21 of 25 Iowa Delegates Are Ron Paul Supporters

KCRG.com reports:

"A sweeping victory by backers of Ron Paul at the Republican Party of Iowa state convention over the weekend is a sign the constitutional conservative movement will be a force in the state’s GOP politics for years, according to one of the leaders of the Liberty Movement.

"The Paul-aligned Liberty Movement scored a near-sweep of national delegates elected at the convention Saturday. [...] 21 of the 25 Iowa’s delegates elected Saturday are members of the Liberty Movement, and most supported Paul in the Jan. 3 first-in-the-nation precinct caucuses, according to Adil Khan, executive director of Liberty Iowa, a PAC aimed at advancing the causes of limited government and individual freedom."

Iowa Caucus Wrap Up

Well, the 2012 Iowa Caucus is over and the national media have now vacated the state faster than a class of graduates.  Officially Mitt Romney won with 30,015 votes(24.6%), narrowly edging out Rick Santorum who had 30,007 votes (24.5%).  There's some questions about some of the vote counts so I think you could call it a tie.  Ron Paul came in third with 26,219 votes (or 21.4% of the total). 

Those were the three coveted "tickets out of Iowa" with the remaining candidates divvying up the electoral crumbs.  Michele Bachmann, who beat Dr. Paul in a squeaker at the Ames Straw Poll this summer, dropped out after her poor showing in the caucus.

While I was definitely a little disappointed that Paul didn't come in first, Reason magazine editor Matt Welch gives seven reasons why Paulistas like myself should take heart.  Among them:

Paul more than doubled his vote over 2008, while Mitt Romney's stayed exactly the same. Seriously, Romney got 30,000 votes (25 percent of the total) in 2008, then 30,000 votes (25 percent of the total) in 2012. Paul vaulted from 10 percent to 21, from 12,000 votes to 26,000. His message of freedom, limited government, attacking the Federal Reserve, and ending wars foreign and domestic is undeniably on the grow.

Paul's delegate- and caucus-focused strategy means that he will likely punch above his electoral weight. The campaign focused not just on doing well at the caucus, but making sure Paul-friendly humans get nominated as county delegates, so that when the 25-delegate pie is eventually divvied up Dr. No will get more than projected.

Barring an unexpected and popular new Republican entrant, Paul is virtually guaranteed of making the Final Four once more. Last time around, Paul finished fifth in Iowa and fifth in New Hampshire, on the way to an overall fourth-place showing in the delegate count. This time Paul finished third in Iowa, and is polling at second in New Hampshire.

Ron Paul, and more importantly his ideas, are in it for the long haul. Other candidates will run out of money; Ron Paul won't. Most politicians see their business in primarily transactional terms of winning, losing, and influencing legislation; Paul sees his as proselytizing for freedom. "Where we are very successful," he said his speech last night, "is re-introducing some ideas the Republicans needed for a long time, and that is the conviction that freedom is popular."

Okay, I feel a little better.

When I was watching some evaluation of Ron Paul's performance a pundit on TV said that Paul did well in college towns because college campuses were rife with "isolationists" against the wars.  While it may have happened, I personally couldn't recall a single instance of any talking head in the media leveling the dreaded term "isolationist" against Cindy Sheehan or the myriad of anti-war protesters when Bush was in office.  But now that Obama is commander-in-chief and Ron Paul is the "peace candidate," suddenly anti-war college students are now "isolationist."  My compliments to the media; you never cease to amaze.

Iowa Gun Owners on Iowa Caucus

I received the following from Iowa Gun Owners:

Iowa Gun Owners wants to inform you about where the candidates stand on your gun rights.

First some good news:

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann and Congressman Ron Paul (in alphabetical order), were the two candidates to complete the survey 100% in favor of your gun rights. This means that, amongst other things, they’ve pledged to:

• Repeal any legislation that would re-institute the so called “Assault Weapons Ban.”


• Repeal the 1993 Brady Bill which allows the government to track what guns you purchase, setting the stage for a national gun registry.

• Repeal legislation that bans guns on school zones, which leaves tens of millions of school children virtually defenseless as their teachers can’t carry a gun.

• Stop any attempts to pass a UN Small Arms Treaty.

Congressman Ron Paul has recently introduced legislation to deal with some of the issues mentioned here – thus putting his money where his mouth is.

These are the candidates that are not afraid of the anti-gun special interest groups, their pals in the media, and their friends in Congress. No one else has the record and the survey results that Congresswoman Bachmann and Congressman Paul.

