Showing posts with label Ron Paul. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ron Paul. Show all posts

Thursday, March 08, 2012

Rand Paul Votes In Favor of Sanctions on Iran




Last week I posted an article about Ron and Rand Paul and why a lot of conservatives seem to like Rand, but won’t vote for Ron for President.  The news about Rand’s recent vote on sanctions on Iran may be a very revealing answer to the question.

Before I get to Rand’s answer, let’s look at Ron’s position on the issue.  I don’t want to put words into his mouth, but I know he considers sanctions to be an act of war.  (And therefore they would only be appropriate if war were officially declared.)  Consider two typical businesses, one in America and one in Iran.  Imposing sanctions would prevent these two businesses from engaging in commerce.  Even though Iran may have wicked leadership, to cite that as a justification for sanctions (or war) would be a case of the pot calling the kettle black (consider who our President is).  What if a business in Iran doesn’t subscribe to the agenda of the leadership of its country?  Why should they be punished for what someone else did?  There are actually some Christians in Iran who haven’t yet been killed.  In general, if you deprive two people from engaging in legitimate commerce, then you are depriving them of liberty.  I realize that there could be extenuating circumstances in which exceptions could apply (i.e. if the business in Iran would be required to pay taxes that would go to support terrorism or other criminal activities).  But just because Iran may get a nuclear weapon, does not justify such extreme measures.  The basic principle is to allow as much liberty as possible without supporting an obvious suppression of it in another case.  One tenet of my political philosophy is that nothing should be against the law unless you can prove from the Bible that it is sin.

Rand said that he would not support a war against Iran because it would rally the Iranian people against the United States.  He also said that we would not be able to afford it.  He said that innocents would be harmed.  But sanctions would also rally the Iranian people against America.  And any sanctions would be meaningless unless we used force to enforce it.  This would also cost a lot of money.  And innocents would be harmed because they would be deprived of the liberty of engaging in commerce as I described above.  All these negative effects could in fact lead to a war which Rand says he is against.

So that is why I conclude that sanctions on Iran are not good unless they actually attack the United States and we formally declare war on them.

Monday, March 05, 2012

"Santorum In, Tiberi Out"

That is the Election Day battle cry in Ohio. Rick Santorum is the only marginally acceptable candidate on the GOP ballot. Fellow blogger, Matt, points out in a number of posts some of Santorum’s shortcomings. However, to me the other three candidates have even worse flaws than the former Senator.

Romney and Gingrich are serial flip floppers and inconsistent. As Governor and as Senate candidate Willard Mitt Romney was for same-sex marriage, abortion, and government mandated healthcare before he was against it. Speaker Newt Gingrich sat on the couch with Nancy Pelosi touting global warming.

Despite his right-on fiscal and government restraint ideas, Representative Ron Paul believes that Iran and Islam are inconsequential threats to America. He believes that hard drugs should be legalized. He believes that the federal government should have no involvement in the matter of abortion or same-sex marriage. These issues, he claims, should be left to the states. I disagree.

John Boehner’s boy, Congressman Pat Tiberi, wants to be my new congressman, thanks to the magical process of redistricting. Unfortunately he towed the GOP line in regards to the debt deal and the debt ceiling, voting the party line on both of these matters. The Tea Party participants and members of Congress who stand for Tea Party Movement principles decried both the debt deal and increasing the debt ceiling without any meaningful future cuts in spending. Pat Tiberi, like many others in Congress went along to get along. I will vote for Bill Yarborough, Tiberi’s opponent, primarily because Tiberi is just another unprincipled, compromising “conservative.”


Thursday, March 01, 2012

Ron and Rand

Photo is courtesy of Gage Skidmore.  Please attribute to Gage Skidmore if used elsewhere.

