution are inherently denied to Congress-- and thus the authority to establish a central bank never was given. Of course Jefferson and Hamilton had that debate early on, a debate seemingly settled in 1913.

2007 Ron Paul 32:2
But transparency and oversight are something else, and they’re worth considering. Congress, although not by law, essentially has given up all its oversight responsibility over the Federal Reserve. There are no true audits, and Congress knows nothing of the conversations, plans, and actions taken in concert with other central banks. We get less and less information regarding the money supply each year, especially now that M3 is no longer reported.

2007 Ron Paul 32:3
The role the Fed plays in the President’s secretive Working Group on Financial Markets goes unnoticed by members of Congress. The Federal Reserve shows no willingness to inform Congress voluntarily about how often the Working Group meets, what actions it takes that affect the financial markets, or why it takes those actions. But these actions, directed by the Federal Reserve, alter the purchasing power of our money. And that purchasing power is always reduced. The dollar today is worth only four cents compared to the dollar in 1913, when the Federal Reserve started. This has profound consequences for our economy and our political stability. All paper currencies are vulnerable to collapse, and history is replete with examples of great suffering caused by such collapses, especially to a nation’s poor and middle class. This leads to political turmoil.

2007 Ron Paul 32:4
Even before a currency collapse occurs, the damage done by a fiat system is significant. Our monetary system insidiously transfers wealth from the poor and middle class to the privileged rich. Wages never keep up with the profits of Wall Street and the banks, thus sowing the seeds of class discontent. When economic trouble hits, free markets and free trade often are blamed, while the harmful effects of a fiat monetary system are ignored. We deceive ourselves that all is well with the economy, and ignore the fundamental flaws that are a source of growing discontent among those who have not shared in the abundance of recent years.

2007 Ron Paul 32:5
Few understand that our consumption and apparent wealth is dependent on a current account deficit of $800 billion per year. This deficit shows that much of our prosperity is based on borrowing rather than a true increase in production. Statistics show year after year that our productive manufacturing jobs continue to go overseas. This phenomenon is not seen as a consequence of the international fiat monetary system, where the United States government benefits as the issuer of the world’s reserve currency.

2007 Ron Paul 32:6
Government officials consistently claim that inflation is in check at barely 2%, but middle class Americans know that their purchasing power--especially when it comes to housing, energy, medical care, and school tuition-- is shrinking much faster than 2% each year.

2007 Ron Paul 32:7
Even if prices were held in check, in spite of our monetary inflation, concentrating on CPI distracts from the real issue. We must address the important consequences of Fed manipulation of interest rates. When interests rates are artificially low, below market rates, insidious mal-investment and excessive indebtedness inevitably bring about the economic downturn that everyone dreads.

2007 Ron Paul 32:8
We look at GDP numbers to reassure ourselves that all is well, yet a growing number of Americans still do not enjoy the higher standard of living that monetary inflation brings to the privileged few. Those few have access to the newly created money first, before its value is diluted.

2007 Ron Paul 32:9
For example: Before the breakdown of the Bretton Woods system, CEO income was about 30 times the average worker’s pay. Today, it’s closer to 500 times. It’s hard to explain this simply by market forces and increases in productivity. One Wall Street firm last year gave out bonuses totaling $16.5 billion. There’s little evidence that this represents free market capitalism.

2007 Ron Paul 32:10
In 2006 dollars, the minimum wage was $9.50 before the 1971 breakdown of Bretton Woods. Today that dollar is worth $5.15. Congress congratulates itself for raising the minimum wage by mandate, but in reality it has lowered the minimum wage by allowing the Fed to devalue the dollar. We must consider how the growing inequalities created by our monetary system will lead to social discord.

2007 Ron Paul 32:11
GDP purportedly is now growing at 3.5%, and everyone seems pleased. What we fail to understand is how much government entitlement spending contributes to the increase in the GDP. Rebuilding infrastructure destroyed by hurricanes, which simply gets us back to even, is considered part of GDP growth. Wall Street profits and salaries, pumped up by the Fed’s increase in money, also contribute to GDP statistical growth. Just buying military weapons that contribute nothing to the well being of our citizens, sending money down a rat hole, contributes to GDP growth! Simple price increases caused by Fed monetary inflation contribute to nominal GDP growth. None of these factors represent any kind of real increases in economic output. So we should not carelessly cite misleading GDP figures which don’t truly reflect what is happening in the economy. Bogus GDP figures explain in part why so many people are feeling squeezed despite our supposedly booming economy.

2007 Ron Paul 32:12
But since our fiat dollar system is not going away anytime soon, it would benefit Congress and the American people to bring more transparency to how and why Fed monetary policy functions.

2007 Ron Paul 32:13
For starters, the Federal Reserve should:

2007 Ron Paul 32:14
Begin publishing the M3 statistics again. Let us see the numbers that most accurately reveal how much new money the Fed is pumping into the world economy.

2007 Ron Paul 32:15
Tell us exactly what the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets does and why.

2007 Ron Paul 32:16
Explain how interest rates are set. Conservatives profess to support free markets, without wage and price controls. Yet the most important price of all, the price of money as determined by interest rates, is set arbitrarily in secret by the Fed rather than by markets! Why is this policy written in stone? Why is there no congressional input at least?

2007 Ron Paul 32:17
Change legal tender laws to allow constitutional legal tender (commodity money) to compete domestically with the dollar.

2007 Ron Paul 32:18
How can a policy of steadily debasing our currency be defended morally, knowing what harm it causes to those who still believe in saving money and assuming responsibility for themselves in their retirement years? Is it any wonder we are a nation of debtors rather than savers?

2007 Ron Paul 32:19
We need more transparency in how the Federal Reserve carries out monetary policy, and we need it soon.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 33
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

The Port Of Galveston: A Source Of Economic Growth For Texas And The Nation 1 March 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, March 1, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 33:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, in recognition of the benefits the Port of Galveston provides to Galveston, and the Nation, the Galveston Chamber of Commerce will honor the port on March 7. I am pleased to join my friends from the Galveston Chamber of Commerce in paying tribute to the Port of Galveston.

2007 Ron Paul 33:2
For the past 5 years, the Port of Galveston has been undergoing major transformations. In fact, port officials believe there have been more changes at the port during this period than in any other 5 years in the port’s history. As a result of these changes, in the 2006 fiscal year the Port of Galveston had its highest gross operating revenue in 23 years.

2007 Ron Paul 33:3
The cruise industry is the largest source of port-related economic growth for both the city of Galveston and the State of Texas. In 2006, the Galveston-based cruise business helped support 13,272 cruise industry jobs in Texas that paid more than $599 million in wages. Approximately 46 percent of the industry’s direct expenditures were based in tourism-related businesses like travel agencies, airlines, hotels, restaurants, and ground transportation providers. Other Texas industries that benefit from the cruise business’s expansion are petroleum refining, communications and navigation equipment, and engines and power transmission equipment manufacturing.

2007 Ron Paul 33:4
The increase in cruise-related income has presented the Port of Galveston with the challenge of ensuring the port is capable of continuing to meet the needs of the cruise business. The Port of Galveston’s management is committed to ensuring the port continues to grow and change to meet the demands of the port’s expanding cruise and other businesses. Since 2000, approximately $45 million has been invested in the port’s cruise facilities. It is expected that revenues from cruise operations will give the port an opportunity to move forward and leverage earlier financing to provide for additional maintenance, repair, and capital construction in the port.

2007 Ron Paul 33:5
Madam Speaker, the Port of Galveston’s contribution to the Texas and United States economies is by no means limited to the cruise business. The port also plays a vital role in the global economy by facilitating trade with Mexico, Guatemala, Panama, Germany, China, Israel, Italy, and other countries.

2007 Ron Paul 33:6
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join the Galveston Chamber of Commerce in honoring the management of the Port of Galveston for all of their contributions to the economies of Galveston, Texas, and the world.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 34
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

The Scandal At Walter Reed 7 March 2007

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

2007 Ron Paul 34:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, the scandal at Walter Reed is not an isolated incident. It is directly related to our foreign policy of interventionism. There is a pressing need to reassess our now widely accepted role as the world’s lone superpower. If we don’t, we are destined to reduce our Nation to something far less powerful.

2007 Ron Paul 34:2
It has always been politically popular for politicians to promise they will keep us out of foreign wars. Likewise, it has been popular to advocate ending prolonged and painful conflicts, like the war in Korea and Vietnam, and now Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 34:3
As recent as the campaign of 2000, it was quite popular to condemn nation building and reject the policy of policing the world in the wake of our involvement in Kosovo and Somalia. We were even promised a more humble foreign policy.

2007 Ron Paul 34:4
Nobody wins elections by promising to take us to war. But, once elected, many politicians greatly exaggerate the threat posed by a potential enemy, and the people too often carelessly accept the dubious reasons given to justify wars.

2007 Ron Paul 34:5
Opposition arises only when the true costs are felt here at home.

2007 Ron Paul 34:6
A foreign policy of interventionism costs so much money that we’re forced to close military bases in the United States even as we’re building them overseas. Interventionism is never good fiscal policy. Interventionism symbolizes an attitude of looking outward, toward empire, while diminishing the importance of maintaining a constitutional republic.

2007 Ron Paul 34:7
We close bases here at home — some want to close Walter Reed — while building bases in Arab and Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia. We worry about foreign borders while ignoring our own. We build permanent outposts in Muslim holy lands, occupy territory and prop up puppet governments. This motivates suicide terrorism against us.

2007 Ron Paul 34:8
Our policies naturally lead to resentment, which in turn leads to prolonged wars and increased casualties. We waste billions of dollars in Iraq while bases like Walter Reed fall into disrepair. This undermines our ability to care for the thousands of wounded we should have anticipated despite the rosy predictions that we would be greeted as liberators in Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 34:9
Now comes the outrage.

2007 Ron Paul 34:10
Now Congress holds hearings.

2007 Ron Paul 34:11
Now comes the wringing of hands. I guess better late than never.

2007 Ron Paul 34:12
Clean it up. Paint the walls. Make Walter Reed look neat and tidy. But this won’t solve our problems. We must someday look critically at the shortcomings of our foreign policy, a policy that needlessly and foolishly intervenes in places where we have no business being.

2007 Ron Paul 34:13
Voters spoke very clearly in November: They want the war to end. Yet Congress has taken no steps to defund or end a war it never should have condoned in the first place.

2007 Ron Paul 34:14
On the contrary, Congress plans to spend another $100 billion or more in an upcoming Iraq funding bill, more than even the administration has requested. The 2007 military budget, $700 billion, apparently is not enough. All of this is done under the slogan of supporting the troops, even though our policy guarantees more Americans will die and Walter Reed will continue to receive tens of thousands of casualties.

2007 Ron Paul 34:15
Every problem Congress and the administration creates requires more money to fix. The mantra remains the same: Spend more money even though we don’t have it; borrow from the Chinese, or just print it. This policy of interventionism is folly, and it cannot continue forever. It will end, either because we wake up or because we go broke.

2007 Ron Paul 34:16
Interventionism always leads to unanticipated consequences and blowback, like a weakened, demoralized military; exploding deficits; billions of dollars wasted; increased inflation; less economic growth; an unstable currency; painful stock market corrections; political demagoguery; lingering anger at home; and confusion about who is to blame.

2007 Ron Paul 34:17
These elements combine to create an environment that inevitably undermines personal liberty. Virtually all American wars have led to diminished civil liberties at home. Most of our mistakes can be laid at the doorstep of our failure to follow the Constitution. The Constitution, if we so desire, can provide needed guidance and a road map to restore our liberties and change our foreign policy. This is critical if we truly seek peace and prosperity.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 35
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

In Honor Of Hazel Johnson 7 March 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, March 7, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 35:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, this Saturday, March 10th, the Happy Hairston Youth Foundation, Inc. of Bay City, Texas, in my congressional district, will honor Ms. Hazel Johnson, the Executive Director of the Economic Action Committee of the Gulf Coast. I am pleased to join the Happy Hairston Youth Foundation, Inc. in honoring this remarkable woman.

2007 Ron Paul 35:2
For the past 17 years, Ms. Johnson has devoted herself to serving the residents of Matagorda County. The Economic Action Committee was created to ensure Matagorda County’s homebound elderly and disabled citizens receive nutritional meals. Under Ms. Johnson’s leadership, the Economic Action Committee has not only continued to fulfill its original mandate of meeting the nutritional needs of the elderly and disabled, but has expanded its function to deliver other vital services to Matagorda County’s senior citizens.

2007 Ron Paul 35:3
Under Ms. Johnson’s leadership, the Economic Action Committee began providing Matagorda County’s low income seniors and citizens with disabilities with air conditioning, heating, refrigeration units, and cooking stoves. Without the efforts of Ms. Johnson, many of these seniors and disabled would not have safe appliances in their homes. Perhaps Ms. Johnson’s most significant accomplishment is making sure that Matagorda County’s low income seniors and disabled residents do not have to go without air conditioning during the hot and humid Texas Gulf Coast summers. Anyone who has spent a summer in the Texas Gulf Coast knows that air conditioning is a necessity. In fact, for the homebound, access to air conditioning can literally be a matter of life and death.

2007 Ron Paul 35:4
It is therefore my privilege to join my friends at the Happy Hairston Youth Foundation, Inc. of Bay City, Texas, in saluting Hazel Johnson and her efforts to improve the lives of the people of Matagorda County.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 36
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

The Real Reason To Oppose The Supplemental Appropriation 20 March 2007

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

2007 Ron Paul 36:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, a $124 billion supplemental appropriation is a good bill, to oppose. I am pleased that many of my colleagues will join me in voting against this measure.

2007 Ron Paul 36:2
If one is unhappy with our progress in Iraq after 4 years of war, voting to defund the war makes sense. If one is unhappy with the manner in which we went to war without a constitutional declaration, voting “no” makes equally good sense.

2007 Ron Paul 36:3
Voting “no” also makes the legitimate point that the Constitution does not authorize Congress to direct the management of any military operation. The President clearly enjoys this authority as Commander in Chief.

2007 Ron Paul 36:4
But Congress, just as clearly, is responsible for making policy, by debating and declaring war, raising and equipping armies, funding military operations, and ending conflicts that do not serve our national interests.

2007 Ron Paul 36:5
Congress failed to meet its responsibilities 4 years ago, unconstitutionally transferring its explicit war power to the executive branch. Even though the administration started the subsequent preemptive war in Iraq, Congress bears the greatest responsibility for its lack of courage in fulfilling its duties. Since then Congress has obediently provided the funds and troops required to pursue this illegitimate war.

2007 Ron Paul 36:6
We won’t solve the problems in Iraq until we confront our failed policy of foreign interventionism. This latest appropriation does nothing to solve our dilemma. Micromanaging the war while continuing to fund it won’t help our troops.

2007 Ron Paul 36:7
Here is a new approach: Congress should admit its mistake and repeal the authority wrongfully given to the executive branch in 2002. Repeal the congressional sanction and disavow Presidential discretion in starting wars. Then start bringing the troops home.

2007 Ron Paul 36:8
If anyone charges that this approach does not support the troops, take a poll. Find out how Reservists and Guardsman and their families, many on their second or third tours in Iraq, feel about it.

2007 Ron Paul 36:9
The constant refrain that bringing our troops home would demonstrate a lack of support for them must be one of the most amazing distortions ever foisted on the American public. We are so concerned about saving face, but whose face are we saving? A sensible policy would save American lives and follow the rules laid out for Congress in the Constitution, and avoid wars that have no purpose.

2007 Ron Paul 36:10
The claim that it is unpatriotic to oppose spending more money in Iraq must be laid to rest as fraudulent. We should pass a resolution that expresses congressional opposition to any more undeclared, unconstitutional, unnecessary, preemptive wars. We should be building a consensus for the future that makes it easier to end our current troubles in Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 36:11
It is amazing to me that this Congress is more intimidated by political propagandists and special interests than the American electorate, who sent a loud, clear message about the war in November. The large majority of Americans now want us out of Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 36:12
Our leaders cannot grasp the tragic consequences of our policies toward Iraq for the past 25 years. It is time we woke them up. We are still by far the greatest military power on Earth; but since we stubbornly refuse to understand the nature of our foes, we are literally defeating ourselves.

2007 Ron Paul 36:13
In 2004 bin Laden stated that al Qaeda’s goal was to bankrupt the United States. His second in command, Zawahari, is quoted as saying that the 9/11 attacks would cause Americans to “come and fight the war personally on our sand where they are within rifle range.”

2007 Ron Paul 36:14
Sadly, we are playing into their hands. This $124 billion appropriation is only part of the nearly $1 trillion in military spending for this year’s budget alone. We should be concerned about the coming bankruptcy and the crisis facing the U.S. dollar.

2007 Ron Paul 36:15
We have totally failed to adapt to modern warfare. We are dealing with a small, nearly invisible enemy, an enemy without a country, a government, an army, a navy, an air force, or missiles. Yet our enemy is armed with suicidal determination and motivated by our meddling in their regional affairs to destroy us.

2007 Ron Paul 36:16
As we bleed financially, our men and women in Iraq die needlessly while the injured swell Walter Reed Hospital. Our government systematically undermines the Constitution and the liberties it is supposed to protect, for which it has claimed our soldiers are dying in faraway places.

2007 Ron Paul 36:17
Only with the complicity of Congress have we become a Nation of preemptive war, secret military tribunals, torture, rejection of habeas corpus, warrantless searches, undue government secrecy, extraordinary renditions, and uncontrollable spying on the American people.

2007 Ron Paul 36:18
The greatest danger we face is ourselves, what we are doing in the name of providing security for a people made fearful by distortions of facts. Fighting over there has nothing to do with preserving preserving freedoms here at home. More likely, the opposite is true.

2007 Ron Paul 36:19
Surely we can do better than this supplemental authorization. I plan to vote “no.”

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 37
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Agriculture Education Freedom Act 27 March 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, March 27, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 37:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Agriculture Education Freedom Act. This bill addresses a great injustice being perpetrated by the Federal Government on those youngsters who participate in programs such as 4–H or the Future Farmers of America. Under current tax law, children are forced to pay federal income tax when they sell livestock they have raised as part of an agricultural education program.

2007 Ron Paul 37:2
Think about this for a moment. These kids are trying to better themselves, earn some money, save some money and what does Congress do? We pick on these kids by taxing them. It is truly amazing that with all the hand- wringing in Congress over the alleged need to further restrict liberty and grow the size of govemment “for the children” we would continue to tax young people who are trying to lead responsible lives and prepare for the future. Even if the serious social problems today’s youth face could be solved by new federal bureaucracies and programs, it is still unfair to pick on those kids who are trying to do the right thing.

2007 Ron Paul 37:3
These children are not even old enough to vote, yet we are forcing them to pay taxes! What ever happened to no taxation without representation? No wonder young people are so cynical about govemment!

2007 Ron Paul 37:4
It is time we stopped taxing youngsters who are trying to earn money to go to college by selling livestock they have raised through their participation in programs such as 4–H or Future Farmers of America. Therefore, I call on my colleagues to join me in supporting the Agriculture Education Freedom Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 38
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Is Excessive 29 March 2007

2007 Ron Paul 38:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, the FY 2008 budget is a monument to irresponsibility and profligacy. It shows that Congress remains oblivious to the economic troubles facing the Nation, and that political expediency trumps all common sense in Washington. To the extent that proponents and supporters of these unsustainable budget increases continue to win reelection, it also shows that many Americans unfortunately continue to believe government can provide them with a free lunch.

2007 Ron Paul 38:2
To summarize, Congress proposes spending roughly $3 trillion in 2008. When I first came to Congress in 1976, the Federal Government spent only about $300 billion. So spending has increased tenfold in 30 years, and tripled just since 1990.

2007 Ron Paul 38:3
About one-third of this $3 trillion is so-called discretionary spending; the remaining two- thirds is deemed “mandatory” entitlement spending, which means mostly Social Security and Medicare. I am sure many American voters would be shocked to know their elected representatives essentially have no say over two-thirds of the Federal budget, but that is indeed the case.

2007 Ron Paul 38:4
The most disturbing problem with the budget is the utter lack of concern for the coming entitlement meltdown. The official national debt figure, now approaching $9 trillion, reflects only what the Federal Government owes in current debts on money already borrowed. It does not reflect what the Federal Government has promised to pay millions of Americans in entitlement benefits down the road. Those future obligations put our real debt figure at roughly 50 trillion dollars — a staggering sum that is about as large as the total household net worth of the entire United States. Your share of this 50 trillion amounts to about $175,000.

2007 Ron Paul 38:5
For those who thought a Democratic Congress would end the war in Iraq, think again: their new budget proposes supplemental funds totaling about $150 billion in 2008 and $50 billion in 2009 for Iraq. This is in addition to the ordinary Department of Defense budget of more than $500 billion, which the Democrats propose increasing each year just like the Republicans.

2007 Ron Paul 38:6
The substitute Republican budget is not much better: while it does call for freezing some discretionary spending next year, it increases military spending to make up the difference. The bottom line is that both the Democratic and Republican budget proposals call for more total spending in 2008 than 2007.

2007 Ron Paul 38:7
My message to my colleagues is simple: If you claim to support smaller government, don’t introduce budgets that increase spending over the previous year. Can any fiscal conservative in Congress honestly believe that overall federal spending cannot be cut 25 percent? We could cut spending by two-thirds and still have a Federal Government as large as it was in 1990.

2007 Ron Paul 38:8
Congressional budgets essentially are meaningless documents, with no force of law beyond the coming fiscal year. Thus budget projections are nothing more than political posturing, designed to justify deficit spending in the near term by promising fiscal restraint in the future. But the time for thrift never seems to arrive: there is always some new domestic or foreign emergency that requires more spending than projected.

2007 Ron Paul 38:9
Nobody in Washington will look back 5 years from now and exclaim, “Gee whiz, back in 2007 we promised to balance the budget by 2012, so I guess we better stick to that pledge and stop spending so much this year.” The only certainty when it comes to Federal budgets is that Congress will spend every penny budgeted and more during the fiscal year in question. All projections about revenues, tax rates, and spending in the future are nothing more than empty promises. Congress will pay no attention whatsoever to the 2008 budget in coming years.

2007 Ron Paul 38:10
We should not let the debate over numbers distract us from the fundamental yet unspoken issues inherent in any budget proposal: What is the proper role for government in our society? Are the programs, agencies, and departments funded in the budget proposal constitutional? Are they effective? Could they operate with a smaller budget? Would the public even notice if certain items were eliminated altogether? These are the kinds of questions the American people should ask, even if Congress lacks the courage to apply any principles whatsoever to the budget process.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 39
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Remembering The 1947 Texas City Disaster 29 March 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, March 29, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 39:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, in recognition of the sixtieth anniversary of the explosion of the Grand Camp ship in the Texas City harbor on April 16, residents of Texas City, in my congressional district, will come together to honor those who lost their lives in the 1947 explosions. I am honored to join my constituents in commemorating those who lost their lives in this tragedy.

2007 Ron Paul 39:2
Early in the morning of April 16, 1947 the Grand Camp caught fire. As the fire combined with the ammonium nitrate on the Grand Camp, a bright orange flame lit up the sky and smoke soared an estimated 2,000 feet into the air. Within seconds of the explosion, the Monsanto Chemical Plant was in flames. The fire spread quickly to the refineries that made up the Texas City industrial complex, causing entire buildings to collapse.

2007 Ron Paul 39:3
The destruction was not limited to Texas City. Windows rattled in Baytown, while a mist of black oil reigned in the city of Galveston. The tragedy and destruction did not end there. A miniature tidal wave resulted when the water from the bay, which had been driven out by the explosion, rushed in over the docks and rushed 150 feet inland, subsuming everything within its path. By nightfall, rescue workers were still searching for those trapped in the wreckage. But the devastation would continue.

2007 Ron Paul 39:4
At 1:10 a.m., another ship, the High Flyer , which was loaded with ammonium nitrate and sulfur, exploded. This explosion destroyed another ship, the Wilson B. Keene , as well as a concrete warehouse and a grain elevator.

