http://www.cfr.org/experts/world/ron-paul/b13303
U.S. Policy toward India
Rep. Paul (R-TX) has addressed India in terms of U.S. policy towards
Iran. He says U.S. “provision of nuclear materials to India is a clear
violation of the [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)], which
contradicts “anti-Iran voices” claiming that Iran is violating the
NPT. In fact, says Paul, Iran is entitled under the NPT to develop
nuclear power “for peaceful purposes.” Further, he argued, “If Iran
had a nuclear weapon, why would this be different from Pakistan,
India, and North Korea having one? Why does Iran have less right to a
defensive weapon than these other countries?”
Paul opposed the U.S. and India Nuclear Cooperation Act of 2006.
Military Tribunals and Guantanamo Bay
When asked where he stands on Guantanamo in June 2007, Rep. Paul
(R-TX) replied, “Shut it down” (Muckraker Report). “This is an issue
that flies in the face of our civic and legal traditions as outlined
in the Constitution.” he said.
Paul voted against the Military Commissions Act.
Domestic Intelligence
Rep. Paul (R-TX), who subscribes to libertarian views, is critical of
any infringements on civil liberties. In a December 2005 PBS
interview, Paul said: “We all should be dedicated to protecting the
privacy of all Americans, and never giving permission to a narrow
group of people in the executive branch.”
Paul voted against the Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act of
2006.
Afghanistan
Rep. Paul (R-TX) is strictly non-interventionist and criticizes
military campaigns in Afghanistan—where he says the United States
replaced “one group of thugs with another”—and in Iraq. He also has
opposed many homeland security measures taken in the name of the war
on terror, like the implementation of the PATRIOT Act, which he argues
undermines “the liberties and privacy of all Americans.”
Democracy Promotion in the Arab World
The noninterventionist Rep. Paul (R-TX) voted against the 2006 Iran
Freedom Support Act, which he said was reminiscent of legislation
passed in the buildup to the Iraq war (WashTimes).
Energy Policy
Rep. Paul (R-TX) said in 2006: “The last thing we need is centralized
government planning when it comes to our precious energy supplies.”
Paul voted against the Clean Energy Act of 2007. He has also called
for an end to “all subsidies and special benefits to energy
companies.” Paul voted against the 2005 Energy Policy Act.
Paul voted in favor of the New Direction for Energy Independence,
National Security, and Consumer Protection Act, which was hailed by
environmentalists for its measures promoting clean energy. Paul is
against government subsides for ethanol (Grist) and pro-nuclear power.
Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Rep. Paul (R-TX) has criticized U.S. “meddling” in the Middle East,
which, he says, “has only intensified strife and conflict.” He has
said U.S. financial aid to Middle Eastern countries is only “adding
fuel to the fire” and is “foolish and unconstitutional.” He says
Israel does not "need" U.S. aid (Haaretz), and insists he is "not
anti-Israel in any way." Though he advocates some U.S. diplomatic role
in brokering an end to violence in the West Bank, he says the U.S.
“should draw the line at any further entanglement.”
Paul spoke out against a July 2006 House resolution condemning attacks
on Israel and “supporting Israel’s right to defend herself.” He argued
that the resolution’s “strong message” could lead to an escalation of
the war between Israel and Lebanon.
North Korea Policy
Rep. Paul (R-TX) has voiced opposition to sanctions against North
Korea. He believes the country could serve as a market for U.S. goods,
saying, “Every market we close to our nation's farmers is a market
exploited by foreign farmers.”
Cuba Policy
Rep. Paul (R-TX) is generally opposed to sanctions on Cuba. He has
worked against the agricultural trade sanctions, which he says, did
"nothing to topple the Castro regime, but they have hurt American
farmers and the Cuban people." In February 2008, Paul said the U.S.
government should take Fidel Castro's resignation as an opportunity to
end the embargo on Cuba. "Cuban markets would be a great place for our
farmers and businesses to sell their products. And, the power of free
markets would quickly push out the remaining totalitarian remnant,
finally ending the Communism in the Western Hemisphere,” Paul said.