But that’s where the good news ends.

We should mention that Senator Santorum has completed the survey as well. On his second attempt he answered the questions correct. However Senator Santorum has a history of anti-gun votes during his time in the US Senate - and it took a lot of activism on your part to get a signed survey.

Santorum voted for the NICS compliance act, mandating that you alert the federal government in nearly every case where you buy a firearm. That’s the last thing gun owners want – their government knowing that they are a gun owner.

Santorum also voted to mandate trigger locks on all new guns being sold. As Iowa Gun Owners documented recently, this has led to horrific murders in cases where victims couldn’t unlock their guns in time.

Yet Santorum refuses to apologize for these votes. His poor initial survey response, combined with his history of anti-gun votes leave us very concerned about his willingness to fight for gun owners should he be the GOP nominee or the President someday.

Newt Gingrich refuses to answer our survey, after his staff assured us that we would receive it. Gingrich used the power of his office and Speaker of the House to voice tremendous support for the Brady Bill. He even said that he wants to take away more of your freedoms by mandating that you surrender your thumb print to the government to be able to buy a firearm. Imagine being treated like a common criminal for wanting to exercise a constitutionally guaranteed right!

It’s no surprise then that Newt’s State Chairwoman is none other that House Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer. Upmeyer broke her written promise by working to KILL Constitutional Carry last session in the House.

Mitt Romney also refuses to answer our survey. But this should be no surprise. Romney has loudly proclaimed his support for mandatory waiting periods and mandatory background checks. But far worse, as Governor of Massachusetts, Romney signed into law a PERMAMENT ban on so-called assault weapons.

Romney’s State Chairwoman is Assistant Majority Leader Renee Schulte. Schulte also lied to gun owners in Iowa by voting to kill Constitutional Carry last year in the House after taking gun owners' votes, time and campaign contributions.

Governor Perry and Former Governor Jon Huntsman have also refused our survey.

This has been an exciting process for us at Iowa Gun Owners. One campaign, that has since imploded, threatened IGO with a libel lawsuit for exposing the position of their candidate during the Iowa Straw Poll.

Another campaign’s staff almost attacked IGO staff and volunteers at a Fox News debate back in August because we were informing so many Iowans about the refusal of their candidate to put his views on the 2nd Amendment on paper.

Multiple campaigns have sought out our endorsement, although we can not and do not endorse candidates.

Our ONLY goal at Iowa Gun Owners is to doggedly find out which candidates really support your gun rights. Don’t forget, “everyone” is pro-gun at election time, or so they say.

We’ve learned that during last year’s mid-term elections. Even the worst candidate on the 2nd Amendment claims to support your rights.

That’s why we issue surveys. A survey doesn’t ensure that a politician will stay faithful to his pledge. But a candidate who refuses to go on the record on gun rights is certainly not a candidate who will support your right to keep and bear arms.

Please consider a small contribution to Iowa Gun Owners to help us cover the costs of our survey program. Our mail, email and robocall program was effective at exposing a slew of anti-gun candidates.

But as we approach the 2012 legislative session we need to replenish our coffers to be able to alert gun owners to the threats that will no doubt come out of the General Assembly this session.

Any amount is helpful. If you can donate $50 to help us pay for this program we would be very grateful. If that is too much, consider chipping in just $5 or $10 instead.

We will put it to immediate use.

Also, you should know that Capitol insiders are reporting that some in the GOP establishment are working hard to remove the Constitutional Carry provision to the Iowa GOP Platform.

They are doing this because they know that their party looks bad when their platform professes support for Constitutional Carry - and then their party promptly caves into the anti-gun lobby in Des Moines and votes to KILL Constitutional Carry.

So they want to remove that portion from the platform.

Iowa gun owners who attend the GOP caucus should resist this and instead, offer this plank to strengthen the platform:

"We demand full restoration of 2nd Amendment rights and call for a state law authorizing law-abiding citizens to carry firearms, open or concealed, without a permit, an idea known as Constitutional Carry.


"We call upon the General Assembly to take immediate action on Constitutional Carry so that law abiding gun owners will no longer have to pay outrageous fees for permitting, submit to government mandated training, and have their fingerprints taken in the same manner that a criminal does."

For Freedom,

Aaron Dorr
Exectutive Director

Iowa Ron Paul Update

Things are looking good for Ron Paul here in Iowa.  The "Real Clear Politics Average" of several polls currently shows him in first place among likely voters. State Senator Kent Sorenson, Michele Bachmann’s Iowa campaign chairman, recently defected to Dr. Paul's campaign.

