Volume 2000 — The Book of Ron Paul

Volume 2000 — The Book of Ron Paul

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 1
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Education and Workforce Committee: January 28, 2000
Statement on OSHA Home Office Regulations
Submitted before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 1:1

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to express my concerns regarding the possibility that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) will attempt to exercise regulatory authority over home-based worksites and hold employers responsible for accidents occurring in such worksites. Although OSHA has announced that it will only hold employers liable for conditions at home-based worksites if the employee is performing “hazardous manufacturing work,” this proposal still raises serious concerns. This is because any expansion of OSHAs regulatory authority in the homes represents a major expansion of federal authority far beyond anything intended by Congress when it created OSHA in the 1970s. Furthermore, OSHA regulation of any type of work in the private residence opens the door to the eventual regulation of all home worksites. In order to ensure home-based workers are protected from overzealous federal bureaucrats, Congressman J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) and myself have introduced legislation, the Home Office Protection Enhancement (HOPE) Act, amending the Occupational Safety and Health Act to clarify that OSHA has no authority over worksites located in an employee’s residence.

2000 Ron Paul 1:2

Modern technology, such as e-mail and the Internet, allows employees to be productive members of the workforce without leaving their homes! The option of “telecommuting” is particularly valuable for women with young children or those caring for elderly parents. Using technology to work at home gives these Americans the chance to earn a living and have a fulfilling career while remaining at home with their children or elderly parents. Telecommuting also makes it easier for citizens with disabilities to become productive members of the job market. Any federal requirements holding employers liable for the conditions of a home office may well cause some employers to forbid their employees from telecommuting, thus shutting millions of mothers, persons caring for elderly parents, and disabled citizens out of the workforce!

2000 Ron Paul 1:3

Federal polices discouraging telecommuting will harm the environment by forcing American workers out of their home and onto America’s already overcrowded roads. It is ironic that an administration, which has claimed that “protecting the environment” is one of its top priorities, would even consider policies that could undermine a market-created means of protecting the environment. Employers who continue to allow their employees to telecommute will be forced by any OSHA regulations on home offices to inspect their employees’ homes to ensure they are in compliance with any and all applicable OSHA regulations. This is a massive invasion of employees’ privacy. What employee would want their boss snooping around their living room, den, or bedroom to make sure their “home-based worksite” was OSHA compliant?

2000 Ron Paul 1:4

Mr. Chairman, the fact that OSHA would even consider exercising regulatory authority over any part of a private home shows just how little respect OSHA has for private property. Private property, of course, was considered one of the bulwarks of liberty by our nation’s founding fathers, and has been seriously eroded in this country. While it is heartening that so many members of Congress have expressed their displeasure with OSHA over this issue, I am concerned that most of the debate has focused on the negative consequences of this regulation instead of on the question of whether OSHA has the constitutional authority to regulate any part of a private residence (or private business for that matter). The economic and social consequences of allowing federal bureaucrats to regulate home offices certainly should be debated. However, I would remind my colleagues that conceding the principle that the only way to protect worker safety is by means of a large bureaucracy with the power to impose a “one-size fits all” model on every workplace in America ensures that defenders of the free market will be always on the defensive, trying to reign in the bureaucracy from going “too far” rather than advancing a positive, pro-freedom agenda.
Furthermore, many companies are experiencing great success at promoting worker safety by forming partnerships with their employees to determine how best to create a safe workplace. This approach to worker safety is both more effective, and constitutionally sound, than giving OSHA bureaucrats the power to, for example, force landscapers to use $200 gas cans instead of $5 cans or fining a construction company $7,000 dollars because their employees jumped in a trench to rescue a trapped man without first putting on their OSHA-approved hard hats; or fine a company because it failed to warn employees not to eat copier toner!

2000 Ron Paul 1:5

Some may argue that occasional regulatory excess is a small price to pay for a safe workplace. However, there is no evidence that OSHAs invasiveness promotes workplace safety! While it is true that workplace accidents have declined since OSHAs creation, OSHA itself has had little effect on the decline. Workplace deaths and accidents were declining before OSHAs creation, thanks to improvements in safety technology and changes in the occupational distribution of labor. Workplace fatalities declined from 30 deaths per 100,000 in 1945 to 18 deaths per 100,000 in 1969, three years before OSHAs creation. In contrast to the dramatic drop in workplace fatalities in the 24 years before OSHAs creation, workplace fatalities only declined from 18 per 100,000 to eight in the 21 years after OSHAs creation.

2000 Ron Paul 1:6

OSHAs role in this decline was negligible! According to Richard Butler of the University of Minnesota, who studied National Safety Council data on workplace facility rates, OSHAs contribution to workplace fatality rates is “statistically insignificant.” This is not an isolated example; the vast majority of workplace studies show an insignificant role for OSHA in reducing workplace injuries.

2000 Ron Paul 1:7

This is why I have supported several legislative efforts to encourage more cooperative approach to workplace safety. I hope Congress will continue to work to replace the old “command-and control” model with one that respects the constitution and does not treat Americans like children in need of the protection of “big brother” government.

2000 Ron Paul 1:8

In conclusion, I wish to once again thank Mr. Hoesktra for holding this hearing on this important issue and urge my colleagues to join with Mr. Hayworth and myself to protect those who work at home from further over-regulation by cosponsoring the Home Office Protection Enhancement Act (HOPE) Act.

2000 Ron Paul 6:1

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Pharmaceutical Freedom Act of 2000. 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.

2000 Ron Paul 6:2

The first provision of my legislation provides seniors a tax credit equal to 80 percent of their prescription drug costs. As many of my colleagues have pointed out, our nation’s seniors are struggling to afford the prescription drugs they need in order to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle. Yet, the Federal Government continues to impose taxes on Social Security benefits and limits senior citizens’ ability to earn additional income by reducing Social Security benefits if a senior exceeds the ‘earnings limitation.’ Meanwhile, Congress continually raids the Social Security trust fund to finance unconstitutional programs! It is long past time for Congress to choose between helping seniors afford medicine or using the Social Security trust fund as a slush fund for big government and pork-barrel spending.

2000 Ron Paul 6:3

Mr. Speaker, I do wish to clarify that this tax credit is intended to supplement the efforts to reform and strengthen the Medicare system to ensure seniors have the ability to use Medicare funds to purchase prescription drugs. I am a strong supporter of strengthening the Medicare system to allow for more choice and consumer control, including structural reforms that will allow seniors to use Medicare funds to cover the costs of prescription drugs.

2000 Ron Paul 6:4

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. Mr. Speaker, letting the free market work is the best means of lowering the cost of prescription drugs.

2000 Ron Paul 6:5

The Pharmaceutical Freedom Act also protects consumers’ access to affordable prescription drugs by forbidding the Federal Government from regulating any Internet sales of FDA-approved pharmaceuticals by state-licensed pharmacists. 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 which sell pharmaceuticals. Any federal regulations would inevitably drive up prices of pharmaceuticals, thus depriving many consumers of access to affordable prescription medications.

2000 Ron Paul 6:6

In conclusion, Mr. 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 Pharmaceutical Freedom Act of 2000.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 7
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

February 10, 2000
REVIEW ARTICLE ON ‘NEW MATH’

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: E117]

2000 Ron Paul 7:1

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I submit for the Record and highly recommend to all of my colleagues Bill Evers’ ‘Secretary Riley Reignites the Math Wars,’ which recently appeared in the Weekly Standard. Mr. Evers’ provides an excellent overview of the controversy created by the Department of Education’s endorsement of ten ‘discovery-learning’ programs (also known as ‘new, new math’ or ‘fuzzy math’). Concerns have been raised that ‘fuzzy math’ de-emphasizes traditional mathematics in favor of encouraging children to ‘discover’ math without the guidance of a teacher. Under some ‘new, new math’ programs traditional teaching is discouraged on the grounds that teachers may harm a child’s self-esteem by, for example, correcting a child’s ‘discovery’ that 2+2 equals 5. Obviously, this type of ‘education’ diminishes a child’s future prospects, after all, few employers value high self-esteem more than the ability to add!

2000 Ron Paul 7:2

Mr. Evers’ article points out that the federal government has no constitutional authority to dictate or even recommend to local schools what type of mathematics curriculum they should adopt. Instead, all curriculum decisions are solely under the control of states, local communities, teachers, and parents. I would remind my colleagues that outrages like ‘new math’ did not infiltrate the classroom until the federal government seized control of education, allowing Washington-DC based bureaucrats to use our children as guinea pigs for their politically correct experiments.

2000 Ron Paul 7:3

The solution to America’s education crisis lies in returning to the Constitution and restoring parental control. In order to restore true parental control of education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (HR 935). This bill would give parents a $3,000 per year tax credit for each child’s education related expenses. Unlike other so-called ‘reform’ proposals, my bill would allow parents considerably more freedom in determining how to educate their children. It would also be free of guidelines and restrictions that only dilute the actual number of dollars spent directly on a child.

2000 Ron Paul 7:4

The Family Education Freedom Act provides parents with the means to make sure their children are getting a quality education that meets their child’s special needs. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleagues that thirty years of centralized education have produced nothing but failure and frustrated parents. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to read Mr. Evers’ article on the dangers of the federal endorsement of ‘fuzzy math’ and support my efforts to improve education by giving dollars and authority to parents, teachers and local school districts by cosponsoring the Family Education Freedom Act.

2000 Ron Paul 7:5

Williamson Evers is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, an adjunct professor of political science at Santa Clara University, a research fellow at the Independent Institute and an adjunct fellow of the Ludwig Von Mises Institute. Mr. Evers has served on the California State Commission for the Establishment of Academic Content and Performance Standards and he is currently a member of the California State Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) assessment system’s Content Review Panels for history and mathematics as well as the Advisory Board of the Californian History-Social Science Project. Mr. Evers is the editor of What’s Gone Wrong in America’s Classrooms (Hoover Institution Press, 1998). Mr. Evers has been published in numerous scholarly and popular periodicals, including the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, and the Christian Science Monitor.

(BY BILL EVERS)

2000 Ron Paul 7:6
In early 1998, U.S. Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley called for a ‘cease-fire’ in the math wars between the proponents of solid content and the proponents of discovery-learning methods. He said he was ‘very troubled’ by ‘the increasing polarization and fighting’ about how and which mathematics should be taught from kindergarten through high school.

2000 Ron Paul 7:7
Despite this call for a cease-fire, the U.S. Department of Education endorsed ten discovery-learning programs in October 1999. This federal imprimatur should not be allowed to disguise the fact that content (such as dividing fractions and multiplying multidigit numbers) is missing from these federally approved programs and that there is no good evidence that they are effective. Discovery-learning math is often called by its critics ‘fuzzy math’ or ‘no-correct-answer math.’

2000 Ron Paul 7:8
In response to the Department of Education, about two hundred mathematicians and scientists signed an open letter to Secretary Riley, which was published in the Washington Post on November 18, 1999 (see letter at www.mathematicallycorrect.com/riley.htm.) The signers, who included Nobel laureates and some of the country’s most eminent mathematicians, didn’t like the Department of Education’s new equation: Federal Math=Fuzzy Math. The letter asked Riley to withdraw the federal endorsements. The news stories that followed got at the essence of the debate.

2000 Ron Paul 7:9
Steve Leinward of the Connecticut Department of Education was on the U.S. Department of Education’s panel that picked the math programs that would receive federal approval. In an interview with the Chronicle of Higher Education, Leinward defended the approved programs as the least common denominator — ‘a common core of math that all students can master.’

2000 Ron Paul 7:10
Leinward is not saying that the federally approved programs cover the material taught in too-performing countries such as Japan or Hungary or that the programs contain complete coverage of elementary and secondary school math. What he and his fellow panelists want is a watered-down program that all American students — as currently trained — can master.

2000 Ron Paul 7:11
Mathematics professor David Klein of California State University at Northridge is a proponent of solid content. He is quoted in the Chronicle of Higher Education as saying that algebra is the key course for students, the gateway to success in mathematics and to success in college in general. Leinward says that Klein’s algebra-for-all position is elitist.

2000 Ron Paul 7:12
Here we have the central difference between the two sides. The rigorous curriculum side says that, like Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore, we can have algebra for all, preparing students for technical careers and college-level work. The water-it-down side says U.S. teachers and students aren’t capable of teaching and learning algebra.

2000 Ron Paul 7:13
These federal recommendations are for kindergarten through high school, which has serious consequences. In essence, the U.S. Department of Education, by making these endorsements, is closing the gate on going to college or even on technical blue-collar jobs for many students. And it is closing that gate as early as kindergarten.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 8
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

February 15, 2000
ON PRESENTING CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL TO JOHN CARDINAL O’CONNOR

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 8:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3557. At the same time, I rise in total support of, and with complete respect for, the work of Cardinal O’Connor. Cardinal O’Connor is a true hero as he labors tirelessly on behalf of the most needy and vulnerable in our society; promotes racial and religious harmony; advocates the best education for all children regardless of race, religion, or financial status; ministers to the poor, sick, and disabled; all the while standing up for that which he believes even in the face of hostility.

2000 Ron Paul 8:2
I must, however, oppose the Gold Medal for Cardinal O’Connor because appropriating $30,000 of taxpayer money is neither constitutional nor, in the spirit of Cardinal O’Connor who dedicates his life to voluntary and charitable work, particularly humanitarian.

2000 Ron Paul 8:3
Because of my continuing and uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, several of my colleagues felt compelled to personally challenge me as to whether, on this issue, I would maintain my resolve and commitment to the Constitution — a Constitution, which only last year, each Member of Congress, swore to uphold. In each of these instances, I offered to do a little more than uphold my constitutional oath.

2000 Ron Paul 8:4
In fact, as a means of demonstrating my personal regard and enthusiasm for the work of Cardinal O’Connor, I invited each of these colleagues to match my private, personal contribution of $100 which, if accepted by the 435 Members of the House of Representatives, would more than satisfy the $30,000 cost necessary to mint and award a gold medal to the well-deserving Cardinal O’Connor. To me, it seemed a particularly good opportunity to demonstrate one’s genuine convictions by spending one’s own money rather than that of the taxpayers who remain free to contribute, at their own discretion, to the work of Cardinal O’Connor as they have consistently done in the past. For the record, not a single Representative who solicited my support for spending taxpayer’s money, was willing to contribute their own money to demonstrate the courage of their so-called convictions and generosity.

2000 Ron Paul 8:5
It is, of course, very easy to be generous with other people’s money.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 9
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

February 16, 2000
THE PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION AND JUDICIAL LIMITATION ACT

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 9:1
Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the Partial Birth Abortion and Judicial Limitation Act. This bill would, in accordance with Article 3, Section 2 of our United States Constitution, prohibit federal courts (exclusive of the US Supreme Court) from hearing cases relative to partial birth abortion.

2000 Ron Paul 9:2
One of the most egregious portions of the Roe v. Wade decision is that the ruling in that case served to substitute the opinions of unelected judges for those of state representatives when it comes to making abortion law. By doing this, judges have not merely taken on the role of legislators, they have also thrust the federal apparatus into an area that the founding fathers specifically and exclusively entrusted to state entities. Unfortunately, this aspect of Roe v. Wade has not received the attention that less critical portions of the decision have received.

2000 Ron Paul 9:3
The legislation I am introducing today is aimed at moving us toward correcting the federal judicial usurpation of constitutionally-identified state authority. This legislation is needed now more than ever as certain “lower federal courts” have taken it upon themselves to continue the error-ridden ways of Roe v. Wade by overturning legitimate state restrictions on partial birth abortion.

2000 Ron Paul 9:4
Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to review this new legislation and to join me in this battle by cosponsoring this pro-life legislation.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 10
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

February 16, 2000
THE AGRICULTURE EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT
------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 10:1
Mr. 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. Think of 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.

2000 Ron Paul 10:2
It is truly amazing that with all the hand-wringing in this Congress over the alleged need to further restrict liberty and grow the size of government “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.

2000 Ron Paul 10:3
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 government!

2000 Ron Paul 10:4
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.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 11
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

March 1, 2000
SENIOR CITIZENS’ FREEDOM TO WORK ACT OF 1999
------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 11:1

2000 Ron Paul 15:1

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I oppose the H.R. 3846, a bill to raise the federally-mandated minimum wage. Raising living standards for all Americans is 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.

2000 Ron Paul 15:2

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?

2000 Ron Paul 15:3

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 and standard of living of the very people proponents of the minimum wage claim will benefit from government intervention in the economy!

2000 Ron Paul 15:4

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.’

2000 Ron Paul 15:5

Mr. Speaker, I do not wish my opposition to this bill to be misconstrued as counseling inaction. Quite the contrary, Congress must enact ambitious program of tax cuts and regulatory reform to remove government-created obstacles to job growth. For example, I would have supported the reforms of the Fair Labor Standards Act contained in this bill had those provisions been brought before the House as separate pieces of legislation. Congress should also move to stop the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) from implementing its misguided and unscientific ‘ergonomics’ regulation. Congress should also pass my H.J. Res. 55, the Mailbox Privacy Protection Act, which repeals Post Office regulations on the uses of Commercial Mail Receiving Agencies (CMRAs). Many entrepreneurs have found CMRAs a useful tool to help them grow their businesses. Unless Congress repeals the Post Office’s CMRA regulations, these businesses will be forced to divert millions of dollars away from creating new jobs into complying with postal regulations!

2000 Ron Paul 15:6

Because one of the most important factors in getting a good job is a good education, Congress should also strengthen the education system by returning control over the education dollar to the American people. A good place to start is with the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935), which provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit for K-12 education expenses. I have also introduced the Education Improvement Tax Cut (H.R. 936), which provides a tax credit of up to $3,000 for donations to private school scholarships or for cash or in-kind contributions to public schools.

2000 Ron Paul 15:7

I am also cosponsoring the Make College Affordable Act (H.R. 2750), which makes college tuition tax deductible for middle-and-working class Americans, as well as several pieces of legislation to provide increased tax deductions and credits for education savings accounts for both higher education and K-12. In addition, I am cosponsoring several pieces of legislation, such as H.R. 1824 and H.R. 838, to provide tax credits for employers who provide training for their employees.

2000 Ron Paul 15:8

My education agenda will once again make America’s education system the envy of the world by putting the American people back in control of education and letting them use more of their own resources for education at all levels. Combining education tax cuts, for K-12, higher education and job training, with regulatory reform and small business tax cuts such as those Congress passed earlier today is the best way to help all Americans, including those currently on the lowest rung of the economic ladder, prosper.

2000 Ron Paul 15:9

However, Mr. Speaker, Congress should not fool itself into believing that the package of small business tax cuts will totally compensate for the damage inflicted on small businesses and their employees by the minimum wage increase. This assumes that Congress is omnipotent and thus can strike a perfect balance between tax cuts and regulations so that no firm, or worker, in the country is adversely effected 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.

2000 Ron Paul 15:10

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.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 16
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

March 9, 2000
PRAISING PARENTS AND TEACHERS DURING TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS WEEK

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 16:1

Mr. Speaker, as this is Texas Public Schools Week, I wanted to take a moment to offer my thanks to the parents and teachers of my district, and those across Texas, for all of their hard work to make sure our children get the best education possible.

2000 Ron Paul 16:2

Unfortunately, Congress and the federal bureaucracy continue to strip authority away from parents, teachers and local school boards. While Congress promises the American people that expansions of federal control over local schools will create an educational utopia, the fact is that the federal education bureaucracy has only increased the difficulties of educating the next generation and diverted resources away from the classroom. For example, while the federal government provides less than 10% of education funding, many school districts find that more than 50% of their paperwork is generated by federal mandates and the hoops local school officials must jump through in order to get Washington to return a ridiculously small portion of taxpayer money to local public schools.