2007 Ron Paul 39:5
A week passed before all of the fires were extinguished, and a month passed before the last body was pulled from the rubble — although some bodies were never recovered. Approximately 600 people lost their lives because of this tragedy. Almost every member of the Texas City fire department gave his life fighting the first explosion. Plant workers, dock workers, and bystanders were among the other victims. Perhaps most tragic of all, the flames claimed the lives of several children.

2007 Ron Paul 39:6
A memorial cemetery now sits near Loop 197 in Texas City as a silent reminder of the 63 unidentified dead who are buried in numbered graves. In 1980, a memorial park was created to honor the others who died in the tragedy.

2007 Ron Paul 39:7
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I take this opportunity to join my constituents in paying my respects to those who lost their lives in the 1947 explosion of the Grand Camp in Texas City.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 40
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

We Just Marched In (So We Can Just March Out) 17 April 2007

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

2007 Ron Paul 40:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, all the reasons given to justify a preemptive strike against Iraq were wrong. Congress and the American people were misled.

2007 Ron Paul 40:2
Support for the war came from various special interests that had agitated for an invasion of Iraq since 1998. The Iraq Liberation Act passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton stated that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was official U.S. policy. This policy was carried out in 2003.

2007 Ron Paul 40:3
Congress failed miserably in meeting its crucial obligations as the branch of government charged with deciding whether to declare war. It wrongly and unconstitutionally transferred this power to the President, and the President did not hesitate to use it.

2007 Ron Paul 40:4
Although it is clear there was no cause for war, we just marched in. Our leaders deceived themselves and the public with assurances that the war was righteous and would be over quickly. Their justifications were false, and they failed to grasp even basic facts about the chaotic, political, and religious history of the region.

2007 Ron Paul 40:5
Congress bears the greater blame for this fiasco. It reneged on its responsibility to declare or not declare war. It transferred this decision-making power to the executive branch and gave open sanction to anything the President did. In fact, the Founders diligently tried to prevent the executive from possessing this power, granting it to Congress alone in article I, section 8, of the Constitution.

2007 Ron Paul 40:6
Today, just about everyone acknowledges the war has gone badly, and 70 percent of the American people want it to end. Our national defense is weakened, the financial costs continue to drain us, our allies have deserted us, and our enemies are multiplying, not to mention the tragic toll of death and injuries suffered by American forces.

2007 Ron Paul 40:7
Iraq is a mess, and we urgently need a new direction. But our leaders offer only hand-wringing and platitudes. They have no clear-cut ideas to end the suffering and war. Even the most ardent war hawks cannot begin to define victory in Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 40:8
As an Air Force officer, serving from 1963 to 1968, I heard the same agonizing pleas from the American people. These pleas were met with the same excuses about why we could not change a deeply flawed policy and rethink the war in Vietnam. That bloody conflict, also undeclared and unconstitutional, seems to have taught us little despite the horrific costs.

2007 Ron Paul 40:9
Once again, though everyone now accepts that the original justifications for invading Iraq were not legitimate, we are given excuses for not leaving. We flaunt our power by building permanent military bases and an enormous billion-dollar embassy, yet claim we have no plans to stay in Iraq permanently. Assurances that our presence in Iraq has nothing to do with oil are not believed in the Middle East. The argument for staying to prevent civil war and bring stability to the region logically falls on deaf ears.

2007 Ron Paul 40:10
If the justifications for war were wrong, if the war is going badly, if we can’t afford the costs, both human and economic, if civil war and chaos have resulted from our occupation, if the reasons for staying are not more credible than the reasons for going, then why the dilemma? The American people have spoken and continue to speak out against the war, so why not end it?

2007 Ron Paul 40:11
How do we end it? Why not exactly the way we went in? We marched in and we can march out.

2007 Ron Paul 40:12
More good things may come of it than anyone can imagine. Consider our relationship with Vietnam, now our friendly trading partner. Certainly we are doing better with her than when we tried to impose our will by force.

2007 Ron Paul 40:13
It is time to march out of Iraq and come home.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 41
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Enhanced Options For Rural Health Care Act 17 April 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, April 17, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 41:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I raise 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.

2007 Ron Paul 41:2
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.

2007 Ron Paul 41:3
My colleagues may be interested to know that the idea for this bill comes from Marcella Henke, an administrator of Jackson County Hospital, a critical access hospital in my congressional district. Ms. Henke conceived of this idea as a way to meet the increasing demand for assisted living services in rural areas and provide hospitals with a profitable way to use beds not being used for critical access purposes. I urge my colleagues to embrace this practical way of strengthening rural health care without increasing federal expenditures by cosponsoring the Enhanced Options for Rural Health Care Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 42
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Child Health Care Affordability Act 17 April 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, April 17, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 42:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to help working Americans provide for their children’s health care needs by introducing the Child Health Care Affordability Act. The Child Health Care Affordability Act provides parents with a tax credit of up to $500 for health care expenses of dependent children. Parents caring for a child with a disability, tenninal disease, cancer, or any other health condition requiring specialized care would receive a tax credit of up to $3,000 to help cover their child’s health care expenses.

2007 Ron Paul 42:2
The tax credit would be available to all citizens, regardless of whether or not they itemize their deductions. The credit applies against both income and payroll tax liability. The tax credits provided in this bill will be especially helpful to those Americans whose employers cannot afford to provide health insurance for their employees. These workers must struggle to meet the medical bills of themselves and their families. This burden is especially heavy on parents whose children have a medical condition; such as cancer or a physical disability that requires long-term or specialized health care.

2007 Ron Paul 42:3
As an OB–GYN who has had the privilege of delivering more than four thousand babies, I know how important it is that parents have the resources to provide adequate health care for their children. The inability of many working Americans to provide health care for their children is rooted in one of the great inequities of the tax code — Congress’ failure to allow individuals the same ability to deduct health care costs that it grants to businesses. As a direct result of Congress’ refusal to provide individuals with health care related tax credits, parents whose employers do not provide health insurance have to struggle to provide health care for their children. Many of these parents work in low-income jobs; oftentimes, their only recourse for health care is the local emergency room.

2007 Ron Paul 42:4
Sometimes parents are forced to delay seeking care for their children until minor health concerns that could have been easily treated become serious problems requiring expensive treatment! If these parents had access to the type of tax credits provided in the Child Health Care Affordability Act, they would be better able to provide care for their children, and our Nation’s already overcrowded emergency rooms would be relieved of the burden of having to provide routine care for people who otherwise cannot afford it.

2007 Ron Paul 42:5
According to research on the effects of this bill done by my staff and legislative counsel, the benefit of these tax credits would begin to be felt by joint filers with incomes slightly above $18,000 dollars per year, or single income filers with incomes slightly above $15,000 dollars per year. Clearly, this bill will be of the most benefit to low-income Americans balancing the demands of taxation with the needs of their children.

2007 Ron Paul 42:6
Under the Child Health Care Affordability Act, a struggling single mother with an asthmatic child would at last be able to provide for her child’s needs, while a working-class family will not have to worry about how they will pay the bills if one of their children requires lengthy hospitalization or some other form of specialized care.

2007 Ron Paul 42:7
Madam Speaker, this Congress has a moral responsibility to provide tax relief so that loncome parents struggling to care for a sick child can better meet their child’s medical expenses. Some may say that we cannot enact the Child Health Care Affordability Act because it would cause the government to lose revenue. But, who is more deserving of this money, Congress or the working parents of a sick child?

2007 Ron Paul 42:8
The Child Health Care Affordability Act takes a major step toward helping working Americans meet their health care needs by providing them with generous health care related tax cuts and tax credits. I urge my colleagues to support the pro-family, pro-health care tax cuts contained in the Child Health Care Affordability Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 43
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

18 April 2007

I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL).

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

2007 Ron Paul 43:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

2007 Ron Paul 43:2
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this bill. I happen to agree with all of the concerns expressed by those sponsoring the bill due to the inequities in the amount of money that some of the CEOs are getting. But I am also convinced that this particular piece of legislation won’t do very much to help, and I am convinced that unless we deal some day with our monetary system and understand better how it participates in these inequities, we will never get a solution for this because the monetary system does play a role in this.

2007 Ron Paul 43:3
I am as outraged as anybody about a company that can hand out $16 billion in bonuses. But where my disagreement is, is that it is not as a result of free market capitalism; that it is the result of an economic system that we have today which is called economic interventionism, and it leads to these inequities.

2007 Ron Paul 43:4
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1257 gives the Securities and Exchange Commission the power to force publicly traded corporations to consider shareholders’ votes on nonbinding resolutions concerning the compensation packages of CEOs. Giving the SEC the power to require shareholder votes on any aspect of corporate governance, even on something as seemingly inconsequential as a nonbinding resolution, illegitimately expands Federal authority into questions of private governance.

2007 Ron Paul 43:5
In a free market, shareholders who are concerned about CEO compensation are free to refuse to invest in corporations that do not provide sufficient information regarding how CEO salaries are set or do not allow shareholders to have a say in setting compensation packages.

2007 Ron Paul 43:6
Since shareholders are a corporation’s owner, the CEO and the board of directors have a great incentive to respond to shareholders’ demands. In fact, several corporations have recently moved to amend the ways they determine executive compensation in order to provide increased transparency and accountability to shareholders.

2007 Ron Paul 43:7
Some shareholders may not care about CEO compensation packages. Instead, they may want to devote time at shareholder meetings to reviewing corporate environmental policies and ensuring the corporation has family- friendly workforce policies. If H.R. 1257 becomes law, the concerns of those shareholders will take a back seat to corporations attempting to meet the demands of Congress.

2007 Ron Paul 43:8
It is ironic to me that Congress would concern itself with high salaries in the private sector when, according to data collected by the CATO Institute, Federal employees on average make twice as much as their private sector counterparts. One of the examples of excessive compensation cited by the supporters of the bill is the multi-million dollar package paid to the former CEO of Freddie Mac. As a government- sponsored enterprise that, along with its counterpart Fannie Mae, received almost $20 billion worth of indirect Federal subsidies in fiscal year 2004 alone, Freddie Mac is hardly a poster child for the free market.

2007 Ron Paul 43:9
For the most part, all economic interventions fail and end up creating new problems that we are forced to deal with. This legislation, although well-motivated in an effort to deal with a very real problem, is unnecessary and should be rejected.

2007 Ron Paul 43:10
Past government actions have made it more difficult for shareholders to hold CEOs and boards of directors accountable for disregarding shareholder interests by, among other things, wasting corporate resources on compensation packages and golden parachutes unrelated to performance. During the 1980s, so-called corporate raiders helped keep corporate management accountable to shareholders through devices such as “junk” bonds that made corporate takeovers easier.

2007 Ron Paul 43:11
The backlash against corporate raiders included the enactment of laws that made it more difficult to launch hostile takeovers. Bruce Bartlett, writing in the Washington Times in 2001, commented on the effects of these laws, “Without the threat of a takeover, managers have been able to go back to ignoring shareholders, treating them like a nuisance, and giving themselves bloated salaries and perks, with little oversight from corporate boards. Now insulated from shareholders once again, managers could engage in unsound practices with little fear of punishment for failure.” The Federal “crackdown” on corporate raiders, combined with provisions in Sarbanes- Oxley disqualifying the people who are the most capable of serving as shareholder watchdogs from serving on corporate boards, contributed to the disconnect between CEO salaries and creation of shareholder value that is being used to justify another expansion of the regulatory state.

2007 Ron Paul 43:12
In addition to repealing laws that prevent shareholders from exercising control over corporations, Congress should also examine United States monetary policy’s effects on income inequality. When the Federal Reserve Board injects credit into the economy, the result is at least a temporary rise in incomes. However, those incomes do not rise equally. People who first receive the new credit — who in most instances are those already at the top of the economic pyramid — receive the most benefit from the Fed’s inflationist polices. By the time those at the lower end of the income scale experience a nominal rise in incomes, they must also contend with price inflation that has eroded their standard of living. Except for the lucky few who take advantage of the new credit first, the negative effects of inflation likely more than outweigh any temporary gains in nominal income from the Federal Reserve’s expansionist polices.

2007 Ron Paul 43:13
For evidence of who really benefits from a system of fiat money and inflation, consider that in 1971, before President Nixon severed the last link of the American currency to gold, the typical CEO’s salary was 30 times higher than the average wage of the typical employee; today it is 500 times higher.

2007 Ron Paul 43:14
Explosions in CEO salaries can be a sign of a Federal credit bubble, which occurs when Federal Reserve Board-created credit flows into certain sectors such as the stock market or the housing market. Far from being a sign of the health of capitalism, excessive CEO salaries in these areas often signal that a bubble is about to burst. When a bubble bursts, people at the bottom of the economic ladder bear the brunt of the bust.

2007 Ron Paul 43:15
Instead of imposing new laws on private companies, Congress should repeal the laws that have weakened the ability of shareholders to discipline CEOs and boards of directors that do not run corporations according to the shareholders’ wishes. Congress should also examine how fiat money contributes to income inequality. I therefore request that my colleagues join me in opposing H.R. 1257 and instead embrace a pro-freedom, pro-shareholder, and pro-worker agenda of free markets and sound money.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 44
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Genetic Information Non-discrimination Act 25 April 2007

2007 Ron Paul 44:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, the supporters of H.R. 493, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, are right to be concerned over the possibility that third parties, such as the government or potential employers, will access an individual’s genetic information without consent, and use that information to deny an individual health insurance or other benefits. I have long advocated repealing government laws and polices that allow third parties to access personal information. For example, I have worked to repeal the provision of Federal law giving the Federal Government the power to assign every American a “unique medical health identifier.” I also support repealing the phony “medical privacy” regulations that give law enforcement officials and state-favored private interests the right to access medical records at will.

2007 Ron Paul 44:2
Because of the Federal Government’s poor record in protecting privacy, I do not believe the best way to address concerns about the misuse of genetic information is through intrusive Federal legislation. Uniform Federal mandates are a clumsy and ineffective way to deal with problems such as employers making hiring decisions on the basis of a potential employee’s genetic profile. Imposing Federal mandates on private businesses merely raises the costs of doing business and thus reduces the employment opportunities for all citizens. A much better way to eliminate irrational discrimination is to rely on state and local regulation. Unlike the Federal Government, states and localities are able to tailor their regulations to fit the needs of their particular populaces. I would remind my colleagues that 34 states currently ban genetic discrimination in employment, while 46 states forbid health insurers from engaging in genetic discrimination. Clearly, the states are capable of addressing this issue without interference from Washington. My colleagues should also remember that Congress has no constitutional authority to forbid private sector employers from making hiring or other employment decisions on the basis of genetic information.

2007 Ron Paul 44:3
The best way to address the sponsors of H.R. 493’s legitimate concerns is to put individuals back in control of the health care dollar. When individuals control the health care dollar they, not their employers, insurance companies or Health Maintenance Organizations, can make all health care decisions, including whether or not to share individual genetic histories with a potential employer, insurer, or other third party. Therefore, instead of creating more Federal regulations and bureaucracies, my colleagues should increase individual control of health care by passing legislation expanding Health Savings Accounts and individual health care tax credits and deductions.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 45
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To Valerian Huvar 25 April 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, April 25, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 45:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, 2007 marks Valerian Huvar’s 52nd year of service as the county clerk for Victoria, Texas, making him the longest serving county clerk in Texas history. I am pleased to join the residents of Victoria in extending my thanks and congratulations to Mr. Huvar.

2007 Ron Paul 45:2
Mr. Huvar, the son of Fred and Stella Huvar, was born in El Campo, Texas on October 19, 1919. Mr. Huvar has resided in Victoria since he was 4 months old. A 1937 graduate of St. Joseph High School, Mr. Huvar worked for the local Goodyear Tire Store until December 30, 1941, when he entered the military. Mr. Huvar spent 5 years in the Army Air Corps Ordnance Department, earning the rank of Master Sergeant.

2007 Ron Paul 45:3
After his discharge from active duty, Mr. Huvar returned to the local Goodyear Tire Store, this time as the store’s manager. Soon thereafter he went to work at the local Montgomery Ward where he set up their business office. In 1950, he went to work as a teller in the First Victoria National Bank.

2007 Ron Paul 45:4
In 1954, Mr. Huvar successfully ran for Victoria County Clerk. He was officially sworn in on January 1, 1955, and has held the position ever since.

2007 Ron Paul 45:5
Mr. Huvar married Luella Edwards of Blanco, Texas, on May 4, 1947. She passed away on January 7, 1984. Valerian and Luella have four children — Charlotte, Carolyn, Dennis, and Michael, 10 grandchildren, and five great- grandchildren.

2007 Ron Paul 45:6
Madam Speaker, for over 5 decades the people of Victoria County have benefited from Mr. Valerian Huvar’s dedication and professionalism. I am pleased to join my constituents and friends in Victoria in paying tribute to the accomplishments of this remarkable Texan.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 46
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To Rudy Okruhlik 25 April 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, April 25, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 46:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, on April 26 the Brazoria Roundtable will honor Mr. Rudy Okruhlik for his over 30 years of work in Texas schools, the last 6 years of which were spent as superintendent of Brazosport Independent School District (ISD). Brazospsort ISD consists of 11 elementary schools, 2 middle schools, 3 intermediate schools, 2 high schools, and an alternative placement center. Under Superintendent Okruhlik’s leadership, Brazosport ISD combined challenging academic programs with a passionate commitment to excellence in order to produce an environment conducive to high student achievement.

2007 Ron Paul 46:2
The results of Superintendent Okruhlik’s efforts are shown in Brazosport lSD’s rating as Academically Acceptable for the last 2 years on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) test, with 9 of the 18 regular education campuses rated exemplary or recognized in 2005. Additionally, Brazosport ISD has scored well above the minimum Federal Adequate Yearly Progress requirements for the last 2 years.

2007 Ron Paul 46:3
Prior to coming to Brazosport lSD, Rudy Okruhlik served as superintendent of Palacios Independent School District from 1992 through 1997 and of Huntsville Independent School District from 1997 through 2000. In recognition of his lifetime commitment to, and achievement in, education, Okruhlik has been named an honorary life member of the Texas Association of School Boards.

2007 Ron Paul 46:4
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I once again express my pleasure in joining the Brazoria Roundtable in saluting Mr. Rudy Okruhlik for his work on behalf of Texas children.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 47
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Freedom To Bank Act 1 May 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 1, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 47:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce legislation repealing two 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.

2007 Ron Paul 47:2
These regulations exceed Congress’s constitutional powers and violate individual property and contract rights. Furthermore, these regulations insult Americans by treating them as children who are unable to manage their own affairs without Federal control. I urge my colleagues to show their respect for the Constitution and the American people by cosponsoring this legislation.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 48
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Internet Gambling 2 May 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, May 2, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 48:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to support H.R. 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act. Last year, a ban on internet gambling was snuck into a port security bill. This ban on internet gambling is an outrageous affront to individual freedom. H.R. 2046 restores respect for the right to patronize internet gambling sites as long as the sites follow certain Federal laws. The bill does not create new Federal laws, and it respects the authority of States and Native American tribes to regulate gambling. I hope all my colleagues will join me in cosponsoring this bill and restoring respect for the American people’s right to decide for themselves whether or not they gamble online.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 49
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The health Freedom Protection Act 2 May 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, May 2, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 49:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Health Freedom Protection Act. This bill restores the First Amendment rights of consumers to receive truthful information regarding the benefits of foods and dietary supplements by codifying the First Amendment standards used by Federal courts to strike down the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) efforts to censor truthful health claims. The Health Freedom Protection Act also stops the Federal Trade Commissions (FTC) from censoring truthful health care claims.

2007 Ron Paul 49:2
The American people have made it clear they do not want the Federal government to interfere with their access to dietary supplements, yet the FDA and the FTC continue to engage in heavy-handed attempts to restrict such access. The FDA continues to frustrate consumers’ efforts to learn how they can improve their health even after Congress, responding to a record number of constituents’ comments, passed the Dietary Supplement and Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA). FDA bureaucrats are so determined to frustrate consumers’ access to truthful information that they are even evading their duty to comply with four Federal court decisions vindicating consumers’ First Amendment rights to discover the health benefits of foods and dietary supplements.

2007 Ron Paul 49:3
FDA bureaucrats have even refused to abide by the DSHEA section allowing the public to have access to scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against diseases by claiming that every article concerning this topic is evidence of intent to sell a drug.

2007 Ron Paul 49:4
Because of the FDA’s censorship of truthful health claims, millions of Americans may suffer with diseases and other health care problems they may have avoided by using dietary supplements. For example, the FDA prohibited consumers from learning how folic acid reduces the risk of neural tube defects for 4 years after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended every woman of childbearing age take folic acid supplements to reduce neural tube defects. This FDA action contributed to an estimated 10,000 cases of preventable neutral tube defects!

2007 Ron Paul 49:5
The FDA also continues to prohibit consumers from learning about the scientific evidence that glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate are effective in the treatment of osteoarthritis; that omega-3 fatty acids may reduce the risk of sudden death heart attack; and that calcium may reduce the risk of bone fractures.

2007 Ron Paul 49:6
The Health Freedom Protection Act will force the FDA to at last comply with the commands of Congress, the First Amendment, and the American people by codifying the First Amendment standards adopted by the Federal courts. Specifically, the Health Freedom Protection Act stops the FDA from censoring truthful claims about the curative, mitigative, or preventative effects of dietary supplements, and adopts the Federal court’s suggested use of disclaimers as an alternative to censorship. The Health Freedom Protection Act also stops the FDA from prohibiting the distribution of scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against disease.

2007 Ron Paul 49:7
This legislation also addresses the FTC’s violations of the First Amendment. Under traditional First Amendment jurisprudence, the Federal government bears the burden of proving an advertising statement false before censoring that statement. However, the FTC has reversed the standard in the case of dietary supplements by requiring supplement manufactures to satisfy an unobtainable standard of proof that their statement is true. The FTC’s standards are blocking innovation in the marketplace.

2007 Ron Paul 49:8
The Health Freedom Protection Act requires the government bear the burden of proving that speech could be censored. This is how it should be in a free, dynamic society. The bill also requires that the FTC warn parties that their advertising is false and give them a chance to correct their mistakes.

2007 Ron Paul 49:9
Madam Speaker, if we are serious about putting people in charge of their health care, then shouldn’t we stop federal bureaucrats from preventing Americans from learning about simple ways to improve their health. I therefore call on my colleagues to stand up for good health care and the First Amendment by cosponsoring the Health Freedom Protection Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 50
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement On Chinese Currency 9 May 2007

Before the Committee on Financial Services

2007 Ron Paul 50:1
The imbalances in international trade, and in particular trade between China and the United States, have prompted many to demand a realignment of the Chinese yuan and the American dollar. Since we are running a huge trade deficit with China the call now is for a stronger yuan and a weaker dollar. This trade imbalance problem will not be solved so easily.

2007 Ron Paul 50:2
If a stronger yuan is implemented, increased exports to China from the US may or may not result. The weaker dollar will lead to higher US prices and crowd out the hoped-for benefits of a realignment of the two currencies.

2007 Ron Paul 50:3
One thing certain is that the immediate impact would be higher prices for consumer goods for middle class Americans. In many ways a weaker dollar would act as an import tax just as if it were a tariff. Both are considered protectionist in nature.

2007 Ron Paul 50:4
The fact that the Chinese keep their currency artificially weak is a benefit to American consumers and long term is inflationary for the Chinese.

2007 Ron Paul 50:5
This deep and legitimate concern for the trade imbalance between China and the US will fall short if the issue of fluctuating, world-wide fiat currencies, is not addressed.

2007 Ron Paul 50:6
The fact that the US dollar is the principal reserve currency of the world gives us a benefit that others do not enjoy. It allows us to export paper dollars and import goods manufactured in countries with cheap labor. It also allows us to finance the welfare/warfare state with cheap loans from China and Japan. It's a good deal for us but according to economic law must come to an end, and the end will be messy for the US consumer and for world trade.

2007 Ron Paul 50:7
The current system can only last as long as the trust in the dollar is maintained and foreigners are willing to accept them as if they had real value.

2007 Ron Paul 50:8
Ironically, the most serious problem we face is a sharply weakening dollar, in danger of collapse, and yet many are now asking for a policy, dealing with the Chinese, that would accelerate the dollar's decline. And yet we're told that we maintain a strong dollar policy.

2007 Ron Paul 50:9
Financing deficits with monetary inflation is in itself a weak dollar policy in the long term. Trust in our currency due to our economic and military strength artificially props up the dollar on international exchange markets. Since these benefits come not from production or sound money policies, they only contribute to the instability and imbalances in international trade.

2007 Ron Paul 50:10
Neither tariffs nor forced devaluations can solve the problem.

2007 Ron Paul 50:11
Our current account deficit and huge foreign indebtedness is a reflection of the world monetary system of fiat money. The longer the trade imbalances last, the more difficult the adjustment will be. The market will eventually force these adjustments on us.

2007 Ron Paul 50:12
Eventually it will be necessary to consider commodity-based money to solve the trade imbalances that concern so many here in the Congress.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 51
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducting The Parental Consent Act 17 May 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, May 17, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 51:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Parental Consent Act. This bill forbids Federal funds from being used for any universal or mandatory mental health screening of students without the express, written, voluntary, informed consent of their parents or legal guardian. This bill protects the fundamental right of parents to direct and control the upbringing and education of their children.

2007 Ron Paul 51:2
The New Freedom Commission on Mental Health has recommended that the Federal and State governments work toward the implementation of a comprehensive system of mental health screening for all Americans. The commission recommends that universal or mandatory mental health screening first be implemented in public schools as a prelude to expanding it to the general public. However, neither the commission’s report nor any related mental health screening proposal requires parental consent before a child is subjected to mental health screening. Federally-funded universal or mandatory mental health screening in schools without parental consent could lead to labeling more children as “ADD” or “hyperactive” and thus force more children to take psychotropic drugs, such as Ritalin, against their parents’ wishes.

2007 Ron Paul 51:3
Already, too many children are suffering from being prescribed psychotropic drugs for nothing more than children’s typical rambunctious behavior. According to Medco Health Solutions, more than 2.2 million children are receiving more than one psychotropic drug at one time. In fact, according to Medico Trends, in 2003, total spending on psychiatric drugs for children exceeded spending on antibiotics or asthma medication.

2007 Ron Paul 51:4
Many children have suffered harmful side effects from using psychotropic drugs. Some of the possible side effects include mania, violence, dependence, and weight gain. Yet, parents are already being threatened with child abuse charges if they resist efforts to drug their children. Imagine how much easier it will be to drug children against their parents’ wishes if a Federally-funded mental health screener makes the recommendation.

2007 Ron Paul 51:5
Universal or mandatory mental health screening could also provide a justification for stigmatizing children from families that support traditional values. Even the authors of mental health diagnosis manuals admit that mental health diagnoses are subjective and based on social constructions. Therefore, it is all too easy for a psychiatrist to label a person’s disagreement with the psychiatrist’s political beliefs a mental disorder. For example, a Federally- funded school violence prevention program lists “intolerance” as a mental problem that may lead to school violence. Because “intolerance” is often a code word for believing in traditional values, children who share their parents’ values could be labeled as having mental problems and a risk of causing violence. If the mandatory mental health screening program applies to adults, everyone who believes in traditional values could have his or her beliefs stigmatized as a sign of a mental disorder. Taxpayer dollars should not support programs that may label those who adhere to traditional values as having a “mental disorder.”

2007 Ron Paul 51:6
Madam Speaker, universal or mandatory mental health screening threatens to undermine parents’ right to raise their children as the parents see fit. Forced mental health screening could also endanger the health of children by leading to more children being improperly placed on psychotropic drugs, such as Ritalin, or stigmatized as “mentally ill” or a risk of causing violence because they adhere to traditional values. Congress has a responsibility to the Nation’s parents and children to stop this from happening. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Parental Consent Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 52
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Federal Housing Finance Reform Act Of 2007 17 May 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, May 17, 2007

The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1427) to reform the regulation of certain housing-related Government-sponsored enterprises, and for other purposes.

2007 Ron Paul 52:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1427 fails to address the core problems with the Government Sponsored Enterprises, GSEs. Furthermore, since this legislation creates new government programs that will further artificially increase the demand for housing, H.R. 1427 increases the economic damage that will occur from the bursting of the housing bubble. The main problem with the GSEs is the special privileges the Federal Government gives the GSEs. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received almost 20 billion dollars worth of indirect Federal subsidies in fiscal year 2004 alone, while Wayne Passmore of the Federal Reserve estimates the value of the GSE’s Federal subsides to be between $122 and $182 billion dollars.

2007 Ron Paul 52:2
One of the major privileges the Federal Government grants to the GSEs is a line of credit from the United States Treasury. According to some estimates, the line of credit may be worth over 2 billion dollars. GSEs also benefit from an explicit grant of legal authority given to the Federal Reserve to purchase the debt of the GSEs. GSEs are the only institutions besides the United States Treasury granted explicit statutory authority to monetize their debt through the Federal Reserve. This provision gives the GSEs a source of liquidity unavailable to their competitors.

2007 Ron Paul 52:3
This implicit promise by the Government to bail out the GSEs in times of economic difficulty helps the GSEs attract investors who are willing to settle for lower yields than they would demand in the absence of the subsidy. Thus, the line of credit distorts the allocation of capital. More importantly, the line of credit is a promise on behalf of the Government to engage in a massive unconstitutional and immoral income transfer from working Americans to holders of GSE debt.

2007 Ron Paul 52:4
The connection between the GSEs and the Government helps isolate the GSEs’ managements from market discipline. This isolation from market discipline is the root cause of the mismanagement occurring at Fannie and Freddie. After all, if investors did not believe that the Federal Government would bail out Fannie and Freddie if the GSEs faced financial crises, then investors would have forced the GSEs to provide assurances that the GSEs are following accepted management and accounting practices before investors would consider Fannie and Freddie to be good investments.

2007 Ron Paul 52:5
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has expressed concern that the government subsidies provided to the GSEs makes investors underestimate the risk of investing in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Although he has endorsed many of the regulatory “solutions” being considered here today, Chairman Greenspan has implicitly admitted the subsidies are the true source of the problems with Fannie and Freddie.

2007 Ron Paul 52:6
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1427 compounds these problems by further insulating the GSEs from market discipline. By creating a “world-class” regulator, Congress would send a signal to investors that investors need not concern themselves with investigating the financial health and stability of Fannie and Freddie since a “world-class” regulator is performing that function.

2007 Ron Paul 52:7
However, one of the forgotten lessons of the financial scandals of a few years ago is that the market is superior at discovering and punishing fraud and other misbehavior than are government regulators. After all, the market discovered, and began to punish, the accounting irregularities of Enron before the government regulators did.

2007 Ron Paul 52:8
Concerns have been raised about the new regulator’s independence from the Treasury Department. This is more than a bureaucratic “turf battle” as there are legitimate worries that isolating the regulator from Treasury oversight may lead to regulatory capture. Regulatory capture occurs when regulators serve the interests of the businesses they are supposed to be regulating instead of the public interest. While H.R. 1427 does have some provisions that claim to minimize the risk of regulatory capture, regulatory capture is always a threat where regulators have significant control over the operations of an industry. After all, the industry obviously has a greater incentive than any other stakeholder to influence the behavior of the regulator.

2007 Ron Paul 52:9
The flip side of regulatory capture is that mangers and owners of highly subsidized and regulated industries are more concerned with pleasing the regulators than with pleasing consumers or investors, since the industries know that investors will believe all is well if the regulator is happy. Thus, the regulator and the regulated industry may form a symbiosis where each looks out for the other’s interests while ignoring the concerns of investors.

2007 Ron Paul 52:10
Furthermore, my colleagues should consider the constitutionality of an “independent regulator.” The Founders provided for three branches of government — an executive, a judiciary, and a legislature. Each branch was created as sovereign in its sphere, and there were to be clear lines of accountability for each branch. However, independent regulators do not fit comfortably within the three branches; nor are they totally accountable to any branch. Regulators at these independent agencies often make judicial-like decisions, but they are not part of the judiciary. They often make rules, similar to the ones regarding capital requirements, that have the force of law, but independent regulators are not legislative. And, of course, independent regulators enforce the laws in the same way, as do other parts of the executive branch; yet independent regulators lack the day-to-day accountability to the executive that provides a check on other regulators.

2007 Ron Paul 52:11
Thus, these independent regulators have a concentration of powers of all three branches and lack direct accountability to any of the democratically chosen branches of government. This flies in the face of the Founders’ opposition to concentrations of power and government bureaucracies that lack accountability. These concerns are especially relevant considering the remarkable degree of power and autonomy this bill gives to the regulator. For example, in the scheme established by H.R. 1427 the regulator’s budget is not subject to appropriations. This removes a powerful mechanism for holding the regulator accountable to Congress. While the regulator is accountable to a board of directors, this board may conduct all deliberations in private because it is not subject to the Sunshine Act.

2007 Ron Paul 52:12
Ironically, by transferring the risk of widespread mortgage defaults to the taxpayers through Government subsidies and convincing investors that all is well because a “world- class” regulator is ensuring the GSEs’ soundness, the Government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges of Fannie and Freddie have distorted the housing market by allowing Fannie and Freddie to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive uses into housing. This reduces the efficacy of the entire market and thus reduces the standard of living of all Americans.

2007 Ron Paul 52:13
Despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the Government’s interference in the housing market, the Government’s policy of diverting capital into housing creates a short-term boom in housing. Like all artificially created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have been had government policy not actively encouraged overinvestment in housing.

2007 Ron Paul 52:14
H.R. 1427 further distorts the housing market by artificially inflating the demand for housing through the creation of a national housing trust fund. This fund further diverts capital to housing that, absent Government intervention, would be put to a use more closely matching the demands of consumers. Thus, this new housing program will reduce efficacy and create yet another unconstitutional redistribution program.

2007 Ron Paul 52:15
Perhaps the Federal Reserve can stave off the day of reckoning by purchasing the GSEs’ debt and pumping liquidity into the housing market, but this cannot hold off the inevitable drop in the housing market forever. In fact, postponing the necessary and painful market corrections will only deepen the inevitable fall. The more people are invested in the market, the greater the effects across the economy when the bubble bursts.

2007 Ron Paul 52:16
Instead of addressing Government polices encouraging the misallocation of resources to the housing market, H.R. 1427 further introduces distortion into the housing market by expanding the authority of Federal regulators to approve the introduction of new products by the GSEs. Such regulation inevitability delays the introduction of new innovations to the market, or even prevents some potentially valuable products from making it to the market. Of course, these new regulations are justified in part by the GSEs’ government subsidies. We once again see how one bad intervention in the market (the GSEs’ government subsides) leads to another (the new regulations).

2007 Ron Paul 52:17
In conclusion, H.R. 1427 compounds the problems with the GSEs and may increase the damage that will be inflicted by a bursting of the housing bubble. This is because this bill creates a new unaccountable regulator and introduces further distortions into the housing market via increased regulatory power. H.R. 1427 also violates the Constitution by creating yet another unaccountable regulator with quasi-executive, judicial, and legislative powers. Instead of expanding unconstitutional and market distorting government bureaucracies, Congress should act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bailout investors who were misled by foolish Government interference in the market.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 53
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement On Immigration Reform 18 May 2007

2007 Ron Paul 53:1
I remain very skeptical about the idea of so-called comprehensive immigration reform and the Senate compromise now being discussed. I will oppose any legislation that in any way, shape, or form grants amnesty to the millions of people who are in this country illegally. I have advocated that we should tighten citizenship requirements, and I still believe that. Moreover, the argument that we need to start a guest worker program is simply a shell game, we already have a generous guest worker program that the American people support. Support for such a program should not be used as a back door to amnesty for illegals.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 54
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

The Affordable Gas Price Act 21 May 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 21, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 54:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Affordable Gas Price Act. This legislation reduces gas prices by reforming government polices that artificially inflate the price of gas. As I need not remind my colleagues, the American people are being hard hit by skyrocketing gas prices. In some parts of the country, gas prices have risen to as much as $4 per gallon.

2007 Ron Paul 54:2
This increase in the price of gas threatens our already fragile economy and diminishes the quality of life for all Americans. One industry that is particularly hard hit is the trucking industry. The effects of high gas prices on the trucking industry will be reflected in increased costs for numerous consumer goods, thus further harming American consumers.

2007 Ron Paul 54:3
Unfortunately, many proposals to address the problem of higher energy prices involve increasing government interference in the market through policies such as price controls. These big government solutions will, at best, prove ineffective and, at worst, bring back the fuel shortages and gas lines of the seventies.

2007 Ron Paul 54:4
Instead of expanding government, Congress should repeal federal laws and polices that raise the price of gas, either directly through taxes or indirectly though regulations that. discourage the development of new fuel sources. This is why my legislation repeals the federal moratorium on offshore drilling and allows oil exploration in the ANWR reserve in Alaska. My bill also ensures that the National Environmental Policy Act’s environmental impact statement requirement will no longer be used as a tool to force refiners to waste valuable time and capital on nuisance litigation. The Affordable Gas Price Act also provides tax incentives to encourage investment in new refineries.

2007 Ron Paul 54:5
Federal fuel taxes are a major part of gasoline’s cost. The Affordable Gas Price Act suspends the federal gasoline tax any time the average gas prices exceeds $3.00 per gallon. During the suspension, the federal government will have a legal responsibility to ensure the federal highway trust fund remains funded. My bill also raises the amount of mileage reimbursement not subject to taxes, and, during times of high oil prices, provides the same mileage reimbursement benefit to charity and medical organizations as provided to businesses.

2007 Ron Paul 54:6
Misguided and outdated trade polices are also artificially raising the price of gas. For instance, even though Russia and Kazakhstan allow their citizens the right and opportunity to emigrate, they are still subject to Jackson- Vanik sanctions, even though Jackson-Vanik was a reaction to the Soviet Union’s highly restrictive emigration policy. Eliminating Jackson- Vanik’s threat of trade-restricting sanctions would increase the United States’ access to oil supplies from non-Arab countries. Thus, my bill terminates the application of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 to Russia and Khazaskin, allowing Americans to enjoy the benefits of free trade with these oil-producing nations.

2007 Ron Paul 54:7
Finally, the Affordable Gas Price Act creates a federal study on how the abandonment of the gold standard and the adoption of freely floating currencies are affecting the price of oil. It is no coincidence that oil prices first became an issue shortly after President Nixon unilaterally severed the dollar’s last connection to gold. The system of fiat money makes consumers vulnerable to inflation and to constant fluctuations in the prices of essential goods such as oil.

2007 Ron Paul 54:8
In conclusion Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the Affordable Gas Price Act and end government polices that increase the cost of gasoline.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 55
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

In The Name Of Patriotism (Who Are The Patriots?) 22 May 2007

2007 Ron Paul 55:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, for some, patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. For others, it means dissent against a government’s abuse of the people’s rights.

2007 Ron Paul 55:2
I have never met a politician in Washington or any American, for that matter, who chose to be called unpatriotic. Nor have I met anyone who did not believe he wholeheartedly supported our troops, wherever they may be.

2007 Ron Paul 55:3
What I have heard all too frequently from the various individuals are sharp accusations that, because their political opponents disagree with them on the need for foreign military entanglements, they were unpatriotic, un- American evildoers deserving contempt.

2007 Ron Paul 55:4
The original American patriots were those individuals brave enough to resist with force the oppressive power of King George. I accept the definition of patriotism as that effort to resist oppressive state power.

2007 Ron Paul 55:5
The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility and out of self- interest for himself, his family, and the future of his country to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to the state. Resistance need not be violent, but the civil disobedience that might be required involves confrontation with the state and invites possible imprisonment.

2007 Ron Paul 55:6
Peaceful, nonviolent revolutions against tyranny have been every bit as successful as those involving military confrontation. Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., achieved great political successes by practicing nonviolence, and yet they suffered physically at the hands of the state. But whether the resistance against government tyrants is nonviolent or physically violent, the effort to overthrow state oppression qualifies as true patriotism.

2007 Ron Paul 55:7
True patriotism today has gotten a bad name, at least from the government and the press. Those who now challenge the unconstitutional methods of imposing an income tax on us, or force us to use a monetary system designed to serve the rich at the expense of the poor are routinely condemned. These American patriots are sadly looked down upon by many. They are never praised as champions of liberty as Gandhi and Martin Luther King have been.

2007 Ron Paul 55:8
Liberals, who withhold their taxes as a protest against war, are vilified as well, especially by conservatives. Unquestioned loyalty to the state is especially demanded in times of war. Lack of support for a war policy is said to be unpatriotic. Arguments against a particular policy that endorses a war, once it is started, are always said to be endangering the troops in the field. This, they blatantly claim, is unpatriotic, and all dissent must stop. Yet, it is dissent from government policies that defines the true patriot and champion of liberty.

2007 Ron Paul 55:9
It is conveniently ignored that the only authentic way to best support the troops is to keep them out of danger’s undeclared no-win wars that are politically inspired. Sending troops off to war for reasons that are not truly related to national security and, for that matter, may even damage our security, is hardly a way to patriotically support the troops.

2007 Ron Paul 55:10
Who are the true patriots, those who conform or those who protest against wars without purpose? How can it be said that blind support for a war, no matter how misdirected the policy, is the duty of a patriot?

2007 Ron Paul 55:11
Randolph Bourne said that, “War is the health of the state.” With war, he argued, the state thrives. Those who believe in the powerful state see war as an opportunity. Those who mistrust the people and the market for solving problems have no trouble promoting a “war psychology” to justify the expansive role of the state. This includes the role the Federal Government plays in our lives, as well as in our economic transactions.

2007 Ron Paul 55:12
Certainly, the neoconservative belief that we have a moral obligation to spread American values worldwide through force justifies the conditions of war in order to rally support at home for the heavy hand of government. It is through this policy, it should surprise no one, that our liberties are undermined. The economy becomes overextended, and our involvement worldwide becomes prohibited. Out of fear of being labeled unpatriotic, most of the citizens become compliant and accept the argument that some loss of liberty is required to fight the war in order to remain safe.

2007 Ron Paul 55:13
This is a bad trade-off, in my estimation, especially when done in the name of patriotism. Loyalty to the state and to autocratic leaders is substituted for true patriotism, that is, a willingness to challenge the state and defend the country, the people and the culture. The more difficult the times, the stronger the admonition comes that the leaders be not criticized.

2007 Ron Paul 55:14
Because the crisis atmosphere of war supports the growth of the state, any problem invites an answer by declaring war, even on social and economic issues. This elicits patriotism in support of various government solutions, while enhancing the power of the state. Faith in government coercion and a lack of understanding of how free societies operate encourages big government liberals and big government conservatives to manufacture a war psychology to demand political loyalty for domestic policy just as is required in foreign affairs.

2007 Ron Paul 55:15
The long-term cost in dollars spent and liberties lost is neglected as immediate needs are emphasized. It is for this reason that we have multiple perpetual wars going on simultaneously. Thus, the war on drugs, the war against gun ownership, the war against poverty, the war against illiteracy, the war against terrorism, as well as our foreign military entanglements are endless.

2007 Ron Paul 55:16
All this effort promotes the growth of statism at the expense of liberty. A government designed for a free society should do the opposite, prevent the growth of statism and preserve liberty.

2007 Ron Paul 55:17
Once a war of any sort is declared, the message is sent out not to object or you will be declared unpatriotic. Yet, we must not forget that the true patriot is the one who protests in spite of the consequences. Condemnation or ostracism or even imprisonment may result.

2007 Ron Paul 55:18
Nonviolent protesters of the Tax Code are frequently imprisoned, whether they are protesting the code’s unconstitutionality or the war that the tax revenues are funding. Resisters to the military draft or even to Selective Service registration are threatened and imprisoned for challenging this threat to liberty.

2007 Ron Paul 55:19
Statism depends on the idea that the government owns us and citizens must obey. Confiscating the fruits of our labor through the income tax is crucial to the health of the state. The draft, or even the mere existence of the Selective Service, emphasizes that we will march off to war at the state’s pleasure.

2007 Ron Paul 55:20
A free society rejects all notions of involuntary servitude, whether by draft or the confiscation of the fruits of our labor through the personal income tax. A more sophisticated and less well-known technique for enhancing the state is the manipulation and transfer of wealth through the fiat monetary system operated by the secretive Federal Reserve.

2007 Ron Paul 55:21
Protesters against this unconstitutional system of paper money are considered unpatriotic criminals and at times are imprisoned for their beliefs. The fact that, according to the Constitution, only gold and silver are legal tender and paper money outlawed matters little. The principle of patriotism is turned on its head. Whether it’s with regard to the defense of welfare spending at home, confiscatory income tax, or an immoral monetary system or support for a war fought under false pretense without a legal declaration, the defenders of liberty and the Constitution are portrayed as unpatriotic, while those who support these programs are seen as the patriots.

2007 Ron Paul 55:22
If there is a war going on, supporting the state’s effort to win the war is expected at all costs, no dissent. The real problem is that those who love the state too often advocate policies that lead to military action. At home, they are quite willing to produce a crisis atmosphere and claim a war is needed to solve the problem. Under these conditions, the people are more willing to bear the burden of paying for the war and to carelessly sacrifice liberties which they are told is necessary.

2007 Ron Paul 55:23
The last 6 years have been quite beneficial to the health of the state, which comes at the expense of personal liberty. Every enhanced unconstitutional power of the state can only be achieved at the expense of individual liberty. Even though in every war in which we have been engaged civil liberties have suffered, some have been restored after the war ended, but never completely. That has resulted in a steady erosion of our liberties over the past 200 years. Our government was originally designed to protect our liberties, but it has now, instead, become the usurper of those liberties.

2007 Ron Paul 55:24
We currently live in the most difficult of times for guarding against an expanding central government with a steady erosion of our freedoms. We are continually being reminded that 9/11 has changed everything.

2007 Ron Paul 55:25
Unfortunately, the policy that needed most to be changed, that is our policy of foreign interventionism, has only been expanded. There is no pretense any longer that a policy of humility in foreign affairs, without being the world’s policemen and engaging in nation building, is worthy of consideration.

2007 Ron Paul 55:26
We now live in a post-9/11 America where our government is going to make us safe no matter what it takes. We are expected to grin and bear it and adjust to every loss of our liberties in the name of patriotism and security.

2007 Ron Paul 55:27
Though the majority of Americans initially welcomed the declared effort to make us safe, and we are willing to sacrifice for the cause, more and more Americans are now becoming concerned about civil liberties being needlessly and dangerously sacrificed.

2007 Ron Paul 55:28
The problem is that the Iraq war continues to drag on, and a real danger of it spreading exists. There is no evidence that a truce will soon be signed in Iraq or in the war on terror or the war on drugs. Victory is not even definable. If Congress is incapable of declaring an official war, it is impossible to know when it will end. We have been fully forewarned that the world conflict in which we are now engaged will last a long, long time.

2007 Ron Paul 55:29
The war mentality and the pervasive fear of an unidentified enemy allows for a steady erosion of our liberties, and, with this, our respect for self-reliance and confidence is lost. Just think of the self-sacrifice and the humiliation we go through at the airport screening process on a routine basis. Though there is no scientific evidence of any likelihood of liquids and gels being mixed on an airplane to make a bomb, billions of dollars are wasted throwing away toothpaste and hair spray, and searching old women in wheelchairs.

2007 Ron Paul 55:30
Our enemies say, boo, and we jump, we panic, and then we punish ourselves. We are worse than a child being afraid of the dark. But in a way, the fear of indefinable terrorism is based on our inability to admit the truth about why there is a desire by a small number of angry radical Islamists to kill Americans. It is certainly not because they are jealous of our wealth and freedoms.