Steve Hoodjer over at Iowa Freedom Report wrote up a nice endorsement of Dr. Paul. "In 30 years in Congress, Dr. Paul has compiled an unprecedented voting record," writes Hoodjer. "With his strict adherence to his oath of office to defend the Constitution, Paul’s votes have set him apart from both Democrats and his fellow Republicans.  By standing alone for liberty, sometimes on the losing end of 434-1 votes, Paul has well earned his title as 'the one exception to the gang of 535 on Capitol Hill.'"

He continues: "Of all the votes Paul has taken during his lonely watch as a sentry for freedom, perhaps none was more important than his 'no' to the Iraq War.  With the Wilsonians and globalists in firm command of the Republican Party, all lofty conservative goals are now sacrificed to one aim – a constant state of global welfare and global warfare.  By daring to challenge the party orthodoxy, Paul re-opened the debate over the proper reach of American foreign policy and introduced truly republican (with a small 'r') ideas into the mainstream[.]

"By operating above the banal traditions of blind partisanship, Ron Paul has united under the libertarian banner a coalition diverse in race, religion, age, sexual orientation, and prior allegiance.  Riding this wave of enthusiasm, victory for Paul in the nomination contest is no longer out of the question."

Let's hope Hoodjer is right.  Be sure to caucus for Ron Paul on January 3rd.

Ron Paul: Champion of the Constitution

Like many others I once raised my hand and swore an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. Bill Salier once reminded me that that oath has no expiration date. Whether or not you formally took that oath is immaterial. It is incumbent upon all Americans to defend the Constitution. It is the basis for our form of government and our very way of life as Americans.

Ignored, abused, and denied by the political class for decades, that Constitution is now under direct assault. The “Father of the Constitution,” James Madison, wrote: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined… [and they] will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.” But now the federal government has usurped so much power that seemingly every human activity falls under its purview. The price tag for this constant encroachment is a loss of freedom and a crushing debt upon our children.

Only one candidate for president has a long, proven track record of defending the Constitution: Ron Paul. He has defended it not just when it was politically convenient, not just when campaigning, not just when addressing “Tea Party” activists, but always and often. When you cast your vote in the January 3rd Republican caucus, cast it in defense of the U.S. Constitution. Vote for Dr. Ron Paul.

[I just sent this in to the Cedar Rapids Gazette as a letter to the editor.]

Iowa Caucus Countdown

There is less than a month to go until the Iowa caucuses on January 3rd when Iowa becomes the center of the American political universe for a day.  Probably to the chagrin of some of my Libertarian Party friends, I am once again a registered Republican so I can go cast a vote for Ron Paul.

For any who also want to do so, you can find an Iowa voter registration form here.  Simply print it out, mark the box for Republican Party and send it in to or drop it off at your local county auditor's office.  But do so quickly, time is running out!  If you're normally an independent or some other party you can change your party affiliation back after the election.

Also, if any Ron Paul supporters are on Facebook, check out the event page for the "Ron Paul Iowa Caucus Mail Bomb" I set up.  It's an easy and free way to support Dr. Paul's efforts here in Iowa.

Ron Paul may be on the verge of major upset in the Hawkeye State.  A Paul win would send shock waves throughout the statist political duopoly.  Sounds like a winning proposition to me!

The Ron Paul Plan

At a time when we are adding over a trillion dollars to our national debt every year, the Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (a body designed to make the hard decisions that Congress itself has been too cowardly to make) is expected to recommend making about that much in spending reductions over ten years. When they’re driving us over a fiscal cliff I guess it’s nice to know that they’re at least thinking about downshifting. This laughable budget-cutting contrasts with the economic plan offered by Congressman and Republican presidential hopeful Dr. Ron Paul.

Dr. Paul’s detailed “Plan to Restore America” would cut $1 trillion from the federal budget during the first year of the Paul presidency and deliver a balanced budget by the third year. Paul’s plan would eliminate five do-nothing federal departments (Energy, HUD, Commerce, Interior, and Education) and reduce the federal workforce by 10%. It would block grant Medicaid and welfare to the states, allowing flexibility and cost-savings.

If you think such cuts are too much and would knock the federal budget back into the 1800’s, no such luck. Nationally syndicated columnist Jacob Sullum points out, “Paul's plan would not return the country to the 1990s, let alone the 19th century. It calls for total outlays of $2.9 trillion in 2015, which is about as much as the federal government spent as recently as 2003, adjusted for inflation.” They are substantial cuts, but not oppressive.

Ron Paul would extend the Bush tax cuts, lower the corporate tax rate to 15%, and abolish taxes on inheritance, capital gains and personal savings. Paul’s plan would repeal the job-crushing Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, and Sarbanes-Oxley laws and repeal many onerous regulations. It would audit the Federal Reserve and use free market techniques to strengthen the dollar and stabilize inflation. In a symbolic gesture, President Paul would take a salary of $39,336, the median income of the American worker.

You can read the plan in-depth at RonPaul2012.com. At a recent forum, Governor Branstad praised Ron Paul’s plan as “the boldest plan to reduce the federal deficit.” With the country careening ever closer to socio-economic collapse, if now isn’t the time for “bold plans” such as Dr. Paul proposes, when will be? I’ll vote for Ron Paul in the January 3rd Republican caucus.

Ron Paul: The Media's 13th Floor

Many of us Ron Paul supporters have been biting our knuckles for a long time over the fact that Ron Paul can't seem to get any notice from the mainstream media.  Apparently others have begun to notice too.  Check out this video of Daily Show host John Stewart (who is probably not a supporter of Dr. Paul, but just enjoys pointing out the media's foibles) as he demonstrates the media's ignoring of Ron Paul.  (Stewart humorously likens the media's treatment of Paul to the 13th floor of a hotel.)



So why don't the media like Ron Paul?  Writing for the Chicago Tribune, John Kass has some theories.  One is that "the media is merely trying to provide us with loving protection from Paul and those challenging libertarian ideals:

"Such as the view we shouldn't be eager to be groped in airports or to fund another war in the Middle East, or that we should legalize drugs rather than fight the drug wars, or the wild idea that a coffee shop waitress should not be expected to pay taxes on her tips.

"These are extreme notions, though the principles behind them were once held dear by a few old guys in powdered wigs who founded this country.

"The TV people are happy to do the work for you, and tell you what notions are fit for public debate."

But another theory that he proffers is that the Democrat and Republican establishment (and thereby their cohorts in the media) are just plain scared of the old boy since he could steal votes from the existing power structure.  Writes Kass:  "Paul is anti-war, and there are many independent Democrats who've been anti-war, including those who elected President Barack Obama in 2008 and have since turned on him because, well, he recently help start a war in Libya, turning America's two wars into three.

"Paul also doesn't campaign on social issues, like outlawing abortion, or involving the government in the bedroom. He's not a political evangelical, so Paul's stance would be attractive to many Democrats."

Republican power brokers fear Paul mucking up the works too.  "[I]t's obvious Republicans see Paul as a threat," writes Kass.  "Perhaps it's the fact that Paul ridicules the GOP military drumbeat against Iran. It may be that he appeals to tea party fiscal conservatives, and if these voters begin to lean toward Paul, the establishment GOP will be left with defense contractors, neocons and evangelicals, not enough to win a national election."

So the media has lots of reasons to downplay Dr. Paul's campaign.  Is there anything that can be done about it?  Some local Ron Paul supporters are going to try.

Liberty-activist Brandon Echols recently informed me that a grassroots group will be staging a "protest in response to the Mainstream Media's blackout on coverage of Ron Paul."  They will gather at the Cedar Rapids Gazette Headquarters (also home of KCRG tv news) at 500 3rd Ave SE, Cedar Rapids, Iowa from 4pm to 5pm on Friday, August 26.  All who support Dr. Paul or are against biased journalism are encouraged to attend.  You can view their Facebook event page here. 

According to Echols, this will be a "peaceful and lawful" rally in support of Ron Paul.  I should note that this assembly is not affiliated with, nor sanctioned by, Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign.

Ron Paul vs. Michele Bachmann: A Leader or A Cheerleader

Recently Jones County Ron Paul supporter Roger Kistler attended both a Ron Paul and a Michele Bachmann campaign event in the same day.   In this letter Kistler provides an interesting comparison of the styles of those two candidates.

Dear Jones County Ron Paulers,

Yesterday I took the day off from my work. I’m glad I did. I learned a lot and I would like to share some of that with you.

At noon I attended the Ron Paul “meet and greet” in Cedar Rapids. At four o’clock I attended a Michele Bachmann event in Maquoketa. The difference between the two campaign events was stark. I am convinced more than ever before that Ron Paul should be our nation’s next chief executive.

