August 4th, 2008
Washington, DC - Congressman Ron Paul is an original cosponsor of legislation introduced July 31st that would ensure that a traveler entering the United States would be subject to searches of their data and digital equipment only if a border agent has a reasonable suspicion to believe the traveler is or is about to be engaged in criminal activity.
In an August 1, 2008 front page story, the Washington Post exposed the ease with which the government can search and/or seize a traveler’s laptop, blackberry, or other electronic device. A border agent can require any individual to provide access to private or other sensitive data with no cause. They can require the owner to surrender their password for encrypted data as well.
“The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution acknowledges the right of the people to be secure in their persons and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. It is unfortunate that it takes legislation to remind border agents of this Constitutionally protected right, but it is apparent to me that HR 6702 is absolutely necessary,” stated Congressman Paul.
Posted in Press Releases | No Comments »
Similar posts:
August 1st, 2008
Madame Speaker, anyone in need of proof that federal control follows federal funding need only examine HR 4137, the Higher Education Opportunity Act. HR 4137 imposes several new mandates on colleges, and extends numerous mandates that previous Congress imposed on colleges. HR 4137 proves the prophetic soundness of people who warned that federal higher education programs would lead to federal control of higher education.
Opponents of increasing federal control over higher education should be especially concerned about HR 4137’s “Academic Bill of Rights.” This provision takes a step toward complete federal control of college curriculum, grading, and teaching practices. While this provision is worded as a “sense of Congress,” the clear intent of the “bill of rights” is to intimidate college administrators into ensuring professors’ lectures and lesson plans meet with federal approval.
The “Academic Bill of Rights” is a response to concerns that federally-funded institutions of higher learner are refusing to allow students to express, or even be exposed to, points of view that differ from those held by their professors. Ironically, the proliferation of “political correctness” on college campuses is largely a direct result of increased government funding of colleges and universities. Federal funding has isolated institutions of higher education from market discipline, thus freeing professors to promulgate their “politically correct” views regardless of whether this type of instruction benefits their students (who are, after all, the professors’ customers). Now, in a perfect illustration of how politicians use the problems created by previous interventions in the market as a justification for further interventions, Congress proposes to use the problem of “political correctness” to justify more federal control over college classrooms.
Instead of fostering open dialog and wide-raging intellectual inquiry, the main effect of the “Academic Bill of Rights” will be to further stifle debate about controversial topics. This is because many administrators will order their professors not to discuss contentious and divisive subjects in order to avoid a possible confrontation with the federal government. Those who doubt this should remember that many TV and radio stations minimized political programming in the sixties and seventies in order to avoid running afoul of the federal “fairness doctrine.”
I am convinced that some promoters of the “Academic Bill of Rights” would be unhappy if, instead of fostering greater debate, this bill silences discussion of certain topics. Scan the websites of some of the organizations promoting the “Academic Bill of Rights” and you will also find calls for silencing critics of the Iraq war and other aspects of American foreign policy.
Madame Speaker, HR 4137 expands federal control over higher education; in particular through an “Academic Bill of Rights” which could further stifle debate and inquiry on America’s college campus. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill.
Posted in Speeches and Statements | No Comments »
Similar posts:
August 1st, 2008
Madam Speaker, I rise in reluctant opposition to this appropriations legislation. It is unfortunate that my colleagues have decided to combine the necessary appropriations contained in the Veterans Affairs portion of this bill with the bloated and unconstitutional military construction appropriations. In the past I have voted in favor of Veterans Affairs appropriation bills when they were not combined with unwise and wasteful spending of other appropriations like military construction.
This appropriation will allocate $9.5 billion to close bases in the United States while spending nearly $12 billion building other facilities overseas! As a matter of fact, any construction of new bases in the United States is prohibited by this bill. While I am not necessarily in favor of building new bases in the United States , we certainly should not be spending money to close existing domestic bases in favor of constructing new bases overseas.
The bill will transfer more than $200 million to NATO, an organization with no purpose that should be disbanded immediately, for the construction of NATO facilities in countries where we have no business having our military in the first place.
We have been told that we will have no permanent bases in Iraq , but then again we have no “permanent” bases in Korea either even though we have had a military presence there for more than 50 years. It is unclear how much of this $12 billion will go to building new facilities to maintain an indefinite presence in Iraq , but any such expenditure will be counterproductive to US national interests.