2007 Ron Paul 55:31
We fail to realize that the extremists, willing to sacrifice their own lives to kill their enemies, do so out of a sense of weakness and desperation over real and perceived attacks on their way of life, their religion, their country, and their natural resources. Without the conventional diplomatic or military means to retaliate against these attacks, and an unwillingness of their own government to address the issue, they resort to the desperation tactic of suicide terrorism. Their anger toward their own governments, which they believe are coconspirators with the American Government, is equal to or greater than that directed toward us.

2007 Ron Paul 55:32
These errors in judgment in understanding the motive of the enemy and the constant fear that is generated have brought us to this crisis where our civil liberties and privacy are being steadily eroded in the name of preserving national security.

2007 Ron Paul 55:33
We may be the economic and the military giant of the world, but the effort to stop this war on our liberties here at home in the name of patriotism is being lost.

2007 Ron Paul 55:34
The erosion of our personal liberties started long before 9/11, but 9/11 accelerated the process. There are many things that motivate those who pursue this course, both well-intentioned and malevolent, but it would not happen if the people remained vigilant, understood the importance of individual rights, and were unpersuaded that a need for security justifies the sacrifice for liberty, even if it is just now and then.

2007 Ron Paul 55:35
The true patriot challenges the state when the state embarks on enhancing its power at the expense of the individual. Without a better understanding and a greater determination to rein in the state, the rights of Americans that resulted from the revolutionary break from the British and the writing of the Constitution will disappear.

2007 Ron Paul 55:36
The record since September 11th is dismal. Respect for liberty has rapidly deteriorated. Many of the new laws passed after 9/11 had, in fact, been proposed long before that attack. The political atmosphere after that attack simply made it more possible to pass such legislation. The fear generated by 9/11 became an opportunity for those seeking to promote the power of the state domestically, just as it served to falsely justify the long plan for invasion of Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 55:37
The war mentality was generated by the Iraq war in combination with the constant drumbeat of fear at home. Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, who is now likely residing in Pakistan, our supposed ally, are ignored, as our troops fight and die in Iraq and are made easier targets for the terrorists in their backyard. While our leaders constantly use the mess we created to further justify the erosion of our constitutional rights here at home, we forget about our own borders and support the inexorable move toward global government, hardly a good plan for America.

2007 Ron Paul 55:38
The accelerated attacks on liberty started quickly after 9/11. Within weeks, the PATRIOT Act was overwhelmingly passed by Congress. Though the final version was unavailable up to a few hours before the vote, no Member had sufficient time. Political fear of not doing something, even something harmful, drove the Members of Congress to not question the contents, and just voted for it. A little less freedom for a little more perceived safety was considered a fair trade-off, and the majority of Americans applauded.

2007 Ron Paul 55:39
The PATRIOT Act, though, severely eroded the system of checks and balances by giving the government the power to spy on law-abiding citizens without judicial supervision. The several provisions that undermine the liberties of all Americans include sneak- and-peek searches, a broadened and more vague definition of domestic terrorism, allowing the FBI access to libraries and bookstore records without search warrants or probable cause, easier FBI initiation of wiretaps and searches, as well as roving wiretaps, easier access to information on American citizens’ use of the Internet, and easier access to e-mail and financial records of all American citizens.

2007 Ron Paul 55:40
The attack on privacy has not relented over the past 6 years. The Military Commissions Act is a particularly egregious piece of legislation and, if not repealed, will change America for the worse as the powers unconstitutionally granted to the executive branch are used and abused. This act grants excessive authority to use secretive military commissions outside of places where active hostilities are going on. The Military Commissions Act permits torture, arbitrary detention of American citizens as unlawful enemy combatants at the full discretion of the President and without the right of habeas corpus, and warrantless searches by the NSA. It also gives to the President the power to imprison individuals based on secret testimony.

2007 Ron Paul 55:41
Since 9/11, Presidential signing statements designating portions of legislation that the President does not intend to follow, though not legal under the Constitution, have enormously multiplied. Unconstitutional Executive Orders are numerous and mischievous and need to be curtailed.

2007 Ron Paul 55:42
Extraordinary rendition to secret prisons around the world have been widely engaged in, though obviously extralegal.

2007 Ron Paul 55:43
A growing concern in the post-9/11 environment is the Federal Government’s list of potential terrorists based on secret evidence. Mistakes are made, and sometimes it is virtually impossible to get one’s name removed even though the accused is totally innocent of any wrongdoing.

2007 Ron Paul 55:44
A national ID card is now in the process of being implemented. It is called the REAL ID card, and it is tied to our Social Security numbers and our State driver’s license. If REAL ID is not stopped, it will become a national driver’s license ID for all Americans. We will be required to carry our papers.

2007 Ron Paul 55:45
Some of the least noticed and least discussed changes in the law were the changes made to the Insurrection Act of 1807 and to posse comitatus by the Defense Authorization Act of 2007. These changes pose a threat to the survival of our Republic by giving the President the power to declare martial law for as little reason as to restore public order. The 1807 act severely restricted the President in his use of the military within the United States borders, and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 strengthened these restrictions with strict oversight by Congress. The new law allows the President to circumvent the restrictions of both laws. The Insurrection Act has now become the “Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.” This is hardly a title that suggests that the authors cared about or understood the nature of a constitutional Republic.

2007 Ron Paul 55:46
Now, martial law can be declared not just for insurrection, but also for natural disasters, public health reasons, terrorist attacks or incidents, or for the vague reason called “other conditions.” The President can call up the National Guard without congressional approval or the Governors’ approval, and even send these State Guard troops into other States.

2007 Ron Paul 55:47
The American Republic is in remnant status. The stage is set for our country eventually devolving into a military dictatorship, and few seem to care. These precedent-setting changes in the law are extremely dangerous and will change American jurisprudence forever if not revised. The beneficial results of our revolt against the King’s abuses are about to be eliminated, and few Members of Congress and few Americans are aware of the seriousness of the situation. Complacency and fear drive our legislation without any serious objection by our elected leaders. Sadly, though, those few who do object to this self-evident trend away from personal liberty and empire building overseas are portrayed as unpatriotic and uncaring.

2007 Ron Paul 55:48
Though welfare and socialism always fails, opponents of them are said to lack compassion. Though opposition to totally unnecessary war should be the only moral position, the rhetoric is twisted to claim that patriots who oppose the war are not supporting the troops. The cliche “Support the Troops” is incessantly used as a substitute for the unacceptable notion of supporting the policy, no matter how flawed it may be.

2007 Ron Paul 55:49
Unsound policy can never help the troops. Keeping the troops out of harm’s way and out of wars unrelated to our national security is the only real way of protecting the troops. With this understanding, just who can claim the title of “patriot”?

2007 Ron Paul 55:50
Before the war in the Middle East spreads and becomes a world conflict for which we will be held responsible, or the liberties of all Americans become so suppressed we can no longer resist, much has to be done. Time is short, but our course of action should be clear. Resistance to illegal and unconstitutional usurpation of our rights is required. Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes.

2007 Ron Paul 55:51
But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 56
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Opening Statement Committee on Financial Services World Bank Hearing 22 May 2007

2007 Ron Paul 56:1
Of all the elements of the Bretton Woods system, perhaps the most enduring has been the World Bank and its associated institutions. Although highly regarded in some circles, the Bank has been a significant failure in helping the residents of poor and developing nations.

2007 Ron Paul 56:2
Like many bureaucracies, the World Bank has constantly attempted to reinvent itself and redefine its mission. Some critics have referred to this as “mission creep.” It is the reaction of self-interested bureaucrats who are intent on saving their jobs at all costs. The non-institutional elements of Bretton Woods, such as the gold-backed dollar standard, have gone by the wayside, but the World Bank and the IMF soldier on.

2007 Ron Paul 56:3
What is most annoying about the World Bank are the criticisms alleging that the Bank and its actions demonstrate the negative side of free-market capitalism. Nothing could be further from the truth. The World Bank is not an organization devoted to capitalism, or to the free market, but to state-run corporate capitalism. Established and managed by a multitude of national governments, the World Bank promotes managed trade, by which politically connected individuals and corporation enrich themselves at the expense of the poor and middle class.

2007 Ron Paul 56:4
Western governments tax their citizens to fund the World Bank, lend this money to corrupt Third World dictators who abscond with the funds, and then demand repayment which is extracted through taxation from poor Third World citizens, rather than from the government officials responsible for the embezzlement. It is in essence a global transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. Taxpayers around the world are forced to subsidize the lavish lifestyles of Third World dictators and highly-paid World Bank bureaucrats who don't even pay income tax.

2007 Ron Paul 56:5
The World Bank has outlived its intended purpose. Capital markets are flush with money and well-developed enough to lend money not just to national governments but to local and regional development projects, at competitive market rates. In the aftermath of Mr. Wolfowitz's departure, much will be made of the question of his successor, when the questioning instead should be directed towards the phasing out of the organization.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 57
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Unanticipated Good results (When We leave) 6 June 2007

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

2007 Ron Paul 57:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, good intentions frequently lead to unintended bad consequences. Tough choices, doing what is right, often leads to unanticipated good results.

2007 Ron Paul 57:2
The growing demand by the American people for us to leave Iraq prompts the naysayers to predict disaster in the Middle East if we do. Of course, these merchants of fear are the same ones who predicted invading and occupying Iraq would be a slam-dunk operation, that we would be welcomed as liberators and oil revenues would pay the bills with minimum loss of American lives. All this hyperbole, while ignoring the precise warnings by our intelligence community of the great difficulties that would lie ahead.

2007 Ron Paul 57:3
The chaos that this pre-emptive undeclared war has created in Iraq has allowed the al Qaeda to establish a foothold in Iraq and the strategic interests of Iran to be served. The unintended consequences have been numerous. A well-intentioned but flawed policy that ignored credible warnings of how things could go awry has produced conditions that have led to a war dominated by procrastination without victory or resolution in sight.

2007 Ron Paul 57:4
Those who want a total military victory, which no one has yet defined, don’t have the troops, the money, the equipment, or the support of a large majority of the American people to do so. Those in Congress who have heard the cry of the electorate to end the war refuse to do so out of fear the demagogues will challenge their patriotism and their support for the troops. So nothing happens except more of the same. The result is continued stalemate with the current policy and the daily sacrifice of American lives.

2007 Ron Paul 57:5
This wait-and-see attitude and a promised reassessment of events in Iraq late this summer strongly motivates the insurgents to accelerate the killing of Americans to influence the coming decision in 3 months. In contrast, a clear decision to leave would prompt a wait-and-see attitude, a de facto cease fire, in anticipation of our leaving; a perfect time for Iraqi factions to hold their fire on each and on our troops and just possibly start talking with each other.

2007 Ron Paul 57:6
Most Americans do not anticipate a military victory in Iraq, yet the Washington politicians remain frozen in their unwillingness to change our policy there, fearful of the dire predictions that conditions can only get worse if they leave. They refuse to admit the conditions of foreign occupation is the key ingredient that unleashed the civil war now raging in Iraq and serves as a recruiting device for al Qaeda. It is time for a change in American foreign policy.

2007 Ron Paul 57:7
But what if those who were so wrong in their predictions as to the outcome of their invasion are equally wrong about what might happen if we leave? Unanticipated good results may well occur. There is room for optimism. The naysayers have been wrong before and are probably going to be wrong again.

2007 Ron Paul 57:8
The truth is, no one knows exactly what would happen if we leave. Civil strife may last for a while longer, but one thing is certain, no longer will American lives be lost. That in itself would be a blessing and reason enough for doing so.

2007 Ron Paul 57:9
After we left Vietnam under dire circumstances, chaos continued, but no more American lives were lost. But, subsequently, we and the Vietnamese have achieved in peace what could not be achieved in war. We now are friends. We trade with each other, and we invest in Vietnam. The result proves the sound advice of the Founders: Trade in friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none. Example and persuasion is far superior to force of arms for promoting America’s goodness.

2007 Ron Paul 57:10
It is claimed that we cannot leave until a new military faction is trained to fill the vacuum. But the question is, will there really be a vacuum, or are we talking about our proxy army being trained well enough to continue to do battle with the very strong militias already in place? Lack of training for the local militias has never been a problem for them.

2007 Ron Paul 57:11
The real problem with our plans to train a faction of Iraqis to carry out our plans for the Middle East is that the majority of Iraqis object and the army trainees are not as motivated as are the members of the various militias. The Kurds have a militia capable of maintaining order in their region. Sadr has a huge militia that is anxious to restore order and have us gone. The Badr brigade is trained to defend its interests. And the Sunnis are armed and determined. Our presence only serves to stir the pot by our troops being a target of nearly all the groups who are positioning themselves for our anticipated departure.

2007 Ron Paul 57:12
After we leave, just maybe the Shiites and the Sunnis will develop an alliance based on nationalism. They already talk of this possibility, and it could include the Badr brigade and the Sadr militias. A coalition like this could serve as an efficient deterrent to al Qaeda and Iran since they all share this goal.

2007 Ron Paul 57:13
Al Qaeda and Iran were not influential in Iraq before the invasion and would not be welcomed after we leave. There is cooperation now, motivated by the shared desire of the Sunnis and the Shiites to oppose our occupation. There’s definitely a potential that the Iraqis may do much better in dealing with their own problems than anyone can imagine once we leave. Already there are developing coalitions of Sunni and Shiites in the Iraqi parliament that seek this resolve.

2007 Ron Paul 57:14
It is claimed by some that leaving the Middle East would not serve the interests of Israel. Israel with its nuclear arsenal is quite capable of defending itself under all circumstances. Its dependency on us frequently prevents it from taking action that otherwise may be in its best interests because we do not approve of such actions. Israel’s overtures to Syria and other neighbors would not be road blocked by U.S. policy if we left the Middle East. With us gone Israel would have greater motivation to talk with other Arab countries as they did with Egypt. It just may be that Israel would accept the overtures made by the Arab League for a comprehensive peace. The Arab League might be an acceptable alternative to the U.S. influencing policy in the region.

2007 Ron Paul 57:15
We’re told we can’t let this happen or we’ll lose control of the oil and gasoline prices will soar — exactly what has happened with our invasion. And if the neo-conservatives have their way there will be an attack on Iran. If that occurs, then watch what happens to the price of oil.

2007 Ron Paul 57:16
No matter who ends up controlling the oil they will always have a need for western markets. Instead of oil prices soaring with our leaving, production may go up and prices fall A change in our foreign policy is overdue.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 58
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Sanctity Of Life Act 6 June 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, June 6, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 58:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Sanctity of Life Act. The Sanctity of Life Act provides that the Federal courts of the United States, up to and including the Supreme Court, do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases. The legislation also clarifies that State and local courts do not have to treat Federal cases overturning State abortion laws as binding precedent.

2007 Ron Paul 58:2
Abortion on demand is no doubt the most serious sociopolitical problem of our age. The lack of respect for life that permits abortion significantly contributes to our violent culture and our careless attitude toward liberty. Whether a civilized society treats human life with dignity or contempt determines the outcome of that civilization. Reaffirming the importance of the sanctity of life is crucial for the continuation of a civilized society. There is already strong evidence that we are on the slippery slope toward euthanasia and non-consensual human experimentation. Although the real problem lies within people’s hearts and minds, the legal problems of protecting life stem from the ill-advised Roe v. Wade ruling, where the court usurped the State’s authority over abortion. Congress can, and should, take a major step toward restoring respect for all life by using the authority granted to it in Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution to rein in rogue Federal judges from interfering with a State’s ability to protect unborn life.

2007 Ron Paul 58:3
Madam Speaker, it is my hope that my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. By following the Constitution and using the power granted to the Congress by the Constitution, we can restore respect for the sanctity of human life.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 59
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Unanticipated Good Results (When We Leave) 7 June 2007

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

2007 Ron Paul 59:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to discuss the irrationality of our current foreign policy and the expected concrete benefits of changing that policy.

2007 Ron Paul 59:2
First, we need to look at the inconsistent and counterproductive way we currently treat other nations. We reward and respect nations with nuclear weapons. Look at how we treat Russia, China, Pakistan, India and North Korea. Our policies serve as an incentive for rogue nations to achieve a nuclear capability. Saddam Hussein was so convinced of this that he pretended he was on the verge of getting a nuclear weapon. Iran is now doing the same thing, yet our CIA assures us they have quite a ways to go before they have a nuclear capability.

2007 Ron Paul 59:3
Without our “remaking” the Middle East, Iran would have less incentive to develop a weapon. And under the NPT, Iran has a right to pursue peaceful use of nuclear power.

2007 Ron Paul 59:4
The foolishness of our foreign policy has us spending money in Pakistan, a military dictatorship with nuclear weapons, which is harboring Osama Bin Laden. The irony that taxpayers are paying to help protect Osama Bin Laden is astounding. For all the so- called reasons we threaten Iran, the same logic could apply to Pakistan many fold and, for that matter, even to Saudi Arabia, from where 15 of the 19 hijackers came.

2007 Ron Paul 59:5
A changed policy in the region would greatly diffuse the boiling conflict now brewing with Iran. Just an announcement, if they believed us, of a move toward diplomacy and plans to move our troops and Navy out of this region may well lead to a sharp drop in oil prices.

2007 Ron Paul 59:6
But credibility is the key. If no one believes we’re sincere in altering our foreign policy of militarism to that of peaceful relationships with all who desire it, it won’t work.

2007 Ron Paul 59:7
Credibility would depend on us discontinuing building permanent bases in Iraq. We don’t need a single base in the entire Middle East to protect U.S. security. Having bases there only jeopardizes our security.

2007 Ron Paul 59:8
The embassy we’re building in Iraq, the largest in the world, a virtual fortress, nearly the size of the Vatican, should be donated to some Iraqi organization that might make good use of it. A small office with a few personnel would send a signal of our intent not to rule the Middle East for decades to come.

2007 Ron Paul 59:9
The economic benefits of a foreign policy of nonintervention are extraordinary. The wars that result from meddling in the internal affairs of other nations cause much greater economic harm than most people imagine. The cliche that war is a stimulus to economic growth is blatantly false.

2007 Ron Paul 59:10
The billions of dollars saved just in the last decade if we weren’t in the Middle East could have been spent here at home improving the conditions of all Americans, or would have prevented our huge national and foreign debt from exploding to historic records.

2007 Ron Paul 59:11
Inflation, though denied by our government as being a serious problem, would be greatly reduced. We shouldn’t forget, the big inflation of prices from our spendthrift ways for this war is yet to come.

2007 Ron Paul 59:12
Without a war going on in the Middle East, we can rebuild our Armed Forces, now run down from this prolonged war. This would certainly help the National Guard and our Reserves to rebuild and re-equip.

2007 Ron Paul 59:13
It’s estimated that 90 percent of our Army and National Guard is poorly equipped. A new policy would return our National Guard to the States to be available when an emergency comes, no longer leaving the States high and dry because these troops are in Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 59:14
Some of these dollars saved and personnel brought home could be redirected toward border protection here in this country. The border guards sent off to Iraq to train Iraqis in border control could return to their proper function here in the United States.

2007 Ron Paul 59:15
The constant and growing dissent here in the United States over the war would disappear. Though not as bad as in the 1960s, it’s a growing problem that can’t be ignored.

2007 Ron Paul 59:16
The threat of terrorism would be greatly reduced, as the evidence is overwhelming that our foreign policy of intervention, occupation, bombing and sanctions is the main incentive for radical insurgents to commit suicide terrorism.

2007 Ron Paul 59:17
Those who misled us into the war in Iraq continually claim that, yes, that’s true. Mistakes were made. But now the reason we must stay is to clean up the mess we created, while never admitting that the mess gets worse and the costs go up the longer we stay.

2007 Ron Paul 59:18
The time has come for a change. A message that our diplomatic doors are open and the preemptive war option is off the table would be a powerful message of peace and hope, not only to the Middle East but to the entire world.

2007 Ron Paul 59:19
The nay-saying warmongers who preach inevitable and long-lasting conflicts must be marginalized. The time for change is now.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 60
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing A Bill To establish A Sunset For The Authorization For The Use Of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution Of 2002 (Public Law 107-243) 7 June 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 7, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 60:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a bill to establish a sunset for the 2002 Authorization for the Use of Force Against Iraq (P.L. 107–243). There are several active pieces of legislation that would rescind the authorization to use force against Iraq, but the approach of this legislation is quite different. This legislation would sunset the original authorization 6 months after it is enacted, which would give Congress plenty of time to consider anew the authority for Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 60:2
The rationale for this sunset is that according to the 2002 authorization for Iraq, the President was authorized to use military force against Iraq to achieve the following two specific objectives only: “( 1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.”

2007 Ron Paul 60:3
It should be obvious to both supporters and critics of our military action in Iraq that our military has achieved both legal objectives. Our military quickly removed the regime of Saddam Hussein, against whom the United Nations resolutions were targeted. And a government has been elected in post-Saddam Iraq that has met with U.S. approval, fulfilling the first objective of the authorization.

2007 Ron Paul 60:4
With both objectives of the original authorization completely satisfied, Congress has a constitutional obligation to revisit this issue and provide needed oversight and policy guidance. We ignore this obligation at risk to the United States and, very importantly, to our soldiers in harm’s way in Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 60:5
Unlike other proposals, this bill does not criticize the President’s handling of the war. It does not cut off funds for the troops. Nor does this bill set a timetable for our withdrawal. I strongly believe that this legislation will enjoy broad support among both those in favor of our action in Iraq and those who favor ending the war, and I am encouraged by the bipartisan support I have received when seeking original cosponsors. Congress is obligated to consider anew the authority for Iraq sooner rather than later and I hope more of my colleagues will join me as cosponsors of this legislation.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 61
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

National Instant Criminal Background Check System Improvements Amendments Act — Part 1 13 June 2007

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

2007 Ron Paul 61:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2640, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System Improvements Amendments Act, and I urge caution.

2007 Ron Paul 61:2
In my opinion, H.R. 2640 is a flagrantly unconstitutional expansion of restriction on the exercise of the right to bear arms protected under the second amendment.

2007 Ron Paul 61:3
H.R. 2640 also seriously undermines the privacy rights of all Americans, gun owners and non-gun owners alike, by creating and expanding massive Federal Government databases, including medical and other private records of every American.

2007 Ron Paul 61:4
H.R. 2640 illustrates how placing restrictions on the exercise of one right, in this case, the right to bear arms, inevitably leads to expanded restriction on other rights as well. In an effort to make the Brady background check on gun purchases more efficient, H.R. 2640 pressures States and mandates Federal agencies to dump massive amounts of information about the private lives of all Americans into a central Federal Government database.

2007 Ron Paul 61:5
Among the information that must be submitted to the database are medical, psychological, and drug treatment records that have traditionally been considered protected from disclosure under the physician/patient relationship, as well as records related to misdemeanor domestic violence. While supporters of H.R. 2640 say that there are restrictions on the use of this personal information, such restrictions did not stop the well-publicized IRS and FBI files privacy abuses by both Democratic and Republican administrations. Neither have such restrictions prevented children from being barred from flights because their names appeared on the massive terrorist watch list. We should not trick ourselves into believing that we can pick and choose which part of the Bill of Rights we support.

2007 Ron Paul 61:6
I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this bill.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 62
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

National Instant Criminal Background Check System Improvements Amendments Act — Part 2 13 June 2007

2007 Ron Paul 62:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, in addition the NICS Improvement Amendments Act illustrates how laws creating new infringements on liberty often also impose large financial burdens on taxpayers. In just its first three years of operation, the bill authorizes new yearly spending of $375 million plus additional spending “as may be necessary.” This new spending is not offset by any decrease in other government spending.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 63
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The American Citizenship Amendment 13 June 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, June 13, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 63:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to once again introduce the American Citizenship Amendment. Currently, any person born on American soil can claim American citizenship, regardless of the citizenship of that child’s parents. This means that any non-citizen who happens to give birth in the United States has just given birth to an American citizen, eligible for all the benefits and privileges afforded to citizens.