At the Ron Paul meet and greet, people came into the meeting at the Marriott Hotel and either stood talking to one another or sat and chatted with the person sitting next to them until Dr. Paul was introduced. Before Dr. Paul began speaking the only sound was that of people talking to one another. At the Bachmann event held in the parking lot of Flapjacks restaurant, driving music was playing over loudspeakers as the people arrived. I chatted briefly with the lady next to me but really there were very few conversations taking place.

Bachmann campaign signs and stickers were freely passed out. Ron Paul had campaign signs as well. They were neatly stacked by the exit and could be picked up on the way out.

The Bachmann campaign was literally staged. They set up a tent and a stage probably twenty feet long in front of the audience with Ms Bachmann’s campaign bus serving as a back drop. On the stage were 8 chairs with people seated facing the audience holding Bachmann signs. Ron Paul stood at a hotel podium by himself.

Not counting campaign staff, I counted between 140 and 150 people at the Ron Paul event. I counted about 60 people at the Bachman event. I found it interesting that the front page of the Dubuque Telegraph Herald today reported Bachmann having “200 Iowans” present.

The numbers in attendance did not impress me as much as their ages. The Ron Paul group was by and large younger. I was on the older side of the age curve. The Bachmann crowd was older. I was on the younger side of that crowd’s age curve.

The messages of the two candidates were as different as night and day. Dr. Paul identified problems with the country as he saw them and then proceeded to explain how they could be solved in the political arena. The audience enthusiastically but politely applauded to statements to which they obviously agreed. Bachmann on the other hand was full of questions. “Do you think Washington is spending too much of your money?” “Do you want to get rid of Obama care?” Depending upon the question, the audience responses were either a loud, vocal “Yes” or “No” occasionally accompanied by spastic applause.

Dr. Paul repeatedly referenced the US Constitution often citing specific article and section numbers. Michele Bachmann mentioned the Constitution once then added, “By the way that’s what we should follow … the Constitution.”

After Dr Paul completed his prepared remarks, he fielded questions. Michele Bachmann did not. She spoke for a little over 15 minutes and that was it. The questions Dr. Paul was asked were very thoughtful and specific. He spoke for probably 30 - 40 minutes.

On cue the music started again and from the elevated stage Ms Bachmann quickly began shaking hands as the people reached up to her while she occasionally reached down to scribble an autograph. When Ron Paul stopped talking, the crowd members started talking to each other again. Dr Paul positioned himself by the door and one by one, face to face, shook hands, fielded one-on-one questions, posed for photos and signed autographs for those interested.

I think my day could be summarized in the following way. One campaign provided thoughtful insight and those present were obviously intent on learning. The other campaign had the depth of and sounded much like a junior high pep rally.

On the way home I kept wondering, “As a nation, are we going to elect a leader or a cheerleader?” If you haven’t done it yet, get your tickets for the Ames Straw Poll at http://www.iowaforronpaul.com/ so you can vote for a leader August 13.

Ron Pauler Mike Angelos gave me a Ron Paul / Michele Backman comparison sheet. You will find it attached. Feel free to make copies and share it with your friends and especially with those who don’t really know much about Ron Paul. Thanks Mike.

It was good seeing all the Jones County Ron Paulers at the Cedar Rapids meet and greet. Keep up the good work.

Yours in liberty,
Roger Kistler,
Jones Co. chair
Ron Paul Presidential Campaign
Olin, Iowa

Ron Paul Gains Ground In Iowa (Literally)

It may come as a surprise to former Congressman Anthony Weiner, but the best way to judge a politician's efficacy is by the size of his... uh, tent.  At least that's how it works at the Iowa Republican Straw Poll in Ames.  Judging by the site awarded to candidate Ron Paul, the good doctor plans on having a lot of supporters in his tent.  (I'll be one of them.)

The straw poll is held in and around the Hilton Coliseum on the ISU campus which is sectioned off and lots are "auctioned" off to the respective campaigns.  Of course not all lots are equal and the choicest spots go to those who cough up the most cash.  (The proceeds go to the Iowa GOP.)  According to the Iowa Republican (which listed Ron Paul as one of the big winners of the straw poll real estate auction):

The Ron Paul Revolution will take center stage at the Iowa Straw Poll now that Paul has purchased the same lot that has hosted the previous two winners of the event, Mitt Romney and George W. Bush. Paul had to pay a hefty price, $31,000, but the space is the closest of any other to the voting locations. The elevated walkways that will surround the Paul compound make it an ideal spot for the media to use as a backdrop.