It just seems so strange to me that so many of the same people who are so afraid to vote for Ron Paul are ones who were so wild about his son Rand when he ran for Senate just two years ago.  I mean, yeah, Ron and Rand are not exactly same on all of the issues, but they are very close on most of the important ones.  Whenever someone gives me a reason why they are not going to vote for Ron Paul, they usually say that they like him on economic issues, but not his foreign policy.  Some cite the drug issue also.  Well, Ron and Rand are very close on these issues.  Of course, you can’t have your cake and eat it too.  Either you are in favor of cutting spending on the military and things like the war on drugs, or you are in favor of borrowing more money to pay for these things and putting the nation into an even deeper debt.  Regardless of whose fault it is, that is the situation we find ourselves in.  We can dig ourselves out of this hole we are in, but we can’t do it if listen to the scare tactics of the big spenders.  There are few problematic issues with Ron Paul--most especially that he supported allowing federal funding for needle exchange programs, but most people don’t know about this.

Here are a few theories I have about why people won’t support Ron, but would support Rand.  Firstly, I think people listen to the radio talk show hosts and to certain organizations who are telling them to bad things about Ron Paul.  These would include Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, the Family Research Council (Action), and possibly the Christian Coalition. But these same talk show hosts and organizations were much more favorable to Rand.  Some people just listen to these guys and do what they say without thinking critically.  People tell me the same reasons for not wanting to vote for Ron Paul almost word for word, like as if they were repeating a mantra that they heard over and over again.

There was an email rumor going around that claimed that Ron Paul was somehow associated with George Soros.  This is totally ridiculous.  Ron Paul and other Republicans were chosen by John Boehner to serve on a particular committee.  The Democrats on the committee were chosen by Nancy Pelosi.  This happens all the time.  The committee was charged with the task of selecting a task force which would prepare a non-binding report on findings about how military defense spending could be reduced without compromising security.  Apparently there were some members of this task force who were also members of organizations supported by George Soros.  But this email does not say which congressmen were the ones who selected those particular panelists.  The email also fails to mention that two of the members of the task force were members of well respected conservative think tank, the CATO institute.  (In my opinion, the CATO institute is actually not so hot, but it would be to most of the intended recipients of the email.)  And there were also CFR members and at least one Rockefeller Institute member on the panel.  (For those of you who don’t know, these are One World Government advocating organizations.)  So the panel was not very good, but was that Ron’s fault?  The fact that Ron Paul would be chosen for this committee is a pretty good indication that it didn’t have very much power.

Another reason why Rand may be more popular is his message.  Even though he is against the war on drugs, unreasonable searches and seizures, and overextending our military, he tended to focus more on populist messages directed at the general public.  For example, his campaign platform included term limits, a balanced budget amendment, and not allowing corporations to lobby Congress if they receive more than some much money a year in government contracts.  But none of these things are really was makes a Constitutional conservative.  Ron Paul mockingly asked why anyone would be so stupid that they would need the government to tell him that he shouldn’t take heroin.  Rand took the exact same position on the issue, but said it in a kinder, gentler manner.  In my opinion, both of them need to incorporate the 10th Amendment into their answers to questions more often.  And not just on the drug issue, but healthcare, entitlements and a lot of other things.  I think there needs to be more talk about using our precious tax dollars on maintaining and improving our missile defense system rather than trying to stop nations from having a nuclear bomb. Rand Paul started out saying that Gitmo prisoner should be tried in courts or released, but later changed his tune.

I am interested in readers’ opinions on why people will vote for Rand, but not Ron.  What do you think?  Is it all just because of media hype or campaign strategy?  And what will happen if Rand runs for President in 2016 or 2020 (if we have anything left of our nation by then)?  Will the “conservative” talk show hosts turn on Rand to prevent real change?

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Who Will You Really Be Voting For in This Primary Election?



pictured at left: Pope Benedict XVI   pictured at right: LDS President Thomas Monson

Now that you know where Newt, Ron, Mitt, and Rick stand on the issues, what about their religion?

Here it is:

Candidate
Religion
Newt Gingrich
Catholic
Ron Paul
Protestant
Mitt Romney
Mormon
Rick Santorum
Catholic

The Framers of the Constitution included a Natural Born Citizen clause (NBCC) in the Constitution.  The purpose of the post is not to suggest that any of the candidates are constitutionally ineligible and it is not to discuss its exact meaning.  The four major candidates for the GOP nomination are all unquestionably eligible according to letter of the Constitution.  But don’t forget what the purpose of the NBCC was.  It was to prevent someone from becoming President who has divided loyalties between America and some other country.  It was to prevent a Presidency that would show favoritism to another country. 

