The Core of Ron Pauls Support

Political positions of Ron Paul

---

Paul is a proponent of school choice, saying that private, parochial, and home schools provide a healthy counterweight to "the near monopoly control over indoctrination of young people" [] of the public schools, which he considers "socialist"; [] and he notes that the nation's Founders themselves were largely home-schooled or taught in church-associated schools. In support of school choice and local control of education, he has introduced into every Congress since measures to provide families with education tax credits. As with parental tax credits, the Education Improvement Tax Cut Act brings true accountability to education since taxpayers will only donate to schools that provide a quality education.

Although Paul supports the right of state and local school districts, under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, to implement education voucher plans, he rejects federal government-controlled school voucher plans, preferring federal education tax credits instead. He regards federal voucher programs as a form of "taxpayer-funded welfare" in which money is taken from middle-class families to unfairly provide private-school educations to a particular group of children favored by politicians and bureaucrats.

Private, religious schools, for instance, would feel pressured to conform to government dictates in order to become accredited by the Department of Education to qualify for participation in the voucher program. He points to how the federal government has used the threat of cutting off funding to dictate to universities which policies they must accept; he argues that the government would try to do the same with private schools.

Paul asserts that access to "education is not a right. In a March 2, interview, when asked whether the government should provide financial aid to a poor student with good grades who wants to further his education, Paul responded that no, the government should not because "nobody has a right to someone else's wealth. You have a right to your life and you have a right to your property but you don't have a — education isn't a right. Medical care isn't a right. These are things you have to earn.

Paul's "Restore America" budget plan, which he laid out in October , [] calls for the immediate elimination of the Department of Education. College Pell grants and other federal financial aid programs would be transferred to another branch of government during a transition period, following which all federal financial aid for education would be eliminated.

Paul has long held that land owned by the federal government should be sold to private parties. As a free-market environmentalist , Paul sees polluters as aggressors who should not be granted immunity from prosecution or otherwise insulated from accountability. Paul argues that enforcing private property rights through tort law would hold people and corporations accountable, and would increase the cost of polluting activities—thus decreasing pollution.

The environment is better protected under private property rights We as property owners can't violate our neighbors' property. We can't pollute their air or their water. We can't dump our garbage on their property Too often, conservatives and liberals fall short on defending environmental concerns, and they resort to saying, "Well, let's turn it over to the EPA.

The EPA will take care of us We can divvy up the permits that allow you to pollute. He believes that environmental legislation, such as emissions standards, should be handled between the states or regions concerned. Paul says he opposes government assistance to private businesses intended to help shape research and investment decisions, including to promote alternative energy production and use.

During a June presidential primary campaign debate, Paul said, "There shouldn't be any assistance to private enterprise. It's not morally correct, it's not legal, it's bad economics. It's not part of the Constitution. But when the politicians get in and direct things, you get the malinvestment.

However, in Paul urged the Department of Energy to approve a federal loan guarantee to help an energy company build two new nuclear reactors in South Texas. Asked to explain the apparent contradiction between his stated opposition to federal financial involvement in private-sector business decisions and his personal intervention in the case of the nuclear company, Paul's campaign issued a statement saying, "As a Congressman and as President, Dr. Paul will work to eliminate all federal intervention in the energy market.

However, until that happens, he will do his best to ensure that the money Congress appropriates is spent in the best way possible. Paul objects to "the demand to recycle everything from paper to glass to plastic," saying that although recycling aluminum makes economic sense, "recycling for the most part consumes more energy than it saves. In an October interview, Paul held that climate change is not a "major problem threatening civilization", stating "I think war and financial crises and big governments marching into our homes and elimination of habeas corpus — those are immediate threats.

We're about to lose our whole country and whole republic! During the presidential campaign Paul said that he had been active in the Green Scissors campaign. Paul says that he opposes and votes against subsidies for oil and gas companies. However, unlike many others in government, industry, and the newsmedia, Paul does not include tax credits or tax deductions in his definition of subsidies.

He uses the term "subsidy" only in the very narrow sense of a direct grant of money from the government to a company. Paul voted on multiple occasions in — to block measures that would have eliminated or reduced tax breaks for oil and gas producers. Republicans for Environmental Protection rated Paul "Worst in the House" on the environment of all Republican representatives in the th Congress — Paul says that contrary to what most Americans believe, access to health care is not a right, but a good whose value should be determined by the free market.