This will be quite different than when I attended the event in 2007.  Back then the deep-pocketed candidates (like Romney) were in the center of the action and had huge tents, catered meals, bands, and carnival rides.  Dr. Paul's lot was a bit off the beaten path and I can only recall one open-sided picnic tent.  He had some local garage bands and campaign volunteers grilled a few hotdogs.  (That was still better than 1999 when I supported Alan Keyes.  His small space was literally out in a parking lot.  He had a small GI pup tent set up and he and I split a Fresca.  Okay, I made that last part up.)

This time Ron Paul appears to one of the major players at the event.  Unlike 2007, Ron Paul will be providing charter bus transportation for supporters to get to the event.  The IowaForRonPaul website boasts that Dr. Paul's tent will include free food, drinks, literature, music and games.  Before supporters had to pay their own way into the event, this year Paul's campaign is subsidizing the tickets so supporters only pay $10 for everything, including transportation.

If you'd like to attend, you can order your ticket at http://www.iowaforronpaul.com/.

Vote Ron Paul At The Ames Straw Poll



 I’ll be supporting doctor and U.S. Representative Ron Paul at the Ames Straw Poll on August 13th.

At a time when the U.S. government is borrowing $3 million every minute, many Republicans have signed on to a supposedly “bold” plan that pretends to have unknown future politicians balance the budget 50 years from now. Ron Paul, however, supports balancing the budget while we still have a country. In his 21 years in Congress, Paul has never voted to raise taxes and has voted AGAINST every unbalanced budget. Imagine what he could do with a presidential veto pen.

He never votes for legislation unless it’s expressly authorized by the Constitution. His votes have earned him the derisive name “Dr. No” from his big-spending colleagues in Congress and “Taxpayers' Best Friend” from the National Taxpayers’ Union. He realizes that we can no longer afford to fight war after endless war where we no longer even bother to define victory. Ron Paul is pro-life, pro-free market, and pro-Second Amendment.

If you want to support Dr. Paul in the Ames Straw Poll you can get your ticket at http://www.iowaforronpaul.com/. If you register before July 4th, you get roundtrip transportation to the event, a Ron Paul T-shirt, and food, drinks, and entertainment at the Ron Paul tent for only $10.

Ron Paul As Popular As Obama?

According to Rasmussen Reports, a hypothetical 2012 race between President Obama and Dr. Ron Paul would be a dead heat.

The report says: "A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of likely voters finds Obama with 42% support and Paul with 41% of the vote. Eleven percent (11%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided."

"Thirty-nine percent (39%) of all voters have a favorable opinion of Paul, while 30% view him unfavorably. This includes 10% with a very favorable opinion and 12% with a very unfavorable one. But nearly one-out-of-three voters (32%) are not sure what they think of Paul."

I don't think we can get that lucky, but if the GOP puts Dr. Paul at the top of the ticket in 2012, this blogger will gladly vote Republican.

Clean Sweep!

All 5 of Iowa's U.S. Representatives Co-Sponsor Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" Bill.

On June 11, U.S. Representative Bruce Braley became the final member of Iowa's U.S. House delegation to co-sponsor HR 1207, the “Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009.″ Iowa's three Democrat and two Republican representatives have all now co-sponsored this important legislation.

The bill merely calls for the Comptroller General (America's chief financial inspector and head of the Government Accountability Office [GAO]) to conduct an audit of the Federal Reserve System by the end of 2010 and report the findings to Congress.

The Federal Reserve (or "Fed") is America's central banking system. It is a a quasi-public and quasi-private organization (an unholy union of government and private interests). It was signed in 1913 by President Woodrow Wilson, who supposedly later lamented, "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. [...] The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. [...] No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."

According to its website, the Federal Reserve's duties fall into four general areas:

1. Conducting the nation's monetary policy by influencing the monetary and credit conditions in the economy in pursuit of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.
2. Supervising and regulating banking institutions to ensure the safety and soundness of the nation's banking and financial system and to protect the credit rights of consumers.
3. Maintaining the stability of the financial system and containing systemic risk that may arise in financial markets.
4. Providing financial services to depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign official institutions, including playing a major role in operating the nation's payments system.