In 2000, Paul voted to end trade restrictions on Cuba , which he
believes would benefit his constituency of Texas farmers.
Paul voted for a 2001 House bill which would stop enforcement of
travel restrictions on Cuba once Castro released political prisoners
and extradited those sought by the United States.
U.S. Policy toward China
Rep. Paul (R-TX) has called China “one of the most brutal,
anti-American regimes in the world.” Still, Paul was one of only five
representatives to vote against the Political Freedom in China Act of
1997.
Paul was also the only member of the House to vote against a 2006
resolution condemning religious persecution in China.
Paul voted against the U.S.-China Trade Relations Act of 2000, as well
as the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act in 2001.
Defense Policy
Rep. Paul (R-TX), a noninterventionist with libertarian views, voted
against the 1999 resolution that sent U.S. troops to join NATO
peacekeeping forces in Kosovo. He also voted against the resolution
authorizing air strikes on Yugoslavia in 1999. That resolution failed
in the House. In 2003, Paul voted against the 2003 resolution for the
reconstruction of Iraq.
Iraq
Rep. Paul (R-TX) is one of the Republicans most critical of the Iraq
war and one of only six House Republicans to vote against the 2002
resolution authorizing the war. Paul cosponsored the Iraq War
De-Escalation Act of 2007, which, if passed, would have stopped the
troop surge in Iraq and begun redeployment of U.S. troops by May 1,
2007. That act was never voted on.
Trade
Rep. Paul (R-TX), who sits on the House Subcommittee on Domestic and
International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology, voted against
free trade agreements with Oman, Chile, Singapore and Peru. He was a
strong critic of CAFTA, of which he said “I believe in free trade, but
this is not free trade. This is regulated, managed trade for the
benefit of special interests.” In 2005, Paul supported legislation
that would have withdrawn U.S. approval for the World Trade
Organization. On his campaign website, Paul criticizes the WTO, which,
he says, “has forced Congress to change our laws, yet we still face
trade wars.” He has also been critical of NAFTA, which he says “is
just one part of a plan to erase the borders between the U.S. and
Mexico.”
Homeland Security
Rep. Paul (R-TX) voted against a number of homeland security measures
that he considered to be infringements on personal liberties. Further,
he implied in a May 2007 Republican debate that he would do away with
the Department of Homeland Security, which he called a “gigantic
bureaucracy.” Paul voted against the Patriot Act in 2001. He was one
of only four Congressmen to vote against the 2006 DHS Authorization
Act. He also voted against implementing the 9/11 Commission
Recommendation Act in 2007, the Real ID Act of 2005, and the Homeland
Security Act of 2002. Paul voted against the Homeland Security
Department Authorization Act FY06.
Iran
In a speech before the House in April 2007, Paul (R-TX) criticized
what he sees as neoconservative efforts to drum up support for
military action against Iran. Paul said that although the country “is
hardly a perfect democracy, its system is far superior to most of our
Arab allies about which we never complain.” The Texas congressman
warned that a war against Iran would be disastrous and dismissed the
justifications for military action against Iran as “propaganda,”
saying that “Iran doesn’t have a nuke and is nowhere close to getting
one, according to the CIA.” Instead, Paul advocates a policy of
non-interventionism.
Climate Change
Rep. Paul (R-TX) believes "the key to sound environmental policy is
respect for private property rights," according to his campaign
website. He says the free market prohibits pollution of one's
"neighbor's land, air, or water." Paul acknowledges that "some" of
climate change is related to human activity, but, he warns, it is
extreme "to assume we have to close down everything in this country
and in the world because there's a fear that we're going to have this
global warming and that we're going to be swallowed up by the oceans,"
he told Grist in October 2007.
Paul opposes the Kyoto treaty and a carbon tax. He is also critical of
the Environmental Protection Agency. "It's a bureaucratic, intrusive
approach and it favors those who have political connections."