When government becomes involved, he says, costs rise and quality of care falls. Paul calls for the eventual elimination of Medicare federally funded health care for the elderly and disabled and Medicaid health care for the poor, jointly funded by the federal and state governments , [] [] and he has been a staunch opponent of the Affordable Care Act health insurance reform law that was enacted in Paul says that when he entered medical practice in the early s, before the Medicare and Medicaid programs were established, the poor and the elderly were hospitalized at about the same rates as they have been under Medicare and Medicaid in the s, and that they received good care.

He says further that in those days, doctors and hospitals provided cut-rate or free care to people who did not have health insurance — "every physician understood that he or she had a responsibility toward the less fortunate, and free medical care for the poor was the norm" — and that this was possible because healthcare costs were much lower. At a church charity hospital where he worked in his early years of practice, "nobody was turned away" for lack of ability to pay.

Paul claims that government meddling in health care delivery is to blame for healthcare costs having skyrocketed over the past few decades. He recalls that in the early s, patients typically paid for basic medical services with cash, as there was almost no government payment for care, and as those Americans who had private insurance were typically only covered for hospitalization and emergency care. He argues that the emergence of government as a payer for healthcare services in the form of Medicare and Medicaid, along with government policies of the s that led to the expansion of private insurance to cover routine medical services in addition to hospitalization and emergency care, and which required most employers to provide health insurance for their employees, interfered with the traditional physician-patient relationship.

The incentive for healthcare providers and patients to keep costs as low as possible was lost. He says that now providers always charge the maximal fees for services, since the government or insurance company can be counted on to pay the bills. Paul additionally argues that government contributes to rising healthcare costs through yet other ways, such as through government regulations, one example being restrictions imposed by the Food and Drug Administration on the manufacture and sale of medications and dietary supplements, and through licensing of physicians and other healthcare practitioners, which Paul says interferes with market-based competition for healthcare services.

He also criticizes the legal system's approach to the handling of medical malpractice claims, which he says needlessly inflates the cost of healthcare further still. Paul has long opposed government funding of medical research. Although he considers himself "pro-research," [] he believes that "all research in a free society should be done privately. The individual suffering from AIDS certainly is a victim — frequently a victim of his own lifestyle — but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing them to pay for his care.

Crash research programs are hardly something, I believe, the Founding Fathers intended when they talked about equal rights. More recently, Paul has called federal funding for medical research unconstitutional and has complained that "neither party in Washington can fathom that millions and millions of Americans simply don't want their tax dollars spent on government research of any kind He argues that the availability of federal research funds distorts "the natural market for scientific research" by inducing scientists to eschew pursuit of radical lines of potentially promising research that might not appeal to politicians and bureaucrats who hold influence over the allocation of grant monies.

Scarce tax resources are allocated according to who has the most effective lobby, rather than on the basis of need or even likely success. Federal funding also causes researchers to neglect potential treatments and cures that do not qualify for federal funds. In , Paul went against the majority of Republicans and voted to block implementation of the Medicare Part D program, which expanded Medicare to cover the costs of medications for the elderly and disabled, and which prohibited the government from negotiating directly with pharmaceutical companies to try to get lower prices for the covered medications.

Paul voted in and against reauthorization and expansion of the Children's Health Insurance Program SCHIP , which is a joint state-federal program to provide health insurance for children and pregnant women in low-income families who do not qualify for Medicaid. He has been a consistent advocate for offering tax credits for healthcare expenses. Since , Paul has several times introduced into Congress proposals to provide tax credits for the cost of health insurance premiums, and to increase the allowable tax deduction for healthcare expenses by removing the 7.

He has also advocated expanding the tax benefits of health savings accounts. Paul was the only member of the entire Congress to vote against the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act in , which prohibits health insurers and employers from discriminating against an individual on the basis of carrying a gene s that is associated with an increased risk for developing a disease. Paul opposes the federal law that requires physicians to treat all patients who go to emergency rooms seeking medical care regardless of the patient's ability to pay.

He asserts that the law is unconstitutional: Therefore, the clear language of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment prevents Congress from mandating that physicians and hospitals bear the entire costs of providing health care to any group. Paul opposes laws that require health insurance to cover pre-existing conditions. He argues that "once insurance companies are required by government to insure against preconditions, it's no longer insurance — it's a social welfare mandate and will result in bankrupting the insurance companies, or they will be bailed out by a government subsidy, further bankrupting the government.

