"ABC
Monday December 10, 2007
In this segment from my interview with Congressman Ron Paul, the unconventional Republican presidential contender offers his refreshing take on what the federal government should and more importantly shouldn't be doing.
With politicians from both sides of the political fence touting their new plans to fix America's problems, the Texas Republican believes that the most effective way that a president can lead is by protecting basic freedoms, and relying on the collective power of citizens to sort out the rest.
Government's Role
When Paul is asked to count off the major responsibilities of the federal government should have, he arrives at a surprisingly short list.
"Protect our freedoms. Have a strong national defense. Look and take care of our borders. Have a sound currency. & Protect our environment through private property rights. & That's it," Paul said.
Paul notes that when our country was founded, the role of the government was to protect the general welfare, enforce the rule of law in court, maintain property rights and allow for free markets and free trade "not to run our lives, and run everything in the economy."
It's a habit of politicians to identify problems and try to "fix" them with new laws and bureaucracies.
While some of these reforms may be well-intended, says Paul, "good intentions won't solve our problems," and more often they encroach on the personal liberties that have made our country great.
For example, it is a political consensus that the federal government should be involved in K-12 education and guarantee that no child is left behind, but Paul doesn't believe that government should be in control of our kids' education.
He would abolish the federal Department of Education.
He notes, "Since the 1950s, since the federal government's gotten involved, the quality of education has gone down, the cost has gone up."
By contrast, Paul counters, if we introduce market forces into education, competition will create innovative schools that offer our kids a better education for less money.
Paul Targets Government Bureaucracy
The Department of Education isn't the only government bureaucracy that Paul would like to see go. He'd also get rid of the Department of Energy.
He says it's useless, and the free market would allocate energy resources far more effectively.
When the government introduces an energy policy, Paul argues, it's all too often a means to offer up "government largesse" to businesses that lobby for support.
Paul would also eliminate the Department of Homeland Security and Federal Emergency Management Agency. He cites the disastrous handling of Hurricane Katrina and the avoidable tragedy of Sept. 11 as signposts of government ineptitude.
I asked him about other Cabinet departments.
The Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development? Get rid of them all, says Paul.
"We should think about what kind of a country we would have without these departments," he said. "I think we would have a better country, and all those problems that they're supposed to solve, I think, would be lessened."
Getting rid of all this bureaucracy wouldn't be Paul's first act as president.
First, he says, he would "immediately take a pay cut & because I wouldn't have so much to do."
Copyright © Infowars.net All rights reserved.
Printed from: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/101207_b_Bureaucracy.htm"
More:
"An Open Letter to Republicans"
Andrew Ter-Grigoryan
Lew Rockwell.com
Monday December 10, 2007
This is a letter to all of my fellow Republicans, written on behalf of the presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul.
If you have been following the Presidential campaign this year, the chances are good that you have encountered a candidate whose name is Ron Paul. Though underreported by the mainstream media (shakes fist at air angrily), the Congressional 10th-term Texas Republican candidate's run for the White House has amassed untold millions and has a legion of grassroots support across America. My fellow Republicans, if you are reading this and have decided to reject Ron Paul's candidacy, please allow me to explain why I so strongly believe that Ron Paul is the man that I believe will rescue our party and restore our Constitutional republic if we elect him into the White House.
Dr. Paul is truly a rarity in today's political environment. A strict adherent of the Constitution, Ron Paul his had the same consistent positions throughout his ten total terms in Congress, and has never compromised his values to a corrupt incentive or special interest. If you would like to read about Ron Paul's presidential platform, go to RonPaul2008.com (which just so happens to be the most visited website of any politician currently running for President, Republican or Democrat). Here is an overview of Ron Paul's positions on some of the major issues of this year's race for the White House:
Abortion: Ron Paul, who delivered over 4,000 infants from the womb over the course of his medical career, has one of the strongest pro-life records in Congressional history. Unlike Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney (before he flip-flopped), Dr. Paul opposes the Roe vs. Wade ruling and views a developing unborn life as a sovereign being, and has always voted that way in Congress. When our party led Congress, we may have had the opportunity to overturn Roe vs. Wade, but it appears that to many, the votes that could potentially be gained from the issue being open was a stronger incentive than actually overturning the decision. Abortion is one of the key GOP issues, and Ron Paul can truly represent our party on it.
Border Security: Like international faux-"free trade" deals such as NAFTA and CAFTA, some of our Republican politicians in Washington were misled into voting for amnesty for illegal immigrants not because of loyalty to conservatism but because of pressure from the president. Ron Paul opposes any plan for amnesty or an open borders policy. Much of his solution incorporates federalism and private ownership. Ron Paul is completely, unabashedly anti-amnesty. In fact, he supports what even Tom Tancredo would not – ending birthright citizenship for the children of illegals. Ron Paul's policies as President would ensure an end to this country's illegal immigrant problem.
Economics: Some have said that the GOP can no longer be considered the party of fiscal conservatism and market libertarianism. After begrudging support of new taxes, out-of-control spending, pork-barrel spending, unbalanced budgets, and many socialist programs, our politicians, even, unhappily, Republicans, often appear disingenuous when they talk of halting increases in taxation and spending. The braver ones may talk of lowering taxes as well. But of all the current candidates, only Ron Paul will abolish the income tax and phase out the IRS. He has never voted for an increase in taxes, an unbalanced budget, programs that propose welfare or affirmative action, or to even raise his own pay! Following with his commitment to personal liberty and limited government, Paul's economic positions are largely based on his decades of studying the free-market philosophy of the Austrian School of economics of Mises and Hayek. Above all this, Ron Paul realizes how much of our economic woes go back to the dollar itself, which is why he contends for a return to the gold standard and the end of the Federal Reserve.