2007 Ron Paul 63:2
Madam Speaker, this is unacceptable and is far from what our Founders intended when they drafted our Constitution. It undermines the very concept of citizenship as enshrined in the United States Constitution: to be constitutionally entitled to U.S. citizenship one must be “born . . . in the United States” and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” This second, and most important, part means that in order to gain U.S. citizenship one must owe and actively express allegiance to the United States in addition to the act of being born on United States soil.

2007 Ron Paul 63:3
Practically, what the current state of affairs does is cheapen citizenship. Rather than impart all the obligations and responsibilities of being an American, it becomes merely a ticket to welfare and other Federal benefits. The history of the United States is that of immigrants, but previously individuals from diverse backgrounds accepted the obligations of citizenship in exchange for the great benefits of living in the United States as Americans.

2007 Ron Paul 63:4
This proposed constitutional amendment restores the concept of American citizenship to that of our Founders. This legislation simply states that no child born in the United States whose mother and father do not possess citizenship or owe permanent allegiance to the United States shall be a citizen of the United States. It is essential to the future of our constitutional republic that citizenship be something of value, something to be cherished. It cannot be viewed as merely an express train into the welfare state. I hope my colleagues will join me as cosponsors of this legislation.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 64
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Honest Money Act 15 June 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 15, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 64:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Honest Money Act. The Honest Money Act repeals legal tender laws that force American citizens to accept fiat money in their economic transactions.

2007 Ron Paul 64:2
Absent legal tender laws, individuals acting through the market will determine what is money. Historically, when individuals have been free to choose their money they have selected items that are portable, widely accepted, and have a stable value. Having the market, rather than the government, define money is integral to the functioning of a free economy. As Edwin Vieira, perhaps the Nation’s top expert on constitutional monetary policy says, “. . . a free market functions most efficiently and most fairly when the market determines the quality and the quantity of money that’s being used.”

2007 Ron Paul 64:3
While fiat money produced by the State is portable and, thanks to legal tender laws, widely accepted, it is certainly not of stable value. In fact, our entire monetary policy is predicated on the government’s ability to manipulate the value of the currency. Thus, absent legal tender laws, many citizens would refuse to accept government money for their transactions.

2007 Ron Paul 64:4
Legal tender laws disadvantage ordinary citizens by forcing them to use inferior money, which they would otherwise refuse. As Stephen T. Byington put in the September 1895 issue of the American Federationist: “No legal tender law is ever needed to make men take good money; its only use is to make them take bad money. Kick it out!”

2007 Ron Paul 64:5
It may seem surprising that the Mr. Byington’s well-phrased attack on legal tender laws appeared in the publication of the American Federation of Labor. However, enlightened union leaders of that time recognized that ways in which workers where harmed by the erosion of the value of money which inevitably follows when governments pass legal tender laws.

2007 Ron Paul 64:6
Legal tender laws may disadvantage average citizens but they do help power-hungry politicians use inflationary monetary policy to expand the government beyond its proper limits. However, the primary beneficiaries of legal tender laws are the special interests who are granted the privilege of producing and controlling the paper money forced on the public via legal tender laws. Legal tender laws thus represent the primary means of reverse redistribution where the wealth of the working class is given, via laws forcing people to use debased money, to well-heeled, politically powerful bankers.

2007 Ron Paul 64:7
The drafters of the Constitution were well aware of how a government armed with legal tender powers could ravage the people’s liberty and prosperity. This is why the Constitution does not grant legal tender powers to the federal government. Instead, Congress was given powers to establish standards regarding the value of money. In other words, in monetary matters the Congress was to follow the lead of the market. When Alexander Hamilton wrote the coinage act of 1792, he simply adopted the market-definition of a dollar as equaling the value of the Spanish milled silver coin.

2007 Ron Paul 64:8
Legal tender laws have reversed that order to where the market follows the lead of Congress. Beginning in the 19th century, Federal politicians sought to enhance their power and enrich their cronies, by using legal tender powers to change the definition of a dollar from a silver-or-gold-backed unit whose value is determined by the market, to a piece of paper produced by the State. The “value” of this paper may be normally backed in part by gold or silver, but its ultimate backing is the power of the State, and its value is determined by the political needs of the State and the powerful special interests who influence monetary policy.

2007 Ron Paul 64:9
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court failed to protect the American people from Congress’ unconstitutional legal tender laws. Supreme Court Justice, and Lincoln Treasury Secretary, Salmon Chase, writing in dissent in the legal tender cases, summed up the main reason why the Founders did not grant Congress the authority to pass legal tender laws: “The legal tender quality [of money] is only valuable for the purposes of dishonesty.” Justice Chase might have added dishonesty is perpetrated by State-favored interests on the average American.

2007 Ron Paul 64:10
Another prescient Justice was Stephen Field, the only justice to dissent in every one of the legal tender cases to come before the Court. Justice Field accurately described the dangers to the constitutional republic posed by legal tender laws: “The arguments in favor of the constitutionality of legal tender paper currency tend directly to break down the barriers which separate a government of limited powers from a government resting in the unrestrained will of Congress. Those limitations must be preserved, or our government will inevitably drift from the system established by our Fathers into a vast, centralized and consolidated government.”

2007 Ron Paul 64:11
Considering the growth of government since the Supreme Court joined Congress in disregarding the constitutional barriers to legal tender laws, can anyone doubt the accuracy of Justice Field’s words? Repeal of legal tender laws would restore constitutional government and protect the people’s right to use a currency chosen by the market because it serves the needs of the people, instead of having to use a currency chosen by the State because it serves the needs of power hungry politicians and special interests. Therefore, I urge my colleges to cosponsor the Honest Money Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 65
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Federal reserve Board Abolition Act 15 June 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 15, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 65:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to restore financial stability to America’s economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve. Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle-and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people.

2007 Ron Paul 65:2
From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the 70s, to the burst of the dotcom bubble, every economic downturn suffered by the country over the last 80 years can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial “boom” followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts.

2007 Ron Paul 65:3
With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America’s exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation.

2007 Ron Paul 65:4
Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government.

2007 Ron Paul 65:5
Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the Federal Government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy.

2007 Ron Paul 65:6
In fact, Congress’ constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our Nation’s founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true free-market economy.

2007 Ron Paul 65:7
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand up for working Americans by putting an end to the manipulation of the money supply which erodes Americans’ standard of living, enlarges big government, and enriches well-connected elites, by cosponsoring my legislation to abolish the Federal Reserve.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 66
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Sunshine In Monetary Policy Act 15 June 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 15, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 66:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam 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; 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.

2007 Ron Paul 66:2
The Federal Reserve Board ceased reporting M3 on March 22, 2006, thus depriving Congress and the American people of the most comprehensive measure of the money supply. The cessation of the Federal Reserve’s weekly M3 report will make it more difficult for policymakers, economists, investors, and the general public to learn the true rate of inflation. As Nobel laureate Milton Friedman famously said, “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.” Therefore, having access to a comprehensive measure of the money supply like M3 is a vital tool for those seeking to track inflation. Thorsten Polleit, honorary professor at HfB-Business School of Finance and Management, in his article “Why Money Supply Matters” posted on the Ludwig von Mises Institute’s Web site mises.org, examined the relationship between changes in the money supply and inflation and concluded that “money supply signals might actually be far more important for inflation — even in the short-term — than current central bank practice suggests,” thus demonstrating the importance of the M3 aggregate.

2007 Ron Paul 66:3
The Federal Reserve Board has claimed neither policymakers nor the Federal Reserve staff closely tracked M3. Even if M3 was 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 relied on M3. For example, my office has been contacted by a professional money manger complaining that the Federal Reserve Board’s discontinuing M3 reports would make it difficult for him to do his job.

2007 Ron Paul 66:4
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.

2007 Ron Paul 66:5
Economists and others who are following M3 have become increasingly concerned about inflation because in 2005 the rate of M3 rose almost twice as fast as other monetary aggregates. This suggests that the inflation picture is not as rosy as the Federal Reserve would like Congress and the American people to believe. Discontinuing reporting the monetary aggregate that provides the best evidence that the Federal Reserve Board has not conquered inflation suggested to many people that the government was trying to conceal information about the true state of the economy from the American people. Brad Conrad, a professor of investing who has also worked with IBM, CDC, and Amdahl, spoke for many when he said, “It [the discontinuance of M3] is unsettling. It detracts from the transparency the Fed preaches and adds to the suspicion that the Fed wants to hide anything showing money growth high enough to fuel inflation . . .”

2007 Ron Paul 66:6
Discontinuing reporting M3 was only expected to save 0.00000699 percent of the Federal Reserve Board’s yearly budget. This savings hardly seems to justify depriving the American people of an important measurement of money supply, especially since Congress has tasked the Federal Reserve Board with reporting on monetary aggregates. Discontinuing reporting M3 may not be a violation of the letter of the Federal Reserve Board’s statutory duty, but it is a violation of the spirit of the congressional command that the Federal Reserve Board ensure the American public is fully informed about the effects of monetary policy.

2007 Ron Paul 66:7
Madam 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.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 67
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

A Man Of Principle 15 June 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 15, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 67:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to enter into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD a letter to the editor of the Carteret County News-Times by General John Batiste titled, “A Man of Principle.” General Batiste commanded the 1st Infantry Division in Iraq and in this letter he rightfully praises one of the most courageous Members of Congress, my friend Rep. WALTER JONES of North Carolina. Rep. JONES, correctly observes General Batiste, is a man of principle and well understands the dilemma we face in Iraq. It is very encouraging for me to read the words of the highly experienced General Batiste affirming the correctness of Congressman JONES’ position on Iraq, because I share Rep. JONES views about this very difficult situation we find ourselves. I also salute Rep. JONES for his courage and his determination to seek the truth.

2007 Ron Paul 67:2
[From the Carteret County News-Times, May
25, 2007]
A MAN OF PRINCIPLE
       ROCHESTER, N.Y.,
              May 22, 2007 TO THE EDITOR: Congressman Walter Jones of North Carolina’s 3rd District deserves our unqualified support. He is a man of principle and well understands the dilemma we face in Iraq to include the fatally flawed strategy that took us to war in March 2003; the failure to modify the same strategy over time; the administration’s continued reliance on the military without the necessary diplomatic, political, and economic components fundamental to a successful strategy; the administration’s failure to mobilize the nation to deal with global Islamic extremism; and the dire straights our great soldiers and Marines find themselves in today.

2007 Ron Paul 67:3
Indeed, our Army and Marine Corps, the best fighting formations our country has ever fielded, are at a breaking point with little to show for it because of the reckless behavior of the current administration.

2007 Ron Paul 67:4
Walter Jones gets it. He personifies patriotism. He understands the American way of war.

2007 Ron Paul 67:5
I base this judgment on personal experience, a 31-year career in the Army, two combat tours in Iraq, many years of service in Balkans peace enforcement in both Bosnia and Kosovo and service in the Pentagon before, during and after Sept. 11th, 2001. I am a lifelong Republican. I respect Walter Jones for his moral courage and resolve to get things right.

2007 Ron Paul 67:6
I met Congressman Jones in his office in the Rayburn Office Building some eight months ago. I was impressed then with his grasp of the situation in Iraq and his unqualified love of country and support for our military. Indeed, for the last five years, he is one of only several congressional Republicans who have embraced their constitutional responsibilities to overwatch and hold accountable our executive branch of government. He asks the tough questions and never backs down. The vast majority of our party has long since abrogated this incredibly important aspect of their duty. He well represents his constituents and the best interests of both our country and our military. As President Gerald Ford once said, “Truth is the glue that holds our government together.” Since our first meeting eight months ago, my respect of Walter Jones has multiplied tenfold.

2007 Ron Paul 67:7
People often ask me to describe how they can help get the country back on track. The answer almost invariably boils down to exercising the right to vote and casting one’s vote for the candidate who understands the issues and has the moral courage to do the right thing. I have now expanded that answer to elect more public servants like Congressman Walter Jones of North Carolina. Our nation desperately needs members of Congress with his character, commitment, and resolve. I salute Walter Jones as a man of principle with the courage of his convictions.
              JOHN BATISTE,
               Maj. Gen. USA (Ret.)

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 68
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Opening Statement – Committee on Financial Services – Subcommittee: Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology – Remittance Hearing 17 June 2007

2007 Ron Paul 68:1
It is clear to most people that remittances provide a significant economic boost to many South American and Latin American countries. Remittance flows to some countries dwarf foreign direct investment and foreign aid and have a beneficial effect on economic development, enabling low-income families to better their situations. The effect of remittances on development showcases the beneficial effects of market-based interaction to improve peoples' lives.

2007 Ron Paul 68:2
Some legislative proposals would require wire transfer services and other money services businesses to comply with elements of the REAL ID Act. While often well-intentioned, such measures, aside from infringing constitutional liberties, would have the effect of creating a thriving black market financial system which would make it even more difficult for law enforcement to track truly criminal financial transfers.

2007 Ron Paul 68:3
Heavy-handed government intrusion into the operation and regulation of money services businesses would also have the effect of raising the costs of doing business. Money service businesses have done a good job of identifying and serving their customers' needs. Healthy competition has led to a reduction in fees over the years so that money services businesses are accessible to more and more consumers. As some of our witnesses will attest, even the threat of regulation can have a chilling effect on the operation of money services businesses. The money services market has done an admirable job of self-regulation so far. The worst thing Congress could do is intervene in an overly forceful manner and undo all the good things that have been done so far.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 69
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Juneteenth 18 June 2007

2007 Ron Paul 69:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support H. Con. Res. 155, legislation commemorating a monumental day in the history of liberty, Juneteenth Independence Day. Juneteenth marks the events of June 19, 1865, when slaves in Galveston, TX, learned that they were at last free men and women. The slaves of Galveston were the last group of slaves to learn of the end of slavery. Thus, Juneteenth represents the end of slavery in America.

2007 Ron Paul 69:2
I hope all Americans will take the time to commemorate Juneteenth. Friends of human liberty should celebrate the end of slavery in any country. The end of American slavery is particularly worthy of recognition since there are few more blatant violations of America’s founding principles, as expressed in the Declaration of Independence, than slavery. I am particularly pleased to join the recognition of Juneteenth because I have the privilege of representing Galveston.

2007 Ron Paul 69:3
I thank the gentleman from Illinois for introducing this resolution, which I am proud to cosponsor. I thank the House leadership for bringing this resolution to the floor, and I urge all of my colleagues to honor the end of slavery by voting for H. Con. Res. 155.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 70
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Calling On The United Nations Security Council To Charge Iranian President With Certain Violations Because Of His Calls For Destruction Of Israel 18 June 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 18, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 70:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this resolution. This resolution is an exercise in propaganda that serves one purpose: to move us closer to initiating a war against Iran. Citing various controversial statements by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this legislation demands that the United Nations Security Council charge Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

2007 Ron Paul 70:2
Having already initiated a disastrous war against Iraq citing U.N. resolutions as justification, this resolution is like deja-vu. Have we forgotten 2003 already? Do we really want to go to war again for U.N. resolutions? That is where this resolution, and the many others we have passed over the last several years on Iran, is leading us. I hope my colleagues understand that a vote for this bill is a vote to move us closer to war with Iran.

2007 Ron Paul 70:3
Clearly, language threatening to wipe a nation or a group of people off the map is to be condemned by all civilized people. And I do condemn any such language. But why does threatening Iran with a pre-emptive nuclear strike, as many here have done, not also deserve the same kind of condemnation? Does anyone believe that dropping nuclear weapons on Iran will not wipe a people off the map? When it is said that nothing, including a nuclear strike, is off the table on Iran, are those who say it not also threatening genocide? And we wonder why the rest of the world accuses us of behaving hypocritically, of telling the rest of the world “do as we say, not as we do.”

2007 Ron Paul 70:4
I strongly urge my colleagues to consider a different approach to Iran, and to foreign policy in general. GEN William Odom, President Reagan’s director of the National Security Agency, outlined a much more sensible approach in a recent article titled “Exit From Iraq Should Be Through Iran.” General Odom wrote: “Increasingly bogged down in the sands of Iraq, the US thrashes about looking for an honorable exit. Restoring cooperation between Washington and Tehran is the single most important step that could be taken to rescue the U.S. from its predicament in Iraq.” General Odom makes good sense. We need to engage the rest of the world, including Iran and Syria, through diplomacy, trade, and travel rather than pass threatening legislation like this that paves the way to war. We have seen the limitations of force as a tool of U.S. foreign policy. It is time to try a more traditional and conservative approach. I urge a “no” vote on this resolution.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 71
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Opening Statement Committee on Financial Services Paulson Hearing 20 June 2007

2007 Ron Paul 71:1
A strong case can be made that our economy is not nearly as robust as our government statistics claim.

2007 Ron Paul 71:2
Unemployment numbers, inflation rates, tax revenues, and GDP growth all indicate there is little to worry about.

2007 Ron Paul 71:3
Yet underemployment and a lower standard of living for many Americans hit with significant price inflation leave them fearful of their economic future.

2007 Ron Paul 71:4
The shake up in the sub prime mortgage market which is now spreading, as the housing bubble deflates, has a long way to go. The same problem exists in the high-yield corporate debt market and will surely add to the economic uncertainty we now face. It’s deceptive to merely blame “abusive lending practices” for these problems.

2007 Ron Paul 71:5
The recent sharp rise in interest rates may well be signaling the end to the painless easy money decade that has allowed us to finance our extravagant welfare/warfare spending with minimal productive effort and no savings. Monetary inflation and foreign borrowing have allowed us to live far beyond our means – a type of monetary arrangement that always comes to a painful end.

2007 Ron Paul 71:6
As our problems worsen, the blame game will certainly accelerate. Claiming it is all due to China’s manipulation of its currency and demanding protectionist measures will unfortunately continue to gain considerable attention. Unfortunately, there is little or no concern for how our own policies - monetary, tax, and regulatory- have contributed to the problems we face.

2007 Ron Paul 71:7
Too often officials ignore and even distort important economic information that could be beneficial in making market decisions.

2007 Ron Paul 71:8
Accurate money supply growth rates are vital in anticipating future price levels, the degree of malinvestment, and chances for financial bubbles to form. Since March of 2006 M3 reports have been discontinued. Private sources now report that M3 is increasing at a significantly high 13% rate.

2007 Ron Paul 71:9
It is said that the CPI is now increasing at the rate of 2.5%, yet if we use the original method of calculation we find that the CPI is growing at a rate of over 10%.

2007 Ron Paul 71:10
Since money growth statistics are key to calculating currency depreciation it is interesting to note, in this era of global financial markets, in a world engulfed with only fiat currencies, what total world wide money supply is doing.

2007 Ron Paul 71:11
Since 1997 the world money supply has doubled. And money growth IS inflation which is the enemy of the poor and the middle class but a friend to the banks and Wall Street.

2007 Ron Paul 71:12
Monetary depreciation is clearly a sinister tax placed on the unsuspecting poor. Too many well meaning individuals falsely believe that deficit financed assistance programs can help the poor, while instead the results are opposite.

2007 Ron Paul 71:13
Welfare and warfare – guns and butter philosophy always leads to harmful inflation. We had severe problems in the 60’s and 70’s and we are doing the same thing once again. We have only started to pay for the extravagance of financing the current war and rapidly expanding the entitlement system by foreign borrowing and creating money and credit out of thin air. There are reasons to believe that the conditions we have created will be much worse than they were in 1979 when interest rates of 21% were required to settle the markets and reverse the stagflation process.

2007 Ron Paul 71:14
Congress, and especially the Financial Services Committee, must insist on total transparency and accuracy of all government financial statistics. Any market interference by government agencies must be done in full public view.

2007 Ron Paul 71:15
All meetings and decision and actions by the Presidents Working Group on Financial Markets must be fully open to public scrutiny. If our government is artificially propping up the dollar by directly manipulating gold prices, or colluding with other central banks, it is information that belongs in the public domain. The same is true about any interference in the stock, bond, or commodity markets.

2007 Ron Paul 71:16
A free market economy requires that government keeps its hands off and allows the consumers to exert their rightful control over the economy.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 72
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Remembering Dr. Hans Sennholz 27 June 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, June 27, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 72:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the life and achievements of Hans F. Sennholz. Dr. Sennholz was one of the foremost free-market economists of his generation and an inspiration to tens of thousands of people around the world.

2007 Ron Paul 72:2
Dr. Sennholz was born on February 3, 1922 in Germany in the midst of the German hyperinflation crisis and experienced firsthand the Great Depression and the horrors of Hitler’s dictatorship. After receiving his master’s degree from the University of Marburg and a doctorate in political science from the University of Cologne, Dr. Sennholz received a Ph.D. in economics at New York University, where he studied under the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises.

2007 Ron Paul 72:3
In his 37 years as a professor of economics at Grove City College, Dr. Sennholz was a formative influence for over 10,000 students. During an era in which Keynesianism was the dominant economic ideology, Dr. Sennholz’s efforts played a major role in keeping alive the flame of classical liberalism and market-based economics. Dr. Sennholz and his free market ideas were a perfect fit for Grove City, which is one of only two colleges in the United States which eschews federal education funding.

2007 Ron Paul 72:4
Dr. Sennholz later became President of the Foundation for Economic Education, reviving the institution and renewing its mission to advancing the ideals of private property, individual liberty, the rule of law, and the free market. He also served as an adjunct scholar at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, from which he received the Gary G. Schlarbaum Prize in 2004 for his lifelong dedication to the cause of liberty.

2007 Ron Paul 72:5
I first met Dr. Sennholz in the early 1970s during the campaign to legalize the private ownership of gold. He was a tremendous influence on me and introduced me to other eminent economists of the Austrian School. Dr. Sennholz consistently taught the beneficial effects of the gold standard and was a tireless opponent of inflation. He never ceased to persist in pointing out the problems of fiat currency, the evils of inflation, and the perils of the Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy.

2007 Ron Paul 72:6
Dr. Sennholz passed away on Saturday, June 23, 2007 at the age of 85, having lived a full and rewarding life. Generations of free- market economists are indebted to him, his spirited teaching, and his lucid writing for keeping free-market economic teaching alive during trying times. Congress would do well to heed his advice on the importance of free markets and the folly of fiat currency.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 73
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Saluting Fred Raschke: Galveston Chamber Of Commerce’s Business Leader Of The Year

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 28, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 73:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, the Galveston Chamber of Commerce has chosen Mr. Fred Raschke as its Business Leader of the Year because, as Galveston Chamber of Commerce President Gina Spagnola said, “Fred is an extraordinary man who is committed to his family, his faith, his friends as well as service to our community.”

2007 Ron Paul 73:2
Mr. Raschke is an honors graduate of the University of Texas and a graduate of Texas Tech University School of Law. He is a partner of the Mills Shirley law firm and a member of numerous legal organizations including the Fifth Federal Circuit and American Bar Association, the State Bar of Texas, and the Texas Association of Defense Counsels. His legal practice areas include defense litigation, negligence defense, personal injury defense, toxic tort defense, premises liability, gas, and electric utilities.

2007 Ron Paul 73:3
In addition to his professional accomplishments, Mr. Raschke’s commitment to community service has made him a partner with all the people of Galveston. Mr. Raschke is very involved with several different community organizations including the Salvation Army, Boy Scouts of America, the Galveston Chamber of Commerce and the Galveston Historical Society. He has also served on boards of various Galveston area organizations, including the UTMB School of Nursing Alumni, Development and Community Relations Advisory Council, the Galveston County Economic Alliance, and the Galveston Rotary Club.

2007 Ron Paul 73:4
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to take this opportunity to join my friends at the Galveston County Chamber of Commerce in saluting Fred Raschke for both his professional accomplishments and his dedication to the Galveston community.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 74
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

University And College Union Of The United Kingdom Boycott Against Israeli Academia 11 July 2007

2007 Ron Paul 74:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise with serious concerns over this legislation. Let me first state that I am personally not in favor of the University and College Union of the United Kingdom boycott against Israeli academia. I oppose all such refusals to engage and interact even where strong disagreement exists. I believe such blockades, be they against countries or academic groups, to be counterproductive. I strongly encourage academic and cultural exchanges, as they are the best way to foster international understanding and prevent wars.