You would think that an institution with so much responsibility to and power in the U.S. economy would be run openly and transparently. Not so. To understand why the audit of the Fed is necessary, here are the words of the bill's author Congressman Ron Paul, when he arose to introduce the bill to Congress:

"I rise to introduce the Federal Reserve Transparency Act. Throughout its nearly 100-year history, the Federal Reserve has presided over the near-complete destruction of the United States dollar. Since 1913 the dollar has lost over 95% of its purchasing power, aided and abetted by the Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy. How long will we as a Congress stand idly by while hard-working Americans see their savings eaten away by inflation? Only big-spending politicians and politically favored bankers benefit from inflation. [...]

"Since its inception, the Federal Reserve has always operated in the shadows, without sufficient scrutiny or oversight of its operations. [...] The Federal Reserve has, on the one hand, many of the privileges of government agencies, while retaining benefits of private organizations, such as being insulated from Freedom of Information Act requests.

"The Federal Reserve can enter into agreements with foreign central banks and foreign governments, and the GAO is prohibited from auditing or even seeing these agreements. Why should a government-established agency, whose police force has federal law enforcement powers, and whose notes have legal tender status in this country, be allowed to enter into agreements with foreign powers and foreign banking institutions with no oversight? [...]

"More importantly, the Fed’s funding facilities and its agreements with the Treasury should be reviewed. The Treasury’s supplementary financing accounts that fund Fed facilities allow the Treasury to funnel money to Wall Street without GAO or Congressional oversight. [...]

"The Federal Reserve Transparency Act would eliminate restrictions on GAO audits of the Federal Reserve and open Fed operations to enhanced scrutiny. We hear officials constantly lauding the benefits of transparency and especially bemoaning the opacity of the Fed, its monetary policy, and its funding facilities. By opening all Fed operations to a GAO audit and calling for such an audit to be completed by the end of 2010, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act would achieve much-needed transparency of the Federal Reserve. I urge my colleagues to support this bill."

And support it they have. HR 1207 currently has 223 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives, Republicans and Democrats alike. That is over half of all representatives. With that much support, it would appear likely that House leadership will allow the bill to be debated and voted on.

Attention now turns to the Senate where the bill's companion bill, S.604 (Federal Reserve Sunshine Act) has already been introduced. The Fed intends to hire a veteran lobbyist to urge Congress to vote against the audit. The people, therefore, need to urge them to vote FOR the bill. Contact information for Iowa's two U.S. Senators is below. Ask them to co-sponsor S.604.

Sen. Charles Grassley (R): Website Contact Page or Mail to 135 Hart Senate Office Building, District of Columbia 20510-1501 D.C. Office Phone: (202) 224-3744 Des Moines Office Phone: (515) 288-1145

Sen. Tom Harkin (D): Website Contact Page or Mail to 731 Hart Senate Office Building,District of Columbia 20510-1502 D.C. Office Phone: (202) 224-3254 Des Moines Office Phone: (515) 284-4574

The Revolution: A Manifesto

Back in October I received a copy of Ron Paul’s book "The Revolution: A Manifesto." I did something with it I had never done with a book before. No, not read it. I read it cover to cover twice in a row.

Usually books written in association with a presidential campaign aren’t very good. They tend to be just the written form of the meaningless sound bites that we expect from modern politics. Paul’s book is, unsurprisingly, different. Although Ron Paul sought the Republican nomination for president, philosophically he is a libertarian and has done more to advance that school of thought than any Libertarian Party candidate. The Revolution isn’t a campaign book at all, but a wide ranging dissertation on libertarian and paleo-conservative philosophy.

The first chapter is titled “The False Choices of American Politics.” Paul writes: “[E]very four years we are treated to the same tired, predictable routine: two candidates with few disagreements on fundamentals pretend that they represent dramatically different philosophies of government.” The false choice presented is, how should the government control something, not should the government control it. This chapter seemed particularly apropos after this election between statists Obama and McCain, and after a Republican president began nationalizing the banking industry like a Democrat on steroids.

Chapter 2 deals with “The Foreign Policy of the Founding Fathers.” Paul spends a good deal of time outlining the policy of “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none,” advocated by Thomas Jefferson and others. He chronicles how far we’ve strayed from that advice and how our intervention in other nations has made us a target for terrorists while draining our treasury.

The third chapter deals with the constitution and how much the federal government has slipped loose from its constraints. Paul again quotes Jefferson, who wrote in 1798, “Confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism. Free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence… In matters of Power, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” Paul urges us to “rally and recall our people to the Constitution, the rule of law, and our traditional American republic.”