This appropriation increases construction funds to the service branches by as much as 50 percent over current levels, which is financially dangerous and unsustainable particularly in view of next year’s record budget deficit.
Madam Speaker, it is a tragedy that necessary spending to keep promises to American veterans should be held hostage to this out of control spending on maintaining an unnecessary and dangerous US empire overseas. We are doing no favors to today’s veterans or to future veterans – or to the US taxpayers — with this appropriations bill.
Posted in Speeches and Statements | No Comments »
Similar posts:
July 30th, 2008
Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution, which is yet another meaningless but provocative condemnation of China . It is this kind of jingoism that has led to such a low opinion of the United States abroad. Certainly I do not condone human rights abuses, wherever they may occur, but as Members of the US House of Representatives we have no authority over the Chinese government. It is our Constitutional responsibility to deal with abuses in our own country or those created abroad by our own foreign policies. Yet we are not debating a bill to close Guantanamo , where abuses have been documented. We are not debating a bill to withdraw from Iraq , where scores of innocents have been killed, injured, and abused due to our unprovoked attack on that country. We are not debating a bill to reverse the odious FISA bill passed recently which will result in extreme abuses of Americans by gutting the Fourth Amendment.
Instead of addressing these and scores of other pressing issues over which we do have authority, we prefer to spend our time criticizing a foreign government over which we have no authority and foreign domestic problems about which we have very little accurate information.
I do find it ironic that this resolution “calls on the Government of the People’s Republic of China to begin earnest negotiations, without preconditions, directly with His Holiness the Dalai Lama or his representatives.” For years US policy has been that no meeting or negotiation could take place with Iran until certain preconditions are met by Iran . Among these is a demand that Iran cease uranium enrichment, which Iran has the right to do under the terms of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. It is little wonder why some claim that resolutions like this are hypocritical.
Instead of lecturing China, where I have no doubt there are problems as there are everywhere, I would suggest that we turn our attention to the very real threats in a United States where our civil liberties and human rights are being eroded on a steady basis. The Bible cautions against pointing out the speck in a neighbor’s eye while ignoring the log in one’s own. I suggest we contemplate this sound advice before bringing up such ill-conceived resolutions in the future.
Posted in Speeches and Statements | No Comments »
Similar posts:
July 30th, 2008
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, which will bar the collection of co-payments from veterans for hospital and nursing home care if the veteran is considered catastrophically disabled. I strongly advocate a noninterventionist foreign policy that would result in far fewer wars and, thankfully, far fewer catastrophically disabled veterans. But I also strongly believe that we must take care of those veterans who have been so severely wounded or otherwise disabled. Too often those who are most vocal in support of foreign military action are most silent when it comes time to take care of those who have paid a very high price for these actions. This legislation will provide at least a little relief to the most seriously injured veterans.
I am concerned, however, that this bill incorporates language from HR 6114, which rescinds a current law requirement that the VA obtain a signed consent form from a veteran before conducting an HIV test. We have seen veterans punished severely for attempting to avoid the required but controversial myriad of inoculations they are required to receive. Now we see that they will have less control over what medical tests to which they might be subjected. I am concerned over this loss of control over one’s healthcare decisions among those who voluntarily join the military, and I urge the adoption of a more flexible policy. I would also urge my colleagues and the American people to contemplate this deprivation of medical and privacy rights on a massive scale should we ever reinstate the draft. I believe taking care of veterans should include both providing promised benefits and protecting their privacy rights.
Posted in Speeches and Statements | No Comments »
Similar posts:
July 24th, 2008
The root of our current economic malaise, the weak dollar, the high price of oil, and the collapse of the housing market, comes about because almost no one understands what inflation is. Inflation is an increase in the money supply, which occurs by various methods, the printing of currency, low reserve requirements, Federal Reserve open market operations, etc.
In Germany in the 1920s, South America in the 1980s, and Zimbabwe today, everyone recognizes that inflation was caused by the government running the printing presses non-stop, with the resulting exponential rise in prices being the necessary result of monetary growth. Yet somehow, both the empirical and theoretical reality of inflation as a rise in money supply is ignored in this country. Inflation is conflated with price inflation, the increase in the overall price level, and is viewed as something both endogenous to the market economy while at the same time influenced by exogenous price shocks.