2000 Ron Paul 16:3

More than thirty years of centralized control of education has resulted in failure and frustrated parents. It is time for Washington to return control of the nation’s school system to the people who best know the needs of the children — local communities and parents. The key to doing so is to return control of the education dollar back to the American people.

2000 Ron Paul 16:4

In order to give control of education back to the people, I have introduced the “Family Education Freedom Act” (HR 935). This bill provides parents with a $3,000 per-child tax credit for K-12 education expenses.

2000 Ron Paul 16:5

The “Family Education Freedom Act” fulfills the American people’s goal of 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 forcing them to send it to Washington to support education programs reflective of the values and priorities of Congress and the federal bureaucracy.

2000 Ron Paul 16:6

The “Family Education Freedom Act” will help parents who send their children to public schools strengthen their child’s public education. Parents may use the credit to improve schools by helping to finance the purchase of education tools such as computers or extracurricular activities such as music programs. Parents of public school students may also wish to use the credit to pay for special services for their children.

2000 Ron Paul 16:7

I have also introduced the “Teacher Tax Cut” (HR 937), which provides a $1,000 tax credit for every teacher in America. Quality education is impossible without quality teaching. Yet, America’s teachers remain underpaid compared to other professionals. Adding insult to injury, teachers often have to use their own money to purchase supplies for their classroom. For example, according to the Association of Texas Professional Educators, many Texas teachers spent between $50-300 of their own money on school supplies during the 1998-99 school year!

2000 Ron Paul 16:8

Since America’s teachers are underpaid because they are overtaxed, the best way to raise teacher take-home pay is to reduce their taxes. Raising teachers’ take-home pay via a $1,000 tax credit lets teachers know the American people and the Congress respect their work and encourages high-quality people to enter, and remain in, the teaching profession.

2000 Ron Paul 16:9

I have also introduced the “Education Improvement Tax Cut” (HR 936), which provides a $3,000 tax credit for cash or in-kind donations to public schools to support academic or extracurricular programs. This legislation encourages local citizens and community leaders to help strengthen local public schools. The “Education Improvement Tax Cut Act” also insures that education funding matches the needs of individual 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.

2000 Ron Paul 16:10

Mr. Speaker, my education agenda of returning control over the education dollar to the American people is the best way to strengthen public education. First of all, unlike plans to expand the federal education bureaucracy, my bills are free of “guidelines” and restrictions that dilute the actual number of dollars spent to educate a child. In addition, the money does not have to go through federal and state bureaucrats, each of whom gets a cut, before it reaches the classroom. Returning power over the education dollar will also free public school teachers, administrators and principals from having to comply with numerous federal mandates. Instead, school personnel and officials may work with parents and other concerned citizens to make sure all children are receiving the best possible education.

2000 Ron Paul 16:11

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I once again extend my thanks to all those who are involved in the education of our nation’s children. I also call upon my colleagues to help strengthen public schools by returning control over the education dollar to parents and other concerned citizens, as well as raising teacher salaries by cutting their taxes, so that the American people can once again make the American education system the envy of the world.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 17
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

March 22, 2000
NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H1197]

2000 Ron Paul 17:1

Mr. Speaker, while nuclear power has conferred a considerable benefit upon power users in this country, today, we confront the symptoms of a federal government run Constitutionally amok which requires our serious attention. As a Congress, we are faced with the decision of whether to further ignore the federal government’s constitutional limits and ultimately confront additional future symptoms of such action or acknowledge the necessary consequences of such an extra-Constitutional activity and act to correct the initial “enumerated powers doctrine” transgression.

2000 Ron Paul 17:2

In 1982, the federal government entered into an agreement with nuclear power industry to take possession of their nuclear waste and properly dispose of it in 1998. It should be noted that it is now March 2000 and the federal government has quite simply breached its contract. More importantly, it should be noted that the federal government had no authority to enter such an agreement in the first place. These facts, of course, did nothing to prevent the federal government from collecting from utility companies and their customers tax revenues for placement in a trust fund to accomplish their illegitimate and unfulfilled promise. Lack of constitutional authority also did nothing to stop the federal government from squandering more than $6 billion of that trust fund without having collected one gram of nuclear waste.

2000 Ron Paul 17:3

Today we are faced with yet another bill which provides mandates for which neither constitutional authority exists nor for which there is any reason to believe that such mandates will be observed by the Department of Energy any more than the previously legislated mandates have been observed. Additionally, this bill further expands the authority of the constitutionally- illegitimate Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and further involves the EPA in the process which could only exponentially increase the difficulty and time required to actually accomplish the legislation’s stated purpose.

2000 Ron Paul 17:4

These facts stated, we nevertheless remain faced with the current status quo requiring a solution. The initial question which must necessarily be asked and answered is “whether one constitutionally illegitimate action by the federal government may ever be used to justify the second?” The answer to this question must always be answered in the negative. This does not mean, however, that those whose taxes have been illegitimately taken should receive nothing in return — quite the contrary. Numerous breach of contract lawsuits have been filed against the federal government for which a quick remedies must be effectuated. Not only must the ill-taken revenues be returned to the non-breaching parties but attorneys fees and damages imposed upon the non-breaching parties should be awarded them as well. Perhaps, even more should be done, however, as this “contract”can, in many ways, be likened to the car thief who knowingly sells a stolen car to an unsuspecting customer inasmuch as the federal government promised to deliver something for which they themselves have usurped (stolen) from the state authorities and, hence, have no legitimate right to offer.

2000 Ron Paul 17:5

Of course, returning the trust fund money including interest and damages to ratepayers and utilities companies quite obviously does not dispose of the hazardous waste. Waste disposal and public safety, though, remains a power of the state governments under the tenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution which specifies that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or the people. The public safety and police power have long been held to be state law matters and most appropriately so.

2000 Ron Paul 17:6

While citizens of those forty-nine states exclusive of Nevada may believe that Nevada is a fine place to dispose of one’s waste, one must never concede the principle of states right guaranteed by the Constitution nor forget that, in so doing, the next choice of the federal government may be to deposit equally dangerous or harmful materials in the rangeland of Texas. Enlisting the aid of the federal government to impose one’s waste on citizens of another state while efficacious for the dumper is thus neither prudent, Constitutional, nor particularly pleasant for the dumpee.

2000 Ron Paul 17:7

It should not be lost on those interested in this issue that the federal government actually encouraged development of this industry to a degree the market would have never “contemplated” by artificially and, again, illegitimately, imposing a federal cap on damages in liability suits. In order to fully weigh the benefits and costs of nuclear power, external costs must be internalized rather than ignored.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 18
Congressional Record [.PDF]

March 28, 2000
CONGRATULATING THE PEOPLE OF TAIWAN FOR SUCCESSFUL CONCLUSION OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND REAFFIRMING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD TAIWAN AND PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H1433]

2000 Ron Paul 18:1

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today with H. Con. Res. 292 Congress bestows well-deserved congratulations upon the people of Taiwan for the successful conclusion of presidential elections on March 18, 2000, and for their continuing efforts to develop and sustain a free republic that respects individual rights and embraces free markets. President Lee Teng-hui of Taiwan should also be praised for his significant contributions to freedom in Taiwan.

2000 Ron Paul 18:2

Unfortunately, because the bill pronounces the Taiwan Relations Act (P.L. 96-8) as the legal standard by which U.S. policy toward Taiwan is governed, I cannot support the measure. This Taiwan Relations Act, effectuated a United States policy which recognized an attack against Taiwan as inimical to an attack on the United States.

2000 Ron Paul 18:3

Just as it is wrong to force our preferences on other countries and cultures, it is wrong to dictate politics. The United States has absolutely no moral or constitutional right to do so. In fact, action of that sort could rightfully be considered an act of aggression on our part, and our founding fathers made it very, very clear that war should be contemplated only when national security is immediately threatened. to play the part of policemen of the world degrades all who seek to follow the Constitution. The Constitution does not allow our government to participate in actions against a foreign country when there is no immediate threat to the United States.

2000 Ron Paul 18:4

Sadly, the U.S. has in recent years played the role of world interventionist and global policeman. Thomas Jefferson stated in his first inaugural address: ‘Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none, I deem [one of] the essential principles of our government, and consequently [one of] those which ought to shape its administration.’ Instead, the U.S. government has become the government force that unconstitutionally subsidizes one country and then pledges taxpayer dollars and lives to fight on behalf of that subsidized country’ enemies. It’s the same sort of wisdom that would subsidize tobacco farmers and pay the health care costs of those who then choose to smoke.

2000 Ron Paul 18:5

Each year the people of the United States write a check to subsidize China, one of the most brutal, anti-American regimes in the world. It has been in vogue of late for everyone in Washington, it seems, to eagerly denounce the egregious abuses of the Chinese people at the hands of the communist dictators. Yet no one in our federal government has been willing to take China on in any meaningful way. Very few people realize that China is one of the biggest beneficiaries of American subsidization. Thanks to the largesse of this Congress, China enjoys the flow of U.S. taxpayers cash into Beijing’s coffers. Yet, today we are asked to pledge support for Taiwan when we could best demonstrate support for Taiwan by terminating subsidies to that country’s enemies.

2000 Ron Paul 18:6

Again, my congratulations to the Taiwanese on their continuing efforts to develop and sustain a free republic that respects individual rights and embraces free markets and to President Lee Teng-hui for his contributions to that end.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 19
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

March 29, 2000
TRIBUTE TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OF HAYS COUNTY, TEXAS

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: E444]

2000 Ron Paul 19:1

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today I pay tribute to the law enforcement officers of Hays County, Texas. April 8th is the date of the second annual Hays County Law Enforcement Appreciation Day (LEAD) sponsored by SAC-N-PAC Stores Inc. LEAD 2000 committees have been meeting since last October to make this year’s event even more successful than the last, which raised $7,500 for participating law enforcement departments.

2000 Ron Paul 19:2

As Event Coordinator Cheryl Warren Norton said, ‘With the growing rate of violence, especially among our youth, it is our responsibility and the general public’s responsibility to assist our law enforcement officers in areas in which they are in need.’ The money raised through LEAD 2000 will go toward crime prevention programs aimed at fighting crime and violence on the 8local level. Local law enforcement is the backbone of public safety and protection across America, and I am proud to represent an area that recognizes its law enforcement personnel for the heroes that they are.

2000 Ron Paul 19:3

Some of the LEAD 2000 exhibits are SWAT, Mounted Patrol, the Dive Team, and possibly a Black Hawk Helicopter or Star Flight. The event will be held at the Hays County Civic Center and begins at 10:00 a.m. with an award presentation of bicycles for youth calendar contest winners, followed by an auction and fish fry.

2000 Ron Paul 19:4

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in saluting our officers in blue across the nation, and I commend the LEAD 2000 organization as a model for other communities. This is an excellent way to show sincere appreciation for those who put their lives on the line for the safety of our communities.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 20
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

March 29, 2000
UNNECESSARY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS AND UNWISE MILITARY ADVENTURISM IN COLOMBIA

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H1484]

2000 Ron Paul 20:1
Mr. Speaker, the current budget this year authorizes an expenditure of $1.789 trillion. We would think that would be enough. The President has asked for an additional $4 billion. After the House leadership thought about this, they decided to give him $9 billion.

2000 Ron Paul 20:2
Quite frankly, I think there is enough waste and fraud in the current budget that we could find the $4 billion if this expenditure were necessary. If we ever considered cutting back on some unconstitutional spending, we would have plenty of funds to take care of additional expenditures and have a lot left over.

2000 Ron Paul 20:3
But we should be very cautious about what we are doing today by expanding our involvement in Colombia. We are now moving into Colombia and spending a lot of money and expanding our war in this area. We should not be spending our money on military adventurism. We should be taking this money and spending it to build up our military defenses. We should be using this money to pay our military personnel more money, give them better housing and better education and better medical care.

2000 Ron Paul 20:4
What we are doing today, if we pass this bill, is we are going to move into an another area of the world where we have no constitutional interest.

2000 Ron Paul 25:1

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3591. At the same time, I am very supportive of President Reagan’s publicly stated view of limiting the federal government to it’s proper and constitutional role. In fact, I was one of only four sitting members of the United States House of Representatives who endorsed Ronald Reagan’s candidacy for President in 1976. The United States enjoyed sustained economic prosperity and employment growth during Ronald Reagan’s presidency.

2000 Ron Paul 25:2

I must, however, oppose the Gold Medal for Ronald and Nancy Reagan because appropriating $30,000 of taxpayer money is neither constitutional nor, in the spirit of Ronald Reagan’s notion of the proper, limited role for the federal government.

2000 Ron Paul 25:3

Because of my continuing and uncompromising opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, I would maintain my resolve and commitment to the Constitution — a Constitution, which only last year, each Member of Congress, swore to uphold. In each of these instances, I offered to do a little more than uphold my constitutional oath.

2000 Ron Paul 25:4

In fact, as a means of demonstrating my personal regard and enthusiasm for Ronald Reagan’s advocacy for limited government, I invited each of these colleagues to match my private, personal contribution of $100 which, if accepted by the 435 Members of the House of Representatives, would more than satisfy the $30,000 cost necessary to mint and award a gold medal to Ronald and Nancy Reagan. To me, it seemed a particularly good opportunity to demonstrate one’s genuine convictions by spending one’s own money rather that of the taxpayers who remain free to contribute, at their own discretion, to commemorate the work of the Reagans. For the record, not a single Representative who solicited my support for spending taxpayer’s money, was willing to contribute their own money to demonstrate their generosity and allegiance to the Reagan’s stated convictions.

2000 Ron Paul 25:5

It is, of course, very easy to be generous with the people’s money.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 26
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

April 5, 2000
PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION BAN ACT OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H1772]

2000 Ron Paul 26:1
Mr. Speaker, like many Americans, I am greatly concerned about abortion. Abortion on demand is no doubt the most serious social political problem of our age. The lack of respect for life that permits abortion has significantly contributed to our violent culture and our careless attitude toward liberty.

2000 Ron Paul 26:2
As an obstetrician-gynecologist, I can assure my colleagues that the partial-birth abortion procedure is the most egregious legally permitted act known to man. Decaying social and moral attitudes decades ago set the stage for the accommodated Roe vs. Wade ruling that nationalizes all laws dealing with abortion. The fallacious privacy argument the Supreme Court used must some day be exposed for the fraud that it is.

2000 Ron Paul 26:3
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 indeed on the slippery slope toward euthanasia and human experimentation. Although the real problem lies within the hearts and minds of the people, the legal problems of protecting life stems from the ill-advised Roe v. Wade ruling, a ruling that constitutionally should never have occurred.

2000 Ron Paul 26:4
The best solution, of course, is not now available to us. That would be a Supreme Court that would refuse to deal with the issues of violence, recognizing that for all such acts the Constitution defers to the States. It is constitutionally permitted to limit Federal courts jurisdiction in particular issues. Congress should do precisely that with regard to abortion. It would be a big help in returning this issue to the States.

2000 Ron Paul 26:5
H.R. 3660, unfortunately, takes a different approach, and one that is constitutionally flawed. Although H.R. 3660 is poorly written, it does serve as a vehicle to condemn the 1973 Supreme Court usurpation of State law that has legalized the horrible partial-birth abortion procedure.

2000 Ron Paul 26:6
Never in the Founders’ wildest dreams would they have believed that one day the interstate commerce clause, written to permit free trade among the States, would be used to curtail an act that was entirely under State jurisdiction. There is no interstate activity in an abortion. If there were, that activity would not be prohibited but, rather, protected by the original intent of the interstate commerce clause.

2000 Ron Paul 26:7
The abuse of the general welfare clause and the interstate commerce laws clause is precisely the reason our Federal Government no longer conforms to the constitutional dictates but, instead, is out of control in its growth and scope. H.R. 3660 thus endorses the entire process which has so often been condemned by limited government advocates when used by the authoritarians as they constructed the welfare State.

2000 Ron Paul 26:8
We should be more serious and cautious when writing Federal law, even when seeking praise-worthy goals. H.R. 3660 could have been written more narrowly, within constitutional constraints, while emphasizing State responsibility, and still serve as an instrument for condemning the wicked partial-birth abortion procedure.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 27
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

April 6, 2000
AMERICAN HOMEOWNERSHIP AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H1917]

AMENDMENT NO. 9 OFFERED BY MR. PAUL

2000 Ron Paul 27:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

2000 Ron Paul 27:2
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

2000 Ron Paul 27:3
The text of the amendment is as follows:

2000 Ron Paul 27:4
Amendment No. 9 offered by Mr. Paul:

2000 Ron Paul 27:5
Page 78, after line 20, insert the following new section:

2000 Ron Paul 27:6
SEC. 408. PROHIBITION ON USE OF AMOUNTS TO ACQUIRE CHURCH PROPERTY.

2000 Ron Paul 27:7
Section 105 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5305) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

2000 Ron Paul 27:8
‘(i) Prohibition on Use of Assistance to Acquire Church Property : Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no amount from a grant under section 106 may be used to carry out or assist any activity if such activity, or the project for which such activity is to be conducted, involves acquisition of real property owned by a church that is exempt from tax under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 501(a)), unless the governing body of the church has previously consented to such acquisition.’.

2000 Ron Paul 27:9
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 460, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul ) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

2000 Ron Paul 27:10
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul ).

2000 Ron Paul 27:11
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

2000 Ron Paul 27:12
(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

2000 Ron Paul 27:13
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I would first like to thank my colleague, the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick ) for cosponsoring this amendment. This amendment is simple and straightforward. The amendment merely states that it prohibits the use of funds for activities involving the acquisition of church property unless the consent of the governing body of the church is obtained. This means that community development block grant money cannot be used to invoke eminent domain and take a church away from the church owners or the occupants without their permission.

2000 Ron Paul 27:14
It has been done in the past, and it is planned to be done in the future. I think this is a very important amendment to make sure that these funds are not used in this way. I think the point is that private property is very important, that owners do have rights; and quite frequently when this is invoked, it occurs in the poorer areas where there is less legal protection and legal help.

2000 Ron Paul 27:15
I am very pleased to introduce this amendment. I am very pleased to have the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick ) as the cosponsor.

2000 Ron Paul 27:16
Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

2000 Ron Paul 27:17
Mr. PAUL. I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan, the coauthor.
Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I stand as a cosponsor of this amendment, and it is a good amendment. We have had several calls in our office today wondering what it is, and we took the opportunity to explain it to them.

2000 Ron Paul 27:18
Mr. Chairman, let me first thank the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Leach ), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio ), as well as the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce ), the ranking member, for the fine work that they have done and the entire Committee on Banking and Financial Services. I was a former Member of that committee, and I know the hard work that they do.

2000 Ron Paul 27:19
No church in America should be denied the opportunity to participate in a developing community. The amendment that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul ) and I are offering today is to say that no community development block grant funds can be used to take any church, unless that church is involved and does agree in that selection.

2000 Ron Paul 27:20
With that, Mr. Chairman, this is a good amendment. I commend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul ) for bringing it to my attention. We have spoken to the minister and other people who are concerned about this issue. I would move, Mr. Chairman, that we adopt the amendment.

2000 Ron Paul 27:21
Mr. PAUL. I appreciate the support of the gentlewoman.

2000 Ron Paul 27:22
Mr. LAZIO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

2000 Ron Paul 27:23
Mr. PAUL. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

2000 Ron Paul 27:24
Mr. LAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul ) for bringing this amendment to the House floor to address an important concern. I want to also thank the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick ) as well.

2000 Ron Paul 27:25
I rise in support of the amendment and want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul ) for his hard work in getting this to the floor and for his numerous discussions with my staff and with myself to ensure that the various concerns that have been raised have been addressed. I want to thank the gentleman. I am in strong support of it and I urge passage.

