View Full Version : A Criticism: Ron Paul: Right to Life, Immigration and Free Trade

08-29-2007, 06:51 AM
Criticism of Ron Paul widely distributed in the anti-illegal immigration movement.
Submitted for review. Cogent responses to the author encouraged.

America First 2008

Ron Paul’s campaign seems to be one that is rooted in Libertarian philosophy and libertarian politics and then evolved out of that into the 2008 Campaign. Dr. Paul was the 1988 Presidential candidate for the Libertarian party. According Wikipedia, “Ron Paul has been referred to as a conservative, a constitutionalist, a libertarian, and a classical liberal] (as distinct from modern American liberalism).”

Let us consider three issues of interest to conservative Republicans, right to life, immigration and free trade.

Right to Life

The Libertarian platform reads, “We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control.” This is not listed as an issue on their platform. If libertarians are interested in protecting individual rights, are they saying that the unborn child has no rights? Surely, this must be a quagmire for libertarians.

Ron Paul’s position differs considerably from the Libertarian Party. Concerning right to life, Ron Paul’s website reads, “The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.”


The Libertarian Party platform states, “Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.” They state…

“Studies also show that not only do immigrants not take jobs away from American workers, they also do not drive down wages. Numerous studies have demonstrated that increased immigration has little or no effect on the wages of most American workers, and may even increase wages at upper income levels.”

Ron Paul says, “The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked.” His six point plan includes: Physically secure our borders and coastlines; enforce visa rules; no amnesty; no welfare for illegal aliens; end birthright citizenship; pass true immigration reform. (Here the complex problem of “amnesty” is given one sentence. And the heart of the immigration control issue is returning illegal aliens to their home countries. There is no mention of enforcement against employers, which would be necessary.)

This seems a recent conversion however, and his recent record of more restrictive immigration may reflect a greater sense of reality, as opposed to libertarian delusions. Or it may be that he could not possibly run for office in Texas any longer an be an open borders libertarian.

Here is Sandra Miller has investigated Ron Paul’s record on immigration:

Ron Paul's voting record
”I'd collected Ron Paul's voting record on the very strategies urged that night to reverse the influence of "one-world government:" hiring Americans, no amnesty for illegal aliens and border security based on Paul's Immigration Voting Record & Report Card on the NumbersUSA website:

(1) Paul consistently voted every year since 1999 against putting the military on the border:

2006: H. Amdt. 206 to H.R. 1815
2004: Goode Amendment to H.R. 4200
2003: Goode Amendment to H.R. 1588
2002: H. Amdt. 479 to H.R. 4546
2001: Traficant amendment to HR 2586
2000: Traficant amendment to H.R.4205
1999: Trafficant Amendment to H.R. 1401.

(2) Paul voted in 1997, 2001( H.R. 1885) and 2002 (H RES 365) to grant, extend or continue Section 245-i amnesties for illegal aliens.

(3) Paul voted NO on extending the voluntary Basic Pilot Workplace Verification Program (H.R. 2359),

(4) Paul voted NO on the border fence in 2005 (Hunter Amendment to HR 4437 - "Enforcement Only" Bill).

(5) Paul voted YES to increase H2-B (HR 763 in 2005) and H-1B visas (HR 3736 in 1998). In 1998, he voted to allow US firms to lay off Americans to replace them with foreigners.”

Ron Paul’s vote for H-1B visas to replace American workers with foreign workers indicates that he doesn’t quite understand the negative impact of massive immigration, legal or illegal, on American workers.

Free Trade

The Libertarian Party is for Free Trade, that is, unrestricted trade with foreign nations regardless of the consequences to the populations of the trading nations. It’s platform says, “Efforts to forcibly redistribute wealth or forcibly manage trade are intolerable.” Surprisingly, there is not more about “Free Trade” on the Libertarian Party website or in the Libertarian Platform. In the last twenty years, libertarians have been mugged by reality. The loss of American manufacturing jobs and massive foreign trade deficits wasn’t suppose to happen under libertarian theory. So, it is just ignored.

Ron Paul’s position on Free Trade is rather contradictory. He opposed free trade agreement, but for the less important issues. He recognizes the threat to United States sovereignty on his website,

“So called free trade deals and world governmental organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC), NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA are a threat to our independence as a nation. They transfer power from our government to unelected foreign elites.”

“Worse, our economy and our very independence as a nation is increasingly in the hands of foreign governments such as China and Saudi Arabia, because their central banks also finance our runaway spending.”

But he does not seem to grasp that Free Trade is a “race to the bottom.” Here is Ron Paul on Lew Rockwell. In effect, he is saying having an Open Trade, Free Trade. In Paul’s view, Free Trade is good, but the agreements are bad.