2007 Ron Paul 74:2
My concerns are about this particular piece of legislation, however. I simply do not understand why it is the business of the United States Congress — particularly considering the many problems we have at home and with U.S. policy abroad — to bring the weight of the U.S. government down on an academic disagreement half a world away. Do we really believe that the U.S. Government should be sticking its nose into a dispute between British and Israeli academics? Is there no dispute in no remote corner of the globe in which we don’t feel the need to become involved?

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 75
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement on HR 2956, the Responsible Redeployment From Iraq 12 July 2007

2007 Ron Paul 75:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2956 which, while a well-intended attempt to reduce our nation’s seemingly unlimited military commitment in Iraq, is in so many respects deeply flawed.

2007 Ron Paul 75:2
I have been one of the strongest opponents of military action against Iraq. I voted against the initial authorization in 2002 and I have voted against every supplemental appropriations bill to fund the war. I even voted against the initial “Iraq regime change” legislation back in 1998. I believe our troops should be brought back to the United States without delay. Unfortunately, one of the reasons I oppose this legislation is that it masquerades as a troop withdrawal measure but in reality may well end up increasing U.S. commitments in the Middle East

2007 Ron Paul 75:3
Mr. Speaker, this is precisely the debate we should have had four years ago, before Congress voted to abrogate its Constitutional obligation to declare war and transfer that authority to the president. Some in this body were rather glib in declaring the constitution antiquated while voting to cede the ability to initiate hostilities to the President. Now we see the result of ignoring the Constitution, and we are bringing even more mayhem to the process with this legislation.

2007 Ron Paul 75:4
To those who believe this act would somehow end the war, I simply point to the title for Section 3 of the bill, which states, “Requirement to reduce the number of armed forces in Iraq and transition to a limited presence of the Armed Forces in Iraq.” However the number of troops are limited, this legislation nevertheless will permit an ongoing American military presence in Iraq with our soldiers continuing to be engaged in hostilities.

2007 Ron Paul 75:5
I also wish to draw attention to Section 4(b)(1), which mandates the President to submit a “Strategy for Iraq” by the beginning of next year. This “strategy” is to include:

2007 Ron Paul 75:6
A discussion of United States national security interests in Iraq and the broader Middle East region and the diplomatic, political, economic, and military components of a comprehensive strategy to maintain and advance such interests as the Armed Forces are redeployed from Iraq pursuant to section 3 of this Act.

2007 Ron Paul 75:7
In other words, far from extricating ourselves from the debacle in Iraq, this bill would set in motion a policy that could lead to a wider regional commitment, both financially and militarily. Such a policy would be disastrous for both our overextended national security forces and beleaguered taxpayers. This could, in fact, amount to an authorization for a region-wide “surge.”

2007 Ron Paul 75:8
Congress’ job is to change the policy on Iraq, not to tell the military leaders how many troops they should have. I have attempted to do this with H.R. 2605, a bill to sunset after a six month period the authorization for military activity in Iraq. During this period a new plan for Iraq could be discussed and agreed. Plan first, authorization next, execution afterward. That is what we should be doing in Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 75:9
In summary, Mr. Speaker, this legislation brings us no closer to ending the war in Iraq. It brings us no closer to bringing our troops home. It says nothing about withdrawal, only about redeployment. It says nothing about reducing U.S. presence in the Middle East, and may actually lead to an expanded U.S. presence in the region. We have no guarantee the new strategy demanded by this legislation would not actually expand our military activities to Iran and Syria and beyond. I urge my colleagues to reject this legislation and put forth an effective strategy to end the war in Iraq and to bring our troops home.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 76
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement before the Financial Services Committee – Humphrey Hawkins Prequel Hearing 17 July 2007

2007 Ron Paul 76:1
During the 30 ^th year of the Humphrey-Hawkins hearings, it would be helpful for Congress to reassess the usefulness of the Humphrey-Hawkins mandate. The dual mandate calls for full employment and stable prices. Humphrey-Hawkins assumes that the Federal Reserve has unique insights into the United States economy that no one else possesses, that the Federal Reserve knows what prices should be and how much unemployment there should be. Full employment which is brought about through rising inflation will eventually lead to a stagnant economy which will lead to more unemployment. 30+ years after the stagflation era, I would hope that Phillips curves are one of those barbarous relics of the past that have been sent to their graves, along with wage and price controls and bans on the private ownership of gold.

2007 Ron Paul 76:2
But what I wish to highlight the most is the most pernicious part of the Humphrey-Hawkins mandate is the mandate for price stability. This objective overlooks the natural tendency of prices to fall over time. As new production technologies are brought on line, factories gear up, economies of scale are reached, and the prices of goods will decrease.

2007 Ron Paul 76:3
Goods which originally are affordable only by the very rich, over the course of time and because of the fall in prices will become available to the poor and the middle class, raising the standard of living of all Americans. 100 years ago a rich person might have driven a car and a poor person would have walked barefoot. Today a rich person might drive a Lexus, while a poor person drives a Kia, but they both have cars, and shoes.

2007 Ron Paul 76:4
Price stability attempts to disadvantage consumers by keeping prices stable, rather than allowing them to take their natural course of decline. This policy comes from two misguided notions: that lower prices lead to lower profits, and that lower prices lead to deflation. In its effort to ensure price stability, the Federal Reserve resorts to inflation targeting, using the federal funds rate and open market operations to increase the money supply at an ostensible low rate, introducing a subtle but pernicious inflation into the monetary system. Inflation benefits the government and the well-off, the first users of the new money, but harms those who receive the new money last, those who are predominantly poor and middle class.

2007 Ron Paul 76:5
But prices do not just apply to goods, they also apply to the price of labor, or wages. Wage raises are often indexed to government CPI figures, which are notoriously prone to manipulation. While official government figures show a CPI under 3%, according to the methods used when CPI was first calculated the current rate of inflation is over 10%. What this means is that while wages will remain stable in real terms, the price of goods and services will increase at a faster rate, leading to a decrease in the real standard of living. The Fed's loose money policy then leads to the lure of easy credit, which will hook more and more families, who will find themselves falling deeper and deeper into debt to finance their lifestyles.

2007 Ron Paul 76:6
Until the Congress realizes that the economy cannot be managed by a group of economists, no matter how large or how brilliant the group may be, the result will be the same. Inflation will continue to rise, and the American people will continue to grow poorer. We would be far better off if the Congress were to reassert its Constitutional authority over the monetary system, establish a sound currency, and eliminate its meddling in the free market.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 77
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act 30 July 2007

2007 Ron Paul 77:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 180 is premised on the assumption that. divestment, sanctions, and other punitive measures are effective in influencing repressive regimes, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. Proponents of such methods fail to remember that where goods cannot cross borders, troops will. Sanctions against Cuba, Iraq, and numerous other countries failed to topple their governments. Rather than weakening dictators, these sanctions strengthened their hold on power and led to more suffering on the part of the Cuban and Iraqi people. To the extent that divestment effected change in South Africa, it was brought about by private individuals working through the market to influence others.

2007 Ron Paul 77:2
No one denies that the humanitarian situation in Darfur is dire, but the United States Government has no business entangling itself in this situation, nor in forcing divestment on unwilling parties. Any further divestment action should be undertaken through voluntary means and not by government fiat.

2007 Ron Paul 77:3
H.R. 180 is an interventionist piece of legislation which will extend the power of the Federal Government over American businesses, force this country into yet another foreign policy debacle, and do nothing to alleviate the suffering of the residents of Darfur. By allowing State and local governments to label pension and retirement funds as State assets, the Federal Government is giving the go-ahead for State and local governments to play politics with the savings upon which millions of Americans depend for security in their old age. The safe harbor provision opens another dangerous loophole, allowing fund managers to escape responsibility for any potential financial mismanagement, and it sets a dangerous precedent. Would the Congress offer the same safe harbor provision to fund managers who wish to divest from firms offering fatty foods, growing tobacco, or doing business in Europe?

2007 Ron Paul 77:4
This bill would fail in its aim of influencing the Government of the Sudan, and would likely result in the exact opposite of its intended effects. The regime in Khartoum would see no loss of oil revenues, and the civil conflict will eventually flare up again. The unintended consequences of this bill on American workers, investors, and companies need to be considered as well. Forcing American workers to divest from companies which may only be tangentially related to supporting the Sudanese government could have serious economic repercussions which need to be taken into account.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 78
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Opposing Further Sanctions On Iran 30 July 2007

2007 Ron Paul 78:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose any move to initiate further sanctions on Iran. Sanctions are acts of war, and expanding sanctions on Iran serves no purpose other than preparing the American people for an eventual attack on Iran. This is the same pattern we saw in the run up to the war on Iraq: Congress passes legislation calling for regime change, sanctions are imposed, and eventually we are told that only an attack will solve the problem. We should expect the same tragic result if we continue down this path. I urge my colleagues to reconsider.

2007 Ron Paul 78:2
I oppose economic sanctions for two very simple reasons. First, they don’t work as effective foreign policy. Time after time, from Cuba to China to Iraq, we have failed to unseat despotic leaders or change their policies by refusing to trade with the people of those nations. If anything, the anti-American sentiment aroused by sanctions often strengthens the popularity of such leaders, who use America as a convenient scapegoat to divert attention from their own tyranny. History clearly shows that free and open trade does far more to liberalize oppressive governments than trade wars. Economic freedom and political freedom are inextricably linked — when people get a taste of goods and information from abroad, they are less likely to tolerate a closed society at home. So sanctions mostly harm innocent citizens and do nothing to displace the governments we claim as enemies.

2007 Ron Paul 78:3
Second, sanctions simply hurt American industries, particularly agriculture. Every market we close to our nation’s farmers is a market exploited by foreign farmers. China, Russia, the Middle East, North Korea, and Cuba all represent huge markets for our farm products, yet many in Congress favor current or proposed trade restrictions that prevent our farmers from selling to the billions of people in these areas.

2007 Ron Paul 78:4
We must keep in mind that Iran has still not been found in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Furthermore, much of the information regarding Iran’s nuclear program is coming to us via thoroughly discredited sources like the MeK, a fanatical cult that is on our State Department’s terror list. Additionally, the same discredited neo-conservatives who pushed us into the Iraq war are making similarly exaggerated claims against Iran. How often do these “experts” have to be proven wrong before we start to question their credibility?

2007 Ron Paul 78:5
It is said that we non-interventionists are somehow “isolationists” because we don’t want to interfere in the affairs of foreign nations. But the real isolationists are those who demand that we isolate certain peoples overseas because we disagree with the policies of their leaders. The best way to avoid war, to promote American values, and to spread real freedom and liberty is to engage in trade and contacts with the rest of the world as broadly as possible.

2007 Ron Paul 78:6
I urge my colleagues to reconsider this counterproductive and dangerous move toward further sanctions on Iran.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 79
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

H.R. 2750 30 July 2007

2007 Ron Paul 79:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to cosponsor H.R. 2750, which directs the United States Treasury to create a commemorative coin honoring the 50th Anniversary of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). From the early space flights of the 1960s to Neil Armstrong’s “small step for mankind” to last year’s successful missions of the Space Shuttle Atlantis and the Space Shuttle Discovery, NASA’s has a long and impressive record of accomplishments that should be a source of pride to all Americans.

2007 Ron Paul 79:2
As a representative of the Gulf Coast of Texas, which is home to many of NASA’s most significant triumphs, I have had the opportunity to meet many NASA employees. I have always been impressed by their professionalism and dedication to their mission.

2007 Ron Paul 79:3
What philosopher Ayn Rand wrote of the moon landing in 1969 applies to 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 50 years of accomplishments by supporting H.R. 2750.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 80
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Public Safety Tax Cut Act 1 August 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, August 1, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 80:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Public Safety Tax Cut Act. This legislation will achieve two important public policy goals. First, it will effectively overturn a ruling of the Internal Revenue Service which has declared as taxable income the waiving of fees by local governments who provide service for public safety volunteers.

2007 Ron Paul 80:2
Many local governments use volunteer firefighters and auxiliary police either in place of, or as a supplement to, their public safety professionals. Often as an incentive to would-be volunteers, the local entities might waive all or a portion of the fees typically charged for city services such as the provision of drinking water, sewerage charges, or debris pick up. Local entities make these decisions for the purpose of encouraging folks to volunteer, and seldom do these benefits come anywhere near the level of a true compensation for the many hours of training and service required of the volunteers. This, of course, not even to mention the fact that these volunteers could very possibly be called into a situation where they may have to put their lives on the line.

2007 Ron Paul 80:3
Rather than encouraging this type of volunteerism, which is so crucial, particularly to America’s rural communities, the IRS has decided that the provision of the benefits described above amount to taxable income. Not only does this adversely affect the financial position of the volunteer by foisting new taxes about him or her, it has in fact led local entities to stop providing these benefits, thus taking away a key tool they have used to recruit volunteers. That is why the IRS ruling in this instance has a substantial deleterious impact on the spirit of American volunteerism. How far could this go? For example, would consistent application mean that a local Salvation Army volunteer be taxed for the value of a complimentary ticket to that organization’s annual county dinner? This is obviously bad policy.

2007 Ron Paul 80:4
This legislation would rectify this situation by specifically exempting these types of benefits from Federal taxation.

2007 Ron Paul 80:5
Next, this legislation would also provide paid professional police and fire officers with a $1,000 per year tax credit. These professional public safety officers put their lives on the line each and every day, and I think we all agree that there is no way to properly compensate them for the fabulous services they provide. In America we have a tradition of local law enforcement and public safety provision. So, while it is not the role of our Federal Government to increase the salaries of these, it certainly is within our authority to increase their take-home pay by reducing the amount of money that we take from their pockets via Federal taxation, and that is something this bill specifically does as well.

2007 Ron Paul 80:6
President George Bush has called on Americans to volunteer their time and energy to enhancing public safety. Shouldn’t Congress do its part by reducing taxes that discourage public safety volunteerism? Shouldn’t Congress also show its appreciation to police officers and fire fighters by reducing their taxes? I believe the answer to both of these questions is a resounding “Yes” and therefore I am proud to introduce the Public Safety Tax Cut Act. I request that my fellow Members join in support of this key legislation.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 81
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Police Security Protection Act 1 August 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, August 1, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 81:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to help America’s law enforcement officers by introducing the Police Security Protection Act. This legislation provides police officers a tax credit for the purchase of armored vests.

2007 Ron Paul 81:2
Professional law enforcement officers put their lives on the line each and every day. Reducing the tax liability of law enforcement officers so they can afford armored vests is one of the best ways Congress can help and encourage these brave men and women. After all, an armored vest could literally make the difference between life or death for a police officer. I hope my colleagues will join me in helping our Nation’s law enforcement officers by cosponsoring the Police Security Protection Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 82
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Congressional Responsibility And Accountability Act

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, August 1, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 82:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Congressional Responsibility and Accountability Act. This bill requires Congress to specifically authorize via legislation any proposed federal regulation that will impose costs on any individual of at least $5,000, impose costs on a business or other private organization of at least $25,000, or impose aggregate costs on the American people of at least $250,000, or cause any American to lose his or her job.

2007 Ron Paul 82:2
According to some legal experts, at least three-quarters of all federal laws consist of regulations promulgated by federal agencies without the consent, or even the review of, Congress. Allowing unelected, and thus unaccountable, executive agencies to make law undermines democracy. Law-making by executive agencies also violates the intent of the drafters of the Constitution to separate legislative and executive powers. The drafters of the Constitution correctly viewed separation of powers as a cornerstone of republican government and a key to protecting individual liberty from excessive and arbitrary government power.

2007 Ron Paul 82:3
Congress’s delegation of lawmaking authority to unelected bureaucrats has created a system that seems to owe more to the writings of Franz Kafka than to the writings of James Madison. The volume of regulations promulgated by federal agencies and the constant introduction of new rules makes it impossible for most Americans to know with any certainty the federal laws, regulations, and rules they are required to obey. Thus, almost all Americans live with the danger that they may be hauled before a federal agency for an infraction they have no reasonable way of knowing is against the law.

2007 Ron Paul 82:4
While it is easy for Members of Congress to complain about out of control federal bureaucrats, it was Congress that gave these agencies the ability to create laws. Since Congress created the problem of lawmaking by regulatory agencies, it is up to Congress to fix the problem and make certain that all federal laws are passed by the people’s elected representatives. Therefore, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Congressional Responsibility and Accountability Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 83
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement on HR 3159, the Ensuring Military Readiness through Stability and Predictability Deployment Policy Act 2 August 2007

2007 Ron Paul 83:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation to provide some Congressional oversight over the deployment and maintenance of our troops stationed overseas. As the Constitution states in Article I Section 8., Congress has the power “to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces,” and therefore Congress has an obligation to speak on such matters. I have been and remain extremely concerned about the deployment extensions and stop-loss programs that have kept our troops deployed and engaged for increasingly extended periods of time. My constituents who are affected by this policy have contacted me with their concerns as well.

2007 Ron Paul 83:2
The legislation at least seeks to provide some guidance and relief to our troops who have been stretched to the limit by the increasing duration of deployment overseas and the decreasing duration of time back home between deployments. Several military experts, including General Barry McCaffrey, have commented on this problem and the challenges it poses to the health and safety of our troops.

2007 Ron Paul 83:3
Although I am voting for this bill, I am increasingly concerned about Congress’s approach to the issue of our continued involvement in Iraq. Rather than a substantive move to end the US military presence in Iraq, this bill and others that have passed recently seem to be merely symbolic moves to further politicize the war in Iraq. Clearly the American public is overwhelmingly in favor of a withdrawal from Iraq, but Congress is not listening. At best, the House seems willing to consider only such half-measures as so-called re-deployment. We need a real solution that puts the safety of our troops above politics. We need to simply bring them home. As I said recently on the Floor of the House, we just marched in so we can just march out.

2007 Ron Paul 83:4
The proper method for ending the war is for Congress to meet its responsibility to deauthorize and defend the war. Micromanaging a troop deployment is not the answer since it overstays the bounds of Congressional authority.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 84
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Quality Health Care Coalition Act 2 August 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, August 2, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 84:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Quality Health Care Coalition Act, which takes a first step towards restoring a true free market in health care by restoring the rights of freedom of contract and association to health care professionals. Over the past few years, we have had much debate in Congress about the difficulties medical professionals and patients are having with Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs). HMOs are devices used by insurance industries to ration health care. While it is politically popular for members of Congress to bash the HMOs and the insurance industry, the growth of the HMOs are rooted in past government interventions in the health care market though the tax code, the Employment Retirement Security Act (ERSIA), and the federal anti-trust laws. These interventions took control of the health care dollar away from individual patients and providers, thus making it inevitable that something like the HMOs would emerge as a means to control costs.

2007 Ron Paul 84:2
Many of my well-meaning colleagues would deal with the problems created by the HMOs by expanding the federal government’s control over the health care market. These interventions will inevitably drive up the cost of health care and further erode the ability of patients and providers to determine the best health treatments free of government and third-party interference. In contrast, the Quality Health Care Coalition Act addresses the problems associated with HMOs by restoring medical professionals’ freedom to form voluntary organizations for the purpose of negotiating contracts with an HMO or an insurance company.

2007 Ron Paul 84:3
As an OB–GYN who spent over 30 years practicing medicine, I am well aware of how young physicians coming out of medical school feel compelled to sign contracts with HMOs that may contain clauses that compromise their professional integrity. For example, many physicians are contractually forbidden from discussing all available treatment options with their patients because the HMO gatekeeper has deemed certain treatment options too expensive. In my own practice, I tried hard not to sign contracts with any health insurance company that infringed on my ability to practice medicine in the best interests of my patients and I always counseled my professional colleagues to do the same. Unfortunately, because of the dominance of the HMO in today’s health care market, many health care professionals cannot sustain a medical practice unless they agree to conform their practice to the dictates of some HMO.

2007 Ron Paul 84:4
One way health care professionals could counter the power of the HMOs would be to form a voluntary association for the purpose of negotiating with an HMO or an insurance company. However, health care professionals who attempt to form such a group run the risk of persecution under federal anti-trust laws. This not only reduces the ability of health care professionals to negotiate with HMOs on a level playing field, but also constitutes an unconstitutional violation of medical professionals’ freedom of contract and association.

2007 Ron Paul 84:5
Under the United States Constitution, the federal government has no authority to interfere with the private contracts of American citizens. Furthermore, the prohibitions on contracting contained in the Sherman antitrust laws are based on a flawed economic theory which holds that federal regulators can improve upon market outcomes by restricting the rights of certain market participants deemed too powerful by the government. In fact, anti- trust laws harm consumers by preventing the operation of the free-market, causing prices to rise, quality to suffer, and, as is certainly the case with the relationship between the HMOs and medical professionals, favoring certain industries over others.

2007 Ron Paul 84:6
By restoring the freedom of medical professionals to voluntarily come together to negotiate as a group with HMOs and insurance companies, this bill removes a government-imposed barrier to a true free market in health care. Of course, this bill does not infringe on the rights of health care professionals by forcing them to join a bargaining organization against their will. While Congress should protect the rights of all Americans to join organizations for the purpose of bargaining collectively, Congress also has a moral responsibility to ensure that no worker is forced by law to join or financially support such an organization.

2007 Ron Paul 84:7
Madam Speaker, it is my hope that Congress will not only remove the restraints on medical professionals’ freedom of contract, but will also empower patients to control their health care by passing my Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act. The Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act puts individuals back in charge of their own health care by providing Americans with large tax credits and tax deductions for their health care expenses, including a deduction for premiums for a high-deductible insurance policy purchased in combination with a Health Savings Account. Putting individuals back in charge of their own health care decisions will enable patients to work with providers to ensure they receive the best possible health care at the lowest possible price. If providers and patients have the ability to form the contractual arrangements that they find most beneficial to them, the HMO monster will wither on the vine without the imposition of new federal regulations on the insurance industry.

2007 Ron Paul 84:8
In conclusion, I urge my colleagues to support the Quality Health Care Coalition Act and restore the freedom of contract and association to America’s health care professionals. I also urge my colleagues to join me in working to promote a true free market in health care by putting patients back in charge of the health care dollar by supporting my Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 85
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Treat Physicians Fairly Act 2 August 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, August 2, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 85:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam 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.

2007 Ron Paul 85:2
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.

2007 Ron Paul 85:3
The professional skills with which one earns a living are property. Therefore, the clear language of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment prevents Congress from mandating that physicians and hospitals bear the entire costs of providing health care to any group.

2007 Ron Paul 85:4
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 were 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 policies.

2007 Ron Paul 85:5
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.

2007 Ron Paul 85:6
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.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 86
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Comprehensive Health Care Act 2 August 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, August 2, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 86:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, America faces a crisis in health care. Health care costs continue to rise, leaving many Americans unable to afford health insurance, while those with health care coverage, and their physicians, struggle under the control of managed-care “gatekeepers.” Obviously, fundamental health care reform should be one of Congress’ top priorities.

2007 Ron Paul 86:2
Unfortunately, most health care “reform” proposals either make marginal changes or exacerbate the problem. This is because they fail to address the root of the problem with health care, which is that government polices encourage excessive reliance on third-party payers. The excessive reliance on third-party payers removes all incentive from individual patients to concern themselves with health care costs. Laws and policies promoting Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) resulted from a desperate attempt to control spiraling costs. However, instead of promoting an efficient health care system, HMOs further took control over health care away from the individual patient and physician.

2007 Ron Paul 86:3
Furthermore, the predominance of third- party payers means there is effectively no market for individual health insurance polices, thus those whose employers cannot offer them health benefits must either pay exorbitant fees for health insurance or do without health insurance. Since most health care providers cater to those with health insurance, it is very difficult for the uninsured to find health care that meets their needs at an affordable price. The result is many of the uninsured turn to government-funded health care systems, or use their local emergency room as their primary care physician. The result of this is declining health for the uninsured and increased burden on taxpayer-financed health care system.