2000 Ron Paul 27:26
Mr. PAUL. I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio ) for the support.

2000 Ron Paul 27:27
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

2000 Ron Paul 27:28
Mr. PAUL. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

2000 Ron Paul 27:29
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I would just join in making it clear that we on the minority side have no objection to the ‘render unto Caesar’ amendment.

2000 Ron Paul 27:30
Mr. PAUL. I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts.

2000 Ron Paul 27:31
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

2000 Ron Paul 27:32
The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member seek time in opposition?

2000 Ron Paul 27:33
If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul ).

2000 Ron Paul 27:34
The amendment was agreed to.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 28
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

April 6, 2000
TRIBUTE TO BASTROP HIGH SCHOOL ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: E513]

2000 Ron Paul 28:1

Mr. Speaker, today I pay tribute to the Student Council Energy and Environment Committee of Bastrop High School in Bastrop, Texas. This dedicated group of students has been working diligently on projects to increase awareness about energy conservation and the environment.

2000 Ron Paul 28:2

Some of their projects include trash pick-up, recycling, efficient driving and car maintenance training, and coordination of Earth Day festivities in Bastrop on the third weekend of April. They have also spread information by way of books, pamphlets and posters around their community. Not only has their work improved the safety and appearance of the campus and surrounding area, but it has also increased feelings of school unity and pride among the students.

2000 Ron Paul 28:3

Their local focus is an example to all of us that local involvement is key to solving most problems faced by Americans today. I am proud to represent such a responsible and dedicated group of young people.

2000 Ron Paul 28:4

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in saluting the Student Council of Bastrop High School. This is an excellent way to show sincere appreciation for those who take the time and energy to improve their communities for themselves and others.

2000 Ron Paul 32:1

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, as this is Texas Home School Appreciation week, I am pleased to take this opportunity to salute those Texas parents who have chosen to educate their children at home. While serving in Congress, I have had the opportunity to get to know many of the home schooling parents in my district. I am very impressed by the job these parents are doing in providing their children with a quality education. I have also found that home schooling parents are among the most committed activists in the cause of advancing individual liberty, constitutional government, and traditional values. I am sure my colleagues on the Education Committee would agree that the support of home schoolers was crucial in defeating the scheme to implement a national student test.

2000 Ron Paul 32:2

Home schooling is becoming a popular option for parents across the country. In Texas alone, there are approximately seventy five thousand home schooling families educating an average of three children per household. Home schooling is producing some outstanding results. For example, according to a 1997 study the average home schooled student scores near the ninetieth percentile on standardized academic achievement tests in reading, mathematics, social studies, and science! Further proof of the success of home schooling is the fact that in recent years, self-identified home schoolers have scored well above the national average on both the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and the American College Test (ACT). These high scores are achieved by home schooling children, regardless of race, income-level, or gender.

2000 Ron Paul 32:3

Contrary to media-generated stereotypes portraying home schooled children as isolated from their peers, home schooled children participate in a wide variety of social, athletic, and extra-curricular activities. Home schooling parents have formed numerous organizations designed to provide their children ample opportunity to interact with other children. In fact, recent data indicates that almost 50% of home schooled children engage in extra-curricular activities such as group sports and music classes, while a third of home schooled children perform volunteer work in their communities.

2000 Ron Paul 32:4

Mr. Speaker, to be a home schooling parent takes a unique dedication to family and education. In many cases, home school families must forgo the second income of one parent, as well as incurring the costs of paying for textbooks, computers, and other school supplies. Home schooling parents must pay these expenses while, like all American families, struggling to pay state, local, and federal taxes.

2000 Ron Paul 32:5

In order to help home schoolers, and all parents, devote more of their resources to their children’s education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935). This bill provides all parents a $3,000 per child tax credit for K-12 education expenses. This bill would help home school parents to provide their children a first-class education in a loving home environment.

2000 Ron Paul 32:6

The Family Education Freedom Act will also benefit those parents who choose to send their children to public or private schools. Parents who choose to send their children to private school may use their tax credit to help cover the cost of tuition. Parents who choose to send their children to public schools may use their tax credit to help finance the purchase of educational tools such as computers or extracurricular activities like music programs. Parents may also use the credit to pay for tutoring and other special services for their children.

2000 Ron Paul 32:7

Mr. Speaker, the best way to improve education is to return control over education resources to the people who best know their children’s unique needs: those children’s parents. Congress should empower all parents, whether they choose to home school or send their child to a public or private school, with the means to control their child’s education. That is why I believe the most important education bill introduced in this Congress is the Family Education Freedom Act.

2000 Ron Paul 32:8

In conclusion, I wish to once again commend the accomplishments of those parents who have chosen to educate their children at home. I also urge my colleagues to help home schoolers, and all parents, ensure their children get a quality education by cosponsoring the Family Education Freedom Act.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 33
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

May 4, 2000
IDEA FULL FUNDING ACT OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: E634]

2000 Ron Paul 33:1

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to express my opposition to H.R. 4055, which authorizes over $160 billion in new federal spending for programs imposed on local school districts by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). While I share the goal of devoting more resources to educating children with learning disabilities, I believe that there is a better way to achieve this laudable goal than increasing spending on an unconstitutional, failed program that thrusts children, parents, and schools into an administrative quagmire. Under the system set up by IDEA, parents and schools often become advisories and important decisions regarding a child’s future are made via litigation. I have received compliments from a special education administrator in my district that unscrupulous trial lawyers are manipulating the IDEA process to line their pockets at the expenses of local school districts. Of course, every dollar a local school district has to spend on litigation is a dollar the district cannot spend educating children.

2000 Ron Paul 33:2

IDEA may also force local schools to deny children access to the education that best suits their unique needs in order to fulfill the federal command that disabled children be educated ‘in the least restrictive setting,’ which in practice means mainstreaming. Many children may thrive in a mainstream classroom environment, however, some children may be mainstreamed solely because school officials believe it is required by federal law, even though the mainstream environment is not the most appropriate for that child.

2000 Ron Paul 33:3

On May 10, 1994, Dr. Mary Wagner testified before the Education Committee that disabled children who are not placed in a mainstream classroom graduate from high school at a much higher rate than disabled children who are mainstreamed. Dr. Wagner quite properly accused Congress of sacrificing children to ideology.

2000 Ron Paul 33:4

Increasing IDEA spending also provides incentives to over-identify children as learning disabled, thus unfairly stigmatizing many children and, in a vicious cycle, leading to more demands for increased federal spending on IDEA. Instead of increasing spending on a federal program that may actually damage the children it claims to help, Congress should return control over education to those who best know the child’s needs: parents. In order to restore parental control to education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935), which provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit to pay for K-12 education expenses. My tax credit would be of greatest benefit to parents of children with learning disabilities because it would allow them to devote more of their resources to ensure their children get an education that meets the child’s unique needs.

2000 Ron Paul 33:5

In conclusion, I would remind my colleagues that parents and local communities know their children so much better than any federal bureaucrat, and they can do a better job of meeting a child’s needs than we in Washington. There is no way that the unique needs of my grandchildren, and some young boy or girl in Los Angeles, CA or New York City can be educated by some sort of ‘Cookie Cutter’ approach. Thus, the best means of helping disabled children is to empower their parents with the resources to make sure their children receive an education suited to their child’s special needs, instead of an education that scarifies that child’s best interest on the altar of the ‘Washington-knows-best’ ideology.

2000 Ron Paul 33:6

I therefore urge my colleagues to join with me in helping parents of special needs children to provide their children with an education by repealing federal mandates that divert resources away from helping children and, instead, embrace my Family Education Freedom Act.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 34
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

SENSE OF THE HOUSE IN SUPPORT OF AMERICA’S TEACHERS May 9, 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H2732]

2000 Ron Paul 34:1

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support the resolution of the gentlewoman from Texas expressing Congress’ appreciation for the valuable work of America’s teachers. I would also like to take this opportunity to urge my colleagues to support two pieces of legislation I have introduced to get the government off the backs, and out of the pockets, of America’s teachers. The first piece of legislation, H.R. 1706, prohibits the expenditure of federal funds for national teacher testing or certification. A national teacher test would force all teachers to be trained in accordance with federal standards, thus dramatically increasing the Department of Education’s control over the teaching profession. Language banning federal funds for national teacher testing and national teacher certification has been included in both the House and Senate versions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).

2000 Ron Paul 34:2

I have also introduced the Teacher Tax Cut Act (H.R. 937) which provides every teacher in America with a $1,000 tax credit. The Teacher Tax Cut Act thus increases teachers’ salaries without raising federal expenditures. It lets America’s teachers know that the American people and the Congress respect their work. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, by raising teacher take-home pay, the Teacher Tax Cut Act encourages high-quality people to enter, and remain in, the teaching profession.

2000 Ron Paul 34:3

Mr. Speaker, these two bills send a strong signal to America’s teachers that we in Congress are determined to encourage good people to enter and remain in the teaching profession and that we want teachers to be treated as professionals, not as Education Department functionaries. In conclusion, I urge my colleagues to vote for this resolution recognizing the hard work of America’s teachers. I also urge they continue to stand up for those who have dedicated their lives to educating America’s children by cosponsoring my legislation to prohibit the use of federal funds for national teacher testing and to give America’s teachers a $1,000 tax credit.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 35
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Ways and Means Committee: May 11, 2000
Statement of Ron Paul on the Misuse of the Social Security Number
Before the Social Security Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 35:1
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding a hearing on the important issue of the misuse of the Social Security number as a uniform standard identifier. For all intents and purposes, the Social Security number has been transformed from an administrative device used to administer the Social Security program into a de facto national ID number. Today, most Americans cannot get a job, get married, open a bank account, or even get a fishing license without their Social Security number. Many hospitals require parents to obtain Social Security numbers for their newborns before the hospital will discharge the baby. Moreover, many jurisdictions will not issue a death certificate without obtaining the deceased’s Social Security number.

2000 Ron Paul 35:2
The Congress that created the Social Security system in no way intended to create a national identifier. In fact, Congress never directly authorized the creation of the Social Security number — they simply authorized the creation of an “appropriate record keeping and identification scheme.” The Social Security number was actually the creation of the Internal Revenue Service!

The Social Security Number did not become a popular identifier until the 1960s. In response to concerns about the use of the Social Security number, Congress passed the Privacy Act of 1974, because “The Congress finds the opportunities for an individual to secure employment, insurance and credit and his right to due process and other legal protections are endangered by the misuse of certain information systems.”

2000 Ron Paul 35:3
The Privacy Act of 1974 states that “It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny any individual any right, benefit or privilege provided by law because of such individual’s refusal to disclose his Social Security number.” This is a good and necessary step toward protecting individual liberty. Unfortunately, the language of the Privacy Act allows Congress to require the use of the Social Security number at will. In fact, just two years after the passage of the Privacy Act, Congress explicitly allowed state governments to use the Social Security number as an identifier for tax collection, motor vehicle registration and drivers’ license identification.

2000 Ron Paul 35:4
Since the passage of the Privacy Act, Congress has been all too eager to expand the use of the Social Security number as a uniform identifier. For example, in 1996, Congress required employers to report the Social Security number of employees as part of the “new hires” database, while in 1998, 210 members of Congress voted to allow states to force citizens to produce a Social Security number before they could exercise their right to vote. Mr. Chairman, my legislation, the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220) forbids Federal or State governments from using the Social Security number for purposes not directly related to administering the Social Security system.

2000 Ron Paul 35:5
Since I introduced this legislation on the first day of the 106th Congress, my office has received countless calls, letter, faxes, and e-mails from Americans around the country who are tired of having to divulge their national ID number in order to get a job, open bank account, or go fishing. The strong public outrage over the federal banking regulators’ “know your customer” scheme, as well as the attempt to turn state drivers’ licenses into a national ID card, and the Clinton Administration’s so-called “medical privacy” proposals all reveal the extent to which the American people oppose the “surveillance state.” These Americans believe that since Congress created this problem, Congress must fix it.

2000 Ron Paul 35:6
Certain well-meaning members of Congress are focusing on the use of the Social Security number by private businesses. However, this ignores the fact that the private sector was only following the lead of the federal government in using the Social Security number as an ID. In many cases, the use of the Social Security number by private business is directly mandated by the government, for example, banks use Social Security numbers as an identifier for their customers because the federal government required them to use the Social Security number for tax reporting purposes. Once the federal government stops using the Social Security number as an identifier, the majority of private businesses, whose livelihood depends on pleasing consumers, will respond to their customers demands and stop using the Social Security number and other standard identifiers

2000 Ron Paul 35:7
I hope that we in Congress would not once again allow a problem Congress created to become an excuse for disregarding the constitutional limitations of federal police powers or imposing new mandates on businesses in the name of “protecting privacy.” Federal mandates on private businesses may harm consumers by preventing business from offering improved services such as the ability to bring new products that consumers would be interested in immediately to the consumers’ attention. These mandates will also further interfere with matters that should be resolved by private contracts.

2000 Ron Paul 35:8
Furthermore, as we have seen with the administration’s so-called “medical privacy protection” proposal, federal “privacy protection laws” can actually undermine privacy by granting certain state-favored interests access to one’s personal information.

2000 Ron Paul 35:9
Finally, I would remind my colleagues that no private organization has the power to abuse personal liberty on as massive a scale as the federal government. After all, consumers have the right to refuse to do business with any private entity that asks for a Social Security number, whereas citizens cannot lawfully refuse to deal with government agencies. Furthermore, most of the major invasions of privacy, from the abuse of IRS files to the case of the Medicare clerk who sold the names of Medicare patients to an HMO, to the abuse of the FBI by administrations of both parties have occurred by government agents. Therefore Congress should focus on the threat to liberty caused by the federal government’s use of uniform identifiers.

2000 Ron Paul 35:10
In conclusion, I once again thank the Subcommittee for holding this hearing on the uses and abuses on the Social Security number. I hope that this hearing is the first step toward Congressional action designed to stop the use of the Social Security number as a national ID number.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 36
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

May 15, 2000
Manipulating Interest Rates

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H3034]

2000 Ron Paul 36:1

The national debt is rising at an annual rate of a $100 billion per year while the federal government obligation to future generations is rising even faster. Yet, little concern is shown in Congress as our budgets grow and new programs are added on to old. Ordinary political deception has been replaced with the dangerous notion of invincibleness as members claim credit for imaginary budgetary surpluses. The percent of our income that government now takes continues to rise, while personal liberty is steadily compromised with each new budget. But the political euphoria associated with the “New Era” economy will soon come to an end.

2000 Ron Paul 36:2

Although many have done well during the last seven years of economic growth, many middle-income families have had to struggle just to keep up. For them, inflation is not dead and the easy fortunes made on Wall Street are as far removed as winning the lottery. When the economy enters into recession, this sense of frustration will spread.

2000 Ron Paul 36:3

Business cycles are well understood. They are not a natural consequence of capitalism but instead result from central bank manipulation of credit. This is especially true when the monetary unit is undefinable as it is in a fiat monetary system, such as ours. Therefore, it is correct to place blame on the Federal Reserve for all depressions/recessions, inflation, and much of the unemployment since 1913. The next downturn, likewise, will be the fault of the Fed.

2000 Ron Paul 36:4

It is true that the apparent prosperity and the boom part of the cycle are a result of the Federal Reserve credit creation, but the price that must always be paid and the unfairness of inflationism makes it a dangerous process.

2000 Ron Paul 36:5

The silly notion that money can be created at will by a printing press or through computer entries is eagerly accepted by the majority as an easy road to riches, while ignoring any need for austerity, hard work, saving, and a truly free market economy. Those who actively endorse this system equate money creation with wealth creation and see it as a panacea for the inherent political difficulty in raising taxes or cutting spending.

2000 Ron Paul 36:6

A central bank that has no restraints placed on it is always available to the politicians who spend endlessly for reelection purposes. When the private sector lacks its appetite to lend sufficiently to the government, the Federal Reserve is always available to buy treasury debt with credit created out of thin air. At the slightest hint that interest rates are higher than the Fed wants, its purchase of debt keeps interest rates in check; that is, they are kept lower than the market rate. Setting interest rates is an enormous undertaking. It’s price fixing and totally foreign to the principles of free market competition.

2000 Ron Paul 36:7

Since this process is economically stimulating, the politicians, the recipients of government largess, the bankers, and almost everyone enjoys the benefits of what seems to be a gift without cost.

2000 Ron Paul 36:8

But that’s a fallacy. There is always a cost. Artificially low interest rates prompt lower savings, over-capacity expansion, mal-investment, excessive borrowing, speculation, and price increases in various segments of the economy. And since money creation is not wealth creation, it inevitably leads to a lower value for the currency. The inflation always comes to an end with various victims, many of whom never enjoyed the benefits of the credit creation and deficit spending.

2000 Ron Paul 36:9

This silly notion of money and credit gives rise to the conventional wisdom that once the economy gets really rolling, it’s time for the Fed to stop economic growth. The false supposition is that economic growth causes higher prices and higher labor costs, and these evils must be prevented by tightening credit and raising interest rates. But these are only the consequences of the previous monetary expansion and blaming rising prices or higher labor costs is done only to distract from the real culprit-monetary inflation by the Federal Reserve.

2000 Ron Paul 36:10

In a free market, economic growth would never be considered a negative and purposely discouraged. It is strange that so many established economists and politicians accept the notion of dampening economic growth for this purpose. Economic growth with sound money always lowers prices-it never raises them. Deliberately increasing rates actually increase the cost of all borrowing, and yet it’s claimed that this is necessary to stop rising costs. Obviously, there’s not much to the soundness of central economic planning through monetary policy of this sort.

2000 Ron Paul 36:11

There are some who see this fallacy and object to deliberately slowing the economy but instead clamor for even more monetary growth to keep interest rates low and the economy booming. But this is just as silly because that leads to even more debasement of the currency, rising prices, and instead of lowering interest rates will in time, due to inflationary expectation, actually raise rates.

2000 Ron Paul 36:12

Fine-tuning the economy, through monetary manipulation is a dangerous game to play. We are now completing nearly a decade of rapid monetary growth and evidence is now appearing indicating that we will soon start to pay for our profligate ways. The financial bubble that the Fed manufactured over the past decade or two will burst and the illusion of our great wealth will end. In time, also the illusion of “surpluses for as far as the eye can see” will end. Then the Congress will be forced to take much more seriously the budgetary problems that it pretends do not exist.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 37
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

May 16, 2000
The Dollar And Our Current Account Deficit

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H3150]

2000 Ron Paul 37:1

Fiat money, that is, money created out of thin air, causes numerous problems, internationally as well as domestic. It causes domestic price inflation, economic downturns, unemployment, excessive debt, (corporate, personal and government) mal-investment, and over capacity — all very serious and poorly understood by our officials. But fluctuating values of various paper currencies cause all kinds of disruptions in international trade and finance as well.

2000 Ron Paul 37:2

Trade surpluses and deficits when sound money conditions exist are of little concern since they prompt changes in policy or price adjustments in a natural or smooth manner. When currencies are non-convertible into something of real value, they can be arbitrarily increased at will, trade deficits and especially current account deficits are of much greater significance.

2000 Ron Paul 37:3

When trade imbalances are not corrected, sudden devaluations, higher interest rates, and domestic inflation are forced on the country that has most abused its monetary power. This was seen in 1997 in the Asian crisis, and precarious economic conditions continue in that region.

2000 Ron Paul 37:4

Japan has yet to recover from its monetary inflation of the 70s and 80s and has now suffered with a lethargic economy for over a decade. Even after this length of time there is no serious thought for currency reform in Japan or any other Asian nation.

