House of Representatives Archive

0

Paul, Ron. “The Revolution: A Manifesto”

“The Revolution: A Manifesto” written by Dr. Paul on the run up to his campaign for President in 2007-8, is a great primer to libertarian thought and a sound introduction...

“The Revolution: A Manifesto” written by Dr. Paul on the run up to his campaign for President in 2007-8, is a great primer to libertarian thought and a sound introduction to the political, social, and economic challenges the freedom movement faces. My path to embracing libertarian principles has been, like most other converts, perhaps the most painful thing I have ever faced under my own volition. There are very few public figures that exemplify absolute the loyalty of principle demanded by liberty. I can only think of two: Judge Andrew Napolitano and Dr. Ron Paul.

Chapter One, “The False Choices of American Politics,” uncovers the fallacy of the left/right divide in American Politics. He shows that there is practically no substantive difference between the major parties. Their disagreements lay in application of power, not in the acquisition of it.

Chapter Two and Three provide us with a brief romp through early American history, with a focus on the constitutional approach the Founding Revolutionaries took toward foreign policy. Perhaps the ballsiest part of the book occurs when Dr. Paul throws down the gauntlet demanding that the neoconservative and liberal pols either openly condemn the founding fathers or else follow them.

Chapter Four, “Economic Freedom,” is a little meatier in substance. Dr. Paul dives into the world of capitalism, declaring that America does not practice laissez-faire capitalism, but actually finds herself approaching a sort of corporatist Fascism. He appeals to Liberals in exposing the over reach of corporations that have become de facto, if not de jure, extensions of government. He then reminds “paleoconservatives” that true free trade does not require our nation to abdicate its sovereignty as it did in NAFTA and the WHO agreements.

Chapter Five, “Civil Liberties and Personal Freedom,” finds Dr. Paul ramping up the rhetoric against the Neo-conservative doctrines which seek to forever disolve the limits the constitution places on government.

Chapter Six, “Money: The Forbidden Issue in American Politics,” is my favorite chapter. In a clear and simple manner, Dr. Paul unrolls the practices of America’s central bank, the Federal Reserve, and exposes its primary goal, the systematic devaluation of our currency. That devaluation comes in the form of inflation, which is explained not as increased prices (that is simply the effect of inflation), but as an increase in the money supply. The effects of inflation, as Dr. Paul explains, are not uniform. The Fed distributes dollars to politically connected institutions where those dollars are enjoyed before the price effects of inflation are fully felt. By the time those dollars trickle down to the middle class, the value is diluted. The Fed redistributes wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich.

The final chapter, “The Revolution,” is a systematic approach, proposed in the form of a Presidential platform, that is intended for a one to two term President. He alludes to the fact that it would be impossible to fully restore the nation to its minarchal roots in eight years. However, his plan, as outlined in the book, is designed not to preempt the inevitable collapse of the American Empire, but to guide the nation in for a soft landing.

Obviously Dr. Paul didn’t win the election in 2008, and the current administration seems to be uber-neocon in ideology. I still hold out hope that Dr. Paul will run again in 2012. I have contacted his offices to offer my support. Though the nation may not be ready quite yet for an Austro-libertarian president, his campaign in 2007 advanced the liberty movement more than any single event in the last 100 years. I can only imagine what it would be like now.

1

A Letter to Dr. Ron Paul

Dear Dr. Paul (or the staffer that reads this): Murray N. Rothbard once said that human life “is an attempt by each man to be as happy as possible.” I’ve...

Dear Dr. Paul (or the staffer that reads this):

Murray N. Rothbard once said that human life “is an attempt by each man to be as happy as possible.” I’ve been down some of the darkest rabbit holes to find that happiness, and in the end I discovered that only in the reverencing of my own personal freedoms and in the fighting for more individual sovereignty can I hope to find joy.

Dr. Paul, more than any man I have ever listened to, is consistently on message regarding personal freedom. Should he run for President in 2012, I will be here supporting him, and given Romney/Huntsman whispers in the Utah rumor mill, I understand the implications that lie therein.

By way of introduction, I’m not a Utah native, but having graduated from BYU’s Marriott School of Management in 2007 (after transferring from Cornell University) I have come to call this state home.

Like most austro-libertarians, my own individualist awakening came from reading a book, in my case, Atlas Shrugged. Since that day I have read practically everything written by Rothbard, Hoppe, Rockwell, Mises, and Woods. I have read Mises’ Human Action a half dozen times and have listened to every lecture from the past three Mises Universities.

Though today I find my idealism tempered by a wide eyed comprehension of the political realities that lie before us, my ambition to restore sovereignty to the individual has never been more aflame. That’s why I would like to develop a relationship with your organization.

Should Romney or Huntsman run, the west is not a lost cause for Dr. Paul. The majority of the Mormon population remembers that our people, long before becoming hyper-nationalist, were in a state of civil disobedience against a federal government which did nothing to defend our civil rights that were trampled by murderous state governments.

It would be my honor to stand against any Republican pundit here in Utah in defense of Dr. Paul. You may not be able to find another supporter in this state that can articulate the austro-libertarian framework as well as I can, in either English or Spanish.

Also, if Dr. Paul has need of any help outside of Utah, I will be more than happy to render my services nationwide and/or tap into my old Ivy League network.

Please feel free to contact me via email at branden.espinoza@gmail.com.

Cheers,
Branden

________

Dr. Paul’s Reply (No doubt boilerplate, but kind of cool none the less):

Dear Mr. Espinoza:

Thank you for taking the time to contact my office with your kind and supportive words. It is reassuring and encouraging to hear from people, such as yourself, who understand the issues and the positive impact of a pro-freedom philosophy.

Such active citizen participation, as the founders well understood, is absolutely vital to our form of government and to the preservation of the liberty they entrusted to us.

As I serve in the 112th Congress, please be assured that I shall continue to take very seriously my oath to uphold the Constitution, support limiting federal powers, and work to make ours the freest and hence most prosperous and tranquil society in the history of mankind.

Thank you again for taking the time to communicate your thoughts.

Sincerely,

Ron Paul

0

Of Congressmen & Dead Pelicans

After the Exxon Valdez disaster, Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. It required oil companies to pay an 8 cent tax on all oil produced or imported into...

After the Exxon Valdez disaster, Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. It required oil companies to pay an 8 cent tax on all oil produced or imported into the United States. In exchange for this act, the companies were guaranteed a maximum liability of $75 million dollars in the event of an oil spill. Furthermore, the Act stipulates that the President can mandate an escrow fund of only up to $250,000 dollars.

This limited liability greatly reduced the risk that oil companies were shouldering. Hence, BP opted for single wall rather than double walled pipe at the Deepwater Horizon site.

Now, BP has agreed to establish a fund of $20 Billion to pay for cleanup and economic recovery. That is more than 250x the maximum the company could be held liable for under 101 HR 1465, and 80,000x greater than what the President is allowed to mandate.

So what? Well, there are some lessons to be had here.

1. The Oil Pollution Act has taken about $8 Billion in revenues from the oil companies in the last 20 years. Where did that money go? Why isn’t it being used to mobilize the National Guard?

2. Congress artificially capped the liability of these oil companies and thus encouraged BP to take greater risks.

3. The free market will save the Gulf Coast. BP is ponying up the $20 Billion, not because the might of the government is descending upon them, but because they know that not a soul in this country will buy gas from them if they don’t make good on this screwup.

4. Everything that has happened on Capitol Hill is simply political posturing to ramp up support for the new Cap and Trade bill that before Deepwater Horizon had no chance of passing in the Senate. But this administration will “never let a crisis go to waste.”

0

There Goes Freedom of Press

Last night Nancy Pelosi  announced that she is going to bring a vote to the floor of the House sometime next week to ban Fox News from the halls of...

Last night Nancy Pelosi  announced that she is going to bring a vote to the floor of the House sometime next week to ban Fox News from the halls of Congress:

“That Fox regularly grants access to Republican Congressman to spread their lies and propaganda on their airwaves is a violation of the public trust, and their continued desire to challenge such well documented facts as Global Warming, and the efficacy of single payer health insurance, proves that they are simply doing the work of the special interests. They should thus be stripped of their journalistic access in the halls of Congress,” argued Pelosi.

Is it just me, or are the Democrats in Congress strong arming Fox? Are they really threatening to suspend the CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHT of Freedom of the Press?

UPDATE:  Thanks to a tip from lefty twitter addict @PlinkingReality I tracked down this story and discovered that it is a spoof. If you look at the dates, the Olberman/Pelosi interview hasn’t even happened yet.  But, what is the bigger story here? This has gone viral online. I got wind of it and believed it along with thousands of other bloggers. The real story is that we live in a time when the government is so hellbent on absorbing our individual rights that smart, educated people actually believed the Speaker of the House was moving to rescind freedom of the press.