



|
U.S. Rep. Ron Paul
Speaks in Northern Kentucky
By Theresa Fritz Camoriano
On Sept. 12, Congressman
Ron Paul addressed a group of over 200 people, including many Kentucky
lawmakers, at the Drawbridge Inn in an event sponsored by the Federalist Society
at the
Salmon P. Chase College of Law. Dr. Paul said that the proper role of the
government is to protect our liberty, and he described ways in which liberties
currently are being eroded by the government. As an example, he described the
way in which the Patriot Act was introduced to Congress. The document was not
available until 11:15 a.m., and even then no printed copy was available. The
debate began at noon, and the law was rushed through, with legislators having no
real opportunity to consider its provisions. Paul was pleased that Congress had
recently repealed the “sneak and peek” provision of the Patriot Act, which
allowed investigators to snoop into your home without presenting you a warrant
and without even letting you know they had been there, and the “librarian”
provision, which allowed investigators to find out what books people had been
reading. Paul said these provisions were repealed because Congress had heard
plenty of complaints from the people back home.
Paul said he supported a
bill that would require legislators to sign an affidavit saying that they had
read a law and understood it and had a way to pay for it before they could vote
for it. However, Paul said there was not much support for such a law in
Congress.
Paul described his original
decision to run for office in 1974, when he assured his wife that he could not
be elected, and how a fluke occurred when the Democrat incumbent resigned and a
special election had to be held. At that time, Dr. Paul was the only ob/gyn in
Brazoria County, Texas. After serving in Congress during the 1970’s, he
returned to his medical practice for twelve years, delivered thousands of
babies, and then returned again to Congress. Paul said he has seen some
encouraging changes, mostly brought about by improved communications, such as
the Internet, which permit people to obtain information from alternative
sources. Indeed, Paul remarked that he had learned about the Patriot Act II
from the “Internet underground” just like the rest of us.
Paul is the leader of the
“Liberty Caucus” and is often the lone dissenting vote in Congress, earning him
the title of “Dr. No”, because he insists upon legislating in accordance with
the Constitution. He said it is unfortunate that most other legislators do not
think they need to be concerned about the Constitution, and he asked, why else
would we take an oath to uphold the Constitution? When the U.S. was preparing
for war in Iraq, Paul introduced a declaration of war, in accordance with the
constitutional requirement that the U.S. enter into a war only upon a
declaration by the Congress. However, leaders of both parties said such a
declaration was an anachronism or unnecessary. Paul noted, “We amended the
Constitution right there!” He explained that the founders considered a
declaration of war by the Congress to be very important, because it prevented
the President from acting unilaterally to commit the country to war, as if he
were a king. Paul said it is very wrong for laws to be made by unelected
bureaucrats or by the courts, when that is the constitutional responsibility of
Congress.
Paul also discussed
monetary policy. He said he supports tax reductions, but a reduction in taxes
does not mean very much without spending reductions, since the government then
simply takes money from our pockets by inflating the currency. Paul said we
need a gold standard. Paul’s remark that he had introduced legislation to
remove the U.S. from the United Nations received with a loud round of
applause.
Paul said he is pleased
that he won reelection in the most recent election by a greater margin than
ever, showing his colleagues that you can stick to your principles and be
re-elected. He said he is in a rural district, and the farmers do not like his
opposition to farm subsidies, but they appreciate his positions on other issues,
such as support for low taxes, opposition to the inheritance tax, opposition to
government intrusion into their land, and defense of U.S. borders. The
character of his district may change, however, if Texas undertakes the
redistricting it proposes, in which case it may become more urban, taking in
parts of Galveston and Houston.
When asked about businesses
moving to other countries with a resulting loss of jobs, Paul said much of the
problem is due to government regulations. For example, the shrimp boats in his
area have to use special nets that are not required in other countries. Paul
said he does not support protective tariffs, which are a tax that benefits one
business at the expense of another. He does not believe it is the job of
government to reduce our freedom by preventing us from buying products from
whomever we chose. In fact, if we can buy a product cheaper from another place,
we have more money left in our pockets, which raises our standard of living and
is a good thing. He said free trade promotes interdependence and peace. It
also encourages U.S. companies to improve their products, as, for example,
competition from Japanese automakers caused U.S. automakers to improve the
quality of their cars. He strongly opposes U.S. subsidies that encourage
companies to move overseas, such as the Overseas Private Investment Corporation
(OPIC) and IMF. Paul said U.S. taxpayers should not be subsidizing the
investments of private corporations in China and other countries.
When asked what can be done
to restore liberty and respect for the Constitution, Paul said it will require a
change in people’s minds, because Congress simply reflects the will of the
people. He is optimistic that, with more sources of information, with groups
such as the Federalist Society on campuses, and with an increase in alternative
types of education, such as home schooling, young people will learn an
appreciation for liberty and for the Constitution.
|