January 30th, 1997
WASHINGTON, DC – US Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) today reaffirmed his opposition to what he calls the “immoral” congressional pension system by refusing to participate in it. While serving in Congress from 1976 to 1984, Paul chose not to participate in the system, despite a taxpayer-funded pay-out which is more lucrative than any private system. He said high-dollar perks like the pension are areas that could be safely cut immediately, without hurting a single American taxpayer.
“The situation is even worse today than it was before,” Paul said. “When I served in the late ’70s and early ’80s, the congressman had to actually write a letter to enter the program, I simply chose not to sign-up. Today, however, everyone is automatically placed in the system and house members are required to write a letter requesting that they not be included in the program.”
After five years of service, a Member of Congress becomes vested in the system, with pay-off beginning at age 62, or pay-off begins at any age after 25 years of service. The five years can be either all in Congress, or added with other federal service, such as time in the military. If someone had 26 years of service, and depending on which of two systems they were under, a Member of Congress leaving office in 1994 could expect a yearly pension of between $52,800 and $86,000.
“This is one reason why so many politicians stay in Washington so long: they get a better retirement plan from the government than they could ever get from an honest job back home. We need to cut perks like this pension system completely; it is immoral that someone spend so much time in Congress that they even should think about getting retirement benefits. And then to expect those benefits to be paid by taxpayers at rates no citizen can ever hope to actually earn is even more unreasonable,” said Paul. “There is a lot of talk about term limits, which I completely support, but if we are to seriously reform Congress, and return it to being a ‘citizen-legislature,’ then we must address these issues. Even the most strict term limits package currently being bandied about restricts members to six years in office, which of course vests them in the retirement system.”
The Sufside, Texas, physician said that during a time when Congress is discussing ways to balance the budget and cut taxes, “a good place to start is right here on Capitol Hill, where we can help the taxpayers by not enriching ourselves at their expense.”
“Members of Congress are elected by the people to handle the affairs of this nation in a responsible, efficient manner, not to enrich themselves for a lifetime,” he said. “To participate in a pension plan at taxpayers expense would for me be hypocritical and immoral. I hope everyone in the 105 th Congress will do as I have done: reject the pension and prepare for retirement without burdening the taxpayers for decades to come. To do any less is to perpetuate what is at it’s most basic level an arrogant insult to the people we were elected to represent.”
Posted in Press Releases | Comments Off
Similar posts:
January 23rd, 1997
WASHINGTON, DC – US Representative Ron Paul, of Texas’ 14 th District, announced Tuesday the opening of his office’s presence on the World Wide Web.
“This site gives constituents and friends not only greater access to my office, but will also provide information on upcoming legislation and events,” Paul said. “I believe every resource should be utilized to ensure taxpayers have all the information they need to fully participate in the running of their government.”
Called “Project Freedom,” the site is located at: http://www.house.gov/paul/ and will be maintained by the Washington office. The site currently allows constituents to obtain forms for ordering flags flown over the capitol, processing applications for military academy nominations, and other such services. There is also a section which provides information on the 14 th District and links to web sites within the district.
Another section provides the text of Congressman Paul’s columns, press releases, and even speeches. In addition, there is a section under construction which will provide information on upcoming legislation which Dr. Paul is watching or supporting.
There will also be other on-going improvements and changes to the site to provide as many “on-line” services as possible to constituents, said Paul.
The office can be reached via e-mail at rep.paul@mail.house.gov , for questions, comments and suggestions, whether regarding the web site, congressional business, or constituent needs.
Posted in Press Releases | Comments Off
Similar posts:
January 7th, 1997
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas, Mr. RON PAUL, my former classmate from 1978.
(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I wish to express my concern about some of the rule changes.
Drug Testing
We are now being asked to support rule changes that will require random drug testing of all members and staff. Drug usage in this country , both legal and illegal, is a major problem and deserves serious attention. However, the proposal to test randomly individuals as a method to cut down on drug usage is ill-advised and should not be done without serious thought
The real issue here is not drugs, but rather the issues of privacy, due process, probable cause, and the fourth amendment. We are dealing with a constitutional issue of the utmost importance. It raises the question of whether or not we understand the overriding principle of the 4th amendment.
A broader, but related question is whether or not it’s the Government’s role to mold behavior any more than it’s the Government’s role to mold, regulate, tax, impede the voluntarism of economic contractoral arrangements. No one advocates restraint to regulate journalistic expression even though great harm has come over the centuries from the promotion of authoritarian ideas. Likewise, we do not advocate the regulation of political expression and religious beliefs however bizarre and potentially harmful they may seem. And yet we casually assume that it’s the role of government to regulate personal behavior to make one act more responsibly.
A large number of us do not call for the regulation or banning of guns because someone might use a gun in an illegal fashion. We argue that it’s the criminal that needs regulated and refuse to call for diminishing the freedom of law-abiding citizens because some individual might commit a crime with a gun. Random drug testing is based on the same assumption made by anti-gun proponents. Unreasonable effort at identifying the occasional and improbable drug user should not replace respect to our privacy. Its not worth it
While some are more interested in regulating economic transactions in order to make a “fairer” society, others are more anxious to regulate personal behavior to make a good society. But both cling to the failed notion that governments, politicians, and bureaucrats know that is best for everyone. If we casually allow our persons to be searched why is it less important that our conversations, our papers and our telephones not be monitored as well. Vital information regarding drugs might be obtained in this manner. We who champion the cause of limited government ought not be promoters of the revolving eye of big brother.
If we embark on this course to check randomly all Congressional personnel for possible drug usage, it must be noted that the two most dangerous and destructive drugs in this country are alcohol and nicotine. To not include these in the efforts to do good, is inconsistent – to say the least.
I have one question. If we have so little respect for our own privacy, our own liberty, and our innocence, how can we be expected to protect the liberties, the privacy and the innocence of our constituents for which we have just sworn an oath to do?
This legislation is well motivated, as is all economic welfare legislation. The good intentions in solving social problems – when violence is absent — perversely uses government power, which inevitably hurts innocent people while rarely doing anything to prevent the anticipated destructive behavior of a few.
The only answer to solving problems like this is to encourage purely voluntary testing programs whereby each individual and member makes the information available to those who are worried about issues like this.
Posted in Speeches and Statements | Comments Off
Similar posts: