Ron Paul - an impotent President?

[katao]

Out campaigning, I often get the rebuttal, "Even if Ron Paul were elected President, he couldn't do any of the things he is promising because he needs the cooperation of Congress. They would fight him and nothing would get done".

I even hear this line of reasoning on these forums, from supporters, occasionally. So this thread is devoted to answering that myth. Because it is truly that, A MYTH!

Here are some of my thoughts.


Congress approves the budgeting of expenditures, but the Executive Branch, under the President, spends it (or not). Who cares if the Congress funds the Dept. of Education, President Paul can still disband it. Same with military funding, etc. It is so much easier for a President to shrink the government than to expand it (which truly does require the cooperation of Congress).

Now let's talk about the repeal of all the Executive Orders that have accumulated under past Presidents. All under President Paul's power.

How about replacing retiring Supreme Court justices with those that actually literally follow the Constitution? And tons of other federal judges. These appointments shift government polices for decades (and then become precedents which shift polices for centuries).


Now, surely, there are some areas where President Paul would need cooperation from Congress. He could easily win over the American Public by treating them as intelligent adults for a change. He could instigate weekly Primetime TV fireside chats where he explained, in great detail, the basics our political system (as represented in the Declaration and Constitution) and how that applies to the issues our country faces, all the stuff we missed from our Public School education. I truly believe Americans would grow to love a President like that. And Congress wouldn't dare vote against such a popular president.


How would you answer the question?

[DJ RP]

Well two things he can do immediately is he can use his position as commander and chief of the military to immediately move all troops out of iraq and back to our borders as well as moving them out of other countries etc.

He can also veto every unconsitutional piece of legislation that comes past his desk whilst president.

[born2drv]

I tell them this:


Ron Paul's ideas sound radical now, but Ronald Reagan was a radical in his time as well. As more and more people learn Paul's message they will understand how important it is to elect him.

And if there is a fundamental change in how the public looks at government intervention in our lives and abroad, then they will elect him. And if elected, the Congress BETTER cooperate or they will quickly find themselves without jobs.

Once elected, Ron Paul would immediately have the political capital to do what he was elected to do. If Congress didn't go along they'd be very sorry and would pay dearly in 2 years time, and we'd be MUCH better off after this "cleansing" of corrupt congressional offices.

Also even if Ron Paul just refused to add new entitlements, forced the congress to come to a standstill and stop spending, and managed to do just 5% of what he campaigns on, it would be a million times better then what we have now.

[CMoore]

I am not sure where the idea comes from that the Executive branch and the Legislative branch of government are in collusion with each other. What is this "cooperation" stuff anyway? I thought it was "checks and balances". This suggests that one keeps the other in line. Congress legislates and the President carries out the laws. The idea that the President has some sort of "program" that he has to get Congress to go along with is not exactly what the framers had in mind, I don't think.

[ButchHowdy]

You know . . . I would trust RP to use some of those recently invoked 'Decider' powers just to get this country 'on a plane' once again.

[walt]

READ MY SIGNATURE....Google "call to economic arms" for the full text...any questions please ask.

[katao]

Ron Paul's ideas sound radical now, but Ronald Reagan was a radical in his time as well.

Unfortunately, Reagan may not be the best example, because he did not follow through on the small government promises he made (with a few exceptions - airline deregulation is one of the exceptions).

But your other points were good.

[tiznow]

Ron paul presidency as i personally see is more about getting his ideas out to all americans not necessarily what will be accomplished, he's not going to walk in day 1 and poof federal reserve gone stuff like that. plus in this instance he understands the financial shock that it would cause. With most of his ideas there will obviously need to be a long transition period, but he will get the ball rolling.

in the end, for the most part it will be ron paul going through gobs of veto stamps....and you know what that's fine by me

have government stop dead in its tracks, since it seems to mess everything up.

this is generally what I tell people who feel he's too "radical", etc.

[EvilEngineer]

Ron Paul will have control over the executive branch of the government. Meaning immediately he will have control over:

US Combined Military Forces
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Department of Commerce (DOC)
Department of Defense (DOD)
Department of Education (ED)
Department of Energy (DOE)
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Department of Housing and Urban Devopment (HUD)
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Department of Labor (DOL)
Department of State (DOS_
Department of the Interior (DOI)
Department of the Treasury
Department of Transportation (DOT)
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

Most of these on the list he wants to get rid of and needs no congressional approval to immediately start scaling all of them back.

[kylejack]

No more dead troops. That's a pretty big change. Also, a standstill in Washington would be fantastic.

[Joe Knows]

Out campaigning, I often get the rebuttal, "Even if Ron Paul were elected President, he couldn't do any of the things he is promising because he needs the cooperation of Congress. They would fight him and nothing would get done".


How would you answer the question?

I usually answer it by asking them a question.

"Do you like the things that Congress is doing now?"

"So if Congress fights him and nothing gets done, then we are a lot better off. It is better for government to do nothing than move in the direction it is moving."

Anyway, I have found that that line or some variation works pretty well.