So what does this have to do with the religion of the candidates?  Catholics do have a loyalty to the Pope who is a foreign sovereign.  Catholicism is not just a religion.  Vatican City is an actual sovereign nation, and the Pope is the head of its government.  The Roman Empire never completely ceased to exist--the Vatican is the remnant of it.  We are not to look for a fifth empire after the four that Daniel spoke of.  We are to look for a resurgence of the fourth. 

There are also other concerns about Catholics. The Catholic Church can blackmail them with their dirty laundry that they have obtained from the confessionals.  The Pope himself has expressed a belief that worldwide governing structures need to be even more consolidated and strengthened, eroding what is left of national sovereignty.

As for Romney, he is a Mormon which is a cult.  The leadership (The Prophet and President) of the Church of Joseph Smith, Jr. of Latter Day Aints, though an American, has even more control of the actions of his flock, than the Pope has over the Catholics.  The Mormons believe that there are many gods and that they can become gods.  The Mormon Church teaches that abortion is acceptable in cases of rape, incest, and with the baby has some certain birth defects.  Don’t listen to Glenn Beck when he says that Romney is a reasonable alternative to Obama.  Beck is also a Mormon. 

Now, may the reader understand, I don’t actually think that Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney have an ounce of sincerity when comes to their religion.  (Their real religion is Socialism.)  But I say these things for the benefit of those who do. 

Ron Paul is not a perfect Christian.  No one but Christ is perfect.  But Ron Paul is a very charitable individual, has been married to his wife for over 50 years, and believes in Biblical principles of government such as personal responsibility, tolerance, Biblical monetary policy, and Christian Just War Theory.  His sincerity is unquestionable.  The church he attends is Bible-based and not overly authoritative like the Catholic Church or the Mormon Church.

In conclusion, Ron Paul is a “safe” candidate from the point of view that his religion would not interfere with the execution of his office and his strong grounding in certain Biblical principles is a definite plus.  The rest of the GOP candidates have a very undesirable conflict of interest.

Thursday, February 16, 2012

FRC Action CORRECTED Voter Guide

I begin this post by quoting a parable from our Lord Jesus Christ:

28 But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in my vineyard. 29 He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went. 30 And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go, sir: and went not. 31 Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you. 32 For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.  Matt 21:28-32 (KJV)

Last week I received a voter guide from “the legislative affiliate of the Family Research Council” (FRC Action).  I think they made quite a few mistakes.  I decided to help them out and correct some of the errors.  The reason for many of their “mistakes” was that they listened to what the candidates said, rather than reporting how they voted.  Here is the CORRECTED FRC Action Voter Guide, followed by the references to back it up:


Question
Newt Gingrich
Ron
Paul
Mitt Romney
Rick Santorum
1
Abortion Funding
Support
Oppose
Support
Support
2
Planned Parenthood Funding
Support
Oppose
Support
Support
3
Federal Funding of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Unknown
Oppose
Unknown
Oppose
4
Federal Ban on Human Cloning
Unknown
Oppose
Unknown
Unknown
5
Repeal of the Federal Estate Tax
?
?
Unknown
?
6
Federal Marriage Amendment
Unknown
Oppose
Unknown
Support
7
Federal Employment Non-Discrimination (of homosexuals) Act
Unknown
DNV
Unknown
Oppose
8
Strict Constructionist Judges
Unknown
Support
?
Oppose
9
Educational Choice
Oppose
Support
?
Oppose
10
Legalize Open Homosexuality in the Military
Oppose
Support
Unknown
Oppose

Support = the candidate voted (or sponsored legislation) to support this issue
Oppose = the candidate voted (or sponsored legislation) to oppose this issue
Mixed = the candidate voted both for and against this issue at various times
Unknown = the candidate was never in a situation to able to vote on this issue and was either unable or unwilling to sponsor legislation to affect it
DNV = the candidate abstained from voting on this issue whenever it came up as a single issue
? = I have not done enough research to make a determination in these cases

Newt Gingrich

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c103:hr4606: (Title V., section 509--click on “Operating Expenses” and scroll down to section 509.) Similarly find the same in the other two bills under the same title and section.
2          ibid
9          http://www.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/26821/newt-gingrich/27/education (Gingrich supports most funding of federal educational programs, which makes educational choice harder for parents.)