2000 Ron Paul 37:5

Although international trade imbalances are a predictable result of fiat money, the duration and intensity of the cycles associated with it are not. A reserve currency, such as is the dollar, is treated by the market quite differently than another fiat currency.

2000 Ron Paul 37:6

The issuer of a reserve currency-in the case the United States-has greater latitude for inflating and can tolerate a current account deficit for much longer periods of time than other countries not enjoying the same benefit. But economic law, although at times it may seem lax, is ruthless in always demanding that economic imbalances arising from abuse of economic principles be rectified. In spite of the benefits that reserve currency countries enjoy, financial bubbles still occur and their prolongation, for whatever reason, only means the inevitable adjustment, when it comes, is more harsh.

2000 Ron Paul 37:7

Our current state of imbalance includes a huge US/foreign debt of $1.5 trillion, a record 20% of GDP and is a consequence of our continuously running a huge monthly current account deficit that shows no signs of soon abating. We are now the world’s greatest debtor. The consequence of this deficit cannot be avoided. Our current account deficit has continued longer than many would have expected. But not knowing how long and to what extent deficits can go is not unusual. The precise event that starts the reversal in the trade balance is also unpredictable. The reversal itself is not.

2000 Ron Paul 37:8

Japan’s lethargy, the Asian crisis, the Mexican financial crisis, Europe’s weakness, the uncertainty surrounding the EURO, the demise of the Soviet system, and the ineptness of the Russian bailout, all contributed to the continued strength in the dollar and prolongation of our current account deficit. This current account deficit, which prompts foreigners to loan back dollars to us and to invest in our stock and bond markets, has contributed significantly to the financial bubble. The perception that the United States is the economic and military powerhouse of the world, helps perpetuate an illusion that the dollar is invincible and has encouraged our inflationary policies.

2000 Ron Paul 37:9

By inflating our currency, we can then spend our dollars overseas getting products at good prices which on the short run raises our standard of living - but, on borrowed money. All currency account deficits must be financed by borrowing from abroad.

2000 Ron Paul 37:10

It all ends when the world wakes up and realizes it has been had by the US printing press. No country can expect to inflate its currency at will forever.

2000 Ron Paul 37:11

Since cartels never work, OPEC does not deserve credit for getting oil prices above $30 per barrel. Demand for equivalent purchasing power for the sale of oil, can. Recent commodity and wage price increases signal accelerating price inflation is at hand. We are witnessing the early stages in a sea change regarding the dollar, inflation, the stock market as well as commodity prices.

2000 Ron Paul 37:12

The nervousness in the stock and bond markets, and especially in the NASDAQ, indicates that the Congress may soon be facing an entirely different set of financial numbers regarding spending, revenues, interest costs on our national debt and the value of the US dollar. Price inflation of the conventional type will surely return, even if the economy slows.

2000 Ron Paul 37:13

Fiscal policy, and current monetary policy will not solve the crisis we will soon face. Only sound money, money that cannot be created out of thin air, can solve the many problems appearing on the horizon. The sooner we pay attention to monetary policy as the source of our international financial problems, the sooner we will come up with a sound solution.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 38
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
Government Reform and Oversight Committee: May 18, 2000
Statement of Ron Paul on the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220)
Before the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 38:1
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing on my legislation, HR 220, the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act. I greatly appreciate your commitment to the issue of personal privacy. Protecting privacy is of increasing importance to the American people. Since I have introduced this bill, my office has received countless calls of support from Americans all across the country who are opposed to the use of uniform identifiers. I have also worked with a bipartisan coalition of members on various efforts to protect Americans from the surveillance state, such as the banking regulators’ “know your customer” scheme, and the attempt by the Post Office to violate the privacy of all Americans who use Commercial Mail Receiving Agencies (CMRAs).

2000 Ron Paul 38:2
The Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act represents a comprehensive attempt to protect the privacy of individual citizens from government surveillance via the use of standard identifiers. Among the provisions of the legislation is one repealing those sections of the 1996 Immigration Act that established federal standards for state drivers’ licenses and 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. As I am sure my colleagues know, the language authorizing a national ID card was repealed in last year’s Transportation Appropriations bill and language prohibiting the expenditure of funds to develop a personal medical identifier has been included in the past two Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bills. These victories where made possible by the thousands of Americans who let their elected representatives know that they were opposed to federally-mandated identifiers.

2000 Ron Paul 38:3
Perhaps the most significant portion of HR 220 prohibits the use of the Social Security number for purposes not related to Social Security. For all intents and purposes, the Social Security number is already a national identification number. Today, in the majority of states, no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a drivers’ license, receive a birth certificate for one’s child without presenting their 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!

2000 Ron Paul 38:4
As a test of citizen resistance, the Census bureau asked 21,000 households to report their Social Security number on their census form. One of the reasons the Census bureau is interested in the Social Security number is as a key to unlock information held by other government agencies.

2000 Ron Paul 38:5
Since the creation of the Social Security number in 1935, there have been almost 40 congressionally-authorized uses of the Social Security number as an identification number for non-Social Security programs. Many of these uses, such as the requirement that employers report the Social Security number of new employees to the “new hires data base,” have been enacted in the past few years.

2000 Ron Paul 38:6
Such Congressional actions do not reflect the intent of the Congress that created the Social Security system as that Congress in no way intended to create a national identifier. In fact, Congress never directly authorized the creation of the Social Security number — they simply authorized the creation of an “appropriate record keeping and identification scheme.” The Social Security number was actually the creation of the Internal Revenue Service!

2000 Ron Paul 38:7
The Social Security number did not become a popular identifier until the 1960s. In response to concerns about the use of the Social Security number, Congress passed the Privacy Act of 1974, because, as stated within the act itself, “The Congress finds the opportunities for an individual to secure employment, insurance and credit and his right to due process and other legal protections are endangered by the misuse of certain information systems.”

2000 Ron Paul 38:8
The Privacy Act of 1974 states that “It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny any individual any right, benefit or privilege provided by law because of such individual’s refusal to disclose his Social Security number.” This is a good and necessary step toward protecting individual liberty. Unfortunately, the language of the Privacy Act allows Congress to require the use of the Social Security number at will. In fact, just two years after the passage of the Privacy Act, Congress explicitly allowed state governments to use the Social Security number as an identifier for tax collection, motor vehicle registration and drivers’ license identification. When one considers the trend toward the use of the Social Security number as an identifier, the need for HR 220 becomes clear.

2000 Ron Paul 38:9
The Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act also contains a blanket prohibition on the use of identifiers to “investigate, monitor, oversee, or otherwise regulate” American citizens. Mr. Chairman, prohibiting the Federal Government from using standard identifiers will ensure that American liberty is protected from the “surveillance state.” Allowing the federal government to use standard identifiers to oversee private transactions present tremendous potential for abuse of civil liberties by unscrupulous government officials.

2000 Ron Paul 38:10
I am sure I need not remind the members of this Committee of the sad history of government officials of both parties using personal information contained in IRS or FBI files against their political enemies. Imagine the potential for abuse if an unscrupulous government official is able to access one’s complete medical, credit, and employment history by simply typing the citizens’ “uniform identifier” into a database.

2000 Ron Paul 38:11
This history of abuse of personal information by government officials demonstrates that the only effective means of guaranteeing American’s privacy is to limit the ability of the government to collect and store information regarding a citizen’s personal matters. The only way to prevent the government from knowing this information is preventing them from using standard identifiers.

2000 Ron Paul 38:12
In addition to forbidding the federal government from creating national identifiers, this legislation forbids the federal government from blackmailing states into adopting uniform standard identifiers by withholding federal funds. One of the most onerous practices of Congress is the use of federal funds illegitimately taken from the American people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates.

2000 Ron Paul 38:13
Certain members of Congress are focusing on the use of the Social Security number and other identifiers by private businesses. However, this ignores the fact that the private sector was only following the lead of the federal government in using the Social Security number as an ID. In many cases, the use of the Social Security number by private business is directly mandated by the government, for example, banks use Social Security numbers as an identifier for their customers because the federal government required them to use the Social Security number for tax reporting purposes. Once the federal government stops using the Social Security number as an identifier, the majority of private businesses, whose livelihood depends on pleasing consumers, will respond to their customers demands and stop using the Social Security number and other standard identifiers in dealing with them.

2000 Ron Paul 38:14
I hope that we in Congress would not once again allow a problem Congress created to become an excuse for disregarding the constitutional limitations of federal police powers or imposing new mandates on businesses in the name of “protecting privacy.” Federal mandates on private businesses may harm consumers by preventing business from offering improved services such as the ability to bring new products that consumers would be interested in immediately to the consumers’ attention. These mandates will also further interfere with matters that should be resolved by private contracts.

2000 Ron Paul 38:15
Furthermore, as we have seen with the administration’s so-called “medical privacy protection” proposal, federal “privacy protection laws” can actually undermine privacy by granting certain state-favored interests access to one’s personal information.

2000 Ron Paul 38:16
Some may claim that the federal government needs expanded surveillance powers to protect against fraud or some other criminal activities. However, monitoring the transactions of every American in order to catch those few who are involved in some sort of illegal activity turns one of the great bulwarks of our liberty, the presumption of innocence, on its head. The federal government has no right to treat all Americans as criminals by spying on their relationship with their doctors, employers, or bankers. In fact, criminal law enforcement is reserved to the state and local governments by the Constitution’s tenth amendment.

2000 Ron Paul 38:17
Others may claim that the federal government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. However, in a constitutional republic the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to make the job of government officials a little bit easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient.

2000 Ron Paul 38:18
The main reason Congress should take action to stop the use of standard identifiers is 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.”

2000 Ron Paul 38:19
I once again extend my sincere appreciation to Chairman Horn and the other members of the Subcommittee for holding this hearing and express my hope that this hearing begins the process of protecting the rights of all citizens to conduct their lives free from government intrusion.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 40
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Permanent Normal Trade Relations May 24, 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H3720]

2000 Ron Paul 40:1

Mr. Speaker, yesterday morning the legislation which would have implemented ‘permanent normal trade relations’ with the People’s Republic of China was three pages in length. Today, it is 66 pages in length. Close examination of this bill ‘gone bad’ is demonstrative of how this Congress misdefines ‘free trade’ and how, like most everything else is in Washington, this ‘free trade’ bill is a misnomer of significant proportions.

2000 Ron Paul 40:2

For the past several years I have favored normal trade relations with the People’s Republic of China. Because of certain misconceptions, I believe it is useful to begin with some detail as to what ‘normal trade relations’ status is and what it is not. Previous ‘normal trade relations’ votes meant only that U.S. tariffs imposed on Chinese goods will be no different than tariffs imposed on other countries for similar products — period. NTR status did not mean more U.S. taxpayers dollars sent to China. It did not signify more international family planning dollars sent overseas. NTR status does not mean automatic access to the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, OPIC, or any member of other ‘foreign aid’ vehicles by which the U.S. Congress sends foreign aid to a large number of countries. Rather, NTR status was the lowering of a United States citizen’s taxes paid on voluntary exchanges entered into by citizens who happen to reside in different countries.

2000 Ron Paul 40:3

Of course, many of the critics of NTR status for China do not address the free trade and the necessarily negative economic consequences of their position. No one should question that individual rights are vital to liberty and that the communist government of China has an abysmal record in that department. At the same time, basic human rights must necessarily include the right to enter into voluntary exchanges with others. To burden the U.S. citizens who enter into voluntary exchanges with exorbitant taxes (tariffs) in the name of ‘protecting’ the human rights of citizens of other countries would be internally inconsistent. Trade barriers when lowered, after all, benefit consumers who can purchase goods more cheaply than previously available. Those individuals choosing not to trade with citizens of particular foreign jurisdictions are not threatened by lowering barriers for those who do. Oftentimes, these critics focus instead on human rights deprivation by government leaders in China and see trade barriers as a means to ‘reform’ these sometimes tyrannical leaders. However, according to Father Robert Sirco, a Paulist priest who discussed this topic in the Wall Street Journal, American missionaries in China favor NTR status and see this as the policy most likely to bring about positive change in China.

2000 Ron Paul 40:4

But all of this said, this new 66 page ‘free trade’ bill is not about free trade at all. It is about empowering and enriching international trade regulators and quasi-governmental entities on the backs of the U.S. taxpayer. Like NAFTA before us, this bill contains provisions which continue our country down the ugly path of internationally-engineered, ‘managed trade’ rather than that of free trade. As explained by Ph.D. economist Murray N. Rothbard: ‘[G]enuine free trade doesn’t require a treaty (or its deformed cousin, a ‘trade agreement’; NAFTA was called an agreement so it can avoid the constitutional requirement of approval by two-thirds of the Senate). If the establishment truly wants free trade, all its has to do is to repeal our numerous tariffs, import quotas, anti-dumping laws, and other American-imposed restrictions of free trade. No foreign policy or foreign maneuvering is necessary.’

2000 Ron Paul 40:5

In truth, the bipartisan establishment’s fanfare of ‘free trade’ fosters the opposite of genuine freedom of exchange. Whereas genuine free traders examine free markets from the perspective of the consumer (each individual), the merchantilist examines trade from the perspective of the power elite; in other words, from the perspective of the big business in concert with big government. Genuine free traders consider exports a means of paying for imports, in the same way that goods in general are produced in order to be sold to consumers. But the mercantilists want to privilege the government business elite at the expense of all consumers, be they domestic or foreign. This new PNTR bill, rather than lowering government imposed barriers to trade, has become a legislative vehicle under which the United States can more quickly integrate and cartelize government in order to entrench the interventionist mixed economy.

2000 Ron Paul 40:6

No Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, don’t be fooled into thinking this bill is anything about free trade. In fact, those supporting it should be disgraced to learn that, among other misgivings, this bill, further undermines U.S. sovereignty by empowering the World Trade Organization on the backs of American taxpayers, sends federal employees to Beijing to become lobbyists to members of their communist government to become more WTO-friendly, funds the imposition of the questionable Universal Declaration of Human Rights upon foreign governments, and authorizes the spending of nearly $100 million to expand the reach of Radio Free Asia.

2000 Ron Paul 40:7

Mr. Speaker, I say no to this taxpayer-financed fanfare of ‘free trade’ which fosters the opposite of genuine freedom of exchange and urge by colleagues to do the same.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 41
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

June 13, 2000
Medical Privacy Amendment

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 41:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

2000 Ron Paul 41:2
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Paul:

At the end of the bill, insert after the last section (preceding the short title) the following new section:

Sec. XX. None of the funds made available in this Act may be used to promulgate or adopt any final standard under section 1173(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d-2(b)).

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of Monday, June 12, 2000, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).

2000 Ron Paul 41:3
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

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

2000 Ron Paul 41:4
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, this amendment says that none of the funds in this appropriation can be used for implementing a uniform medical identifier. It is a privacy amendment. It was in the bill in 1998 and 1999. I think it would be a good idea to have it in this year’s bill.

2000 Ron Paul 41:5
This comes from authority granted in the Health Insurance Portability Act of 1996 and it was designed to establish a medical data bank. But because many, on both sides of the aisle, have objected to this invasion of privacy to set up a medical data bank, there has been some resistance to this. Although the removal of the authority would be the proper way to solve this problem once and for all, I think that it would be very appropriate to continue the policy of not permitting any Federal funding to be spent on developing this universal medical identifier, which by all indications would be our Social Security numbers.

2000 Ron Paul 41:6
Many people object to this invasion of privacy. They do not place full trust in the U.S. Congress and in the U.S. Government to protect our privacy. Many say that this would not be an invasion of privacy and there would be some strict rules and regulations about how this medical information would be used, but that is not enough reassurance.

2000 Ron Paul 41:7
As a physician, I can tell my colleagues that this form of invasion of our medical privacy will not serve us well in medical care. What it leads to is incomplete and inaccurate medical records, because it becomes known to the patient as well as the physician that once this information is accumulated that it might get in the hands of the politicians and used for reasons other than for medical care, I think, it could damage medical care endangered from having a medical data bank set up.

2000 Ron Paul 41:8
The American people have spoken out strongly in recent years about their invasion of privacy. There was a proposal to implement a know-your-customer bank regulations. These were soundly rejected by the people, and I think that this same sentiment applies to the medical data bank. Also, efforts to establish a national identification card for the American people has not met with a great deal of acceptance with the American people.

2000 Ron Paul 41:9
So my effort here in limiting this development of a universal medical identifier is to keep the Federal Government out of this business. It is too easy for abuse of this type of information to occur. We have heard that the various administrations over the years have abused records kept in the IRS as well as the FBI. This would just be another source of information that individuals could use in a negative fashion.

2000 Ron Paul 41:10
I believe it is a fallacy for those who promote the setting up of a universal medical identifier and a universal medical data bank that it is an effort to simplify the process, to streamline the system, to make government more efficient, to facilitate medical research. It has also been said this could be used in law enforcement. But just think about this. If these records can be turned over without the approval of the patient to law enforcement, it really, quite clearly, is a violation of the fifth amendment of self-incrimination. So this idea that this medical bank might be beneficial for law enforcement is rather scary and something that we should prevent.

2000 Ron Paul 41:11
Already, under authority that was given to Health and Human Services, they have started to draw up regulations which regulate privacy matters, not so much the medical data bank but in other areas. The other thing that concerns me a great deal is these medical regulations that have been proposed not only deal with the privacy of somebody that may be receiving medical care from Medicare but also in the private sector.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 42
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Yield 13 June 2009

2000 Ron Paul 42:1
Mr. PAUL. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 43
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

June 14, 2000
TRIBUTE TO THE ROUND TOP, TEXAS, INDEPENDENCE DAY PARADE

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Pages: E1003]

2000 Ron Paul 43:1

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the citizens of Round Top, Texas. The bark of the old cannon on the town square in Round Top, Texas, on July 4, 2000, will announce the city’s famous Independence Day Parade. Each year, the small town of Round Top, deep in the heart of Fayette County in Texas’ Congressional District 14, swells to accommodate a crowd of 8,000 Fourth of July visitors that come to celebrate our nation’s freedom.

2000 Ron Paul 43:2

In 1851, on the occasion of the 75th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence of United States, Round Top celebrated its first Fourth of July. The celebration of this most important date in United States history continues to be the longest held observance of Independence Day west of the Mississippi.

2000 Ron Paul 43:3

According to historical accounts, early stagecoach lines operating along the Old Bahia Road between Houston and Austin traveled near the center of today’s town. When the drivers crossed Rocky Creek along the route and spotted the octagonal-shaped roof of the stage stand, they called out ‘Round Top!’

2000 Ron Paul 43:4

Things are slow to change in Round Top. Its citizens appreciate their traditions and have adopted ordinances that are designed to project, enrich and promote the old historic landmarks for the enjoyment and edification of future generations.

2000 Ron Paul 43:5

On the occasion of over 150 years of celebrations, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the people of Round Top, Texas, who, on Independence Day, proudly proclaim, ‘God Bless America!’