2007 Ron Paul 86:4
Returning control over health care to the individual is the key to true health care reform. The Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act puts control of health care back into the hands of the individual through tax credits, tax deductions, Health Care Savings Accounts (HSA), and Flexible Savings Accounts. By giving individuals tax incentives to purchase their own health care, the Comprehensive Health Care Act will help more Americans obtain quality health insurance and health care. Specifically, the Comprehensive Health Care Act:

2007 Ron Paul 86:5
A. Provides all Americans with a tax credit for 100 percent of health care expenses. The tax credit is fully refundable against both income and payroll taxes.

2007 Ron Paul 86:6
B. Allows individuals to roll over unused amounts in cafeteria plans and Flexible Savings Accounts (FSA).

2007 Ron Paul 86:7
C. Makes every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), removes the requirement that individuals must obtain a high-deductible insurance policy to open an HSA; allows individuals to use their HSA to make premiums payments for high-deductible policy; and allows senior citizens to use their HSA to purchase Medigap policies.

2007 Ron Paul 86:8
D. Repeals the 7.5 percent threshold for the deduction of medical expenses, thus making all medical expenses tax deductible.

2007 Ron Paul 86:9
By providing a wide range of options, this bill allows individual Americans to choose the method of financing health care that best suits their individual needs. Increasing frustration with the current health care system is leading more and more Americans to embrace this approach to health care reform. For example, a poll by the respected Zogby firm showed that over 80 percent of Americans support providing all Americans with access to a Health Savings Account. I hope all my colleagues will join this effort to put individuals back in control of health care by cosponsoring the Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 87
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Freedom From Unnecessary Litigation Act 2 August 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, August 2, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 87:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act. As its title suggests, this bill provides an effective means of ensuring that those harmed during medical treatment receive fair compensation while reducing the burden of costly malpractice litigation on the health care system. This bill achieves its goal by providing a tax credit for negative outcomes insurance purchased before medical treatment. The insurance will provide compensation for any negative outcomes of the medical treatment. Patients can receive this insurance without having to go through lengthy litigation and without having to give away a large portion of their award to a trial lawyer.

2007 Ron Paul 87:2
Relying on negative outcomes insurance instead of litigation will also reduce the costs imposed on physicians, other health care providers, and hospitals by malpractice litigation. The Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act also promotes effective solutions to the malpractice crisis by making malpractice awards obtained through binding, voluntary arbitration tax-free.

2007 Ron Paul 87:3
The malpractice crisis has contributed to the closing of a maternity ward in Philadelphia and a trauma center in Nevada. Meanwhile, earlier this year, surgeons in West Virginia walked off the job to protest increasing liability rates. These are a few of the examples of how access to quality health care is jeopardized by the epidemic of large (and medically questionable) malpractice awards, and the resulting increase in insurance rates.

2007 Ron Paul 87:4
As is typical of Washington, most of the proposed solutions to the malpractice problem involve unconstitutional usurpations of areas best left to the States. These solutions also ignore the root cause of the litigation crisis: the shift away from treating the doctor-patient relationship as a contractual one to viewing it as one governed by regulations imposed by insurance company functionaries, politicians, government bureaucrats, and trial lawyers. There is no reason why questions of the assessment of liability and compensation cannot be determined by a private contractual agreement between physicians and patients. The Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act is designed to take a step toward resolving these problems through private contracts.

2007 Ron Paul 87:5
Using insurance, private contracts, and binding arbitration to resolve medical disputes benefits patients, who receive full compensation in a timelier manner than under the current system. It also benefits physicians and hospitals, which are relieved of the costs associated with litigation. Since it will not cost as much to provide full compensation to an injured patient, these bills should result in a reduction of malpractice premiums. The Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act benefits everybody except those trial lawyers who profit from the current system. I hope all my colleagues will help end the malpractice crises while ensuring those harmed by medical injuries receive just compensation by cosponsoring my Freedom from Unnecessary Litigation Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 88
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement in Opposition to H.Res 552 4 September 2007

2007 Ron Paul 88:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 552, “Calling on the Government of the People’s Republic of China to remove barriers to United States financial services firms doing business in China.”

2007 Ron Paul 88:2
Attempting to force the hand of the Chinese government by requiring them to open their markets to United States financial services firms is akin to playing with fire. Politicians today fail to realize just how deeply our profligate fiscal and monetary policies of the past three decades have left us in debt to China. The Chinese government holds over one trillion dollars in reserves, leaving the future of the dollar highly vulnerable to the continued Chinese demand.

2007 Ron Paul 88:3
While I am in favor of unencumbered free trade, free trade cannot be enforced through threats or by resorting to international protectionist organizations such as the WTO. Even if the Chinese are recalcitrant in opening up their markets, it is not the role of the United States government to lecture the Chinese government on what it should or should not do in its own economy.

2007 Ron Paul 88:4
H. Res. 552 is a blatant encroachment on the sovereignty of the Chinese government. Were the Chinese government to pressure us into allowing greater access to the United States market for Chinese financial services firms, or to pressure us into allowing the sale of firms in strategic sectors of the market, we would justifiably resist this pressure.

2007 Ron Paul 88:5
Diplomatic efforts cannot work through blustering language and vague retaliatory threats. It requires an awareness both of the many benefits of trade with China and the fact that our current trade imbalances are largely the responsibility of our trade policies. We must understand that China is not a 98-pound weakling who can be bossed around. If we treat other countries with respect and as equal partners, we might be pleased to find that our requests receive a more attentive ear.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 89
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Terrorism Insurance 19 september 2007

2007 Ron Paul 89:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, six years ago, when the Congress considered the bill creating the terrorism insurance program, I urged my colleagues to reject it. One of the reasons I opposed the bill was my concern that, contrary to the claims of the bill’s supporters, terrorism insurance would not be allowed to sunset. As I said then:

2007 Ron Paul 89:2
“The drafters of H.R. 3210 claim that this creates a ‘temporary’ government program. However, Mr. Speaker, what happens in three years if industry lobbyists come to Capitol Hill to explain that there is still a need for this program because of the continuing threat of terrorist attacks. Does anyone seriously believe that Congress will refuse to reauthorize this ‘temporary’ insurance program or provide some other form of taxpayer help to the insurance industry? I would like to remind my colleagues that the federal budget is full of expenditures for long-lasting programs that were originally intended to be ‘temporary.’ ”

2007 Ron Paul 89:3
I am disappointed to be proven correct. I am also skeptical that, having renewed the program twice, this time for fifteen years, Congress will ever allow it to expire.

2007 Ron Paul 89:4
As Congress considers extending this program, I renew my opposition to it for substantially the same reasons I stated six years ago. However, I do have a suggestion on how to improve the program. Since one claimed problem with allowing the private market to provide terrorism insurance is the difficulty of quantifying the risk of an attack, the taxpayers’ liability under the terrorism reinsurance program should be reduced for an attack occurring when the country is under orange or red alert. After all, because the point of the alert system is to let Americans know when there is an increased likelihood of an attack it is reasonable to expect insurance companies to demand that their clients take extra precautionary measures during periods of high alert. Reducing taxpayer subsidies will provide an incentive to ensure private parties take every possible precaution to minimize the potential damage from possible terrorists attack.

2007 Ron Paul 89:5
Since my fundamental objections to the program remain the same as six years ago, I am attaching my statement regarding H.R. 3210, which created the terrorist insurance program in the 107th Congress:

2007 Ron Paul 89:6
Mr. Chairman, no one doubts that the government has a role to play in compensating American citizens who are victimized by terrorist attacks. However, Congress should not lose sight of fundamental economic and constitutional principles when considering how best to provide the victims of terrorist attacks just compensation. I am afraid that H.R. 3210, the Terrorism Risk Protection Act, violates several of those principles and therefore passage of this bill is not in the best interests of the American people.

2007 Ron Paul 89:7
Under H.R. 3210, taxpayers are responsible for paying 90 percent of the costs of a terrorist incident when the total cost of that incident exceeds a certain threshold. While insurance companies technically are responsible under the bill for paying back monies received from the Treasury, the administrator of this program may defer repayment of the majority of the subsidy in order to “avoid the likely insolvency of the commercial insurer,” or avoid “unreasonable economic disruption and market instability.” This language may cause administrators to defer indefinitely the repayment of the loans, thus causing taxpayers to permanently bear the loss. This scenario is especially likely when one considers that “avoid . . . likely insolvency, unreasonable economic disruption, and market instability” are highly subjective standards, and that any administrator who attempts to enforce a strict repayment schedule likely will come under heavy political pressure to be more “flexible” in collecting debts owed to the taxpayers.

2007 Ron Paul 89:8
The drafters of H.R. 3210 claim that this creates a “temporary” government program. However, Mr. Speaker, what happens in three years if industry lobbyists come to Capitol Hill to explain that there is still a need for this program because of the continuing threat of terrorist attacks. Does anyone seriously believe that Congress will refuse to reauthorize this “temporary” insurance program or provide some other form of taxpayer help to the insurance industry? I would like to remind my colleagues that the federal budget is full of expenditures for long-lasting programs that were originally intended to be “temporary.”

2007 Ron Paul 89:9
H.R. 3210 compounds the danger to taxpayers because of what economists call the “moral hazard” problem. A moral hazard is created when individuals have the costs incurred from a risky action subsidized by a third party. In such a case individuals may engage in unnecessary risks or fail to take steps to minimize their risks. After all, if a third party will bear the costs of negative consequences of risky behavior, why should individuals invest their resources in avoiding or minimizing risk?

2007 Ron Paul 89:10
While no one can plan for terrorist attacks, individuals and businesses can take steps to enhance security. For example, I think we would all agree that industrial plants in the United States enjoy reasonably good security. They are protected not by the local police, but by owners putting up barbed wire fences, hiring guards with guns, and requiring identification cards to enter. One reason private firms put these security measures in place is because insurance companies provide them with incentives, in the form of lower premiums, to adopt security measures. H.R. 3210 contains no incentives for this private activity. The bill does not even recognize the important role insurance plays in providing incentives to minimize risks. By removing an incentive for private parties to avoid or at least mitigate the damage from a future terrorist attack, the government inadvertently increases the damage that will be inflicted by future attacks!

2007 Ron Paul 89:11
Instead of forcing taxpayers to subsidize the costs of terrorism insurance, Congress should consider creating a tax credit or deduction for premiums paid for terrorism insurance, as well as a deduction for claims and other costs borne by the insurance industry connected with offering terrorism insurance. A tax credit approach reduces government’s control over the insurance market. Furthermore, since a tax credit approach encourages people to devote more of their own resources to terrorism insurance, the moral hazard problems associated with federally funded insurance is avoided.

2007 Ron Paul 89:12
The version of H.R. 3210 passed by the Financial Services committee took a good first step in this direction by repealing the tax penalty which prevents insurance companies from properly reserving funds for human-created catastrophes. I am disappointed that this sensible provision was removed from the final bill. Instead, H.R. 3210 instructs the Treasury Department to study the benefits of allowing insurers to establish tax-free reserves to cover losses from terrorist events. The perceived need to study the wisdom of cutting taxes while expanding the federal government without hesitation demonstrates much that is wrong with Washington.

2007 Ron Paul 89:13
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, H.R. 3210 may reduce the risk to insurance companies from future losses, but it increases the costs incurred by the American taxpayer. More significantly, by ignoring the moral hazard problem this bill may have the unintended consequence of increasing the losses suffered in any future terrorist attacks. Therefore, passage of this bill is not in the long-term interests of the American people.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 90
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Voter Protection Act 19 september 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, September 19, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 90:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Voter Protection Act. Unlike most so-called “campaign reform” proposals, the Voter Protection Act enhances fundamental liberties and expands the exchange of political ideas. The Voter Protection Act accomplishes this goal by lowering and standardizing the requirements for, and the time required to get, signatures to qualify a Federal candidate for the ballot. Many states have unfair rules and regulations that make it virtually impossible for minor party and independent candidates to get on the ballot.

2007 Ron Paul 90:2
I want to make 4 points about this bill. First, it is constitutional. Article I, section 4, explicitly authorizes the U.S. Congress to, “At any time by law make or alter such regulations regarding the manner of holding elections.” This is the authority that was used for the Voter Rights Act of 1965.

2007 Ron Paul 90:3
The second point I would like to make is an issue of fairness. Because so many states require independent candidates to collect an excessive amount of signatures in a short period of time, many individuals are excluded from the ballot. For instance, there has not been one minor party candidate in a regularly scheduled election for the U.S. House of Representatives on the Georgia ballot since 1943, because of Georgia’s overly strict ballot access requirements. This is unfair. The Voter Protection Act corrects this.

2007 Ron Paul 90:4
My third point addresses those who worry about overcrowding on the ballot. In fact, there have been statistical studies made of states that have minimal signature requirements and generous grants of time to collect the signatures. Instead of overcrowding, these states have an average of 3.3 candidates per ballot.

2007 Ron Paul 90:5
The fourth point that I would like to make is that complying with ballot access rules drains resources from even those minor party candidates able to comply with these onerous rules. This obviously limits the ability of minor party candidates to communicate their message and ideas to the general public. Perhaps the ballot access laws are one reason why voter turnout has been declining over the past few decades. After all, almost 42 percent of eligible voters have either not registered to vote or registered as something other than Democrat or Republican.

2007 Ron Paul 90:6
The Voter Protection Act is a constitutional way to reform campaign laws to increase voter participation by making the election process fairer and open to new candidates and ideas. I hope all my colleagues will join me in supporting this true campaign reform bill.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 91
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Television Consumer Freedom Act 19 September 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, September 19, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 91:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Television Consumer Freedom Act, legislation repealing regulations that interfere with a consumer’s ability to obtain desired television programming. The Television Consumer Freedom Act also repeals federal regulations that would increase the cost of a television.

2007 Ron Paul 91:2
My office has received numerous calls from rural satellite and cable TV customers who are upset because their satellite or cable service providers have informed them that they will lose access to certain network and cable programming. The reason my constituents cannot obtain their desired satellite and cable services is that the satellite and cable “marketplace” is fraught with government interventionism at every level. Local governments have historically granted cable companies franchises of monopoly privilege. Government has previously intervened to invalidate “exclusive dealings” contracts between private parties, namely cable service providers and program creators, and has most recently imposed price controls. The Library of Congress has even been delegated the power to determine prices at which program suppliers must make their programs available to cable and satellite programming service providers.

2007 Ron Paul 91:3
It is, of course, within the constitutionally enumerated powers of Congress to “promote the progress of Science and Useful Arts by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the Exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” However, operating a clearing-house for the subsequent transfer of such property rights in the name of setting a just price or “instilling competition” via “central planning” seems to be neither economically prudent nor justifiable under this enumerated power. This process is one best reserved to the competitive marketplace.

2007 Ron Paul 91:4
It is impossible for the government to set the just price for satellite programming. Over- regulation of the cable industry has resulted in competition among service providers for government privilege rather than free market competition among providers to offer a better product at a lower price. While federal regulation does leave satellite programming service providers free to bypass the governmental royalty distribution scheme and negotiate directly with owners of programming for program rights, there is a federal prohibition on satellite service providers making local network affiliates’ programs available to nearby satellite subscribers. This bill repeals that federal prohibition so satellite service providers may freely negotiate with program owners for programming desired by satellite service subscribers. Technology is now available by which viewers could view network programs via satellite as presented by their nearest network affiliate. This market-generated technology will remove a major stumbling block to negotiations that should currently be taking place between network program owners and satellite service providers.

2007 Ron Paul 91:5
This bill also repeals Federal laws that force cable companies to carry certain programs. These Federal “must carry” mandates deny cable companies the ability to provide the programming their customers’ desire. Decisions about what programming to carryon a cable system should be made by consumers, not Federal bureaucrats.

2007 Ron Paul 91:6
The Television Consumer Freedom Act also repeals Federal regulations that mandate that all TVs sold in the United States contain “digital technology.” In complete disregard of all free market and constitutional principles, the FCC actually plans to forbid consumers from buying TVs, after 2006, that are not equipped to carry digital broadcasts. According to economist Stephen Moore, this could raise the price of a TV by as much as $250 dollars. While some television manufacturers and broadcasters may believe they will benefit from this government-imposed price increase, they will actually lose business as consumers refrain from purchasing new TVs because of the government-mandated price increase.

2007 Ron Paul 91:7
Madam Speaker, the Federal Government should not interfere with a consumer’s ability to purchase services such as satellite or cable television in the free market. I therefore urge my colleagues to take a step toward restoring freedom by cosponsoring my Television Consumer Freedom Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 92
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement On Introduction Of The Cost Of Government Awareness Act 19 September 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, September 19, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 92:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Cost of Government Awareness Act, which repeals one of the most deceptive practices of the federal government — income tax withholding. Withholding keeps many Americans ignorant about the true size of the federal tax burden. Withholding is also the reason millions of Americans overpay their income taxes, granting the United States Government interest-free loans. Many of these taxpayers are further misled into thinking the U.S. Government is acting benevolently when they receive “refunds” of money improperly taken from them through withholding!

2007 Ron Paul 92:2
Collecting taxes via withholding damages the economy because it forces every business in America to waste valuable resources complying with the withholding tax requirements. The Internal Revenue Service is so fanatical about forcing employers to act as de facto federal agents that it once confiscated the assets of a church because the church refused to violate the church’s religious beliefs by acting as a tax collector. The IRS sent armed federal agents in this house of worship, even though the church’s employees regularly paid taxes.

2007 Ron Paul 92:3
When the United States Government implemented withholding in 1943, it promised the American people that this would be a “temporary” measure. I am sure my colleagues agree that 64 years is a sufficient lifespan for any “temporary” measure. It is time to end the deceptive practice of withholding and empower taxpayers to reflect upon their tax bill each month and ask, “What are they getting for their money.” An honest answer to that question may lead to a groundswell for true tax reform.

2007 Ron Paul 92:4
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to let the American people know their tax burden by cosponsoring the Cost of Government Awareness Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 93
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement before the Financial Services Committee 20 September 2007

2007 Ron Paul 93:1
Mr. Chairman, the situation facing us now in the mortgage industry has its roots in the Federal Reserve's inflationary monetary policy. Without addressing the roots of the current crisis, any measures undertaken to improve the situation will be doomed to fail.

2007 Ron Paul 93:2
As with asset bubbles and investment manias in past history, the fuel for the current housing bubble had its origins in monetary manipulation. The housing boom was caused by the Federal Reserve's policy resulting in artificially low interest rates. Consumers, misled by low interest rates, were looking to consume, while homebuilders saw the low interest rates as a signal to build, and build they did.

2007 Ron Paul 93:3
One of the primary means the Federal Reserve uses to stimulate the economy is manipulation of the federal funds rate and the discount rates, which are used as benchmark rates throughout the economy. The interest rate is the price of time, as the value of a dollar today and the value of a dollar one year from now are not the same. Just like any price in the market, interest rates have an important informational signaling purpose. Government price fixing of the interest rate has the same deleterious effects as price controls in other areas.

2007 Ron Paul 93:4
Reduction in the interest rate has two major effects: it encourages consumption over saving; and it makes long-term, capital-intensive projects cheaper to undertake. Under Chairman Greenspan's tenure, the federal funds rate was so low that the real interest rate (that is the nominal interest rate minus inflation) was negative. With a negative real interest rate, someone who saves money will literally lose the value of that money.

2007 Ron Paul 93:5
The Federal Reserve continued and still continues to increase the money supply. After ceasing the publication of M3 last February, private economists have calculated that M3 has risen at an annual rate of almost 12%, which is faster than we have seen since the 1970's.

2007 Ron Paul 93:6
Millions of Americans now find themselves stuck in a financial quandary that is not their fault. The result of manipulation of the interest rate, money supply, and mortgage markets are the recently popped housing bubble.

2007 Ron Paul 93:7
Further regulation of the banking sector, of mortgage brokers, mortgage lenders, or credit rating agencies will fail to improve the current situation, and will do nothing to prevent future real estate bubbles. Any proposed solutions which fail to take into account the economic intervention that laid the ground for the bubble are merely window dressing, and will not ease the suffering of millions of American homeowners. I urge my colleagues to strike at the root of the problem and address the Federal Reserve's inflationary monetary policy.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 94
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Opposing Legislation To Provoke Iran 25 September 2007

2007 Ron Paul 94:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strongest opposition to this curiously-timed legislation which continues to beat the drums for war against Iran. It is interesting that this legislation was not scheduled for a vote this week, but appeared on the schedule at the last minute after a controversial speech by Iran’s President at Columbia University.

2007 Ron Paul 94:2
The House has obviously learned nothing at all from the Iraq debacle. In 2002, Congress voted to abrogate its Constitutional obligation to declare war and instead transfer that authority to the President. Many of my colleagues have expressed regrets over their decision to transfer this authority to the President, yet this legislation is Iraq all over again. Some have plausibly claimed that the move in this legislation to designate the Iranian military as a foreign terrorist organization is an attempt to signal to the President that he already has authority under previous resolutions to initiate force against Iran. We should recall that language specifically requiring the President to return to Congress before initiating any strike on Iran was removed from legislation by House leadership this year.

2007 Ron Paul 94:3
In expanding sanctions against Iran and against foreign businesses and countries that do business with Iran, we are hurting the American economy and moving the country closer to war. After all, sanctions are a form of warfare against a nation; and, if anyone has forgotten Cuba, sanctions never achieve the stated goals.

2007 Ron Paul 94:4
This legislation authorizes millions more dollars to identify and support young Iranians to come to the United States. Does anyone believe that we are assisting political opposition to the current Iranian regime by singling Iranians out for U.S. support? How would Americans react if the Chinese government were funding U.S. students to come to China to learn how to overthrow the U.S. government? This move is a counterproductive waste of U.S. taxpayer dollars.

2007 Ron Paul 94:5
The march to war with Iraq was preceded with numerous bills similar to H.R. 1400. No one should be fooled: supporters of this legislation are aiming the same outcome for Iran. I strongly urge a “no” vote on this bill.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 95
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tax Free Tips Act 25 September 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, September 25, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 95:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to help millions of working Americans by introducing the Tax Free Tips Act. As the title suggests, this legislation makes tips exempt from federal income and payroll taxes. Tips often compose a substantial portion of the earnings of waiters, waitresses, and other service-sector employees. However, unlike regular wages, a service-sector employee usually has no guarantee of, or legal right to, a tip. Instead, the amount of a tip usually depends on how well an employee satisfies a client. Since the amount of taxes one pays increases along with the size of tip, taxing tips punishes workers for doing a superior job!

2007 Ron Paul 95:2
Many service-sector employers are young people trying to make money to pay for their education, or single parents struggling to provide for their children. Oftentimes, these workers work two jobs in hopes of making a better life for themselves and their families. The Tax Free Tips Act gives these hard-working Americans an immediate pay raise. People may use this pay raise to devote more resources to their children’s, or their own, education, or to save for a home, retirement, or to start their own businesses.

2007 Ron Paul 95:3
Helping Americans improve themselves by reducing their taxes will make our country stronger. I, therefore, hope all my colleagues will join me in cosponsoring the Tax Free Tips Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 96
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act 27 September 2007

2007 Ron Paul 96:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, Madam Speaker, I am pleased to lend my support to two amendments to H.R. 3121, the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act, that will help those Americans, including many in my congressional district, at risk of increased flood insurance premiums because of actions of the Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA). FEMA is demanding that many towns and communities spend thousands of dollars in taxpayer money to certify levies and other mitigation devices. If the levies are not certified to FEMA’s satisfaction, the residents of those communities will face higher flood insurance premiums. Many local governments are struggling to raise the funds to complete the certification in time to meet the FEMA-imposed certification deadlines.

2007 Ron Paul 96:2
Several communities in my own district have been impacted by these requirements. My office is working with these jurisdictions and FEMA to establish a more reasonable schedule for completing the certifications. My office is also doing every thing it can to help these local jurisdictions fund these projects. Unfortunately, even though there is never a shortage of available funds for overseas programs, there are no funds available to help countries comply with this new federal demand.