Ron Paul

2          Ibid
7          http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1057.xml  I believe that the reason why Ron Paul missed this vote was that he was invited to a Presidential debate/interview at that time.  

Mitt Romney

2          Ibid
3-7, 10 Mitt Romney has never held a federal office.

Rick Santorum

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c103:hr4606: (Title V., section 509--click on “Operating Expenses” and scroll down to section 509.) Similarly find the same in the other two bills under the same title and section.
2          Ibid
8          Santorum voted to confirm Samuel Alito the Supreme Court (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00002), but contrary to popular opinion, Alito is not a strict constructionist.  For example, he ruled that a New Jersey law against partial birth abortion was unconstitutional because it was an “undue burden on a woman’s constitutional right to choose” and that he would “approach the issue with an open mind”.  He echoed this sentiment in the Senate confirmation hearings.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axExSrXw3Uk

On the Issue of Marriage: A Wash for Santorum?


One of the reasons why social conservatives are choosing Santorum over Paul in this Presidential primary is because of the marriage issue.  But most have failed to look carefully at the records of the two candidates and to take into consideration the Constitutional role of the President. 

Both Ron Paul and Rick Santorum support the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).  DOMA does two things.  It limits the use of the word “marriage” in the United States Code to one man, one woman marriage.  Secondly, it prevents any state, which issues marriage licenses to gay couples, from forcing another state to recognize these licenses as valid.  Evidence of the support of DOMA by both candidates is very clear.  Santorum voted for it.  Ron Paul, though not in congress at the time it was voted on, said that he would have voted for it and he voted for the Marriage Protection Act (MPA)--a bill which would have protected DOMA from being struck down as unconstitutional by the federal courts by stripping the jurisdiction of the federal courts over that issue.

MPA was introduced into the House of Representatives by Congressman John Hostettler (R-IN) in 2003 and passed the House in September of 2004.  With the President (Bush) up for election that year, MPA had a real chance of becoming law.  But after passing the House, MPA was assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee and no further action was taken.  One reason why MPA may never have gotten out of committee was because one of it’s most powerful members was Arlen Specter, a gay marriage supporter.   Rick Santorum  endorsed and campaigned for Specter over a more conservative challenger, Pat Toomey.  But Ron Paul continued to cosponsor the Marriage Protection Act in every subsequent session of Congress, but no Senator, including Rick Santorum, ever introduced a companion bill.


Ron Paul is also the author of the We the People Act, which is even stronger than MPA, making it an impeachable offense for any judge to strike down a state’s laws against gay marriage.  But Santorum has never supported anything like this.

Please take a minute to read Article V of the Constitution:


The usual manner in which Constitutional Amendments are ratified is by passing with a 2/3 majority in both the House and Senate and ratification by ¾ of the state legislatures or conventions.  Another option is a Constitutional Convention, which has never been used except when the Constitution itself was created in the beginning.  But in no situation does the President have any power in the process of the adoption of a Constitutional Amendment. 


Why I am I saying all this?  What does this have to do with comparing Santorum and Paul on marriage?  Santorum voted for the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) and Ron Paul voted against it.  Ron Paul sees no need to change the Constitution--the Framers, in his view, put everything in it that was needed in the beginning.  But from a practical standpoint, for this particular election, this does not matter--since it is not at all up to the President whether a Constitutional Amendment, such as FMA, is passed.  Similarly, the possible support of Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich of the FMA is basically a non-issue.  Gingrich actually missed the vote on both DOMA and FMA and Romney has flip-flopped on the issue of marriage.  Another important point is that, in contrast to legislation like DOMA and MPA, the adoption of a Constitutional Amendment is a real long shot.  It’s easy to support something (for political reasons only) that you know will probably not pass.  There is a question also in my mind about whether the FMA would actually even do any good--since the essential components of marriage could placed into legislation and called by a different name (such as civil unions, domestic partnerships, etc).  They are doing this already in Ohio, despite the fact that we passed a state marriage amendment just a few years ago.

And far as endorsements go, Ron Paul did endorse gay marriage supporter John Dennis.  But this is clearly no worse than Santorum’s endorsement of Specter.  At least Dennis was a fiscal conservative, but Specter was not conservative on any issue.

Conclusion

Though not perfect, Ron Paul is actually the best GOP candidate on the issue of marriage from the standpoint of a typical, “one man, one woman only” social conservative.  It is somewhat close, but even on his best issue, Santorum does not win.

Wednesday, February 08, 2012

Senator Santorum Gains Steam

Hat tip goes to CBSNews.com for the video below:



As a supporter of the only marginally acceptable GOP candidate in this year’s crop of Presidential candidates, I was pleasantly surprised and encouraged by the results of the three caucus/elections last evening. I lived for a time in the states of Missouri and Colorado and would have voted for Rick Santorum had I been living in either state yesterday.
Senator Santorum is far from the perfect candidate; however, he seems to be strong on Pro-Life and True-Marriage issues. He acknowledges the threat of Islam to the American way of life. He won despite the Leftist media’s attempt to create and raise expectations for Governor Romney who is their choice to be served up in November as the sacrificial goat on the altar of Obama and statist worshippers.

Although no candidate is better than Rep. Ron Paul on fiscal and monetary matters, his libertarian views on addictive drugs and his seemingly weak positions on marriage and his naïve view of the Islamic menace scare me and make him an unacceptable candidate to me. Romney is a serious serial flip-flopper, who is absolutely untrustworthy. He is the complete antithesis to true conservativism. Gingrich runs a close second in the flip-flopping, lack of trust category. The Marxist Barack Obama is an anathema as a Presidential choice. He was in 2008 and he is even more so in 2012 with a record of criminal proportions.

Saturday, January 21, 2012

A picture perfect finish for South Carolina GOP Primary


Rick Santorum  –  31%
Newt Gingrich  –  29%
Ron Paul  –  21%
Romney  –  19%

Wouldn’t a finish like the one imagined above in today's South Carolina Republican Primary just frost the Left, the Main Stream Media, Organizing for America, and the GOP establishment?

After Romney's poor performance in Monday's Fox News debate, and with strong performances by both Gingrich and Santorum and the typical steady Paul performance, in Thursday's CNN debate, the above scenario is very possible. South Carolina is a very conservative state and hopefully the conservatives will all show up today and vote. However, above result is not the outcome that the Media and the Obama Campaign has orchestrated, but it is realistic.

With Santorum and Gingrich finishing one-two in South Carolina, along with Paul all finishing ahead of Romney, it would really put conservatives in a great position going into the Florida Primary. It would be an especially big blow to the moneyed candidacies of Willard Mitt Romney and Dr. Ron Paul. Most of America does not want Romney, who is perceived to be weak and wishy-washy, just another John McCain, or worse. My top choice of the candidates that remain are: Santorum or a CTBNL (a conservative-to-be-named-later). Gingrich, Paul, and especially Romney and Obama are all unacceptable candidates for one reason or another.

America wants and needs a conservative in 2012 if she has any hope to change our slide toward total European socialism and eventual oblivion. This South Carolina GOP Primary could be a turning point, a real trend-setter.

Thursday, December 29, 2011

Voting Record of Ron Paul


This is a series of articles which gives voting record information about 2012 presidential candidates.  Most of the references given are from thomas.loc.gov, an official government website which is part of the Library of Congress.  Hopefully, this information will help you to make a decision about who you are going to vote for.  Also included is a brief biography and information about endorsements made by the candidate.  Today's candidate is Ron Paul.