H.J. Res. 90

	YEAS	NAYS	PRES	NV
REPUBLICAN	33	182		6
DEMOCRATIC	21	181	3	6
INDEPENDENT	2
TOTALS	56	363	3	12

**— YEAS 56 —**
Abercrombie	Hall (TX)	Peterson (MN)
Aderholt	Hilleary	Pombo
Baldwin	Hostettler	Rohrabacher
Barr	Hunter	Sanders
Bartlett	Istook	Scarborough
Bilirakis	Jackson (IL)	Schaffer
Bonior	Jones (NC)	Sensenbrenner
Brown (OH)	Kaptur	Smith (NJ)
Burton	Kennedy	Strickland
Chenoweth-Hage	Kucinich	Stupak
Coburn	Lipinski	Tancredo
Deal	McKinney	Taylor (MS)
DeFazio	Metcalf	Taylor (NC)
Doolittle	Mink	Traficant
Duncan	Ney	Wamp
Everett	Norwood	Waters
Gibbons	Oberstar	Weldon (FL)
Goode	Obey	Young (AK)
Goodling	Paul

**— NAYS 363 —**
Ackerman	Gilchrest	Northup
Allen	Gillmor	Nussle
Andrews	Gilman	Olver
Archer	Gonzalez	Ortiz
Armey	Goodlatte	Ose
Baca	Gordon	Owens
Bachus	Goss	Oxley
Baird	Graham	Packard
Baker	Granger	Pallone
Baldacci	Green (TX)	Pascrell
Ballenger	Green (WI)	Pastor
Barcia	Greenwood	Payne
Barrett (NE)	Gutierrez	Pease
Barrett (WI)	Gutknecht	Pelosi
Barton	Hall (OH)	Peterson (PA)
Bass	Hansen	Petri
Bateman	Hastings (FL)	Phelps
Becerra	Hastings (WA)	Pickering
Bentsen	Hayes	Pickett
Bereuter	Hayworth	Pitts
Berkley	Hefley	Pomeroy
Berman	Herger	Porter
Berry	Hill (IN)	Portman
Biggert	Hill (MT)	Price (NC)
Bilbray	Hilliard	Pryce (OH)
Bishop	Hinojosa	Quinn
Blagojevich	Hobson	Radanovich
Bliley	Hoeffel	Rahall
Blumenauer	Hoekstra	Ramstad
Blunt	Holden	Regula
Boehlert	Holt	Reyes
Boehner	Hooley	Reynolds
Bonilla	Horn	Riley
Bono	Houghton	Rodriguez
Borski	Hoyer	Roemer
Boswell	Hulshof	Rogan
Boucher	Hutchinson	Rogers
Boyd	Hyde	Ros-Lehtinen
Brady (PA)	Inslee	Rothman
Brady (TX)	Isakson	Roukema
Brown (FL)	Jackson-Lee (TX)	Royce
Bryant	Jenkins	Rush
Burr	John	Ryan (WI)
Buyer	Johnson (CT)	Ryun (KS)
Callahan	Johnson, E. B.	Sabo
Calvert	Johnson, Sam	Salmon
Camp	Jones (OH)	Sanchez
Canady	Kanjorski	Sandlin
Cannon	Kasich	Sanford
Capps	Kelly	Sawyer
Capuano	Kildee	Saxton
Cardin	Kilpatrick	Schakowsky
Castle	Kind (WI)	Scott
Chabot	King (NY)	Sessions
Chambliss	Kingston	Shadegg
Clay	Kleczka	Shaw
Clayton	Klink	Shays
Clement	Knollenberg	Sherman
Clyburn	Kolbe	Sherwood
Coble	LaFalce	Shimkus
Collins	LaHood	Shows
Combest	Lampson	Simpson
Condit	Lantos	Sisisky
Conyers	Largent	Skeen
Cooksey	Larson	Skelton
Costello	Latham	Slaughter
Cox	LaTourette	Smith (MI)
Coyne	Lazio	Smith (TX)
Cramer	Leach	Smith (WA)
Crane	Lee	Snyder
Crowley	Levin	Souder
Cubin	Lewis (CA)	Spence
Cummings	Lewis (GA)	Spratt
Cunningham	Lewis (KY)	Stabenow
Danner	Linder	Stark
Davis (FL)	LoBiondo	Stearns
Davis (IL)	Lofgren	Stenholm
Davis (VA)	Lowey	Stump
DeGette	Lucas (KY)	Sununu
Delahunt	Lucas (OK)	Sweeney
DeLauro	Luther	Talent
DeMint	Maloney (CT)	Tanner
Deutsch	Maloney (NY)	Tauscher
Diaz-Balart	Manzullo	Tauzin
Dickey	Markey	Terry
Dicks	Martinez	Thomas
Dingell	Mascara	Thompson (CA)
Dixon	Matsui	Thompson (MS)
Doggett	McCarthy (MO)	Thornberry
Dooley	McCarthy (NY)	Thune
Doyle	McCollum	Thurman
Dreier	McCrery	Tiahrt
Dunn	McDermott	Tierney
Edwards	McGovern	Toomey
Ehlers	McHugh	Towns
Ehrlich	McInnis	Turner
Emerson	McIntyre	Udall (CO)
Engel	McKeon	Udall (NM)
English	McNulty	Upton
Eshoo	Meehan	Velazquez
Etheridge	Meek (FL)	Visclosky
Evans	Meeks (NY)	Vitter
Ewing	Menendez	Walden
Farr	Mica	Walsh
Fattah	Millender-McDonald	Watkins
Filner	Miller (FL)	Watt (NC)
Fletcher	Miller, Gary	Watts (OK)
Foley	Miller, George	Waxman
Forbes	Minge	Weiner
Ford	Moakley	Weldon (PA)
Fossella	Mollohan	Weller
Fowler	Moore	Wexler
Frank (MA)	Moran (KS)	Weygand
Franks (NJ)	Moran (VA)	Whitfield
Frelinghuysen	Morella	Wicker
Frost	Murtha	Wilson
Gallegly	Myrick	Wise
Ganske	Nadler	Wolf
Gejdenson	Napolitano	Woolsey
Gekas	Neal	Wu
Gephardt	Nethercutt	Young (FL)

2000 Ron Paul 58:1

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today I pay tribute to the Rev. Msgr. Clyde Holtman on the occasion of his retirement. The Reverend Holtman was born in Westphalia, Texas. He was also baptized, made his First Communion, was confirmed, was ordained to the priesthood May 15, 1949, and offered his first Mass in the Church of the Visitation in that same community.

2000 Ron Paul 58:2

Msgr. Holtman has served in eleven parishes in the Austin Diocese for over 50 years. He has also served as Dean of the LaGrange Deanery, Judge of the Marriage Tribunal, Diocesan Resettlement Director, Diocesan Consultant and President of the Infirm Priest’s Fund.

2000 Ron Paul 58:3

On May 30, 1985, Msgr. Holtman was invested as a Prelate of Honor in the Church by Pope John Paul II.

2000 Ron Paul 58:4

Msgr. Holtman has touched thousands of lives in the central Texas area. I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Reverend Holtman on his retirement.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 59
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

June 26, 2000
Hostettler Amendment to Commerce, Justice, State, Judiciary Appropriations Act

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Pages: H5142]

2000 Ron Paul 59:1
Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler ) for bringing this very important amendment to the floor.

2000 Ron Paul 59:2
There is a lot of emphasis around here on the first amendment, and rightfully so. We should defend it. There is a lot of neglect on the second amendment, but there are a lot of Americans that believe that the second amendment is equally as important as the first amendment. So I congratulate the gentleman.

2000 Ron Paul 59:3
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Hostettler amendment. The Founding Fathers fought to break away from a tyrannical government. Part of the problem was that the King of England was making laws without any accountability. When they set up this Government, they saw the dire need to have several checks and balances, thus creating the three-fold system of Government: the executive branch, the judicial branch, and the legislative branch.

2000 Ron Paul 59:4
It is this legislative branch that is responsible for making laws and the judicial branch for interpreting them, period.

2000 Ron Paul 59:5
A serious act of misconduct on the administration occurred when the Smith & Wesson agreement was settled. The executive branch acted as the legislative branch when they bypassed Congress through 22 pages of litigation. The egregious agreement will require all authorized Smith & Wesson dealers to limit handgun sales to one handgun every 14 days regardless of make, require all authorized Smith & Wesson dealers to require customers to pass a certified test before completing a sale of any firearm, mandate that the BATF participate on an oversight commission created by the settlement agreement, and does not allow unaccompanied minors into areas where firearms are present.

2000 Ron Paul 59:6
It seems now that the administration sees fit, acting on no authority given it by the Constitution, to dictate to a company who they can sell their products to and in what manner their product can be sold. This forces law-abiding citizens to jump through Government-ordained hoops before they exercise their rights to purchase as many firearms as they choose and to purchase them whenever they choose.

2000 Ron Paul 59:7
The BATF, which has never been known for its fair treatment of gun owners, will play an integral part on the oversight commission of gun owners by the agreement.

2000 Ron Paul 59:8

The BATF will require all employees of dealers to attend annual training courses. In these training courses, the BATF gives the final say as to what can be taught and what will be excluded. Each employee must also complete an examination of which its contents will be closely reviewed by the oversight commission and make its own changes as it sees fit. In essence, they are acting as the ‘thought-control’ police. This sounds very Orwellian to me and far from what Patrick Henry had in mind when he said, ‘The great objective is that every man be armed . . . Everyone who is able may have a gun.’

2000 Ron Paul 59:9

Let us not forget past calamities against U.S. citizens from over zealous federal agents in trying to enforce unconstitutional gun laws. Again, too much power is being given to these unconstitutional agencies and even worse, it is being done without the consent of Congress. Members of the House, you must remember the oath that you swore to uphold and not relinquish your authority any longer. By what authority does the administration set up this new commission, what check will be placed on this agency in making their new regulations that will affect all Americans without giving them a chance to vote or have a say in these changes. Why should we hand over our authority to another branch of the government and then let it take more freedoms away from our citizens?

2000 Ron Paul 59:10

These requirements have been voted on in the past in the House and Senate and thus far have not passed either house. It is all to clear that the agenda of the Clinton Administration has always been anti-second amendment, and thus, they have found a way to implement their policies by forcing a gun manufacturer to comply regardless of their legal legitimacy. The Federal government and executive branch have no business — and have no authority — to mandate how a company runs its business.

2000 Ron Paul 59:11

Let us not allow our authority to be usurped from us any longer. Please stop the funding for this anti-constitutional settlement and vote for the Hostettler Amendment and support H.R. 2655, the Separation of Powers Restoration Act.

2000 Ron Paul 59:12
I strongly support this amendment. I compliment the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler ) for bringing this to the floor, and I hope that we can pass this overwhelmingly.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 60
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

June 29, 2000
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1304, QUALITY HEALTH-CARE COALITION ACT OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 60:1
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule. It is an imperfect rule, but this bill needs to be brought to the floor.

2000 Ron Paul 60:2
H.R. 1304 is the only bill that I have seen in the last 3 years, probably in the last 30 years, that would move us in a proper direction for health care in this country. For 30 years now we have moved in the direction, not toward socialized medicine, we do not have socialized medicine, we have a mess. We have a monster we created called ‘medical management.’ But we have moved toward corporate medicine.

2000 Ron Paul 60:3
Who are the greatest opponents of H.R. 1304? The HMOs and the insurance companies.

2000 Ron Paul 60:4
All we are asking for here is a little bit of return of freedom to the physician, that is, for the right of the physician to freedom of contract, to associate. We are giving no special powers, no special privileges. Trying to balance just to a small degree the artificial power given to the corporations who now run medicine, who mismanage medicine, who destroyed the doctor-patient relationship.

2000 Ron Paul 60:5
Mr. Speaker, this has given me a small bit of hope. I am thankful the leadership was willing to bring this bill to the floor tonight. We should go through, get the rule passed, and vote on this. This is the only thing that has offered any hope to preserve and to restore the doctor-patient relationship.

2000 Ron Paul 60:6
We need this desperately. We do not need to support the special corporate interests who get the money. The patient does not get the care. The doctors are unhappy. The hospitals are unhappy. And who lobbies against this? Corporate interests. This is total destruction of the doctor-patient relationship.

2000 Ron Paul 60:7
All we want to ask for is the freedom to associate and the freedom to contract. If they do not want to become a union, doctors do not have to. They had the power to become unions in the 19th century, but under ethical conditions they did not. Nobody tells doctors that they have to, if we remove this obstacle.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 61
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Quality Health-Care Coalition Act of 2000 June 29, 2000
QUALITY HEALTH-CARE COALITION ACT OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 61:1

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to take this opportunity to lend my support to H.R. 1304, 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.

2000 Ron Paul 61:2

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 patents 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.

2000 Ron Paul 61:3

As an OB-GYN with over 30 years in practice, 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 have 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 have 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.

2000 Ron Paul 61:4

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, it, like existing antitrust laws, are an unconstitutional violation of medical professionals’ freedom of contract and association.

2000 Ron Paul 61:5

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: 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. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I would hope that my colleagues would see the folly of antitrust laws and support my Market Process Restoration Act (H.R. 1789), which repeals all federal antitrust laws.

2000 Ron Paul 61:6

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. I am quite pleased that this bill does not infringe on the rights of health care professionals by forcing them to join a bargaining organization against their will. Contrary to the claims of some of its opponents, H.R. 1304 in no way extends the scourge of federally-mandated compulsory unionism to the health care professions. While Congress should protect the right 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.

2000 Ron Paul 61:7

Mr. Chairman, it is my hope that Congress will follow up on its action today by empowering patients to control their health care by providing all Americans with access to Medical Saving Accounts (MSAs) and large tax credits for their health care expenses. 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 found most beneficial to them, the HMO monster would wither on the vine without the imposition of new federal regulations on the insurance industry.

2000 Ron Paul 61:8

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the Quality Health Care Coalition Act and restore the freedom of contract and association to American’s health care professionals. Antitrust laws are no more legitimate or constitutional in the health care market than they are on the software market. Therefore, I hope my colleagues will not just pass this bill but will also support my Market Process Restoration Act and exempt all Americans from antitrust laws. 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 through means such as Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs) and individual health care tax credits.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 62
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

29 June 2000
THE FAMILY HEALTH TAX CUT ACT

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Pages: E1170]

2000 Ron Paul 62:1

Mr. Speaker, today I attempted to help working Americans provide for their children’s health care needs by introducing the Family Health Tax Cut Act. The Family Health Tax Cut 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, terminal 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. The tax credit would be available to all citizens regardless of whether or not they itemize their deductions.

2000 Ron Paul 62:2

The tax credits provided in this bill will be especially helpful to those Americans whose employers cannot afford to provide their employees health insurance. 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, which requires long-term or specialized health care.

2000 Ron Paul 62:3

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 to health care is the local emergency room.

2000 Ron Paul 62:4

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 Family Health Tax Cut Act they would be better able to provide care for their children and our nation’s already overcrowded emergency room facilities would be relieved of the burden of having to provide routine care for people who otherwise cannot afford any other alternative.

2000 Ron Paul 62:5

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 a 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.

2000 Ron Paul 62:6

Under the Family Health Tax Cut Act, a struggle 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.

2000 Ron Paul 62:7

Mr. Speaker, this Congress has a moral responsibility to provide low-income parents struggling to care for a sick child tax relief in order to help them better meet their child’s medical expenses. I would ask any of my colleagues who would say that we cannot enact the Family Tax Cut Act because it would cause the government to lose too much revenue, who is more deserving of this money, Congress or the working-class parents of a sick child?

2000 Ron Paul 62:8

The Family Health Tax Cut 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 Family Health Tax Cut Act.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 63
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Sense Of Congress Regarding Importance And Value Of Education In United States History July 10, 2000
SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING IMPORTANCE AND VALUE OF EDUCATION IN UNITED STATES HISTORY

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 63:1

Madam Speaker, I rise to address two shortcomings of S. Con. Res. 129. I am certainly in agreement with the sentiments behind this resolution. The promotion of knowledge about, and understanding of, American history are among the most important activities those who wish to preserve American liberty can undertake. In fact, I would venture to say that with my work with various educational organizations, I have done as much, if not more, than any other member of Congress to promote the study of American history.

2000 Ron Paul 63:2

Unfortunately, while I strongly support efforts to increase the American public’s knowledge of history, I cannot support a resolution claiming to encourage Americans to embrace their constitutional heritage, while its very language showcases a fundamental misunderstanding of the beliefs of America’s founders and the drafters of the United States Constitution. Popular acceptance of this misunderstanding of the founders’ thought is much more dangerous to American liberty than an inability to name the exact date of the Battle at Bunker Hill.

2000 Ron Paul 63:3

In particular, the resolution refers to American ‘democracy’ and the ‘democratic’ principles upon which this country was founded. However, this country was founded not as a democracy but as a constitutional republic. Madam Speaker, the distinction between a democracy and a republic is more than just a matter of semantics. The fundamental principle in a democracy is majority rule. Democracies, unlike republics, do not recognize fundamental rights of citizens (outside the right to vote) nor do they limit the power of the government. Indeed, such limitations are often scored as ‘intrusions on the will of the majority.’ Thus in a democracy, the majority, or their elected representatives, can limit an individual’s right to free speech, defend oneself, form contracts, or even raise ones’ children. Democracies recognize only one fundamental right: the right to participate in the choosing of their rulers at a pre-determined time.

2000 Ron Paul 63:4

In contrast, in a republic, the role of government is strictly limited to a few well-defined functions and the fundamental rights of individuals are respected. A constitution limiting the authority of central government and a Bill of Rights expressly forbidding the federal government from abridging the fundamental rights of a people are features of a republican form of government. Even a cursory reading of the Federalist Papers and other works of the founders shows they understood that obtaining the consent of 51 percent of the people does not in any way legitimize government actions abridging individual liberty.

2000 Ron Paul 63:5

Madam Speaker, the confusion over whether America is a democracy, where citizens’ rights may be violated if the consent of 51 percent of the people may be obtained, or a republic, where the federal government is forbidden to take any actions violating a people’s fundamental rights, is behind many of the flawed debates in this Congress. A constitutionally literate Congress that understands the proper function of a legislature in a constitutional republic would never even debate whether or not to abridge the right of self-defense, instruct parents how to raise and educate their children, send troops to intervene in distant foreign quarrels that do not involve the security of the country, or even deny entire classes of citizens the fundamental right to life.

2000 Ron Paul 63:6

Secondly, it is not the proper role of the United States Congress to dictate educational tenets to states and local governments. After all, the United States Constitution does not give the federal government any power to dictate, or even suggest, curriculum. Instead the power to determine what is taught in schools is reserved to states, local communities, and, above all, parents.

2000 Ron Paul 63:7

In conclusion, by mistaking this country’s founding as being based on mass democracy rather than on republican principles, and by ignoring the constitutionally limited role of the federal government, this resolution promotes misunderstanding about the type of government necessary to protect liberty. Such constitutional illiteracy may be more dangerous than historical ignorance, since the belief that America was founded to be a democracy legitimizes the idea that Congress may violate people’s fundamental rights at will. I, therefore, encourage my colleagues to embrace America’s true heritage: a constitutional republic with strict limitations on the power of the central government.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 64
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

July 13, 2000
LIMITATION ON FUNDS FOR ABORTION, FAMILY PLANNING, OR POPULATION CONTROL EFFORTS

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 64:1
Amendment No. 17 offered by Mr. Paul:

2000 Ron Paul 64:2
At the end of the bill (preceding the short title), insert the following:

TITLE VII — ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS

LIMITATION ON FUNDS FOR ABORTION, FAMILY PLANNING, OR POPULATION CONTROL EFFORTS

2000 Ron Paul 70:1

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in hesitant opposition to H.R. 4115, the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum Authorization Act. We as vigilant Americans must never forget the horrific lessons of the past and those attendant consequences of corporatism, fascism, and tyrannical government; that is, governmental deprivation of individual rights. A government which operates beyond its proper limits of preserving liberty never bodes well for individual rights to life, liberty and property. Particularly, Adolph Hitler’s tyrannical regime is most indicative of the necessary consequences of a government dominated by so-called ‘government-business’ partnerships, gun-confiscation schemes, protectionism, and abandonment of speech and religious freedom in the name of ‘compelling government interests.’

2000 Ron Paul 70:2

Ironically, this measure’s language permanently authorizes the appropriation of such sums as may be necessary for the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; a purpose which propels our very own federal government beyond its constitutionally enumerated limits. This nation’s founders were careful to limit the scope of our federal government to those enumerated powers within Article One, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. These limits were further instilled within the bill of rights’ tenth amendment which reserves to States and private parties those powers not specifically given to the federal government.

2000 Ron Paul 70:3

Evidence that such private contributions can properly memorialize this most important historical abhorration can be found given that this museum receives approximately $20 million in private donations annually.

2000 Ron Paul 70:4

Mr. Chairman, while I agree it is most important to remember and memorialize with a heavy heart the consequences of tyrannical governments operating beyond their proper limits, ignoring our own government’s limits of power and, thus, choosing a means incompatible with its ends to do so must not be tolerated. Hence, I must oppose H.R. 4115.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 71
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Child Support Distribution Act Of 2000 September 7, 2000
CHILD SUPPORT DISTRIBUTION ACT OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

2000 Ron Paul 71:1

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I must oppose H.R. 4678, the Child Support Distribution Act. While I applaud the sections of the bill providing increased flexibility to states to ensure that child support payments go to benefit children, rather than government bureaucrats, other provisions of H.R. 4678 present grave dangers to individual liberty, privacy, constitutional government and the sanctity of the American family.

2000 Ron Paul 71:2

I am particularly disturbed by the language expanding the use of the National Directory of New Hires, popularly known as the ‘new hires database’, in order to more effectively administer the unemployment compensation system and deny visas and residency to non-citizens who are delinquent in child support payments. Identifying persons who are failing to fulfill their legal obligation to pay child support is a worthy goal, as an OB-GYN who has delivered over four thousand babies in my over thirty year medical career, words cannot express the contempt I hold for those who would refuse to support their children. Similarly, preventing fraud in the unemployment program is obviously important to the nation’s employers and employees whose taxes finance the unemployment insurance system.

2000 Ron Paul 71:3

However much I share the goals meant to be accomplished by the expanded uses of the database, I must remind my colleagues that the road to serfdom, like the road to hell, is paved with noble purposes and good intentions. Expanding the use of the new hires database brings us closer to the day when the database is a universal tracking system allowing government officials easy access to every individual’s employment and credit history. Providing the government with that level of power to track citizens is to invite abuse of individual liberties.

2000 Ron Paul 71:4

The threat of the expansion of the new hires database is magnified by the fact that it uses on the social security number, which has become for all intents and purposes a de facto national ID number. In addition to threatening liberty, forcing Americans to divulge their uniform identifier for inclusion in a database also facilitates the horrendous crime of identity theft. In order to protect American citizens from both private and public criminals I have introduced legislation, H.R. 220, restricting the use of the social security number to purposes related to social security administration so that the government cannot establish databases linked by a common identifier.

2000 Ron Paul 71:5

I would also remind my colleagues that the federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in the collection of child support, much less invade the privacy of every citizen in order to ferret out a few wrongdoers. Constitutionally, there are only three federal crimes: treason, counterfeiting, and piracy on the high seas. For Congress to authorize federal involvement in any other law enforcement issue is a violation on the limits on Congressional power contained in Article 1, section 8 and the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution. No less an authority than Chief Justice William Renhquist has stated that Congress is creating too many federal laws and infringing on the proper police powers of the states.

2000 Ron Paul 71:6

In a free society, constitutional limits on government power and the liberty of citizens must never

2000 Ron Paul 71:7

2000 Ron Paul 71:8

be sacrificed to increase the efficiency of any government program, no matter how noble the program’s goal. Again I ask my colleagues to keep in mind that the dangerous road toward the loss of liberty begins when members of Congress put other goals ahead of our oath to preserve the Constitution and protect the liberty of our constituents.

2000 Ron Paul 71:9

While the expanded use of the new hires database provides sufficient justification for constitutionalists to oppose this bill, H.R. 4678 also must be opposed as it furthers the intrusion of the federal government into family life through the use of federal funds to support ‘fatherhood programs.’ Mr. Speaker, the federal government is neither constitutionally authorized nor institutionally competent to promote responsible fatherhood. In fact, by leveling taxes on responsible parents to provide special programs for irresponsible parents the federal government is punishing responsible fathers!

2000 Ron Paul 71:10

Federal programs promoting responsible fatherhood are another example of how the unintended consequences of government interventions are used to justify further expansions of state power. After all, it was the federal welfare state which undermined the traditional family as well as the ethic of self-responsibility so vital to maintaining a free society. In particular, the welfare state has promoted the belief that the government (re: taxpayer) has the primary responsibility for child-rearing, not the parents. When a large number of citizens view parenting as proper function of the central state it is inevitable that there will be an increase in those who fail to fulfill their obligations as parents. Without the destructive effects of the welfare state, there would be little need for federal programs to promote responsible fatherhood.

2000 Ron Paul 71:11

Instead of furthering federal involvement in the family, Congress should stop pumping the narcotic of welfare into America’s communities by defunding federal bureaucracies and returning responsibility for providing assistance to those institutions best able to provide help without fostering an ethic of irresponsibility and dependancy: private charities and churches.

2000 Ron Paul 71:12

Certain of my colleagues will say that this bill does promote effective charity through expansion of the ‘charitable choice’ program where taxpayer funds are provided to ‘faith-based’ institutions in order to administer certain welfare programs. While I have no doubt that churches are better able to foster strong families than federal bureaucrats, I am concerned that providing taxpayer funding for religious institutions will force the institutions to water-down their message — thus weakening the very feature that makes these institutions effective in the first place!

2000 Ron Paul 71:13

Furthermore, providing taxpayers dollars to secular institutions violates the rights of taxpayers not to be forced to subsidize beliefs that may offend them. As Thomas Jefferson said ‘To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.’

2000 Ron Paul 71:14

In conclusion, H.R. 4678, the Child Support Distribution Act, violates the Constitution by expanding the use of the new hires database, thus threatening the liberty and privacy of all Americans, as well as by expanding the federal role in family in the misguided belief that the state can somehow promote responsible fatherhood. By expanding the so-called ‘charitable choice’ program this bill also violates the conscience of millions of taxpayers and runs the risk of turning effective religious charities into agents of the welfare state. It also furthers the federalization of crime control by increasing the federal role in child support despite the fact that the federal government has no constitutional authority in this area. I therefore urge my colleagues to reject this bill and return responsibility for America’s children to states, local communities and, most importantly, parents.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 72
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

7 September 2000
SOCIAL SECURITY TAX RELIEF ACT

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Pages: E1412]

2000 Ron Paul 72:1

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of the Social Security Tax Relief Act (H.R. 4865). By repealing the 1993 tax increase on Social Security benefits, Congress will take a good first step toward eliminating one of the most unfair taxes imposed on seniors: the tax on Social Security benefits.

2000 Ron Paul 72:2

Eliminating the 1993 tax on Social Security benefits has long been one of my goals in Congress. In fact, I introduced legislation to repeal this tax increase in 1997, and I am pleased to see Congress acting on this issue. I would remind my colleagues that the justification for increasing this tax in 1993 was to reduce the budget deficit. Now, President Clinton, who first proposed the tax increase, and most members of Congress say the deficit is gone. So, by the President’s own reasoning, there is no need to keep this tax hike in place.

2000 Ron Paul 72:3

Because Social Security benefits are financed with tax dollars, taxing these benefits is yet another incidence 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 mask the true size of the federal deficit.

2000 Ron Paul 72:4

Mr. Speaker, the Social Security Tax Relief Act, combined with our action earlier this year to repeal the earnings limitation, goes a long way toward reducing the burden imposed by the Federal Government on senior citizens. However, I hope my colleagues will not stop at repealing the 1993 tax increase, but will work to repeal all taxes on Social Security benefits. I am cosponsoring legislation to achieve this goal, H.R. 761.

2000 Ron Paul 72:5

Congress should also act on my Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which ensures that all money in the Social Security Trust Fund is spent solely on Social Security. When the government takes money for the Social Security Trust Fund, 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.

2000 Ron Paul 72:6

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to help free senior citizens from oppressive taxation by supporting the Social Security Benefits Tax Relief Act (H.R. 4865). I also urge my colleagues to join me in working to repeal all taxes on Social Security benefits and ensuring that moneys from the Social Security trust fund are used solely for Social Security and not wasted on frivolous government programs.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 73
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

FSC Repeal And Extra-Territorial Income Exclusion Act Of 2000 September 12, 2000
FSC REPEAL AND EXTRA-TERRITORIAL INCOME EXCLUSION ACT OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H7428]

2000 Ron Paul 73:1

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4986, brought up under suspension, deserves serious consideration by all Members.

2000 Ron Paul 73:2

There are three reasons to consider voting against this bill. First, it perpetuates an international trade war. Second, this bill is brought to the floor as a consequence of a WTO ruling against the United States. Number three, this bill gives more authority to the President to issue Executive Orders.

2000 Ron Paul 73:3

Although this legislation deals with taxes and technically actually lower taxes, the reason the bill has been brought up has little to do with taxes per se. To the best of my knowledge there has been no American citizen making any request that this legislation be brought to the floor. It was requested by the President to keep us in good standing with the WTO.

2000 Ron Paul 73:4

We are now witnessing trade war protectionism being administered by the World (Government) Trade Organization — the WTO. For two years now we have been involved in an ongoing trade war with Europe and this is just one more step in that fight. With this legislation the U.S. Congress capitulates to the demands of the WTO. The actual reason for this legislation is to answer back to the retaliation of the Europeans for having had a ruling against them in favor of the United States on meat and banana products. The WTO obviously spends more time managing trade wars than it does promoting free trade. This type of legislation demonstrates clearly the WTO is in charge of our trade policy.

2000 Ron Paul 73:5

The Wall Street Journal reported on 9/5/00, ‘After a breakdown of talks last week, a multi billion-dollar trade war is now about certain to erupt between the European union and the U.S. over export tax breaks for U.S. companies, and the first shot will likely be fired just weeks before the U.S. election.’

2000 Ron Paul 73:6

Already, the European Trade Commissioner, Pascal Lamy, has rejected what we’re attempting to do here today. What is expected is that the Europeans will quickly file a new suit with the WTO as soon as this legislation is passed. They will seek to retaliate against United States companies and they have already started to draw up a list of those products on which they plan to place punitive tariffs.

2000 Ron Paul 73:7

The Europeans are expected to file suit against the United States in the WTO within 30 days of this legislation going in to effect.

2000 Ron Paul 73:8

This legislation will perpetuate the trade war and certainly support the policies that have created the chaos of the international trade negotiations as was witnessed in Seattle, Washington.

2000 Ron Paul 73:9

The trade war started two years ago when the United States obtained a favorable WTO ruling and complained that the Europeans refused to import American beef and bananas from American owned companies.

2000 Ron Paul 73:10

The WTO then, in its administration of the trade war, permitted the United States to put on punitive tariffs on over $300 million worth of products coming in to the United States from Europe. This only generated more European anger who then objected by filing against the United States claiming the Foreign Sales Corporation tax benefit of four billion dollars to our corporations was ‘a subsidy’.

2000 Ron Paul 73:11

On this issue the WTO ruled against the United States both initially and on appeal. We have been given till October 1st to accommodate our laws to the demands of the WTO.

2000 Ron Paul 73:12

That’s the sole reason by this legislation is on the floor today.

2000 Ron Paul 73:13

H.R. 4986 will only anger the European Union and accelerate the trade war. Most likely within two months the WTO will give permission for the Europeans to place punitive tariffs on hundreds of

2000 Ron Paul 73:14

millions of dollars of U.S. exports. These trade problems will only worsen if the world slips into a recession when protectionist sentiments are strongest. Also, since currency fluctuations by their very nature stimulate trade wars, this problem will continue with the very significant weakness of the EURO.

2000 Ron Paul 73:15

The United States is now rotating the goods that are to receive the 100 to 200 percent tariff in order to spread the pain throughout the various corporations in Europe in an effort to get them to put pressure on their governments to capitulate to allow American beef and bananas to enter their markets. So far the products that we have placed high tariffs on have not caused Europeans to cave in. The threat of putting high tariffs on cashmere wool is something that the British now are certainly unhappy with.

2000 Ron Paul 73:16

The Europeans are already well on their way to getting their own list ready to ‘scare’ the American exporters once they get their permission in November.

2000 Ron Paul 73:17

In addition to the danger of a recession and a continual problem with currency fluctuation, there are also other problems that will surely aggravate this growing trade war. The Europeans have already complained and have threatened to file suit in the WTO against the Americans for selling software products over the Internet. Europeans tax their Internet sales and are able to get their products much cheaper when bought from the United States thus penalizing European countries. Since the goal is to manage things in a so-called equitable manner the WTO very likely could rule against the United States and force a tax on our international Internet sales.

2000 Ron Paul 73:18

Congress has also been anxious to block the Voice Stream Communications planned purchase by Deutch Telekom, a German government-owned phone monopoly. We have not yet heard the last of this international trade fight.

2000 Ron Paul 73:19

The British also have refused to allow any additional American flights into London. In the old days the British decided these problems, under the WTO the United States will surely file suit and try to get a favorable ruling in this area thus ratchening up the trade war.

2000 Ron Paul 73:20

Americans are especially unhappy with the French who have refused to eliminate their farm subsidies — like we don’t have any in this country.

2000 Ron Paul 73:21

The one group of Americans that seem to get little attention are those importers whose businesses depend on imports and thus get hit by huge tariffs. When 100 to 200 percent tariffs are placed on an imported product, this virtually puts these corporations out of business.

2000 Ron Paul 73:22

The one thing for certain is this process is not free trade; this is international managed trade by an international governmental body. The odds of coming up with fair trade or free trade under WTO are zero. Unfortunately, even in the language most commonly used in the Congress in promoting ‘free trade’ it usually involves not only international government managed trade but subsidies as well, such as those obtained through the Import/Export Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and various other methods such as the Foreign Aid and our military budget.

2000 Ron Paul 73:23

Free trade should be our goal. We should trade with as many nations as possible. We should keep our tariffs as low as possible since tariffs are taxes and it is true that the people we trade with we are less likely to fight with. There are many good sound, economic and moral reasons why we should be engaged in free trade. But managed trade by the WTO does not qualify for that definition.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 74
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Scouting For All Act September 12, 2000
SCOUTING FOR ALL ACT

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H7455]

2000 Ron Paul 74:1

Mr. Speaker, today, we find ourselves debating an intolerance-laden bill advanced by those who will claim to be the ‘tolerant’ ones. What the bill’s proponents are really saying is that they are intolerant of an individual’s freedom to associate with those whom they, as individuals, see fit. Two vital issues are raised by this bill’s ascendancy to the House floor. The first is that of our constitutional right to freedom of association. The second being the notion of ‘federal charters.’

2000 Ron Paul 74:2

On June 28, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Boy Scouts of America was within its rights when the private organization expelled an adult scout leader because he was gay. In its five-to-four opinion, the court found that requiring the Boy Scouts to admit homosexuals violated the group’s free association rights.

2000 Ron Paul 74:3

Nevertheless, this Congress has decided to bring to the floor a bill attempting to penalize this private group of citizens for exercising their first amendment ‘freedom of association’ rights. This is very close to denying the very right itself. To the extent the Boy Scouts should be penalized for their exercise of free association (or exclusion in this case), that penalty should only manifest itself through other private citizens exercising their freedom not to associate with individuals or groups whose associations (or lack therof) they find offensive.

2000 Ron Paul 74:4

As to the ‘federal charter’, where do we find authority for the federal government to charter organizations it deems ‘honorable’? To the extent the ‘charter’ is an honorary title awarded by Congress to organizations which is then ultimately used to threaten exercise of the right to freedom of association, I suggest we repeal not only the Boy Scout’s charter but all federal charters such that they won’t be used as tools of federal meddling.

2000 Ron Paul 74:5

While I hesitate to further propagate this system of federal charters by which the federal government manipulates private groups, I despise more so this congressional attempt to penalize the Boy Scouts for merely exercising their constitutional rights — or as syndicated columnist Charley Reese recently put it in the Orlando Sentinel:

2000 Ron Paul 74:6

I think that it’s time for all patriotic organizations that have these federal charters to surrender those documents. It is impossible for a dishonorable organization to honor anyone. And these charters are, practically speaking, worthless. If the federal government believes that mindless non-discrimination trumps morality, then it’s time to disassociate from such bad company.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 75
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Literacy Involves Families Together Act September 12, 2000
LITERACY INVOLVES FAMILIES TOGETHER ACT

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H7468]

2000 Ron Paul 75:1

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why Congress should reject the Literacy Involves Families Together (LIFT) Act (House Resolution 3222), which aims to increase ‘family literacy’ by directing money from the American taxpayer to Washington and funneling a small percentage of it back to the states and localities to spend on education programs that meet the specifications of DC-based bureaucrats. While all support the goal of promoting adult literacy, especially among parents with young children, Congress should not endorse supporting the unconstitutional and ineffective means included in this bill. If Congress were serious about meaningful education reform, we would not even be debating bills like H.R. 3222. Rather, we would be discussing the best way to return control over the education dollar to the people so they can develop the education programs that best suit their needs.

2000 Ron Paul 75:2

Several of my colleagues on the Education and Workforce Committee have expressed opposition to the LIFT Act’s dramatic increase in authorized expenditures for the Even Start family literacy programs. Of course, I share their opposition to the increased expenditure, however, my opposition to this bill is based not as much on the authorized amount but on the bill’s underlaying premise: that the American people either cannot or will not provide educational services to those who need them unless they are forced to do so by the federal government.

2000 Ron Paul 75:3

In contrast to the drafters of the LIFT bill, I do not trust the Congress to develop an education program that can match the needs of every community in the United States. Instead, I trust the American people to provide the type of education system that best suits their needs, and the needs of their fellow citizens, provided Congress gives them back control over the education dollar.

2000 Ron Paul 75:4

The drafters of the United States Constitution understood that the federal government was incapable of effectively providing services such as education. This is why they carefully limited the federal government’s powers to a few narrowly defined areas. This understanding of the proper role of the federal government was reinforced by the tenth amendment which forbids the Federal Government from controlling education, instead leaving authority over education in the hands of states, local communities and parents.

2000 Ron Paul 75:5

Reinforcing that the scariest words in the English language are ‘I’m from the federal government and I am here to help you,’ the American education system has deteriorated in the years since Congress disregarded the constitutional limitations on centralizing education in order to ‘improve the schools.’ One could argue that if the federally-controlled schools did a better job of educating children to read, perhaps there would not be a great demand for ‘adult literacy programs!’

2000 Ron Paul 75:6

Of course, family literacy programs do serve a vital purpose in society, but I would suggest that not only would family literacy programs exist, they would better serve those families in need of assistance if they were not controlled by the federal government. Because of the generosity of the American people, the issue is not whether family literacy programs will be funded but who should control the education dollars; the American people or the federal government?

2000 Ron Paul 75:7

Mr. Speaker, rather than give more control over education to the people, H.R. 3222 actually further centralizes education by attaching new requirements to those communities receiving taxpayer dollars for adult literacy programs. For example, under this bill, federally-funded Even Start programs must use instruction methods based on ‘scientific research.’ While none question the value of research into various educational methodologies, it is doubtful that the best way to teach reading can be totally determined through laboratory experiments. Learning to read is a complex process, involving many variables, not the least of which are the skills and abilities of the individual.

2000 Ron Paul 75:8

Many effective techniques may not be readily supported by ‘scientific research.’ Therefore, this program may end up preventing the use of many effective means of reading instruction. The requirement that recipients of federal funds use only those reading techniques based on ‘scientific research,’ (which in practice means those methods approved by the federally-funded ‘experts’) ensures that a limited number of reading methodologies will, in essence, be ‘stamped with federal approval.’