So far no one has mandated insurance companies sell fire insurance to a person whose house is on fire. During a primary debate in the presidential election campaign, Paul was asked who would pay for the medical care of a previously healthy year-old man without medical insurance who suddenly falls seriously ill and requires six months of intensive medical care. Following the debate, Paul was criticized by some political commentators for his refusal to yield in his opposition to the health insurance reform law "Obamacare" , which prohibits insurers from denying coverage on the basis of a pre-existing condition, when it was pointed out that Paul's presidential campaign chair and friend had contracted a sudden severe illness necessitating a prolonged hospital stay before dying.

He had not had any medical insurance through his employer and had been unable to purchase insurance due to a pre-existing condition. Paul has proposed radical changes in the way medical malpractice claims are handled. If the patient were to experience a negative outcome in association with the medical procedure or treatment, he or she would then seek compensation through binding arbitration , rather than through a medical malpractice trial before a jury.

Paul claims that "using insurance, private contracts, and binding arbitration to resolve medical disputes benefits patients, who receive full compensation in a timelier manner than under the current system," as well as physicians and hospitals, since their litigation costs, and malpractice insurance premiums, would be markedly reduced.

Paul proposes that all government funding of medical care be eliminated with the exception, perhaps, of care for veterans. His Plan to Restore America budget proposal would begin a phase out of Medicare starting in , when workers younger than 25 would be able to opt out of participating in the program. Paul proposes sharply reducing the government's regulation of medications and health supplements by reducing the role of, and ultimately eliminating, the Food and Drug Administration FDA.

So, yes, government just gets in the way on so many of those things. In the interest, as he sees it, of fighting for greater freedom of choice for consumers, he has also introduced bills that would significantly reduce the government's ability to prevent manufacturers or sellers of dietary supplements and certain other health products from making what government regulators believe to be false or misleading claims about the health effects of the products. He essentially feels that consumers should be able to buy whatever health aids they want from whomever they want, without the need for guidance by the government.

Paul argues against the prevailing system of government licensure of physicians and other healthcare practitioners. I mean, they're not going to go to the nurse if they need brain surgery. They can go there for a sore throat. Paul feels that anyone who claims to be a healthcare practitioner whether of allopathic, homeopathic, or naturopathic medicine should be able to offer healthcare services, without interference from the "nanny state.

Paul favors the right to use marijuana as a medical option. He was cosponsor of H. Paul contends that prohibition of drugs is ineffective and advocates ending the War on Drugs. Constitution does not enumerate or delegate to Congress the authority to ban or regulate drugs in general. Paul believes in personal responsibility, but also sees inequity in the current application of drug enforcement laws, noting in , "Many prisoners are non-violent and should be treated as patients with addictions, not as criminals.

Irrational mandatory minimal sentences have caused a great deal of harm. We have non-violent drug offenders doing life sentences, and there is no room to incarcerate the rapists and murderers. When asked about his position on implementing the Tenth Amendment , Paul explained, "Certain medical procedures and medical choices, I would allow the states to determine that.

The state law should prevail not the Federal Government. People should have freedom of choice.

The World According to Ron Paul

We certainly should respect the law and the law says that states should be able to determine this. Paul believes that the Veterans Administration should not be building more hospitals, and that VA hospitals should instead be phased out. He believes that government should pay to treat veterans in private hospitals, arguing they will get better care more cost-effectively. Paul has also stated that "The government shouldn't be in the medical business. Paul, was asked a hypothetical question at a Tea Party debate by CNN host Wolf Blitzer about how society should respond if a healthy year-old man who decided against buying health insurance suddenly requires intensive care for six months.

Navigation menu

Paul said it shouldn't be the government's responsibility. Paul mentioned he does not believe society should let the aforementioned hypothetical man die but emphasized that churches and communities — rather than governments — should take care of those in need.

As a former Libertarian Party candidate for President, Paul has been a proponent of ballot access law reform, and has spoken out on numerous election law reform issues. In , he introduced H. He supported this bill in a speech before Congress in In , Paul joined 32 other members of Congress in opposing the renewal of the Voting Rights Act , originally passed to remove barriers to voting participation for minorities. Many of Texas' Republican representatives voted against the bill, because they believe it specifically singles out some Southern states, including Texas, for federal Justice Department oversight that makes it difficult for localities to change the location of a polling place or other small acts without first receiving permission from the federal government.

Paul opposed the Civil Rights Act of on the grounds that it was an unconstitutional infringement on liberty and by leading to quotas had in his view increased racial disharmony [ citation needed ]. Paul would like to restore State representation in Congress.