“As economist Henry Hazlitt explained, tariffs simply protect politically-favored special interests at the expense of consumers, while lowering wages across the economy as a whole. Hazlitt, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and countless other economists have demolished every fallacy concerning tariffs, proving conclusively that unilateral elimination of tariffs benefits the American people.” (Here he is stuck in the paradigm that no American working family believes.)

Ron Paul’s position is exactly the opposite that built the economic wealth of the United States. Alexander Hamilton read Adam Smith and his claims for free trade and rejected it. Hamilton’s report on manufacturers to the U.S. Congress stressed the importance of protecting American industry from cheap foreign goods and one of the first bills passed by the United States was a tariff bill.


Dr. Paul has assembled an eclectic set of financial and social positions that appear to have their roots in the libertarian movement. In some cases, he has abandoned those roots and adopted positions that are in alignment with long-term American conservative values. Restrictive immigration is the most prominent.

My net impression, is that Ron Paul's campaign is a contradiction. On one hand it strongly supports a limited government, limited spending, individual rights and the Constitution. Further, he supports the right to life.

On the other hand, only belatedly has he recognized the dangers of illegal immigration, much less the dangers of mass legal immigration. He somehow wants to support the individual American, yet at the same time send that citizen's job to China.

Paul Streitz

08-29-2007, 07:31 AM
Slanted smear piece. Best ignore or politely refute this crap.

08-29-2007, 07:51 AM

Personally I'm all for the cheap goods (unfortunately the labor practices are horrid, we could do w/ less cheap for better labor) and here is why....

we've exported massive amounts of dollars and it is killing the value worldwide... however, in exchange.... well... think of it this way....

China wins against the U.S. (economically) because it has cheap labor, currency and a lack of environmental, quality control or safety standards. European nations win off of this as well, but no one so much as the U.S. As a result, China exports manufactured goods that are purchased by the US.. all the inflation... you know the story...

The dollar shrinks in value versus the Euro, however we still bought more of the Chinese product, in higher bulk and cheaper.

Now as the dollar fades in worth, the refined, packaged, Brand America'd, and marketed products are assets that our nation has in its possession on shelves. The issue for us to regain our worth against the Euro is to become an exporter of these finished retail goods.

Remember our money is only worth about .50 maybe .75 cents on a good day versus the Euro so they can afford to purchase these goods (assuming one buys wholesale or sales used merchandise) at a rate much higher than American customers due to the favorable exchange. In this manner, through proper marketing of Brand America, we could easily find ourselves atop the economic ladder once again.

08-29-2007, 07:54 AM
When you look at a product that is on sale somewhere, cut that price in half and tag on about $5.00 for shipping...

say, 'does that look America enough?' or like a luxury others might not have? then say, if I were those folks would I pay ".50 on the dollar plus shipping for this?" If so snatch it up and list it online at sites that all you to sale and ship internationally. If it sells, go snatch all of 'em up.

08-29-2007, 07:55 AM
It appears to be genuine criticism. It we write off everything negative as a smear piece, we are no better than any of the other politicians we so dislike.

I am planning on writing him a reply regarding abortion and free trade, but I need to learn more about these issues raised about immigration.

Since one of Paul's great attributes is consistency, I am very curious to hear more about this accusation that he only recently began opposing illegal immigration. Being at work, I don't have time to read all the bills right now. I would appreciate it if someone could shed some light on the issue.

08-29-2007, 08:34 AM
uh, this guy is lying about some things.

he said:

(2) Paul voted in 1997, 2001( H.R. 1885) and 2002 (H RES 365) to grant, extend or continue Section 245-i amnesties for illegal aliens.

Which is untrue, he voted against that.

he also said:

(4) Paul voted NO on the border fence in 2005 (Hunter Amendment to HR 4437 - "Enforcement Only" Bill).

again, he voted YES on that.

those two popped out at me, i'm sure there are more lies, but those are just two i noticed

08-29-2007, 08:46 AM
I think we could all agree RP has a few very miniscule flaws. No one's perfect. But when compared to the other candidates in the running....I mean come on! Ron's the man by leaps and bounds!!!

An issue like abortion is a wedge issue and has been set up by the media to divide people. This issue is of very little concern, considering we are at a great risk of losing our Country, way of life, and everything we know and love. These petty issues need to be looked past and dealt with at a much later time.

08-29-2007, 08:47 AM
I think we could all agree RP has a few very miniscule flaws. No one's perfect. But when compared to the other candidates in the running....I mean come on! Ron's the man by leaps and bounds!!!

except that what this author cites as flaws, i dont see them as being flaws at all.

08-29-2007, 09:26 AM
This is a piece that we need to respond to thoroughly and respecfully.

Saying its a slanted or "everyone makes some mistakes" is completely unnacceptable.

I will look into the immigration part this week.

Post back your findings here, complete with links to prove votes, or explanations of the vote in an organized fashion.

This way we all learn more and we can respond well.