Chapter 4 expounds upon “Economic Freedom.” He details his thoughts on government waste and spending (but I repeat myself), taxes, and regulation of private markets. In Chapter 5, “Civil Liberties and Personal Freedom,” he deals with privacy rights and other civil protections that have been buffeted by the “wars” on terror and drugs. Writes Paul: “Freedom means not only that our economic activity ought to be free and voluntary, but that government should stay out of our personal affairs as well. […] Economic freedom and personal liberty are not divisible.” This flies in the face of conservatives and liberals that want one but not the other, conservatives wanting only the former and liberals wanting only the latter.

The sixth chapter deals with Paul’s true passion: “Money: The Forbidden Issue in American Politics.” Here Paul chronicles America’s monetary policy and how it creates inflation, encourages debt and government spending, and causes the economic “bubbles” that seem to be bursting everywhere lately. Chief among Paul’s concerns is the Federal Reserve, which orchestrates all of the above. To remedy our problems, Paul advises abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning the dollar to the gold standard.

In the final chapter, “The Revolution,” Paul explains what can be done to peacefully implement the points he raised in the previous chapters.

If you’re at all interested in understanding libertarian ideas, you should read "The Revolution: A Manifesto." It touches on just about every subject of importance and is an easy, enjoyable read. It’s available at the Campaign For Liberty Store online, amazon.com and anywhere else books are sold.

Ron Paul Gets It

In this interview on CNN, Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) raises many of the same points about the downfall of the GOP that I raised in my post "Cinders and Ashes!"

Ron Paul & Senator Coburn On Economic "Bailout"

I would be remiss in my duties if I didn't write about the massive economic "bailout" that just passed through Congress. However, when I heard Senator Tom Coburn's (R-OK) speech I knew that he had put it more elequantly than I could. Rather than try to reinvent the wheel, here is Senator Coburn's speech:

Here is U.S. Representative Ron Paul's (R-TX) comments in the House:

October 3, 2008

"Madame Speaker, only in Washington could a bill demonstrably worse than its predecessor be brought back for another vote and actually expect to gain votes. That this bailout was initially defeated was a welcome surprise, but the power-brokers in Washington and on Wall Street could not allow that defeat to be permanent. It was most unfortunate that this monstrosity of a bill, loaded up with even more pork, was able to pass.

"The Federal Reserve has already injected hundreds of billions of dollars into US and world credit markets. The adjusted monetary base is up sharply, bank reserves have exploded, and the national debt is up almost half a trillion dollars over the past two weeks. Yet, we are still told that after all this intervention, all this inflation, that we still need an additional $700 billion bailout, otherwise the credit markets will seize and the economy will collapse. This is the same excuse that preceded previous bailouts, and undoubtedly we will hear it again in the future after this bailout fails.

"One of the most dangerous effects of this bailout is the incredibly elevated risk of moral hazard in the future. The worst performing financial services firms, even those who have been taken over by the government or have filed for bankruptcy, will find all of their poor decision-making rewarded. What incentive do Wall Street firms or any other large concerns have to make sound financial decisions, now that they see the federal government bailing out private companies to the tune of trillions of dollars? As Congress did with the legislation authorizing the Fannie and Freddie bailout, it proposes a solution that exacerbates and encourages the problematic behavior that led to this crisis in the first place.

"With deposit insurance increasing to $250,000 and banks able to set their reserves to zero, we will undoubtedly see future increases in unsound lending. No one in our society seems to understand that wealth is not created by government fiat, is not created by banks, and is not created through the manipulation of interest rates and provision of easy credit. A debt-based society cannot prosper and is doomed to fail, as debts must either be defaulted on or repaid, neither resolution of which presents this country with a pleasant view of the future. True wealth can only come about through savings, the deferral of present consumption in order to provide for a higher level of future consumption. Instead, our government through its own behavior and through its policies encourages us to live beyond our means, reducing existing capital and mortgaging our future to pay for present consumption.

"The money for this bailout does not just materialize out of thin air. The entire burden will be borne by the taxpayers, not now, because that is politically unacceptable, but in the future. This bailout will be paid for through the issuance of debt which we can only hope will be purchased by foreign creditors. The interest payments on that debt, which already take up a sizeable portion of federal expenditures, will rise, and our children and grandchildren will be burdened with increased taxes in order to pay that increased debt.

"As usual, Congress has show itself to be reactive rather than proactive. For years, many people have been warning about the housing bubble and the inevitable bust. Congress ignored the impending storm, and responded to this crisis with a poorly thought-out piece of legislation that will only further harm the economy. We ought to be ashamed."