How Ron Paul’s Libertarian Principles Support Racism

During a speech in New Hampshire in February Paul called for a repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment , [] which replaced state election of U. Senators with popular election. Instead Paul would have members of state legislatures vote for U. Senators as they had done under Article One, Section 3. Direct popular representation would be retained in the U.

Paul believes that increased representation of state interests at the federal level encourages greater sharing of power between state and federal government. In , he spoke out against efforts to abolish the electoral college , stating that "Democracy, we are told, is always good. But the founders created a constitutionally limited republic precisely to protect fundamental liberties from the whims of the masses, to guard against the excesses of democracy. The electoral college likewise was created in the Constitution to guard against majority tyranny in federal elections.

The President was to be elected by the states rather than the citizenry as a whole, with votes apportioned to states according to their representation in Congress. Paul's views are generally attributed to those of non-interventionism , which is the belief that the United States should avoid entangling alliances with other nations, but still retain diplomacy, and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.

As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country. Paul's stance on foreign policy is one of consistent non-intervention , [] [] opposing wars of aggression and entangling alliances with other nations. Paul advocates bringing troops home from U. In an October 11, interview with The Washington Post , Paul said, "There's nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of the face of the earth within hours.

And here we are, so intimidated and so insecure and we're acting like such bullies that we have to attack third-world nations that have no military and have no weapons. But over the years even though he initially supported the War in Afghanistan , Paul also advocates withdrawing troops from Afghanistan because he believes a decade of war in Afghanistan is enough. There really is nothing for us to win in Afghanistan. Our mission has morphed from apprehending those who attacked us, to apprehending those who threaten or dislike us for invading their country, to remaking an entire political system and even a culture … This is an expensive, bloody, endless exercise in futility.

Not everyone is willing to admit this just yet. But every second they spend in denial has real costs in lives and livelihoods … Many of us can agree on one thing, however. Our military spending in general has grown way out of control. Paul was the only Republican presidential candidate who voted against the Iraq War Resolution in , [] [] and he opposed the U.

He believes a just declaration of war after the September 11, , attacks should have been directed against the actual terrorists, Al-Qaeda , rather than against Iraq, which has not been linked to the attacks. Congress, and it must be concluded when the victory is complete as previously planned, which would allow all resources to be dedicated to victory; he added, "The American public deserves clear goals and a definite exit strategy in Iraq.

During the invasion, Paul found himself "annoyed by the evangelicals being so supportive of pre-emptive war , which seems to contradict everything that [he] was taught as a Christian". Paul argues that if the United States cares about Israel , the U. He states that "the surrounding Arab nations get seven times as much aid as Israel gets and also a recent study came out that showed that for every dollar you give to an Arab nation it prompts Israel to spend 1.

Our foreign military aid to Israel is actually more like corporate welfare to the U. We send almost twice as much aid to other countries in the Middle East, which only insures increased militarization and the drive toward war. We have adopted a foreign policy that has left Israel surrounded by militaristic nations while undermining Israel's sovereignty by demanding that its foreign and defense policies be essentially pre-approved in Washington. That is a bad deal for Israel, as sovereign nations must determine on their own what is a most appropriate national defense.

On foreign policy as well, the U. Paul was in Congress when Israel bombed Iraq's Osirak nuclear plant in and—unlike the United Nations and the Reagan administration —defended its right to do so. He says Saudi Arabia has an influence on Washington equal to Israel's. He votes against support for Israel due to his opposition to foreign aid by the US in general. In an interview with Don Imus, Paul was asked for his view of the Gaza flotilla raid. I think it's absolutely wrong to prevent people that are starving and having problems, that are almost like in concentration camps, and saying yes we endorse this whole concept that we can't allow ships to go in there in a humanitarian way And that's just stirring up trouble.

And I believe in a non-interventionist foreign policy. I don't think we should get in the middle of these squabbles. But to go out of our way and say that so-and-so is not a real people? Technically and historically, yes-- you know, under the Ottoman Empire , the Palestinians didn't have a state, but neither did Israel have a state then too. Paul rejects the "dangerous military confrontation approaching with Iran and supported by many in leadership on both sides of the aisle". House of Representatives, only Paul and Dennis Kucinich voted against the Rothman-Kirk Resolution, which asks the United Nations to charge Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating its genocide convention and charter.

In his speech before the House on a related bill, H. Paul argued the proposal was unrelated to "the US national interest" or "the Constitutional function of [United States] military forces". Paul was the only "no" vote on H. Paul advocates ending the United States embargo against Cuba , arguing, "Americans want the freedom to travel and trade with their Cuban neighbors, as they are free to travel and trade with Vietnam and China. Those Americans who do not wish to interact with a country whose model of governance they oppose are free to boycott.