Immigration
On the Texas Congressman’s campaign website, Paul stresses the
importance of secure borders and lists a six-point plan for
immigration policy that says the U.S. must secure borders, enforce
visa rules, and end birthright citizenship. Paul is against amnesty
and “welfare for illegal aliens.” Paul voted in favor of the Secure
Fence Act of 2006.
In February 2008, Paul signed a pledge sponsored by anti-illegal
immigration group NumbersUSA that he will "oppose amnesty or any other
special path to citizenship for the millions of foreign nationals
unlawfully present in the United States."
United Nations
Rep. Paul (R-TX) strongly opposes the United Nations. He introduced
the American Sovereignty Restoration Act in 2003, which would withdraw
the United States from the United Nations and would “evict the
organization from its New York headquarters.” That act has never been
passed. He argues that the United Nations cannot be reformed and that
it “is inherently illegitimate, because supra-national government is
an inherently illegitimate concept.”
U.S. Policy toward Russia
Rep. Paul (R-TX) advocates a “strong national defense and a policy of
non-intervention abroad” to ensure a Russia policy that “seeks our
national interest.”
In January 2007, Paul cosponsored a resolution to suspend the
antidumping duty orders on imports of solid urea—a substance used in
fertilizers, plastics, and animal feed—from Russia and Ukraine. That
bill failed.
Paul was the only member of the House to vote against a 2007
resolution “noting the disturbing pattern of killings of numerous
independent journalists in Russia since 2000, and urging Russian
President Vladimir Putin to authorize cooperation with outside
investigators in solving those murders.”
U.S. Policy toward Pakistan
Rep. Paul (R-TX) opposes U.S. aid to Pakistan’s government. In 2005,
he criticized the granting of $638 million in aid to Pakistan as
unconstitutional.
In December 2007, Paul criticized the U.S. alliance with Pakistan as a
provocation to al-Qaeda. He also criticized those advocating military
action against terrorists in Pakistan. Threatening Pakistan “makes no
sense whatsoever,” he said at an August 2007 Republican debate.
Nuclear Nonproliferation
Rep. Paul (R-TX) says the U.S.posture toward nuclear proliferation is
hypocritical. “If countries do have a nuclear weapon, they tend to be
left alone, or possibly get a subsidy, but if they do not gain such a
weapon then we threaten them,” Paul wrote in December 2007. His stance
on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty is unknown.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From the root to the fruit, he's a kindly old coot
MANCHESTER, N.H. — A 76-year-old great-grandfather who gives
eye-glazing speeches on monetary policy, displays a crotchety streak
and disappears from the Republican campaign trail for days at a time
to rest is captivating young voters.
Texas Rep. Ron Paul's libertarian message of less government, personal
liberty and ending U.S. military involvement overseas clicks with
young people, who are supplying zest for his stronger-than-expected
presidential campaign. Nearly half of all voters under 30 went for
Paul in the first two states to vote, helping to propel him to a
second-place finish in the New Hampshire primary and third place in
Iowa's leadoff caucuses.
Why would young people gravitate to the oldest guy in the field?
"Freedom is a young idea," says Eddie Clearwater, a 22-year-old Des
Moines photographer who attended a Ron Paul party in Ankeny, Iowa,
earlier this month. "All of his policies are such a good, radical
change. It's what we need."
Paul's campaign events are charged with an energy that any politician
would love, attracting an eclectic band of youthful activists ranging
from preppy college students to blue collar workers to artists
sporting piercings and dreadlocks. At his party after the New
Hampshire primary, there were spontaneous chants of "Ron Paul
Revolution! Give us back our Constitution" and "President Paul!
President Paul!"
A tickled Paul told the cheering crowd: "Freedom is a wonderful idea,
and that's why I get so excited. But I really get excited when I see
young people saying it."
"We are dangerous to the status quo of this country," said Paul, who
seems to relish making political mischief and has taken on the role of
a feisty attacker in some of the GOP debates.
While Paul is unlikely to win the GOP nomination and young voters make
up a relatively small slice of the electorate — 12 percent in the New
Hampshire primary and 15 percent in the Iowa caucuses — their lopsided
support has made Paul a force to be reckoned with in the 2012
campaign. And it could prompt a more serious consideration of his
views by Republicans and Democrats alike.
"Ron Paul is bringing unorthodox ideas to the marketplace that don't
fit with the conventional pillars of either political party," said
Matthew Segal of OurTime.org, a nonpartisan group that promotes
political participation among young people. "And because young people
today are a uniquely independent-minded generation, he's resonating
with them."
According to polling-place interviews conducted for The Associated
Press and the television networks, 53 percent of under-30 voters in
New Hampshire and 35 percent in Iowa identified as independents or
something else. They are not establishment Republicans, and not as
supportive of the tea party movement as their elders.
Paul's critics sometimes poke fun at his popularity with that age
group, suggesting they are mainly attracted to his anti-war message
and support for liberalizing drug laws, which are both far outside the
Republican mainstream.
But the stereotypes belie the reality facing young people.
Polling-place interviews in New Hampshire and Iowa found younger
voters in both states were just as likely as older voters to cite the
economy as their top concern. Paul won among younger voters who said
the economy is the most important issue. Overall, he drew 46 percent
of under-30 voters in New Hampshire, beating front-runner Mitt Romney
by a full 20 percentage points in that age group. In Iowa, he got 48
percent of the youth vote, 12 points higher than top-two-finishers
Romney and Rick Santorum combined.
In interviews, Paul's young supporters say they fear a bleak future of
joblessness, steep college loan payments, pandering politicians and a
government made sluggish by debt. Paul's pledge to adhere to the
Constitution and shrink government appeals to many young voters
looking to get back to basics, as does his promise to focus on
problems at home.
"We're in such a crisis right now we should focus on us, not choose
which country we aid and which country we invade next," said Nick
Wright, a 23-year old volunteer at a Paul campaign event in Meredith,
N.H.
Jeff Popek, of Meredith, said he believes Paul's plan to slash taxes
would spur job creation.
"A lot of us are graduating with a lot of college debt and we can't
pay for it unless we get jobs," the 18-year old said.
Many of Paul's younger supporters say they believe the government is
overly intrusive and encroaching on civil liberties. They like his
pledge to overturn the Patriot Act, which Congress passed in the wake
of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks to allow law enforcement greater
access to people's email, telephone and other records.
The heavily wired generation of younger voters also responds to Paul's
warning that the federal government is poised to limit Internet
privacy. He often rails against a bill pending in Congress called
SOPA, the Stop Online Privacy Act, that Paul insists would allow the
government to snoop on people's Internet searches.
"They want to take over the Internet," Paul said to boos at a campaign
stop in Iowa. "Can you imagine how much we're going to be curtailed in
the spreading of our information if we lose the Internet?
Paul does part ways with younger voters on some issues. He opposes
abortion rights, even as polls show that a majority of young people
support a woman's right to have an abortion. He says the subject of
gay marriage should be left to the states. Polls show young people
strongly support same sex marriage, much more so than older voters.
While he might not share their views on these issues, his
libertarianism means he's not trying to outlaw them.
After the presidential race shifted to South Carolina this week, Paul
decamped to Texas for a few days of rest. His young supporters say age
matters little to them. His message, they say, is what matters.
President Barack Obama "should be the poster child for why you
shouldn't vote for someone for their age or because they look
presidential," said Anthony Mazaka, a 27-year-old architect who voted
for Paul in New Hampshire. "People have to realize Obama isn't the
president he said he was going to be."
Obama won 66 percent of young voters in 2008 and is working hard to
reclaim them. But Obama's popularity has dipped with young voters, as
it has with many other groups amid a weak economy and persistent high
unemployment.
Paul's young supporters may choose not to back either Obama or the
Republican primary victor. And Paul hasn't ruled out a third party
candidacy, which could keep many young voters in his camp.
"Any political operative in either party would be stupid to ignore Ron
Paul's appeal," Segal said.
