PDA

View Full Version : Senator Rand Paul: Overcriminalization Champion




tsai3904
12-27-2012, 07:37 PM
Senator Rand Paul: Overcriminalization Champion

By Daniel J. Dew
December 27, 2012

Since he was sworn into the Senate in 2011, Senator Rand Paul (R–KY) has consistently fought against overcriminalization, a term used to describe the use of criminal penalties to punish morally blameless conduct. Conduct that was not a crime in the past—and perhaps not a violation of any law—is now punished with time in prison.

Senator Paul has spent his time in the Senate educating people on the issue of overcriminalization, blocking legislation with overcriminalization elements, and proposing solutions to the overcriminalization problem. Paul should be applauded for his efforts.

Educating People on Overcriminalization

The first step to combating any problem is to let people know that one exists. Paul has brought the struggles of ordinary citizens with overcriminalization to light. He has demonstrated that overcriminalization can hurt anyone.

Overcriminalization is an idea that is still relatively new to most people—if they understand the concept at all. Paul has made it his mission to educate the masses on this critical issue. He has held congressional hearings, participated in interviews and speaking engagements, and even written a book on the topic.[1]

Most admirably, he practices what he preaches.

Blocking Bad Legislation

In the early hours of the morning of September 22, 2012, the Senate was finishing up its pre-election business as usual, which entailed quickly passing several bills via unanimous consent agreement to keep the federal government funded. One of these bills, the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2012, is much less pernicious than it might have been thanks to the work of Senator Paul.

One section of the bill, “International Fisheries Stewardship and Enforcement,” was identical to a Senate bill of the same name (the International Fisheries Stewardship and Enforcement Act, or IFSEA) that likely did not have enough votes to pass as a stand-alone bill. However, “business as usual” in the Senate often entails Senators trying to shovel bills such as the IFSEA into other bills which are considered “must-pass legislation,” such as the Coast Guard Authorization Act. In the end, Paul brought the Senate to a screeching halt to keep IFSEA from being enacted as part of the Coast Guard Authorization Act.

IFSEA would have added civil and criminal penalties for actions that are already penalized under 12 existing statutes. Existing criminal penalties would have increased from six months to five years in prison for simply catching the wrong type or number of fish. Additionally, IFSEA would have created an “International Fisheries Enforcement Program” and given the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) an additional $30 million per year to implement the program. NOAA has a history of abusive enforcement and has threatened fishermen, marine biologists, and others with fines and prison time in order partially to fund itself.[2]

Senator Paul’s opposition to IFSEA was a matter of principle. IFSEA would have had little affect on his constituency—Kentucky is landlocked.


More:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/12/senator-rand-paul-overcriminalization-champion

supermario21
12-27-2012, 11:18 PM
I think this is a sign of good things to come from Heritage. It may take them awhile (if ever) for them to get the purists on board, but in terms of the think tanks, it's definitely going to benefit having DeMint run the show over there.

FSP-Rebel
12-28-2012, 11:34 AM
I wonder if DeMint made that his first line of business to pump out a pro-Rand piece from the epic think tank.

Matt Collins
12-28-2012, 11:43 AM
I wonder if DeMint made that his first line of business to pump out a pro-Rand piece from the epic think tank.Either that or the employees there see the writing on the way and are forecasting the change in wind direction and are trying to make their new boss happy.

Bastiat's The Law
12-28-2012, 12:49 PM
Either way I approve of this message.