Education: Whereas the party once opposed public-schooling measures and a Department of Education (as Paul still does), schooling freedom has continued to wane. Some of our politicians have allowed themselves to be watered down to the point of supporting No Child Left Behind. Ron Paul wants to make private and home schooling viable options once more by restoring educational freedom, while deconstructing the federal bureaucracy. School vouchers do not have the ability to accomplish these ends.
Health: As a lifelong physician, Ron Paul obviously has a lot of firsthand experience with the health care situation. When his patients could not pay for medical services, he helped them regardless, without pay. He understands that some Americans are unable to pay for their health care, mostly because of present anti-free-market policies in this field, not a lack of big government social programs. As the dollar gets further inflated and income further taxed, how can the average American be expected to keep up? Remember that since the government has unfortunately conditioned our citizens to depend on programs like Medicare, Ron Paul will not actively work to phase them out as President, but he would work to give citizens the option to opt out of such programs.
Family: Unlike the GOP "front-runner" Rudy Giuliani, Ron Paul lives by his own moral values. He is possibly the most socially traditional of all the candidates running for President. Dr. Paul is a family man who has been married to his wife Carol for fifty years, has five children, and many more grandchildren. Although he does not publicly focus on this aspect of his life, like much of the GOP base, he is a churchgoing Baptist. If he gets the nomination, no kind of attack ads from the Democratic opposition would be able to lay a glove on Ron Paul's personal life, because there is simply nothing to be attacked! In Congress, he never voted for abortion, for infringements on our religious freedoms, or for an economic policy that harms the middle-American family. Ever. He voted against a national ban on same-sex marriage on federalist grounds. Marriage – period – is a private and societal institution that should not be connected with the State or its nanny-state benefits. That's the way it used to be in this country.
Foreign Policy: And here we reach the pivotal point. Fellow Republicans, if the current foreign policy's intrinsic failures have not been enough to convince you that it is errant, let me offer a recommendation: read your history! Far from a fringe renegade, Ron Paul's non-interventionist foreign policy is simply the policy that our party once had. What do WWI, WWII, the Korean War, Vietnam, the Bay of Pigs, and our presence in Kosovo have in common? They were all started by big-government Democrats and opposed by conservatives! The American people voted in our party to end self-destructive conflicts like the Korean and Vietnam Wars. How did the current administration's policy come to be the norm? It certainly was not the policy advocated by Russell Kirk, Robert Taft or President Ronald Reagan. President Bush's foreign policy is informed by members of an intellectual school called "neo-conservatism" encompassing those like Leo Strauss, Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, and Paul Wolfowitz, many of whom are former Marxists! Such a policy has already cost us trillions, reduced our national sovereignty, tarnished our image abroad, bred extremists, and entangled us in ever more perpetual and complicated conflicts and alliances, exactly what our nation's Founding Fathers warned against. Ron Paul, a former serviceman, supports our troops but not any errant, non-traditional foreign policy. He also supports the U.S. pulling out of NATO and the U.N., positions which used to be conservative boilerplate. A Ron Paul administration would be strong on defense; not offense. The mainstream media (boo! hiss!) tries to characterize him as out of step with Republican traditions; no, it is the other candidates who want the US to be the world’s policeman, who are incompatible with our basic philosophy.
Guns: In Congress, Ron Paul has never voted for a piece of legislation that would have infringed upon the rights of gun owners (well, further than they've already been trampled on). Paul is a gun owner standing 100% opposed to gun control and votes against any legislation to that effect. Giuliani, Huckabee, and Romney all have terrible records on gun rights. We must be wary of the Democrats in Congress that would strip us of our rights to own a firearm to protect ourselves and our loved ones.
How can we compromise ourselves in this critical time by supporting a candidate who can not fully represent our most basic historical beliefs? It is crucial that we lend our support to this man’s Presidential bid and his undiluted platform. What is the extent of Ron Paul’s competition? Rudy Giuliani? A fiscal moderate and social liberal without foreign policy experience. Mike Huckabee? An amnesty-loving big-government tax-and-spend "right-wing progressive" who will wreck federalism. Mitt Romney? Ditto, and a flip-flopper. John McCain? A thoroughly lukewarm big-government neoconservative. Fred Thompson? A zombie, with the Hollywood writers on strike. And all of them are in support of a failed foreign policy that compromises the values of our nation.
Finally, there is another objection, not to Paul's political program but asserting that "he can't win." We must not deceive ourselves in this way. Ron Paul is the only Republican candidate that I believe can defeat Hillary Clinton almost on default if nominated, largely due to the contrast between his views and her vicious welfare statism and her hawkish foreign policy not even in tune with her own party. Only Ron Paul of all the Republican candidates can attract uncommitted and even Democratic voters. The Paul campaign has enormous grassroots support from Americans of all walks of life, and has raised unbelievable amounts of money. Paul has over 40,000 Meetup groups to Huckabee’s 3000+. On November 5th the campaign raised an amazing $4.3 million, an all-time GOP fundraising record. On Dec. 16th, the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, he is expected to break even that amazing fundraising record. Don't trust the "official scientific" polls that claim to represent "likely" Republican voters for one second. Those polled therein had 80% support for Bush’s performance in Iowa and 55% in New Hampshire, meaning that the majority polled were hardcore Bushites. So, his actual Republican support, plus his massive independent support, is far greater than those polls would indicate. Ron Paul's supporters can also be expected to have a much higher voting turnout than supporters of other candidates. Ron Paul can win the Presidency, and if so, can certainly bring forth an era in this country that will far outshine the Reagan revolution.
"In your heart, you know he's right."
Copyright © Infowars.net All rights reserved.
Printed from: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/101207_b_Republicans.htm"
Yes, we do!