2007 Ron Paul 96:3
While FEMA has thus far been willing to cooperate with my office and the local officials in providing extensions of deadlines for certification, there remains a serious possibility that many Americans will see their flood insurance premiums skyrocket because their local governments where unable to comply with these unreasonable federal demands. In some cases, people may even loose their flood insurance completely.

2007 Ron Paul 96:4
The amendments offered by Mr. CARDOZA of California will help alleviate this problem by providing a five-year grace period for homeowners whose flood insurance coverage is affected by decertification of a levy. During this five-year, these homeowners would receive a 50 percent reduction in flood insurance premiums. Another amendment, offered by Mr. GREEN provides a five-year phasing in of any changes for flood insurance premiums for low- income homeowners impacted by the updating of the flood maps. These amendments will benefit my constituents, and all Americans, whose flood insurance is endangered by FEMA’s certifying requirements, and I hope my colleagues will support them. I also hope my colleagues will continue to work to help those communities impacted by the new mitigation requirements.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 97
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Resolution On Situation In Burma 2 October 2007

2007 Ron Paul 97:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation not because I do not sympathize with the plight of the oppressed people of Burma, particularly as demonstrated by the continued confinement of Aung San Suu Kyi. Any time a government represses its citizenry it is reprehensible. My objection to this legislation is twofold. First, the legislation calls on the United Nations Security Council to “take appropriate action” with regard to Burma and its internal conditions. This sounds like an open door for an outside military intervention under the auspices of the United Nations, which is something I do not support.

2007 Ron Paul 97:2
More importantly, perhaps, I am concerned that while going around the world criticizing admittedly abhorrent governmental actions abroad we are ignoring the very dangerous erosions of our own civil liberties and way of life at home. Certainly it is objectionable that the Burmese government holds its own citizens in jails without trial. But what about the secret prisons that our own CIA operates around the globe that hold thousands of individuals indefinitely and without trial? Certainly it is objectionable that the government of Burma can declare Aung San Suu Kyi a political prisoner to be held in confinement. But what about the power that Congress has given the president to declare anyone around the world, including American citizens, “enemy combatants” subject to indefinite detention without trial? What about the “military commissions act” that may well subject Americans to military trial with secret evidence permitted and habeas corpus suspended?

2007 Ron Paul 97:3
So while I am by no means unsympathetic to the current situation in Burma, as an elected Member of the United States House of Representatives I strongly believe that we would do better to promote freedom around the world by paying better attention to our rapidly eroding freedom here at home. I urge my colleagues to consider their priorities more closely and to consider the much more effective approach of leading by example.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 98
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement Introducing American Freedom Agenda Act Of 2007 15 October 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, October 15, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 98:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a comprehensive piece of legislation to restore the American Constitution and to restore the liberties that have been sadly eroded over the past several years.

2007 Ron Paul 98:2
This legislation seeks to restore the checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution by our Founding Fathers to prevent abuse of Americans by their government. This proposed legislation would repeal the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and re-establish the traditional practice that military commissions may be used to try war crimes in places of active hostility where a rapid trial is necessary to preserve evidence or prevent chaos.

2007 Ron Paul 98:3
The legislation clarifies that no information shall be admitted as evidence if it is obtained from the defendant through the use of torture or coercion. It codifies the FISA process as the means by which foreign intelligence may be obtained and it gives members of the Senate and the House of Representatives standing in court to challenge presidential signing statements that declares the president’s intent to disregard certain aspects of a law passed in the U.S. Congress. It prohibits kidnapping and extraordinary rendition of prisoners to foreign countries on the president’s unilateral determination that the suspect is an enemy combatant. It defends the first amendment by clarifying that journalists are not to be prevented from publishing information received from the legislative or executive branch unless such publication would cause immediate, direct, and irreparable harm to the United States.

2007 Ron Paul 98:4
Finally, the legislation would prohibit the use of secret evidence to designate an individual or organization with a United States presence to be a foreign terrorist or foreign terrorist organization.

2007 Ron Paul 98:5
I invite my colleagues to join my efforts to restore the U.S. Constitution by enacting the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 99
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

House Financial Services Committee – Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy 17 October 2007

2007 Ron Paul 99:1
Mr. Chairman, as you know, I have consistently favored a policy of non-intervention with regard both to foreign affairs and to economic policy. While there may well be problems with the Russian economy in terms of failed privatization, government expropriation of assets, etc., there is no reason that these issues should concern the United States government.

2007 Ron Paul 99:2
Foreign nations could easily criticize the United States for its weak dollar policy which favors our exporting industries while harming the exporting industries of our trading partners; for our eminent domain policies which make a mockery of property rights; and for Sarbanes-Oxley, which unfairly burdens companies operating in this country and causes companies to move to foreign capital markets. We would understandably resent this intrusion into our affairs.

2007 Ron Paul 99:3
While I empathize with the investors who have lost money through the Yukos incident, the fact remains that markets are fraught with risk. Our loose monetary policy and stimulation of credit have led to expectations of permanent positive economic growth. The technology bubble and the housing bubble have caused many to believe that markets can only go up. When bubbles burst, when stocks decline, something must have gone awry, and the government is called upon to right the wrong.

2007 Ron Paul 99:4
While many innocent investors are lured into the stock market as a result of our flawed expansionary government policies leading to visions of ever-increasing wealth, and may not be entirely at fault for their losses, the principle of caveat emptor seems to have been forgotten. In the case of a burst asset bubble or a stock's decline in price, some investors will lose out. It might be painful, it may have come about through injustice and government meddling, but government wrongdoing cannot be undone by more government wrongdoing.

2007 Ron Paul 99:5
Neither a bailout, as in the case of the housing bubble, nor attempted government pressure on a foreign government, as in the case of Yukos, are appropriate reactions to the losses of investors. I wish the investors affected in the Yukos incident well, but urge my colleagues to resist the temptation to intervene in Russia's internal affairs.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 100
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Congratulations To LaVace Stewart Elementary 5 November 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, November 5, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 100:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to congratulate LaVace Stewart Elementary School in Kemah, Texas, in my congressional district, for being awarded a No Child Left Behind- Blue Ribbon award. LaVace Stewart Elementary School earned this award by going from acceptable to exemplary in State accountability ratings in less than 4 years.

2007 Ron Paul 100:2
LaVace Stewart Elementary School is one of only 23 Texas schools selected for the Blue Ribbon award, which honors public and private elementary, middle, and high schools that demonstrate superior academic performance or high gains in student achievement. LaVace Stewart is certainly worthy of this award. As Dr. Sandra Mossman, superintendent of schools for Clear Creek Independent School District said, “[W]hen you walk into [LaVace Stewart] you can immediately feel the enthusiasm for learning and witness the compassion for children.”

2007 Ron Paul 100:3
Madam Speaker, I agree with Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings that “It takes a lot of hard work by teachers and students to become a Blue Ribbon school, and it’s a privilege to celebrate their great effort.” I am pleased to extend my congratulations to the teachers, administrators, parents, and the students of LaVace Stewart Elementary School for the school’s is named a Blue Ribbon School.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 101
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Legislation Allowing Interstate Shipment Of Unpasteurized Milk 5 November 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, November 5, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 101:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation that allows the transportation and sale in interstate commerce of unpasteurized milk and milk products, as long as the milk both originates from and is shipped to States that allow the sale of unpasteurized milk and milk products. This legislation removes an unconstitutional restraint on farmers who wish to sell unpasteurized milk and milk products, and people who wish to consume unpasteurized milk and milk products.

2007 Ron Paul 101:2
My office has heard from numerous people who would like to purchase unpasteurized milk. Many of these people have done their own research and come to the conclusion that unpasteurized milk is healthier than pasteurized milk. These Americans have the right to consume these products without having the Federal Government second-guess their judgment about what products best promote health. If there are legitimate concerns about the safety of unpasteurized milk, those concerns should be addressed at the State and local level.

2007 Ron Paul 101:3
I urge my colleagues to join me in promoting consumers’ rights, the original intent of the Constitution, and federalism by cosponsoring my legislation to allow the interstate sale of unpasteurized milk and milk products.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 102
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Question Of The Privileges Of The House 6 November 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, November 6, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 102:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise, reluctantly, in favor of the motion to table House Resolution 799, Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors, and in favor of referring that resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for full consideration. I voted to table this resolution not because I do not share the gentleman from Ohio’s desire to hold those responsible for the Iraqi debacle accountable; but rather, because I strongly believe that we must follow established protocol in matters of such importance. During my entire time in Congress, I have been outspoken in my opposition to war with Iraq and Iran. I have warned my colleagues and the administration against marching toward war in numerous speeches over the years, and I have voted against every appropriation to continue the war on Iraq.

2007 Ron Paul 102:2
I have always been strongly in favor of vigorous congressional oversight of the executive branch, and I have lamented our abrogation of these Constitutional obligations in recent times. I do believe, however, that this legislation should proceed through the House of Representatives following regular order, which would require investigation and hearings in the House Judiciary Committee before the resolution proceeds to the floor for a vote. This time- tested manner of moving impeachment legislation may slow the process, but in the long run it preserves liberty by ensuring that the House thoroughly deliberates on such weighty matters. In past impeachments of high officials, including those of Presidents Nixon and Clinton, the legislation had always gone through the proper committee with full investigation and accompanying committee report.

2007 Ron Paul 102:3
I noted with some dismay that many of my colleagues who have long supported the war changed their vote to oppose tabling the motion for purely political reasons. That move was a disrespectful to the Constitutional function of this body and I could not support such actions with my vote.

2007 Ron Paul 102:4
I was pleased that the House did vote in favor of sending this legislation to the Judiciary Committee, which essentially directs the committee to examine the issue more closely than it has done to this point.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 103
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Statement Before the Joint Economic Committee 8 November 2007

2007 Ron Paul 103:1
Mr. Chairman, our economy finds itself in a precarious state. Oil prices are rising, gold is nearing all-time highs, and the dollar is nearing all-time lows. The root of this crisis, as with past financial and economic crises, results from federal government intervention into the economy, not to anything endemic to the market, nor to the the actions of market participants.

2007 Ron Paul 103:2
The collapse of the housing market has served as a catalyst for the economy's latest bust. For years the federal government has made it one of its prime aims to encourage homeownership among people who otherwise would not be able to afford homes. Various federal mortgage programs through the FHA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac have distorted the normal workings of the housing market.

2007 Ron Paul 103:3
The implicit government backing of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac provides investors an incentive to provide funds to Fannie and Freddie that otherwise would have been put to use in other sectors of the economy. It was this flood of investor capital that helped to fuel the housing bubble.

2007 Ron Paul 103:4
Legislation such as the Zero Downpayment Act and the misnamed American Dream Downpayment Act made it possible for people who could not afford down payments on houses to receive assistance from the federal government, or even to pay no down payment at all, courtesy of the taxpayers. The requirement of a down payment has always helped to ascertain the ability of a buyer to pay off a mortgage. It requires the buyer to show hard work and thrift, the ability to delay present consumption in order to make a larger acquisition in the future.

2007 Ron Paul 103:5
When this requirement is minimized or eliminated, you introduce a new class of homebuyers, people who are unable to budget and save for the purchase of a home, or who should wait for a few years until they have saved enough to purchase a home. Federal policies have encouraged investors, lenders, and brokers to cater to these people, so it is no surprise that market actors came up with ever more sophisticated means of bringing these people into the real estate market.

2007 Ron Paul 103:6
Finally, the Federal Reserve's loose monetary policy and lowering of interest rates were a major spur to the housing boom. Low interest rates influence marginal buyers, those who are sitting on the fence, and encourage them to take on a mortgage that they otherwise would not. Even when interest rates are raised, no one expects them to stay high for long, as there is always pressure from politicians and investors to keep rates low, as no one wants the cheap credit to end.

2007 Ron Paul 103:7
Thinking that interest rates will cycle from low to higher, back to low, lenders begin to offer adjustable rate mortgages, 2/28's, 3/27's, and other sophisticated mortgages that may trap many unsavvy buyers. Buyers go short, lenders go long, and many people have been burned as a result.

2007 Ron Paul 103:8
It is time that the federal government get out of the housing business. Through our interventionist legislation we have caused the boom and bust, and any attempts at reform that fail to address the causes of our current problem will only sow the seeds for the next b

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 104
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of The Make No Cents Until It Makes Sense Act 8 November 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, November 8, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 104:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I am introducing this bill in response to H.R. 3956, which would unconstitutionally delegate the authority to determine the metal content of coins to the Secretary of the Treasury. While I am concerned at the high cost of minting pennies, I am not entirely convinced that the Mint needs to mint as many pennies as it does. Over the past 30 years, over 300 billion pennies have been minted, more than twice as many coins as all other denominations combined. This is over 1,000 pennies for each man, woman, and child in this country.

2007 Ron Paul 104:2
I find it hard to believe that with this many pennies having been minted, we still have a shortage of pennies. My bill would prohibit the minting of pennies until the Treasury and Federal Reserve certify that there is no surplus of pennies. If there is a surplus of pennies, it makes no sense for the Mint to continue to coin them if each penny costs more than one cent to produce. If there really were a shortage, the onus would be on the Treasury and Federal Reserve to conduct their survey in a timely fashion in order to facilitate further penny production.

2007 Ron Paul 104:3
In the event of a shortage I would urge my colleagues to consider Mr. ROSKAM’s H.R. 4036, which addresses the cost issue by changing the composition of pennies while maintaining the Congressional control and oversight mandated by the Constitution.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 105
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introduction Of Property Tax Deduction For All Act 5 December 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, December 5, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 105:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Property Tax Deduction for All Act, legislation making the property tax deduction an “above-the-line” deduction. This simple change makes the property tax deduction available to homeowners who do not file an itemized tax return.

2007 Ron Paul 105:2
The Property Tax Deduction for All Act will help millions of Americans who struggle with high property taxes, but because they do not itemize, are unable to take advantage of the Federal deduction for property taxes. Extending the property tax deduction to all homeowners will especially benefit senior citizens, whose homes often are the major part of their wealth, and young families struggling to cope with the costs of owning a new home. I respectfully urge my colleagues to help ensure all homeowners can take advantage of the tax deduction for property taxes by cosponsoring this legislation.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 106
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Violent Radicalization And Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act 5 December 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, December 5, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 106:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I regret that I was unavoidably out of town on October 23, 2007, when a vote was taken on H.R. 1955, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted against this misguided and dangerous piece of legislation. This legislation focuses the weight of the U.S. government inward toward its own citizens under the guise of protecting us against “violent radicalization.”

2007 Ron Paul 106:2
I would like to note that this legislation was brought to the floor for a vote under suspension of regular order. These so-called “suspension” bills are meant to be non-controversial, thereby negating the need for the more complete and open debate allowed under regular order. It is difficult for me to believe that none of my colleagues in Congress view H.R. 1955, with its troubling civil liberties implications, as “non-controversial.”

2007 Ron Paul 106:3
There are many causes for concern in H.R. 1955. The legislation specifically singles out the Internet for “facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process” in the United States. Such language may well be the first step toward U.S. government regulation of what we are allowed to access on the Internet. Are we, for our own good, to be subjected to the kind of governmental control of the Internet that we see in unfree societies? This bill certainly sets us on that course.

2007 Ron Paul 106:4
This seems to be an unwise and dangerous solution in search of a real problem. Previous acts of ideologically-motivated violence, though rare, have been resolved successfully using law enforcement techniques, existing laws against violence and our court system. Even if there were a surge of “violent radicalization” — a claim for which there is no evidence — there is no reason to believe that our criminal justice system is so flawed and weak as to be incapable of trying and punishing those who perpetrate violent acts.

2007 Ron Paul 106:5
This legislation will set up a new government bureaucracy to monitor and further study the as-yet undemonstrated pressing problem of homegrown terrorism and radicalization. It will no doubt prove to be another bureaucracy that artificially inflates problems so as to guarantee its future existence and funding. But it may do so at great further expense to our civil liberties. What disturbs me most about this legislation is that it leaves the door wide open for the broadest definition of what constitutes “radicalization.” Could otherwise non-violent anti-tax, antiwar, or anti-abortion groups fall under the watchful eye of this new government commission? Assurances otherwise in this legislation are unconvincing.

2007 Ron Paul 106:6
In addition, this legislation will create a Department of Homeland Security-established university-based body to further study radicalization and to “contribute to the establishment of training, written materials, information, analytical assistance and professional resources to aid in combating violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism.” I wonder whether this is really a legitimate role for institutes of higher learning in a free society.

2007 Ron Paul 106:7
Legislation such as this demands heavy- handed governmental action against American citizens where no crime has been committed. It is yet another attack on our Constitutionally- protected civil liberties. It is my sincere hope that we will reject such approaches to security, which will fail at their stated goal at a great cost to our way of life.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 107
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Two medical Breakthroughs From UTMB 12 December 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, December 12, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 107:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, researchers at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) have been responsible for two significant medical breakthroughs that have the potential to dramatically improve American health care.

2007 Ron Paul 107:2
Earlier this year, Dr. Lisa Elferink, an associate professor at UTMB’s Cancer Center, led a national research team that discovered how use of the bacterial pathogen, Listeria monocytogenes could help medical researchers and practitioners understand the mechanisms by which cancer cells develop. This discovery is a major step in developing successful treatments for a variety of cancers.

2007 Ron Paul 107:3
Another team of UTMB researchers, lead by Dr. Angela Shepherd, have helped American men at risk of osteoporosis by developing the Male Osteoporosis Risk Estimation Score (MORES). While osteoporosis screening is common for women, many men who are at risk for this bone disease are not regularly checked. MORES provides a quick and easy way to identify men who may need further screening and possibly treatment for osteoporosis.

2007 Ron Paul 107:4
The development of MORES and the new use of Listeria monocytogenes are just two of the advances in medical research to come out of UTMB. UTMB is one of America’s leading centers of medical research, as well as a source of quality health care for the people of the Gulf Coast of Texas. Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to extend my congratulations to the researchers involved in these recent breakthroughs and to everyone associated with UTMB for their tireless work to improve health care.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 108
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Tribute To Dr. Russell Arthur Matthes 12 December 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, December 12, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 108:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, the residents of Bay City, Texas lost a true friend when Dr. Russell Arthur Matthes passed away on November 27. A native of Bay City, Russell Matthes volunteered for the Naval Air Corps in 1942. Dr. Matthes served as a turret gunner on a flying gunship, participating in the Saipan, Tinian, Okinawa, and Philippines campaigns. These where among the most decisive battles in the closing chapters of World War II.

2007 Ron Paul 108:2
When Japan surrendered, Dr. Matthes’s squadron was transferred to the USS Cumberland Sound and sent to Japan. His plane’s crew flew across Japan, taking aerial photographs for intelligence purposes and also looking for prison camps. A camp at Kobe was found and the crew dropped all the canned food from the plane’s galley.

2007 Ron Paul 108:3
Following the war, Russell Matthes completed his education at Baylor University and Baylor Dental School, where he trained as an orthodontist. He then returned to Bay City to practice orthodontics. Dr. Matthes and his wife, Juniata LeTulle Matthes, raised two daughters and a son.

2007 Ron Paul 108:4
In addition to serving the people of his community with his medical practice, Dr. Matthes was active in numerous civic and community groups. In order to maintain his links with his fellow veterans, Dr. Matthes was a lifetime member of Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 2438. He was also a member of the Masonic Lodge, the Eastern Star Jesters, the Shiners, and the Medical Benevolence Foundation.

2007 Ron Paul 108:5
Dr. Matthes was particularly interested in helping the youth of his community. Thus, in addition to all his other civic activities and his full-time medical practice, Dr. Matthes was very active with the Boy Scouts. Through his activities with the scouts, as well as his other civic work, he helped improve the lives of thousands of young Texans.

2007 Ron Paul 108:6
Residents of Bay City were not the only ones who benefited from Dr. Matthes commitment to service. As a member of the Episcopal Church, Dr. Matthes preformed church missionary work in around the world.

2007 Ron Paul 108:7
Madam Speaker, Dr. Matthes devotion to his community and his fellow human beings set an example we all should follow. I extend my deepest condolences to Dr. Matthes’ family and friends.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 109
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Cancer And Terminal Illness Patient Health Care Act 13 December 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, December 13, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 109:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to help working Americans stricken with cancer or other terminal illnesses, and their families, by introducing the Cancer and Terminal Illness Patient Health Care Act. This act exempts people with terminal illnesses from the employee portion of payroll taxes while they are suffering from such illnesses or are incurring significant medical costs associated with their conditions. The Cancer and Terminal Illness Patient Health Care Act also provides a payroll deduction to any worker who is the primary caregiver for a spouse, parent, or child with a terminal illness.

2007 Ron Paul 109:2
When stricken with cancer or another terminal disease, many Americans struggle to pay for the treatment necessary to save, or extend, their lives. Even employees with health insurance incur costs such as for transportation to and from care centers, prescription drugs not covered by their insurance, or for child care while they are receiving treatment. Yet, the Federal Government continues to force these employees to pay for retirement benefits they may never live to see!

2007 Ron Paul 109:3
Many Americans struggle to pay the costs of treating children, a spouse, or a parent with a terminal illness. My bill also provides much needed tax relief for those who are providing care to a loved one with a terminal disease.

2007 Ron Paul 109:4
As a physician who has specialized in women’s health issues for decades, I know how critical it is that cancer patients and others suffering from terminal illnesses have the resources they need to combat these illnesses. The Cancer and Terminal Illness Patient Health Care Act provides a realistic way to help people suffering from cancer or other terminal illnesses receive quality health care.

2007 Ron Paul 109:5
It is hard to think of a more compassionate tax policy this Congress could enact than to stop taking the resources away from working Americans that could help them treat cancer, AIDS, or other terrible health problems. I hope all my colleagues will help people suffering from terminal illnesses, and their caregivers, by cosponsoring the Cancer and Terminal Illness Patent Health Care Act.

2007 Ron Paul Chapter 110
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Congressional Record [.PDF]

Introducing The Free Competition In Currency Act 13 December 2007

HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, December 13, 2007

2007 Ron Paul 110:1
Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Free Competition in Currency Act. This act would eliminate two sections of U.S. Code that, although ostensibly intended to punish counterfeiters, have instead been used by the Government to shut down private mints. As anticounterfeiting measures, these sections are superfluous, as 18 U.S.C. 485, 490, and 491 already grant sufficient authority to punish counterfeiters.

2007 Ron Paul 110:2
The two sections this bill repeals, 18 U.S.C. 486 and 489, are so broadly written as to effectively restrict any form of private coinage from competing with the products of the United States Mint. Allowing such statutes to remain in force as a catch-all provision merely encourages prosecutorial abuse. One particular egregious recent example is that of the Liberty Dollar, in which Federal agents seized millions of dollars worth of private currency held by a private mint on behalf of thousands of people across the country.

2007 Ron Paul 110:3
Due to nearly a century of inflationary monetary policy on the part of the Federal Reserve, the U.S. dollar stands at historically low levels. Investors around the world are shunning the dollar, and millions of Americans see their salaries, savings accounts, and pensions eroded away by rising inflation. We stand on the precipice of an unprecedented monetary collapse, and as a result many people have begun to look for alternatives to the dollar.

2007 Ron Paul 110:4
As a proponent of competition in currencies, I believe that the American people should be free to choose the type of currency they prefer to use. The ability of consumers to adopt alternative currencies can help to keep the Government and the Federal Reserve honest, as the threat that further inflation will cause more and more people to opt out of using the dollar may restrain the government from debasing the currency. As monopolists, however, the Federal Reserve and the Mint fear competition, and would rather force competitors out using the federal court system and the threat of asset forfeiture than compete in the market.

2007 Ron Paul 110:5
A free society should shun this type of strong-arm action, and the Free Competition in Currency Act would take the necessary first steps to freeing the market for competing currencies. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.