Because no one understands that inflation is growth in the monetary supply, no one is able to combat it effectively. We hear all sorts of hand-wringing about increasing inflation, and all sorts of explanations about how rising oil and food prices will make inflation worse. At the same time, the fact that MZM, the closest approximation to total money supply that still is reported by the Fed, is still rising by almost 15% per year and that M2 is rising significantly as well is quietly ignored. The pundits have causation backwards, it is inflation that leads to rising prices of oil and food, and not vice versa.
Until the cause of inflation is understood, no effective strategy can be undertaken to combat it. The problem, however, is that the government does not want inflation to be done away with. Inflation benefits debtors and harms creditors, and the United States government is the biggest debtor of all. The United States government, the banking monopoly under the Federal Reserve System, and politically-connected firms and industries are the first entities to take advantage of new money injected into the system, before prices increase. As the increased supply of money begins to chase the same number of goods, prices rise, and the average American suffers. Poor and middle class Americans are always the hardest hit by inflation, as the weakening dollar makes the imported goods that many Americans depend on more expensive.
As Chairman Bernanke admitted last week, inflation is a tax, and it is the most pernicious because of its hidden nature. It taxes the very purchasing power of money, and because the inflation rate in recent years has generally been low, its effects often take a while to manifest themselves. Now that inflation is beginning to rise, more and more rhetoric is being spun to hide the government’s role in creating inflation. I applaud Chairman Frank for holding this hearing, as hearings such as this one investigating the link between the weak dollar and the high price of oil are more important now than ever.
Posted in Speeches and Statements | No Comments »
Similar posts:
July 24th, 2008
Madam Speaker, For several years, followers of the Austrian school of economics have warned that unless Congress moved to end the implicit government guarantee of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and took other steps to disengage the US Government from the housing market, America would face a crisis in housing. This crisis would force Congress to chose between authorizing a taxpayer bailout of Fannie and Freddie, and other measures increasing government’s involvement in housing, or restoring a free-market in housing by ending government support for Fannie and Freddie and repealing all laws that interfere in housing. The bursting of the housing bubble, and the recent near-collapse in investor support for Fannie and Freddie has proven my fellow Austrians correct. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, instead of ending the prior interventions in the housing market that are responsible for the current crisis, Congress is increasing the level of government intervention in the housing market. This is the equivalent of giving a drug addict another fix, which will only make the necessary withdrawal more painful.
The provision giving the Treasury Secretary a blank check to purchase Fannie and Freddie stock not only makes the implicit government guarantee of Fannie and Freddie explicit, it represents another unconstitutional delegation of Congress’ Constitutional authority to control the allocation of taxpayer dollars. While the Treasury Secretary has to file a report with Congress, the lack of any effective standards for the expenditure of funds makes it impossible for Congress to perform effective oversight on Treasury’s expenditures.
HR 3221 also takes another troubling step toward the creation of surveillance state by creating a Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry. This federal database will contain personal information about anyone wishing to work as a “loan originator.” “Loan originator” is defined broadly as anyone who “takes a residential loan application; and offers or negotiates terms of a residential mortgage loan for compensation or gain.” According to some analysts, this definition is so broad as to cover part-time clerks and real estate agents who receive even minimal compensation from “originators.” Additionally, this database forced on industry will be funded by fees paid to the federal banking agencies, yet another costly burden to the American taxpayers.
Among the information that will be collected from loan originators for inclusion in the federal database are fingerprints. Madam Speaker, giving the federal government the power to force Americans who wish to work in real estate to submit their fingerprints to a federal database opens the door to numerous abuses of privacy and civil liberties and establishes a dangerous precedent. Fingerprint databases and background checks have been no deterrent to espionage and fraud among governmental agencies, and will likewise fail to prevent fraud in the real estate market. I am amazed to see some members who are usually outspoken advocates of civil liberties and defenders of the Fourth Amendment support this new threat to privacy.
Finally, HR 3221 increases the federal debt limit by $800 billion. We are told that CBO has scored this bill at a cost of $25 billion, but this debt limit increase belies that. The Federal Reserve has already propped up the housing and financial markets to the tune of over $300 billion, and this raise of the debt limit indicates that the cost of this newest bailout will likely be even more costly. I am dismayed that my colleagues have not learned the lessons of the Patriot Act and Sarbanes-Oxley. Massive bills passed in knee-jerk reaction to crisis events will always be poorly written, burdensome and expensive to taxpayers, and destructive of liberty.