Ron Paul                                  

Ron Paul is an OB/GYN and has delivered over 4000 babies.  He has been married to his wife for over 50 years.  He was an Air Force flight surgeon during the Vietnam War.  (He is one of only two candidates who have ever been in the military.)  He has served 11 terms in Congress and has run for President twice before (1988 and 2008).  He received more campaign contributions from those active in and veterans of military than any other candidate in both 2008 and in this election [1].  He was recently chosen to be the chairman of the House Domestic Monetary Policy Subcommittee.  His son Rand, a Tea Party favorite, was recently elected to the U.S. Senate in Kentucky.

He has never voted for a Congressional pay raise and has never taken a government-paid junket.  He doesn’t participate in the lucrative congressional pension benefits program.  He always returns unused portions of his congressional office budget to the treasury. 

One criticism I have of Mr. Paul is that he has missed several important votes.

Ron Paul has announced that he will not run for reelection to Congress.


Abortion

Ron Paul is the author of the Sanctity of Life Act of 2011, which would define human life and personhood as beginning at conception and would nullify Roe v. Wade. [1] He used to cosponsor the “Right to Life Act” (now known as the Life at Conception Act), but has not in the last several congresses. [2] He is not a cosponsor of the Sanctity of Human Life Act in the current congress. [3] (See also Judicial Activism.)

He has never voted for any budget that includes funding for Planned Parenthood. He has never voted for a Department of Health and Human Services appropriations bill.  These bills always make federal funds available for abortion providers.  Although, if these bills did not pass, some people would likely have their Medicare and/or Medicaid benefits cut off.  [4] He has introduced the Taxpayers’ Freedom of Conscience Act to cut off all taxpayer funding of abortions (both domestic and foreign) and so-called “family planning”. [5] He has supported many other measures which limit the access of funding to abortion providers. [6-10] He voted for the Stupak-Pitts amendment to Obamacare.  (This would have prevented most abortions from being funded with Obamacare money.) [11, 12]  He said, “I will veto any spending bill that contains funding for Planned Parenthood, facilities that perform abortion and all government family planning schemes.” [13]

[4] You have to check through a lot of records to verify these facts since so there have been so many of these bills voted on over Ron Paul’s 20+ years in Congress.

Constitutional Separation of Powers

Ron Paul is a cosponsor of the Sunset All Czars Act. [1] He is also a cosponsor of the Enumerated Powers Act which would require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws. [2]


Drugs

Ron Paul is outspoken critic of the war on drugs.  He has sponsored bills to legalize hemp [1] and marijuana [2].  He also cosponsors legislation which would eliminate the legal distinction between crack cocaine and other forms of cocaine. [3, 4]  He was a cosponsor of a bill in the last two congresses that would allow federal tax money to be used to distribute syringes to drug addicts for the purpose of preventing the spread of AIDS and hepatitis. [5]


Economy and Jobs

He has been a consistent supporter of the National Right to Work Act which would prevent workers from being forced to join a union. [1, 2]  (See also the Monetary Policy and Taxes, Spending, and Budget Issues sections.)


Education

He is the sponsor of the Family Education Freedom Act [1] which would give a tax credit of up to $5000 per year to anyone who spends their own money on K-12 education of their children.  Another bill [2] he introduced would give the same $5000 tax credit to those who donate to charitable organizations which use the money to provide scholarships or instructional materials for K-12 education.


Energy and the Environment

Ron Paul has introduced legislation to stop unnecessary regulations on offshore oil drilling and the building of refineries. [1-5] He voted no on Cap and Trade [6] and cosponsored a bill to prevent the EPA from enacting it without the approval of Congress. [7] He has supported many other bills to prevent the regulation of greenhouse gases. [8-10] He is a cosponsor of Michele Bachmann’s bill to repeal the ban on incandescent light bulbs.


Gun Rights

Ron Paul has never voted for any bill to outlaw any type of weapon. [1] He has voted several times (as far back as 2001) to make it legal for airline pilots to carry guns to prevent to terrorists attacks. [2]

[1] Again, you have to check through a lot records to prove this.

Healthcare

Ron Paul voted no on Obamacare and voted for bills to repeal it [1,2,3,4] and several bills to repeal parts of it [4,5,6,7] and to allow states to opt out of it [8].  He supports legislation to eliminate the provision that federal officials are exempted from Obamacare. [9] He supports legislation to make it easier for Americans buy prescription drugs from other countries. [10] He supports legislation to repeal the mandate portion of Obamacare. [11, 12] He supports a bill to allow Medicare recipients to elect (instead of regular Medicare benefits) to receive a voucher for a health savings account.[13] He supports tax deductions for medical related expenses [14] and ending federal excise taxes on medical devices [15, 16].


Illegal Immigration and Border Control

Ron Paul voted “no” on the DREAM act, which would have allowed some illegal immigrants to receive financial aid for college and other federal benefits paid for by American taxpayers. [1, 2]  Ron Paul voted for Secure Fence Act of 2006. [3, 4]  He introduced a bill called the Terror Immigration Elimination Act of 2007, which would have limited the issuance of student and diversity immigrant visas to aliens who are nationals of Saudi Arabia, countries that support terrorism, or countries not cooperating fully with United States antiterrorism efforts. [5]


Judicial Activism

Ron Paul is the sponsor of the most aggressive anti-judicial activist bill to be introduced into the Congress.  The “We the People Act” would prevent federal judges from striking down state laws against abortion, prevent them from forcing states to accept gay marriage, and would prevent them from prohibiting religious freedom and freedom of speech in public places.  The bill authorizes the removal of any judge who would defy it. [1] He is a cosponsor of legislation which would prevent foreign law from being used in federal courts. [2]


Marriage and Gay Rights

Ron Paul supports the Defense of Marriage Act [1] and the Marriage Protection Act. [2-4] He voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment. [5] He voted “no” on hate crimes legislation which would have protected homosexuals from “hate speech”. [6, 7]  He voted against a Defense Appropriations bill which contained a hate crimes amendment. [8] He voted to end the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy which had prevented the openly gay from serving in the military. [9]

[1] Ron Paul was not in the congress at the time that the Defense of Marriage Act was enacted, but has on numerous occasions verbally indicated his support for this bill.  His support is further indicated by his cosponsorship of the Marriage Protection Act, described in the next note.
[2] The Marriage Protection Act is a bill which would make the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act not subject to judicial review.
[8] http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:hr2647: (find Division E in the enrolled bill.  The roll call is at http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll770.xml).

Monetary Policy

While no one else has supported Ron Paul’s bill to abolish the Federal Reserve [1], his bill to audit the Fed [2] was very popular in last Congress.  He got the support of every Republican in the House of Representatives plus over 100 Democrats.  But the bill didn’t pass because the Senate rejected it.  He voted against the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act which gave the Federal Reserve more power. [3, 4]  He introduced legislation to solve the debt crisis without raising the debt ceiling.  His solution was to cancel the $1.6 trillion debt that the Federal Government owes to the Federal Reserve.  There is no need for the taxpayer’s to pay this money back since the Federal Reserve simply printed the money out of thin air anyway. [5] He has introduced legislation to repeal legal tender laws. [6]


National Sovereignty

Ron Paul is the sponsor of a bill which would get the U.S. out of the U.N. [1] He opposes the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization.  [2, 3]  He voted against the Peru Free Trade Agreement. [4, 5]


Religious Freedom and Freedom of Speech

In addition to the “We the People Act”, Ron Paul also voted for the Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005, which would have prevented the ACLU and other similar groups from receiving lawyer’s fees from the taxpayers when they win cases having to do with supposed violations of the “Separation of Church and State”. [1] He is a cosponsor of a bill to preserve freedom of speech on the internet. [2] In the 105th Congress (1998), he cosponsored a resolution to make an amendment to the Constitution of the United States clarifying the meaning of religious freedom, but then voted against it. [3, 4]


Social Security

Ron Paul supports legislation to prevent illegal aliens from receiving Social Security benefits. [1,2]  He supports legislation to stop taxing Social Security benefits. [3] He is in favor of repealing a law which says that senior citizens are ineligible to receive Social Security benefits if they decide not to participate in Medicare. [4] He supports legislation to make it illegal for the government to spend FICA taxes for anything but Social Security benefits.  [5]


Taxes, Spending, and Budget Issues

Ron Paul voted “no” on Obama’s economic stimulus bills. [1, 2]  He voted for the Bush tax cuts [3, 4] and the 2010 extension [5-7] of them. [3] He has cosponsored legislation to end federal inheritance taxes. [8-9] He has cosponsored a bill to end the Alternative Minimum Tax on individuals. [10] Ron Paul has sponsored a bill to eliminate taxes on tips. [11] He has cosponsored the Telephone Excise Tax Repeal Act of 2011. [12] He voted for the Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act of 2011. This repealed the law which would have required you to file a 1099 every time you buy something for $600 or more from a small business.  [13-15]

He always votes “no” on raising the debt ceiling. [16-18]


He has cosponsored a bill to cut congressional pay by 5%. [19] He cosponsored a bill that would require that unused portions of each congressman’s budget be used for federal deficit or debt reduction. [20] He voted to end taxpayer funding of Presidential campaigns. [21] He supports legislation (the End the Stimulus Advertisement Act) to ban the use of taxes for highway signs that indicate that a project is funded by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Obama’s Economic Stimulus Bill). [22]

[5] I know that Ron Paul voted for the tax cut extension from word of mouth.  The vote for this particular bill was done by voice vote and was not recorded in the archives of the Library of Congress because Congress passed a measure to suspend the rules regarding voting procedure for this bill.  Below are a link to the text of the legislation and an alternative link which has the unofficial vote tally.

Veterans

Ron Paul supports the Retired Pay Restoration Act [1] and the Disabled Veterans Tax Termination Act [2, 3] which would allow veterans to receive both disability and retirement pay and would provide tax relief from them.


War on Terrorism

Ron Paul voted for the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) in Afghanistan immediately following the September 11th attacks. [1] A month later, he introduced a bill to issue Letters of Marque and Reprisal against Al Qaeda. [2] He voted against the AUMF in Iraq in 2002 [3] and has been an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq and the handling of the war in Afghanistan.  He has voted to withdraw troops from Iraq as early as 2007 [4] and now supports an immediate withdrawal of all troops from Afghanistan. [5-7] He voted in favor of legislation requiring a withdrawal of troops from Pakistan in July of 2010 [8, 9] and also has recently voted against funding the wars several times. [10] He supports legislation to order Barack Obama to immediately withdrawal troops from Libya. [11, 12] He is one of ten congressmen who are actually suing Barack Obama for unconstitutionally invading Libya without congressional approval. [13]

He is generally against sanctions.  He is not a cosponsor of the bill to continue sanctions against Iran until they give up their nuclear program. [14]

Ron Paul voted against the both the Patriot Act and the Protect America Act. [15-17] He opposes the use of government mandated body scanners and pat downs at airports.  He has sponsored the American Traveler Dignity Act which would have made it illegal for TSA agents to do anything to anybody which would be illegal if anybody else did it (i.e. groping people, etc.). [18] Ron Paul voted to allow prisoners at Guantanamo Bay to be tried in U.S. courts. [19, 20]



Paul’s (Worst) Endorsements

Ron Paul endorsed San Francisco Republican and gay-marriage supporter John Dennis in the 2010 election for Congress. [1, 2]

Ron Paul sent out emails in support of Congressman Lamar Smith despite the fact that Smith voted for the war in Iraq and the bailouts.  Smith was running against an opponent whose positions were perfectly aligned with Paul’s. [3] When confronted about this, he said, “I made an agreement with the Republican Party to support the [Texas] incumbents.” [4]

But the two example cited above are not typical.  In 2008, Ron Paul endorsed about 30 candidates for Congress.  Michele Bachmann was one of these candidates and was typical of the others on list. [5]

[5] I can’t find this list on the internet, but it did appear on the website of one of Ron Paul’s Political Action Committees (the Liberty PAC) during the 2008 election.