2000 Ron Paul 75:9

In addition to violating the United States Constitution, the LIFT bill raises some serious questions regarding the relationship between the state and the family. Promoting family literacy is a noble goal but programs such as these may promote undue governmental interference in family life. Many people around the country have expressed concern that ‘parenting improvement’ programs have become excuses for the government bureaucrats to intimidate parents into ceding effective control over child-rearing to the government. While none of these complaints are directly related to the Even Start program Even Start does rest on the premise that it is legitimate for the federal government to interfere with the parent-child relationship to ‘improve’ parenting. Once one accepts that premise, it is a short jump to interfering in all aspects of family life in order to promote the federal government’s vision of ‘quality parenting.’

2000 Ron Paul 75:10

In order to give control over education back to the American people, I have introduced several pieces of legislation that improve education by giving the American people control over their education dollar. For instance my Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935), provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit for K-12 education expenses incurred in sending their children to public, private, or home school. I have also introduced the Education Improvement Tax Cut Act (H.R. 936), which provides a tax donation of up to $3,000 for cash or in-kind donations to public or private schools as well as for donations to elementary and secondary scholarships. I am also cosponsoring legislation (H.R. 969) to increase the tax donations for charitable contributions, as well as several bills to provide tax credits for adult job training and education.

2000 Ron Paul 75:11

Unleashing the charitable impulses of the American people is the most effective means of ensuring that all Americans have access to the quality education programs they need, and to make sure that those programs are tailored to meet the particular needs of the local communities and the individuals they serve.

2000 Ron Paul 75:12

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I call on my colleagues to reject the LIFT Act and instead embrace a program of education and charitable tax credits that will give the American people the ability to provide for the education needs of their children and families in the way that best suits the unique circumstances of their own communities.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 76
Ron Paul’s Congressional website
September 14, 2000
SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS TAX RELIEF ACT OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: E1493]

2000 Ron Paul 76:1

2000 Ron Paul 76:2

2000 Ron Paul 76:3

2000 Ron Paul 76:4

2000 Ron Paul 76:5

2000 Ron Paul 76:6

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to help free senior citizens from oppressive taxation by supporting the Social Security Benefits Tax Relief Act (H.R. 4865). 1 also urge my colleagues to join me in working to repeal all taxes on Social Security benefits and ensuring that moneys from the Social Security trust fund are used solely for Social Security and not wasted on frivolous government programs.

An excerpt from Herbert W. Titus’ Constitutional Analysis of the United Nations

2000 Ron Paul 78:1

Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Essential Rural Hospital Preservation Act. This legislation provides a cost-effective means of providing assistance to those small rural hospitals who are struggling with the unintended consequences of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. As those of us who represent rural areas can attest to, rural hospitals are desperately in need of such assistance. According to a survey conducted by Texas CPAs in April of 2000, the operating margin for hospitals outside a Standard Metropolitan Area with under 50 licensed beds pre-BBA was $26,000,000 while the operating margin post-BBA was negative $7,900,000. Reimbursement has been reduced by over $34 million since the BBA, while at the time the average rural hospital has incurred uncompensated and charity charges of $1.1 million since the changes contained in the Balanced Budget Act went into effect. Unless action is taken this year to provide assistance for these hospitals, many of them will be forced to close their doors, leaving many rural areas without access to hospital services.

2000 Ron Paul 78:2

I believe I can speak for all of my colleagues when I say that while none of us want to endanger the Medicare trust fund, we also want to ensure that Medicare reforms do not drive valuable health care providers into bankruptcy. After all, denying Medicare recipients in rural areas access to quality health care breaks the promise the government makes to the American people when it requires them to pay taxes to finance the Medicare trust fund that they will receive quality health care in their golden years.

2000 Ron Paul 78:3

Therefore, I am pleased to advance this proposal, which was developed by experts in rural health care in my district, which provides help for rural health care without endangering the soundness of the Medicare trust fund. The proposal consists of four simple changes in current Medicare laws for ‘Essential Service Hospitals.’ An Essential Service Hospital is defined as a hospital located in a non-Metropolitan Statistical Area with 50 state-licensed beds or less. The specifics of the legislation are:

2000 Ron Paul 78:4

1. A wage index for Essential Service Hospitals set at 1.0 — Essential Service Hospitals receive 26 percent less Medicare Reimbursement than hospitals in MSA area. This places rural areas at disadvantage in competing for high-quality employees with hospitals in urban areas. Setting the wage index at 1.0 will enhance the ability of rural hospitals to attract the best personal and thus ensure residents of rural areas can continue to receive quality health care.

2000 Ron Paul 78:5

2. Allow Essential Service Hospitals to treat 100 percent of Medicare copay and deductions which become hospital bad debts as an allowable cost — The BBA of 1997 reduced the amount of bad debts incurred because of uncollected Medicare copayments and deductions that hospitals can submit to Medicare for reimbursement as an allowable cost. This places an especially tough burden on Essential Service Hospitals which often have a high percentage of bad debts because they tend to have a high percentage of low-income populations among their clientele.

2000 Ron Paul 78:6

3. Exempt Essential Service Hospitals from the Outpatient Payment System (PPS) — Since rural hospitals lack the volume necessary to achieve a fair reimbursement rate under PPS, it makes no sense to apply PPS to these hospitals. Exempting Essential Service Hospitals from PPS assures that they will have their reimbursement rate determined by a formula that matches their unique situation.

2000 Ron Paul 78:7

4. Provides a 20 percent Medicare Disproportionate Share (DSH) payment to Essential Service Hospitals — Since small rural hospitals tend to serve a larger number of low-income persons than the average hospital, they have a particular need for Medicare DSH payments. However, many of these hospitals are not benefiting from the DSH program, this legislation will help ensure these hospitals received the support from Medicare they need to continue providing vital health care to low-income residents of rural areas.

2000 Ron Paul 78:8

Considering that the BBA of 1997 has resulted in Medicare savings of over $50 billion more than projected by Congress surely it is not to much to ask that Congress ensure Medicare patients in rural areas are not denied access to quality health care services because of the unintended consequences of the Balanced Budget Amendment. I therefore call on my colleagues to stand up for rural hospitals by cosponsoring the Essential Rural Hospital Preservation Act.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 79
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

September 21, 2000
CHILDHOOD CANCER AWARENESS MONTH

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: E1555]

2000 Ron Paul 79:1

Mr. Speaker, because September is Childhood Cancer Awareness Month this is an excellent time to reflect on the problems faced by working parents struggling to meet the needs of a child stricken with cancer. I am sure that all would agree that there are few Americans more in need of tax relief than families forced to devote every available resource to caring for a child with a terminal illness such as cancer. This is why I have introduced the Family Health Tax Cut Act (H.R. 4799). This legislation provides a $3,000 tax credit to parents caring for a child with cancer, another terminal disease, or any other serious health condition requiring long-term care. H.R. 4799 also helps all working parents provide routine health care for their children by providing them with a $500 per child tax credit.

2000 Ron Paul 79:2

The bill will be particularly helpful to those parents whose employers cannot afford to provide their employees’ health insurance. Often-times those employees work in low-income jobs and thus must struggle to provide adequate health care for their children. This burden is magnified when the child needs special care to cope with cancer or a physical disability. Yet, thanks to Congress’ refusal to grant individuals the same tax breaks for health-care expenses it grants businesses, these hard-working parents receive little or no tax relief to help them cope with the tremendous expenses of caring for a child requiring for a child requiring long-term or specialized care.

2000 Ron Paul 79:3

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 a year or single income filers with incomes slightly above 15,000 dollars per year. Clearly this bill will be of the most benefit to working families balancing the demands of taxation with the needs of their children.

2000 Ron Paul 79:4

Under the Family Health Tax Cut 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 have less worry about how they will pay the bills if one of their children requires lengthy hospitalization or some other form of specialized care.

2000 Ron Paul 79:5

Mr. Speaker, it is tough enough for working families to cope with a child with a serious illness without having to sacrifice resources that should be used for the care of that child to the federal government. It is hard to think of a more compassionate action this Congress can take than to reduce taxes on America’s parents in order to allow them to help provide quality health care to their children. I therefore call on my colleagues to join me in helping working parents provide health care to their children by cosponsoring H.R. 4799, the Family Health Tax Cut Act.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 80
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

September 25, 2000
TWENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H8004]

2000 Ron Paul 80:1

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I must oppose H. Con. Res. 399, which celebrates the 25th Anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). My opposition to H. Con. Res. 399 is based on the simple fact that there is a better way to achieve the laudable goal of educating children with disabilities than through an unconstitutional program and thrusts children, parents, and schools into an administrative quagmire. Under the IDEA law celebrated by this resolution, parents and schools often become advisories and important decisions regarding a child’s future are made via litigation. I have received complaints from a special education administrator in my district that unscrupulous trial lawyers are manipulating the IDEA process to line their pockets at the expenses of local school districts. Of course, every dollar a local school district has to spend on litigation is a dollar the district cannot spend educating children.

2000 Ron Paul 80:2

2000 Ron Paul 80:3

2000 Ron Paul 80:4

IDEA also provides school personal with incentives to over-identify children as learning disabled, thus unfairly stigmatizing many children and, in a vicious cycle, leading to more demands for increased federal spending on IDEA also IDEA encourages the use of the dangerous drug Retalin for the purpose of getting education subsidies. Instead of celebrating and increasing spending on a federal program that may actually damage the children it claims to help, Congress should return control over education to those who best know the child’s needs: parents. In order to restore parental control to education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (HR 935), which provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit to pay for K-12 education expenses. My tax credit would be of greatest benefit to parents of children with learning disabilities because it would allow them to devote more of their resources to ensure their children get an education that meets the child’s unique needs.

2000 Ron Paul 80:5

In conclusion, I would remind my colleagues that parents and local communities know their children so much better than any federal bureaucrat, and they can do a better job of meeting a child’s needs than we in Washington. There is no way that my grandchildren, and some young boy or girl in Los Angeles, CA or New York City can be educated by some sort of ‘Cookie Cutter’ approach. Thus, the best means of helping disabled children is to empower their parents with the resources to make sure their children receives an education suited to that child’s special needs, instead of an education that scarifies that child’s best interest on the altar of the ‘Washington-knows-best’ ideology.

2000 Ron Paul 80:6

I therefore urge my colleagues to join with me in helping parents of special needs children provide their children with a quality education that meets the child’s needs by repealing federal mandates that divert resources away from helping children and, instead, embrace my Family Education Freedom Act.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 81
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

Congratulating Home Educators And Home Schooled Students September 26, 2000
CONGRATULATING HOME EDUCATORS AND HOME SCHOOLED STUDENTS

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H8187]

2000 Ron Paul 81:1

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support H. Res. 578, which celebrates the accomplishments of parents across the nation who have chosen to educate their children at home by designating the first week of October as ‘National Home Schooling Week.’ While serving in Congress, I have had the opportunity to get to know many of the home-schooling parents in my district. I am very impressed by the job these parents are doing in providing their children with a quality education. I have also found that home schooling parents are among the most committed activists in the cause of advancing individual liberty, constitutional government, and traditional values. I am sure my colleagues on the Education Committee would agree that the support of home schoolers was crucial in defeating the scheme to implement a national student test.

2000 Ron Paul 81:2

Home schooling is becoming a popular option for parents across the country. In Texas alone, there are approximately 75,000 home schooling families educating an average of three children per household. Home schooling is producing some outstanding results. For example, according to a 1997 study the average home schooled student scores near the 19th percentile on standardized academic achievement tests in reading, mathematics, social studies, and science. Further proof of the success of home schooling is the fact that in recent years, self-identified home schoolers have scored well above the national average on both the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and the American College Test (ACT). All home schooled children, regardless of race, income-level, or gender achieve these high scores.

2000 Ron Paul 81:3

Contrary to media-generated stereotypes portraying home schooled children as isolated from their peers, home schooled children participate in a wide variety of social, athletic, and extra-curricular activities. Home schooling parents have formed numerous organizations designed to provide their children ample opportunity to interact with other children. In fact, recent data indicates that almost 50 percent of home schooled children engage in extra-curricular activities such as group sports and music classes, while a third of home schooled children perform volunteer work in their communities.

2000 Ron Paul 81:4

Mr. Speaker, to be a home schooling parent takes a unique dedication to family and education. In many cases, home school families must forgo the second income of one parent, as well as incurring the costs of paying for textbooks, computers, and other school supplies. Home schooling parents must pay these expenses while, like All-American families, struggling to pay state, local, and federal taxes.

2000 Ron Paul 81:5

In order to help home schoolers, and all parents, devote more of their resources to their children’s education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935). This bill provides all parents a $3,000 per child tax credit for K-12 education expenses. This bill will help home school parents to provide their children a first-class education in a loving home environment.

2000 Ron Paul 81:6

2000 Ron Paul 81:7

2000 Ron Paul 81:8

In conclusion, I once again wish to express my strong support for H. Res. 578 and urge all my colleagues to support this resolution and acknowledge the accomplishments of those parents who have avoided the problems associated with an education controlled by federal ‘educrats’ by choosing to educate their children at home. I also urge my colleagues to help home schoolers, and all parents, ensure their children get a quality education by cosponsoring the Family Education Freedom Act.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 82
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

September 27, 2000
GONZALES — ‘LEXINGTON OF TEXAS’

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: E1607]

2000 Ron Paul 82:1

Mr. Speaker, in the town of Gonzales, Texas, on October 2, 1835, the first shot for Texas Independence was fired from a cannon by colonists waving a flag which proclaimed ‘Come and Take It.’ Gonzales became known as the ‘Lexington of Texas. ’

2000 Ron Paul 82:2

The Little Cannon has been recognized by many as a true and proper memento of our glorious past and has appeared in no less historic sites as the Alamo and the rotunda of the Texas Capitol, and is forever enshrined in The Great Seal of Texas.

2000 Ron Paul 82:3

Exactly 165 years after the shot was fired, on the afternoon of October 2, 2000, the City of Gonzales will accept the ‘Come and Take It Cannon’ from the estate of Dr. Patrick J. Wagner.

2000 Ron Paul 82:4

The Little Cannon will be an ever-present reminder to the citizens of Gonzales of the courage of those who stood at the ‘Lexington of Texas’ and first cried, ‘Come and Take It!’

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 83
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

October 11, 2000
CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4205, FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H9658]

2000 Ron Paul 83:1

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4205, the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 Conference Report. While Federal constitutional authority clearly exists to provide for the national defense, global militarism was never contemplated by the founders. Misnamed like most everything else in Washington, the ‘Defense’ Authorization Act thus funds U.N.-directed peacekeeping in Kosovo and Bosnia to the tune of $3.1 billion dollars, $443 million in aid to the former Soviet Union, $172 million for NATO infrastructure (the formerly defensive alliance which recently initiated force against Kosovo), and $869 million for drug interdiction efforts by the U.S. military in an attempt to take our failed 1920’s prohibition experiment worldwide.

2000 Ron Paul 83:2

Certainly a bill authorizing use of resources for the national defense which also properly compensates those military personnel necessary to maintain it would be not only constitutional but most appropriate. Contrarily, a bill which continues our elitist and failed policy of policing the world all the while creating additional enemies of the United States is neither constitutional, justifiable, supportable, nor prudent. By avoiding such a police-the-world approach, which destroys troop morale by isolating them from their families and spreading them dangerously thin, considerably less money could be authorized with seriously improved security results.

2000 Ron Paul 83:3

Meanwhile, H.R. 3769, my bill to prohibit the destruction during fiscal year 2001 of missile silos in the United States, fails to even receive so much as a hearing. While I understand that to comply with questionable, but ratified, disarmament treaties, certain missiles may need to be deactivated, it seems ill-advised to spend money to also destroy the missile silos which may be strategically vital to our national defense at some date in the not-so-distant future.

2000 Ron Paul 83:4

I encourage my colleagues to rethink the United States’ 20th century role of global policeman and restore instead, a policy of true national defense which will better protect their constituents, keep their constituent’s children safer and out of endless global conflicts, and reassume for taxpayers some semblance of fiscal sanity.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 87
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

17 October 2000
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER CONFIDENTIALITY ACT OF 1999

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: E1845]

2000 Ron Paul 87:1

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to support HR 3218, the Social Security Number Confidentiality Act. This bill takes a step toward protecting the integrity and security of the Social Security number by ensuring that window envelopes used by the Federal Government do not display an individual’s Social Security number. HR 3218 will help protect millions of Americans from the devastating crime of identity theft, which is a growing problem in my district and throughout the country.

2000 Ron Paul 87:2

This bill will be partially helpful to senior citizens who rely on Social Security. These seniors could lose a lifetime’s worth of savings if a criminal obtained their Social Security number. We owe it to America’s senior citizens to make sure that they are not exposed to the risk of identity theft as a price of receiving their Social Security benefits.

2000 Ron Paul 87:3

While this bill does represent a good step toward protecting privacy, I would remind my colleagues that much more needs to be done to ensure the Social Security number is not used as means of facilitating identity crimes. The increasing prevalence of identity theft is directly related to the use of the Social Security number as a uniform identifier.

2000 Ron Paul 87:4

For all intents and purposes, the Social Security number is already a national identification number. Today, in the majority of states, no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a drivers’ license, or receive a birth certificate for one’s child without presenting their 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!

2000 Ron Paul 87:5

Unscrupulous people have found ways to exploit this system and steal another’s identity — the ubiquity of the Social Security number paved the way for these very predictable abuses and crimes. Congress must undo the tremendous injury done to the people’s privacy and security by the federal government’s various mandates which transformed the Social Security number into a universal identifier.

2000 Ron Paul 87:6

In order to stop the disturbing trend toward the use of the Social Security number as a uniform ID I have introduced the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act (HR 220), which forbids the use of the Social Security number for purposes not related to Social Security. The Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act also contains a blanket prohibition on the use of identifiers to ‘investigate, monitor, oversee, or otherwise regulate’ American citizens. Mr. Speaker, prohibiting the Federal Government from using standard identifiers will help protect Americans from both private and public sector criminals.

2000 Ron Paul 87:7

While much of the discussion of identity theft and related threats to privacy has concerned private sector criminals, the major threat to privacy lies in the power uniform identifiers give to government officials. I am sure I need not remind my colleagues of the sad history of government officials of both parties using personal information contained in IRS or FBI files against their political enemies, or of the cases of government officials rummaging through the confidential files of celebrities and/or their personal acquaintances, or of the Medicare clerk who sold confidential data about Medicare patients to a Health Maintenance Organization. After considering these cases, one cannot help but shudder at the potential for abuse if an unscrupulous government official is able to access one’s complete medical, credit, and employment history by simply typing the citizens’ ‘uniform identifier’ into a database.

2000 Ron Paul 87:8

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I enthusiastically join in supporting HR 3218 which will help protect millions of senior citizens and other Americans from identity theft by strengthening the confidentiality of the Social Security number. I also urge my colleagues to protect all Americans from the threat of national identifiers by supporting my Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 88
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

October 19, 2000
THREATS TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: E1868 - E1869]

2000 Ron Paul 88:1

Mr. Speaker, I recently had the pleasure of hearing remarks made by our former House colleague, Bob Bauman of Maryland, at a meeting of the Eris Society in Colorado. Since his talk centered on banking, financial and related privacy issues pending before the Congress, I want to share his view with the House as an informed statement of the threats to financial freedom posed by the Clinton administration’s policies.