The point being — it is Americans who live in a free country, and as free people we should choose who to buy from or where to travel, not our government Considering the lack of success government has had in engendering friendship with Cuba, it is time for government to get out of the way and let the people reach out.

Paul advocates withdrawing U. Suffice to say, his opponents in the GOP race have a far more "exceptional" take on U. His policy solutions are even more anathema to conservatives. He wants to reduce the military budget, abolish the CIA , pull the United States out of NATO , end financial support for Israel, and do nothing in the face of Iranian nuclear proliferation , which he claims is a legitimate desire for Tehran to have.

In Liberty Defended , Paul is unabashed in his criticism of prominent Republicans.

According to Bruce Fein, senior foreign policy advisor to Paul, his campaign is "about changing the conventional orthodoxies" that are articulated by the other GOP candidates. He wants every defense resource focused on defending America and not other countries. Paul uneasily falls into a long-silenced tradition in Republican politics of isolationist thought. While Paul is often quick to note that he is not an economic protectionist and thus, he claims, not an isolationist he is, says Christopher Nichols, a historian at the University of Pennsylvania who has written extensively on isolationism, more of a political isolationist.

Indeed, while Republicans might like some of the things that Paul has to say — about foreign aid, the United Nations, and international trade — generally speaking, the candidate has a fairly hard ceiling on how far he can rise within the GOP. In fact, his favorability in Iowa is higher among independent voters than it is among actual Republicans.

What is perhaps most interesting about Paul — and where his political potential might lie should he choose to run as a third-party candidate — is in the support that he garners from across the political aisle. Paul also believes that the United States should depart from all international organizations and global alliances.

What about foreign aid?

Dozens of armed officers and a growling Doberman stand guard outside. Behind locked gates, men and women are sewing sportswear that can end up on U. This is one of a growing number of internment camps in the Xinjiang region, where by some estimates 1 million Muslims are detained, forced to give up their language and their religion and subject to political indoctrination.

The Associated Press has tracked recent, ongoing shipments from one such factory inside an internment camp to Badger Sportswear, a leading supplier in Statesville, North Carolina. The agreement requires Mr. Stone to run ads in national newspapers, including The Wall Street Journal, apologizing for making defamatory statements about a Chinese businessman who is a vocal critic of Beijing. It also requires Mr. Stone to publish a retraction of the false statements on social media. Doing so exempts him from paying any of the damages. The number of homeless Americans crept up in , marking the second year in a row that homelessness in the U.

The HUD figures are based on a national one-night count conducted every year, which found , homeless in January Overall, homelessness is still down significantly compared to a decade ago. And given the small size of the overall increase in — 0. Having worked to help get Trump into the White House, they now worked to neutralize the biggest threat to his staying there.

The Russian operatives unloaded on Mueller through fake accounts on Facebook, Twitter and beyond, falsely claiming that the former FBI director was corrupt and that the allegations of Russian interference in the election were crackpot conspiracies. Maximus does it all, holding contracts for everything from job training to child support enforcement to health care enrollment. An in depth investigation of residents navigating the choppy waters of American immigration policy. This legal, ethical and moral question of whether to help immigrant or agent is a recurring theme in Roma, as a Times reporter and photographer discovered while living here this year.

How Ron Paul’s Libertarian Principles Support Racism

They found that whether to aid immigrants or agents often triggered debates, sometimes within families. Do you call or not call? Even voters who agreed with Trump were turned off by his focus on the border and the migrant caravan. His report found that voters broadly were 59 percent less likely to back Republicans after hearing from them on immigration and 63 percent less likely to support them based on the issues of border security and the migrant caravan.

Yet, voters were 76 percent more likely to vote for Republicans after hearing about jobs and the economy. Amy Klobuchar is suddenly attracting the notice of potential Iowa caucus goers, according to a new poll where the Minnesota Democrat pulled in 10 percent — placing her fourth in a crowded Democratic presidential field.

Former Vice President Joe Biden led the field with 30 percent saying he was their top pick for president, followed by Sen. Bernie Sanders with 13 percent and Texas Rep.

• Mortal Bite (Golden Vampires of Tuscany Book 2)
• Christmas in Ireland (Kaylee OShay, Irish Dancer Book 4)
• Di Lavoro E Non Solo Sguardi Pedagogici (Italian Edition)
• What You Need to Know about Strategy
• The Lincoln Paradox (Out of Time Book 2)