Posted in Speeches and Statements | No Comments »
Similar posts:
July 24th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this irresponsible legislation, which will ship $48 billion overseas as foreign aid at a time when Americans are feeling the pressure of rapidly increasing inflation and a weakened dollar. It is particularly objectionable to ship money to fund healthcare overseas when so many Americans either struggle with high healthcare costs or avoid seeking medical assistance altogether due to lack of insurance or funds.
As we know, the federal government does not have $48 billion to send overseas so it will have to print the money. It is a cruel irony that this will add to inflation at home which will increase even further the costs of healthcare in the United States .
Mr. Speaker, I am saddened by the prevalence of disease in impoverished countries overseas. I certainly encourage every American concerned about HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria overseas to voluntarily provide assistance to help alleviate the problem. But I do not believe it is appropriate — nor is it Constitutional — to forcibly take money from American citizens to send abroad. I urge my colleagues to reject this and all foreign aid legislation.
Posted in Speeches and Statements | No Comments »
Similar posts:
July 22nd, 2008
Washington , DC - Last month Congressman Ron Paul, ranking member of the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy called for a hearing on the relationship between the falling value of the dollar and the recent rise of oil prices, noting:
“The price of oil is currently among the most pressing issues to American workers. Congress should be examining all factors contributing to the high cost of oil, and monetary policy is one of the key factors in the run-up in price.”
That hearing request has been granted and scheduled for July 24 at 2:00pm.
Besides himself, 16 other Representatives signed on to the letter, including ranking member of the House Committee on Financial Services Spencer Bachus, and Chairman of the Republican Study Committee Rep. Jeb Hensarling.
Confirmed witnesses will be:
- Economist Walter J. Williams, of ShadowStats.com which examines government economic reporting.
- Economist Robert Murphy of the Institute for Energy Research
- Economist C. Fred Bergsten, Director of the Peterson Institute
- Dr. Joseph Kasputys of Global Insight, Inc.
Posted in Press Releases | No Comments »
Similar posts:
July 16th, 2008
Mr. Chairman, today we find ourselves on the verge of an economic crisis the likes of which the United States has not seen in decades. Our economy is very clearly in a recession, and every time someone tells us that the worst has passed, another serious event takes place, as we saw once again last week and early this week. Everyone now realizes that the situation is dire, yet either no one understands the cause behind the credit crisis, or no one is willing to take the necessary steps to ensure as orderly an end to the crisis as possible. Instead, we hear talk of further bailouts. The Fed-brokered takeover of Bear Stearns, a supposed one-off incident, has now been joined by a potential bailout of the Government-Sponsored Enterprises, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
The two GSE’s have been disasters waiting to happen, as I and many others have warned over the years. It was bad enough that Fannie and Freddie were able to operate with significant advantages, such as lower borrowing costs and designation of their debt as government debt. Now, the implicit government backstop has turned out to be an explicit backstop, just as we feared. The Greenspan reflation of the economy after the dot-com bust pumped additional liquidity into an already-skewed housing market, leading to an unsustainable boom that from many accounts has only begun to unravel. With a current federal funds rate of two percent, and inflation at over four percent, the Fed is currently sowing the seeds for another economic bubble.
At the heart of this economic malaise is the Fed’s poor stewardship of the dollar. The cause of the dollar’s demise is not the result of a purely psychological response to public statements on US dollar policy, but is rather a reaction to a massive increase in the money supply brought about by the Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy. The policies that led to hemorrhaging of gold during the 1960’s and the eventual closing of the gold standard are the same policies that are leading to the dollar’s decline in international currency markets today. Foreign governments no longer wish to hold depreciating dollars, and would prefer to hold stronger currencies such as the euro. Foreign investors no longer wish to hold underperforming dollars, and seek to hold better-performing assets such as ports and beer companies.
Every government bailout or promise thereof leads to moral hazard, the likelihood that market actors will take ever riskier actions with the belief that the federal government will bail them out. Bear Stearns was bailed out, Fannie and Freddie will be bailed out, but where will the line be drawn? The precedent has been established and the taxpayers will end up footing the bill in these cases, but the federal government and the Federal Reserve lack the resources to bail out every firm that is deemed “too big to fail.” Decades of loose monetary policy will lead to a financial day of reckoning, and bailouts, liquidity injections, and lowering of the federal funds rate will only delay the inevitable and ensure that the final correction will be longer and more severe than it otherwise would. For the sake of the economy, I urge my colleagues to resist the temptation to give in to political expediency, and to oppose loose monetary policy and any further bailouts.
Posted in Speeches and Statements | No Comments »
Similar posts: