Next up on my The Issues According To a Candidate’s Website is the staunch libertarian (though a member of the Republican Party) and internet darling Ron Paul. Though I used to identify as a libertarian, I’ve recently reevaluated my position. In theory it sounds great, but it may be completely impractical. Analysis of Paul’s stance on the issues should prove interesting and enlightening as to my own political persuasion. His website on the issues can be found here.

He does have one major strike against him right of the bat: He’s a Republican from Texas, *shudder*.

Debt and Taxes: It is telling that this is his first issue, considering this isn’t the first thing on most voters’ minds. Even more interesting is that he immediately compares a single mom saving $40 in taxes a month to a business owner saving thousands in taxes. But his point is that he is a fiscal conservative (real conservative as he puts it) who believes in lower taxes. He also notes that our government’s debt endangers our future and partially blames the Federal Reserve’s status as a private bank as part of the problem. Other than that, he just says that the Constitution should be used to prioritize our spending.

American Independence and Sovereignty: He opposes pretty much all involvement in international institutions, such as the International Criminal Court, NAFTA, GATT, WTO, CAFTA, and the UN because he considers them a threat to our sovereignty. He singles out the WTO and CAFTA as bad for alternative medicine! Good. Alternative medicine is mostly bunk and potentially dangerous. How odd that Paul would even mention it. The idea of joining these organizations is that they benefit America, either financially or by providing protection for captured soldiers, etc. They may impose very limitedly on our sovereignty, but our participation is optional and we can drop out anytime if unreasonable limits are imposed. Paul makes it sound as if these organizations are going to shred the Constitution tomorrow. Considering the economic benefits of free trade, I’m willing to conditionally be members of these organizations.

War and Foreign Policy: So far, Paul is the only Republican to be honest about Iraq. I’ll allow him to explain this one in his own words:

“The war in Iraq was sold to us with false information. The area is more dangerous now than when we entered it. We destroyed a regime hated by our direct enemies, the jihadists, and created thousands of new recruits for them. This war has cost more than 3,000 American lives, thousands of seriously wounded, and hundreds of billions of dollars. We must have new leadership in the White House to ensure this never happens again.”

Well put! Strangely, he goes on to place most of the blame on the UN and not cherry-picking ‘intelligence’ by the current administration. Refreshingly, he finishes this issue with a promise to become more selective with our foreign aid and not to fund evil/totalitarian governments.

Life and Liberty: Don’t let the name fool you, this issue is really anti-choice. Oh, I’m sorry; I mean pro-’life’. A full disclosure of my thoughts on this issue will be forthcoming. In particular, his critique of Row vs. Wade suggests that he puts no value in legal precedent building. Since the Constitution doesn’t explicitly give us the right of privacy, we don’t have one, according to Ron Paul. He’s so serious about this issue that he uses bold and underlining on his webpage. Asshole.

The Second Amendment: As with most 2nd Amendment ‘supporters’, Paul focuses on the second half of the Amendment, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” while completely ignoring the first, and in my opinion more important part, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State”. An arms free-for-all is not well regulated. ‘Regulation’ is even used in this Amendment. He wants citizens to be able to own assault weapons, and those with psychiatric disorders to purchase weapons without limitation; presumably so that they can go shoot dead abortion doctors .

Social Security: This seems to be an anomaly for a libertarian. He supports Social Security, thinks that it should not be taxed, and wants to ensure money paid into Social Security stays in Social Security. He has introduced a couple of bills that would do just that. This seems to contradict a statement that appears on each and every issues page, ‘Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution. So he’s a strict constructionist unless it isn’t politically expedient.

Border Security and Immigration Reform: Paul’s position can be summed up as “secure our borders now at any cost“. He actually lists a six-part plan. Physically secure our borders and coastlines, enforce visa laws (emphasis on deportation), no amnesty, no welfare of illegal aliens, end birthright citizenship (!?!), and pass ‘true’ immigration reform. Again, a part of this contradicts, Paul’s supposed Constitution-centered legal theories. Birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the the 14th Amendment of the constitution. Other than this consistency issue, I think his position on this issue is extreme and impractical, though I’m not sure what would work.

Privacy and Personal Liberty: Paul’s position on this contradicts his analysis of Roe vs. Wade! He thinks that our privacy is under threat from the government. He opposes a national ID system, national data basing, and tracking technologies, calling them ‘Orwellian’. He suggests, but doesn’t directly say, that issuing Social Security numbers is what is at fault for identity theft. He also opposes open access to medical information for insurance companies, required reporting to the government of deposits of $10k or more in any financial institution, the so-called Patriot Act! I couldn’t agree with him more on all of these thoughts. I just wish he was consistent and extended this right to privacy to women and their pregnancies.

Property Rights and Eminent Domain: Paul would fight misuse of eminent domain, and unfair compensation when it is used. He believes property rights are fundamental to a free society. Again, I find myself in agreement.

Health Freedom: This issue seems an odd one. He seems to really care about the scam that is alternative ‘medicine’. If he had his way, Snake Oil would be back. Caveat emptor. He does mention that he opposes a section of the Homeland Security Bill that would require forced immunizations and vaccinations for all citizens.

Home Schooling: Paul strongly supports home schooling. He wants to give tax credits to parents who choose to home school and enforced parity for home schooling degrees and traditional degrees when considering employment and college. In this vein, he also opposes any national standards for education that negatively impacts home schooling. Unfortunately, too many parents are unqualified to give their children a compete and balanced education. Too much home schooling would result in America falling further behind other nations in our education level.

That’s it. He likes his position on issues to be like his government, as small as possible. There is one line on his issues page that indicates that even more issues are forthcoming. Feel free to add those in the comments as they appear.