2000 Ron Paul 88:2

Mr. Bauman, the author of several books on offshore financial topics, serves as legal counsel to The Sovereign Society (http://www.sovereignsaociety.com), an international group of citizens concerned with the government encroachment on financial freedom.

2000 Ron Paul 88:3

Remarks of Robert E. Bauman, Eris Conference, Durango, Colorado, August 12, 2000.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 89
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

October 24, 2000
PALMETTO BEND CONVEYANCE ACT

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H10571]

2000 Ron Paul 89:1

Mr. Speaker, Lake Texana (The Palmetto Bend Project), is located in my congressional district near Edna in the Texas Gulf Coast area about midway between Corpus Christi and Houston. Lake Texana supplies roughly 75,000 acre/feet per year of municipal and industrial water to a large multicounty area of Texas. The Lake Texana water is directly responsible for creating over 3,000 jobs in the cities of Edna and Victoria, Texas and water sales from the project make it financially self-sufficient.

2000 Ron Paul 89:2

S. 1474 merely facilitates the early payment of the project’s construction costs (discounted, of course, by the amount of interest no longer due as a consequence of early payment) and transfers title of the Palmetto Bend Project to the Texas state authorities. Both the Lavaca Navidad River Authority and Texas Water Development Board concur that an early buy-out and title transfer is extremely beneficial to the economic and operational well-being of the project as well as the Lake Texana water users. The Texas Legislature and Governor George W. Bush have both formally supported the early payment and title transfer.

2000 Ron Paul 89:3

This bill will save Lake Texana water users as much as $1 million per year as well as provide an immediate infusion of millions of dollars to the national treasury. Additionally, all liability associated with this water project are, under my legislation, assumed by the state of Texas thus further relieving the financial burden of the federal government.

2000 Ron Paul 89:4

Texas has already demonstrated sound management of this resource. Recreational use of the lake has been well-provided under Texas state management to include provision of a marina, pavilion, playground, and boating docks, all funded without federal money. A woodland bird sanctuary and wildlife viewing area will also be established upon transfer with the assistance of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and several environmental organizations.

2000 Ron Paul 89:5

My thanks go to members and staff of both the Resources committee and the subcommittee on Energy and Water for their continued assistance with this bill as well as Senator Hutchison and her staff for working with me to move our bill in the Senate.

2000 Ron Paul 89:6

Mr. Speaker, I respectfully request my colleague’s support for S. 1474 as passed by the Senate.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 90
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

October 24, 2000
OLDER AMERICANS ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H10605]

2000 Ron Paul 90:1

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take this opportunity to express my opinion on the Older Americans Act Reauthorization (H.R. 782) and explain why I must vote against this bill. Of course, I support efforts to ensure America’s senior citizens have access to employment, nutritional and other services; however the federal government is neither constitutionally authorized nor competent to provide such services.

2000 Ron Paul 90:2

Under the tenth amendment, the federal government is forbidden from interfering in areas such as providing employment and nutritional services to any group of citizens. Thus, when the federal government uses taxpayer funds to support these services, it is violating the constitution. In a constitutional republic, good intentions are no excuse for constitutional carelessness.

2000 Ron Paul 90:3

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, by involving itself in these areas, the federal government has politicized the offering of these services as well as assured inefficiencies in their delivery — inefficiencies that would not be present if the federal government respected its constitutional limits and allowed states, local communities and private citizens to provide these vital services to seniors. For example, one of the most contentious areas of this bill is the funding that goes to private organization to provide employment services. Many of these organizations are involved in partisan politics, and, because money is fungible, the federal grants to these organizations make taxpayers de facto underwriters of their political activities. As Thomas Jefferson said: ‘To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is both sinful and tyrannical.’ This ‘sinful and tyrannical’ action is inevitable whenever Congress exceeds its constitutional limitations and abuses the taxing power by forcing citizens to support the charitable activities of congressionally-favored organizations. One reason for this is that federal funding encourages these organizations to become involved in lobbying in order to gain more federal support. These organizations may even form alliances with other advocacy groups in order to build greater support for their cause.

2000 Ron Paul 90:4

When social services are nationalized, there is inevitably waste and inefficiency in the distribution of the services. This is because when the government administers social services the lion’s share of those services are provided to those with the most effective lobby or those whose Congressional representative is able to exercise the most clout at appropriations time. While I applaud the efforts of certain of my colleagues on the Education and Workforce Committee to direct resources to where they are truly needed, particularly Mr. Barrett’s efforts to bring more resources to rural areas, the politicization of social services will inevitably result in some areas receiving inadequate funding to meet their demand for those services. I have little doubt that if these programs were restored to the private sector those areas with the greatest concentration of needy seniors would receive priority over those areas with the most powerful lobby.

2000 Ron Paul 90:5

There are ways to ensure that seniors have opportunities for productive lives without violating the constitution and politicizing charity. One way is to repeal the social security earnings limit, which punishes seniors who continue to work in the private sector. Another way is through generous tax credits and deductions for taxpayers who support charitable organization designed to provide services to individuals. Finally, the best way to aide the nation’s seniors, and those who are about to be seniors, is to stop raiding the nation’s social security system to finance other unconstitutional programs. This is why the first piece of legislation I introduced this year was The Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219), which would ensure that social security monies would be spent on social security. I was also a cosponsor of the legislation to end the earnings limit, which passed the House of Representatives this year. I am also cosponsoring several pieces of legislation to allow people to use more of their own resources to help the needy by expanding the charitable tax deduction.

2000 Ron Paul 90:6

Mr. Speaker, several years ago, when people still recognized their moral duty to voluntarily help their fellow humans rather than expect the government to coerce their fellow citizens to provide assistance through the welfare state, my parents were involved in a local Meals-on-Wheels program run by their church. I remember how upset they were when their local program was forced to conform to federal standards or close its program because Congress had decided to take control of delivering hot food to the elderly. It is time that this Congress return to the wisdom of the drafters of the Constitution and return responsibility for providing services to the nation’s seniors to states, communities, churches, and other private organizations who can provide those services much more effectively and efficiently than the federal government.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 91
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

October 25, 2000
NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION ACT

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: E1919]

2000 Ron Paul 91:1

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject the National Science Act (H.R. 4271), which violates the limits on congressional power found in Article 1, section 8 and the 10th amendment to the Constitution by using tax monies unjustly taken from the American people to promote the educational objectives favored by a few federal politicians and bureaucrats. As an OB-GYN, I certainly recognize the importance of increasing the quality of science education as well as undertaking efforts to interest children in the sciences. However, while I share the goals of the drafters of this legislation, I recognize that Congress has no constitutional authority to single out any one academic discipline as deserving special emphasis. Instead, the decision about which subjects to emphasize should be made by local officials, educators and parents.

2000 Ron Paul 91:2

H.R. 4271 not only singles out science for special emphasis, certain positions of the bill will lead to a national science curriculum. For instance, the bill calls for the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation to coordinate and disseminate information on ‘standard’ math and science curricula as well as licensing requirements for teachers of math, science, engineering or technology. While local school districts are not forced to adopt these standards, local schools will be pressured to adopt these standards because they are the ones favored by their DC-based overlords. I would also ask the drafters of this bill what purpose is served by spending taxpayer moneys to create and disseminate a model curriculum at the federal level if their intent is not to have local schools adopt the federally-approved model?

2000 Ron Paul 91:3

I also object to the provision of this bill providing special assistance to science teachers for training and professional development as well as grants for so-called ‘Master Teachers.’ Of course, I recognize that, like other citizens, teachers are underpaid because they are overtaxed. This is why I have introduced the Teacher Tax Cut Act (H.R. 937) which provides all teachers with a $1,000 tax credit. H.R. 937 effectively raises teacher salaries by lowering their taxes. In contrast H.R. 4271 raises the salaries of certain congressionally-favored educators by effectively cutting the pay of engineers, doctors, truck drivers, waiters, and even their fellow educators. Mr. Speaker, I cannot find any constitutional nor moral justification for Congress to redistribute money to any favorite class of professionals.

2000 Ron Paul 91:4

If the steady decline of America’s education system over the past thirty years has shown us anything, it is that centralizing control leads to a declining education system. In fact, according to a recent 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. Clearly, the drafters of the Constitution knew what they were doing when they forbade the Federal Government from meddling in education.

2000 Ron Paul 91:5

In order to put education resources back into the hands of the American people I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935). This act provides a $3,000 per child tax credit for parents to help cover K-12 education expenses. I have also introduced the Education Improvement Tax Cut Act (H.R. 936), which provides a $3,000 tax deduction for contributions to K-12 education scholarships as well as for cash or in-kind donations to private or public schools. HRs 935 and 936 move control of education resources back into the hands of the American people and help ensure parents can provide their children an excellent education. In fact, since the tax credits contained in H.R. 935 and H.R. 936 may be used to help finance the purchase of items necessary for a science education, such as labs equipment and computers, these bills will particularly benefit those citizens who wish to improve science education. I therefore urge my colleagues to reject the failed, unconstitutional command-and-control approach of H.R. 4271 and instead embrace my legislation to return control of education resources to the American people.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 92
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

October 26, 2000
CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2615, CERTIFIED DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2000

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H11260]

2000 Ron Paul 92:1

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2614 contains some very laudable tax cut measures which I strongly support. However, the bill also contains some very troubling provisions, provisions which have no place in what ought to be purely tax relief legislation. As a result, this bill represents an eleventh-hour political compromise which makes politicians feel good but does more harm than good for the American people.

2000 Ron Paul 92:2

Many Members, including myself, have worked hard to bring some measure of tax relief to American families this year. We worked to pass meaningful bills which would have eliminated the marriage penalty and eliminated the harmful estate tax. We worked to increase deductions for health care expenses. We worked to increase the tax-deductible amounts individuals can contribute to their IRA and pension plans. We worked for these tax cuts because we know that American families pay too much in taxes. Tax relief has been, and should be, our guiding principle.

2000 Ron Paul 92:3

Accordingly, I strongly endorse many of the provisions in this bill. I fully support the increased IRA and pension plan deduction amounts, which will benefit virtually all Americans. Tax-deductible and tax-deferred savings incentives represent the very best kind of tax reforms this Congress can make. Not only do Americans pay less in taxes with an increased deduction, they also have an increased incentive to accumulate retirement savings.

2000 Ron Paul 92:4

Another worthwhile portion of this bill addresses the needs of rural hospitals, which were unfairly singled out for excessive reductions in Medicare reimbursements by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. While Congress deserves a share of the blame, most of the problems experienced by rural health care providers are the result of flawed implementation of the Act by the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA). This administration has decimated rural health care in order to artificially prolong the life of the Medicare trust fund, while avoiding reforms that would give seniors more control over their health care decisions. The administration should not play political games with Medicare trust funds at the expense of rural hospitals. By doing so, it has violated the promise of quality health care made to senior taxpayers in rural areas.

2000 Ron Paul 92:5

Mr. Speaker, I also am pleased that this bill extends the Medical Savings Accounts (MSA) program created in 1996. MSAs and generous health care tax deductions are critical to preserving health care freedom. Federal policies removing consumer control over health care dollars inevitably have led to increased decision making by HMOs and federal bureaucrats.

2000 Ron Paul 92:6

We must restore individual control over health care dollars, and MSAs coupled with health care tax credits and deductions are an important step in the right direction. MSAs and health care tax deductions lower health care costs without sacrificing quality by motivating patients to negotiate for the highest quality care at a reasonable price.

2000 Ron Paul 92:7

2000 Ron Paul 92:8

Unfortunately, these positive tax relief provisions are outweighed by other measures in today’s mixed bag legislation, measures which have been agreed to only because many Members want to claim they have passed a ‘tax relief’ bill before they go home. The administration has thwarted many of our tax relief efforts through the veto process, and we apparently have decided to take whatever tax measures we can get, regardless of the price. So now we find ourselves in a position where we cobble together some less sweeping tax relief proposals which the administration will accept, and we put them in a larger bill which contains some very bad measures favored by the administration. Before we tout today’s bill, however, we ought to be honest with our constituents about the real nature of this last-minute compromise.

2000 Ron Paul 92:9

The small business tax relief in this bill is more than outweighed by the provisions raising the federally-mandated minimum wage. While I certainly understand the motivation to help lower wage workers, the reality is that a minimum wage hike hurts lower income Americans the most. When an employer cannot afford to pay a higher wage, the employer has no choice but to hire less workers. As a result, young people with fewer skills and less experience find it harder to obtain an entry-level job. Raising the minimum wage actually reduces opportunities and living standards for the very people the administration claims will benefit from this legislation! It’s time to stop fooling ourselves about the basic laws of economics, and realize that Congress cannot legislate a higher standard of living. Congress should not allow itself to believe that the package of small business tax cuts will fully compensate businesses and their employees for the damage inflicted by a minimum wage hike. Congress is not omnipotent; we cannot pretend to strike a perfect balance between tax cuts and wage mandates so that no American businesses or workers are harmed. It may make my colleagues feel good to raise the minimum wage, but the real life consequences of this bill will be felt by those who can least afford diminished job opportunities.

2000 Ron Paul 92:10

We also make a mistake when we rush to change our domestic tax laws to comply with the ruling of an international body. Nobody in Congress or the administration wants to talk about it, but this is the first time in the history of our nation that we have changed our laws because an international body told us to do so. We are not considering this legislation because American citizens or corporations lobbied for it. We are considering it solely because of the demands of the WTO appellate panel, which agreed with EU complaints about our corporate income tax laws. We created the Foreign Sales Corporation rules back in the 1980s, but now the EU has decided our exempting a small portion of foreign source income from corporate taxes represents a ‘subsidy.’ We have plenty of federal subsidies in this country, but the FSC tax treatment assuredly is not one of them. FSCs do not receive a subsidy — no tax dollars are collected from taxpayers and given to FSCs. The FSC rules simply permit the parent corporation to pay less taxes on its foreign income. Most EU countries don’t tax their corporations on foreign income at all! So the EU complaint that the FSC represents a subsidy is ridiculous.

2000 Ron Paul 92:11

This measure clearly demonstrates how our membership in the WTO undermines our national sovereignty. I have warned this body that the WTO does not promote true free trade, but rather enforces politically influenced ‘managed trade.’ I warned this body that our agreement to abide by WTO rulings would force us to change our domestic laws. I warned this body that our participation in the WTO was unconstitutional. Yet Members scoffed at this idea. Members of the Ways and Means committee said it was ‘unthinkable’ that the U.S. Congress would change our nation’s laws because of an order by the WTO. We were told that we had to join or else we would lose the international ‘trade wars.’ Today we see our sovereignty clearly undermined, and at the same time we stand on the brink of a retaliatory trade war by the EU. So the WTO has given us the worst of all worlds.

2000 Ron Paul 92:12

We should not change our tax laws at the behest of any body other than the U.S. Congress. If we want to help American businesses, we should simply stop taxing foreign source income. Today’s FSC measure will not appease the EU; they already have indicated that the House version of this bill is unsatisfactory to them. Worst of all, this measure gives the President further unconstitutional executive order powers to make changes when demanded by the WTO in the future. Never mind that the legislative power is supposed to reside solely with Congress. We simply cede our legislative authority to the WTO when we pass this measure, and it’s shameful that it likely will go unnoticed by the American people. We ought to tell them exactly what we are doing to national sovereignty when we pass this last-minute mixed bag of tax measures.

2000 Ron Paul 92:13

Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the leadership for bringing this conference report to the floor. This conference report includes many important provisions to spur individual retirement savings.

2000 Ron Paul 92:14

Most importantly, the report includes language that increases the IRA contribution limit, a proposal I have worked on for several years. The popularity of this issue is evidenced by the more than 222 bipartisan members who cosponsored my IRA legislation.

2000 Ron Paul 92:15

For years, millions of Americans have relied on Individual Retirement Accounts to help save for a secure retirement. However, despite their past success, IRAs are in danger of becoming obsolete because inflation is destroying much of their value. Since 1981 the limit on IRAs has been frozen. Had it simply kept pace with inflation, Americans would now be able to contribute $5,068 instead of only $2,000.

2000 Ron Paul 92:16

If IRAs are to continue to be a real help for people as they plan for their retirement years, it is past time for the federal government to allow higher contributions.

2000 Ron Paul Chapter 93
Ron Paul’s Congressional website

Congressional Record [.PDF]

November 13, 2000
ECONOMIC PROBLEMS AHEAD

------------
Statement of
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS

[Page: H11866]

2000 Ron Paul 93:1

Mr. Speaker, the financial markets are now nervously watching the impasse now reached in the Presidential election. Many commentators have already claimed the most recent drop in the market is a consequence of the uncertainty about the outcome of the election. Although it would be a mistake to totally dismiss the influence of the election uncertainty as a factor in the economy, it must be made clear that the markets and the economy are driven by something much more basic. We know that the markets have been off significantly for the past several months, and this drop was not related in any way to the Presidential election.

2000 Ron Paul 93:2

Confidence is an important factor in the way markets work, and certainly the confusion in the Presidential election does not convey confidence to investors and to the rest of the world.

2000 Ron Paul 93:3

Mises, the great 20th century economist, predicted decades before the fall of the Soviet system that socialism was unworkable and would collapse upon itself. Although he did not live to see it, he would not have been surprised to witness the events of 1989 with the collapse of the entire Communist-Soviet system. Likewise, the interventionist-welfare system endorsed by the West, including the United States, is unworkable. Even without the current problems in the Presidential election, signs of an impasse within our system were evident. Inevitably, a system that decides almost everything through pure democracy will sharply alienate two groups: the producers, and the recipients of the goods distributed by the popularly elected congresses. Our system is not only unfairly designed to take care of those who do not work, it also rewards the powerful and influential who can gain control of the government apparatus. Control over government contracts, the military industrial complex and the use of our military to protect financial interests overseas is worth great sums of money to the special interests in power.

2000 Ron Paul 93:4

Even though it is argued that there are huge budget surpluses in Washington, instead of budget compromise, a stalemate results. Each side wants even a greater share of the loot being distributed by the politicians. Even with the windfall revenues, no serious suggestion is made in Washington for cuts in spending. Instead of moving toward a market economy and less dependency on the federal government in the midst of this so-called ‘prosperity,’ we continue to go World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank. Although in the early stages of interventionism and government planning, especially when a great deal of wealth is available for redistribution, it seems to enhance prosperity while prolonging the financial bubble on which the economy is dependent. The monetary system, both our domestic system as well as the international fiat system, plays a key role in the artificial prosperity based on inflated currencies as well as debt and speculation.

2000 Ron Paul 93:5

The pretended goal of the economic planners has been economic fairness through redistribution of wealth, politically correct social consciousness, and an all-intrusive government which becomes a responsibility for personal safety, health and education while personal responsibility is diminished. The goal of liberty has long been forgotten. The concentrated effort has been to gain power through the control of wealth with a scheme that pretends to treat everybody fairly. An impasse was destined to come, and already signs are present in our system of welfarism. This election in many ways politically demonstrates this economic reality. The political stalemate reflects the stalemate that is developing in the economy. Both will eventually cause deep division and hardship. The real problem-preserving of the free market and private property rights- if ignored, will only make things worse, because the only solution that will be offered in Washington will be more government intervention, increased spending, increase in monetary inflation, more debt, greater military activity throughout the world, and priming the economic pump with more expenditures for weapons we do not need.

2000 Ron Paul 93:6

We have already seen signs of economic troubles ahead . Although the Fed plans for only a slight slow down and a so-called ‘soft landing,’ the correction from the monetary mischief of the last 10 years has already been determined. Although the dollar currently remains strong, because other currencies are so weak, there is a limitation on how long we can create new dollars without them being devalued. A weaker dollar will surely come in our not too distant future. Our huge current account deficit and trade imbalances warn us of that day.