[ctb619]

"nothing getting done" is a hell of a lot better than what we are getting right now

[randolphus maximus]

Since the Treasury Department directs the IRS, Ron Paul could order the IRS to "stand down" or eliminate the IRS completely:D

[erowe1]

A president who is 100% committed to shrinking the government and utterly fails is still immeasurably preferable to a president who is 100% committed to growing the government and succeeds even a little bit.

[libertarian4321]

"They would fight him and nothing would get done"."

You say it like its a BAD thing.

I PRAY we someday have 4 years of congress and the President butting heads and NOTHING getting done! If only we could be so lucky...

[noxagol]

No kidding. That's why I usually like it when Congress and president are differing parties. Not so this time around.

[SouthernGuy15]

A president has UNLIMITED pardon power.

He could....

Pardon non-violent people guilty of owning illegal firearms.

Pardon non-violent drug users.

Pardon those who refused to return to Iraq.

Pardon everyone who is guilty of victimless crimes.

[Starks]

Listen, I know Ron is old... But I'm sure he can still perform in bed. He ain't impotent.

[RP4ME]

he can veto congress into submission

[Joe Knows]

A president has UNLIMITED pardon power.

He could....

Pardon non-violent people guilty of owning illegal firearms.

Pardon non-violent drug users.

Pardon those who refused to return to Iraq.

Pardon everyone who is guilty of victimless crimes.

He could also pardon any citizen who refused to pay his taxes.

[Thom1776]

We will probably know who the Republican nominee will be by February 5th. If it's Ron Paul, all we have to do is get candidates for congress in every district.

Anyone voting for Paul will vote for a Ron Paul congressional candidate, too.

Pretty simple there, folks.

[foofighter20x]

How about replacing retiring Supreme Court justices with those that actually literally follow the Constitution? And tons of other federal judges. These appointments shift government polices for decades (and then become precedents which shift polices for centuries).

I wonder who it is that's asking these questions... All I can say is that I hope it's not the evangelical Christians. I'd find it somewhat ironic that people who take the Bible literally wouldn't do the same for the Constitution.

[Grandson of Liberty]

I'd like to think he'd go on national TV from the oval office. . .lay out his plan for America, and ask the citizens to pressure their representatives to back his plans. If he's in the Oval Office, then he'll definitely have plenty of pull on Congress. Give congress time to come around, and if they don't, ask the people to recall their congressmen for violating the oaths they took to defend the Constitution.

[adpierce]

Effectively we have an elected monarchy right now in our country. We have monarchs for 4-8 years. Executive privilege has been interpreted so widely that a president can pretty much do whatever they want. For example, President Bush recently has decided to give millions of dollars worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia. Did he get congressional approval for this spending? No, he didn't because it was seen as his prerogative as commander-in-chief and chief diplomat. This needs to end. Ron would end it, and he would scale back much more than just foreign spending. Domestic spending would significantly decrease. Also I'm betting Ron wouldn't sign a budget into effect unless it will provide a significant surplus so that we can start paying off this country's mortgage. Also scaling back the executive departments is something that Dr. Paul wouldn't need congress to approve.

Also the veto power of the presidency has been used to guide congress in it's bill making. In effect, the president can tell congress what he'll approve and what he won't, and because approving a vetoed bill requires a super majority he'll usually get his way. I don't know if Ron Paul will continue this practice of "guiding Congress" but I'm willing to bet Congress won't pass bills they know they don't have a super majority for if Dr. Paul is probably going to veto it. This can have a huge impact on the way our country is run, a shift so large that a rEVOLution is an appropriate term for what would happen to the governing of our nation.

[Corydoras]

the president can tell congress what he'll approve and what he won't, and because approving a vetoed bill requires a super majority he'll usually get his way. I don't know if Ron Paul will continue this practice of "guiding Congress" but I'm willing to bet Congress won't pass bills they know they don't have a super majority for if Dr. Paul is probably going to veto it.

They will call him "obstructionist" and he will say he's "building consensus."
:D

[Grandson of Liberty]

They will call him "obstructionist" and he will say he's "building consensus."
:D

He could also say, "I'm not the one with an 11% approval rating." :D

[katao]

Thanks for all your responses. They help a lot!

[dsentell]

A president has UNLIMITED pardon power.

He could....

Pardon non-violent people guilty of owning illegal firearms.

Pardon non-violent drug users.

Pardon those who refused to return to Iraq.

Pardon everyone who is guilty of victimless crimes.

He could pardon Ramos and Compean (the border agents who were imprisoned for shooting and wounding-not killing, an illegal alien drug smuggler crossing the border).

[dsentell]

I just love it when people tell me that Ron Paul is too radical .....

I respond, "You consider the Constitution radical?"

Also, I watched "Ron Paul a Man for All Seasons" last night. Ron Paul was addressing a crowd and said something to the effect that he had wondered how he could campaign as a weak president. Then concluded that he would actually be a strong president -- strong enough not to take powers that the president was not supposed to have.

[TheEvilDetector]

Ron will need to triple the secret service protection and he will need secret service for the secret service.

He will be a marked man.