When all the high-fives, handshakes, and hip-hip hoorays finish dying down a bit of reality overcomes the Ron Paul, anti-Fed faithful. In order for Ron Paul’s full Federal Reserve audit to become law it requires Paul to swim in uncomfortable waters. He must compromise his principles. So the celebrations must be tempered with the hard truth that is DC politics. It is indeed a bittersweet symphony.
Ron Paul’s efforts at having HR.1207 voted on as a standalone bill never really had a chance. Instead, it will arrive to the House floor attached to Barney Frank’s little boy, his comprehensive financial regulatory reform bill. The draft legislation grants new powers to the Federal Reserve and creates more regulatory controls over the market. If the free market is god, this bill is the devil. However, the bill will now have something good attached to it now that HR.1207 was added to it as an amendment.
Ron Paul makes a name for himself by always considering the Constitution while weighing his votes. Should Paul supporters expect him to don his Dr. No mask when his 30+ year fight against the central bank finally comes to a vote on the House floor? Will Paul vote against auditing the Fed because it is attached to an obviously unconstitutional bill? The libertarian purists among us may expect him to do so, but I expect him to vote for the evil to get the good. In fact, I would expect most if not all Paul supporters will give him a pass on this one. Tell us what you think in the comments section to this article.
“While HR 3996, if passed, will grant sweeping new powers to the Federal Reserve, at least with this amendment attached, it won’t be acting in secret anymore. This is a major victory for Federal Reserve transparency and government accountability. I am very grateful to Congressman Bachus and all the other Members who were so supportive and helpful in this effort,” stated Congressman Paul.
An argument could be made (and Paul seems to be implying it by his quote) that the financial regulatory reform bill is going to pass anyway and with Paul’s audit included in it, the bill’s attack on the free market will be softened. If they gut Paul’s amendment (like Mel Watt and Barney Frank tried to do in committee) as it moves closer to a floor vote it wouldn’t be shocking to see Dr. Paul morph into Dr. No once again.
So it is certainly bittersweet, but at least it’s not all bitter and no sweet.
——————————————-
UPDATE: It looks like Paul will still push for a separate vote on HR.1207 as a standalone bill. I don’t think those in power will let it happen, but I never thought his bill would get as far as it has already, so we’ll see.
By now we all know the story. Mel Watt introduced an amendment on the big financial regulatory reform bill that “gutted” Ron Paul’s HR.1207 Fed audit bill. Today, Ron Paul introduced a substitute amendment to that amendment that puts the “guts” back in to the audit. Effectively, Paul’s amendment is HR.1207 with a bit more detailed language regarding monetary policy oversight.
Paul’s amendment passed, first by voice vote, and then by roll call vote later in the day. The final tally was 43 for Paul’s bill and 26 against.
First up is Ron Paul arguing (yet again) why Fed transparency is not a call for injecting Congress into Fed policy decisions.
Next we have Barney Frank patting himself on the back again for bringing Ron Paul’s Fed audit legislation up in the committee. There’s a bit of humorous back and forth then Congressman Hensarling rips Frank for his comments a bit by calling them “irrelevant”.
Here are the leadup comments from Alan Grayson and co., then the voice vote on adopting Ron Paul’s substitute amendment.
And finally, the official roll call vote of Ron Paul’s substitute amendment. Ron Paul wins!
Kentucky Republicans should be asking themselves if they want another Lindsey Graham who compromises and capitulates to the Left in the name of big government bipartisanship or if they’d like a true conservative Senator who will fight for low taxes and free markets? It’s still quite early but judging from recent comments it seems Trey Grayson is sounding more and more like Graham and Rand Paul is sounding more and more like a Republican.
A few weeks ago at a Town Hall meeting Lindsey Graham argued that he would not let Ron Paul hijack the Republican Party. Grayson seems to be taking lessons from Graham. Watch Grayson in the interview below from WHAS11 as he smugly dismisses Paul while labeling him “crazy”. Hmmm… where have we heard that tactic before?
As the news report mentions, it appears there is the potential for another establishment Republican to enter the race. That would certainly shake up the race, but I’m not sure it would be a bad thing for Paul’s chances.
Judge Andrew Napolitano on his radio show this morning pulled no punches when discussing the viability of Sarah Palin as the next President of the United States. I couldn’t agree with his blunt assessment more. He said:
“I just don’t think she possesses the mental capacity to be the President of the United States. She’s a goofball!”
So everyone’s favorite host of Freedom Watch has weighed in on Sarah Palin. To me, she’s a completely divisive figure. People seem to either idolize her or loathe her. I don’t think she has much chance of being the next POTUS. In fact, I’d be surprised if she did better than Giuliani did in the GOP primaries of 2008.
For more about what lead up to the Judge’s “straight talk” listen to the audio:
Ron Paul’s bill to audit the Federal Reserve (HR.1207) has over 300 cosponsors, well above 2/3rds of the House, including every single House Republican. A few days ago an opinion piece appeared in the Wall Street Journal arguing that the Federal Reserve is already transparent enough and that a full audit would be overkill and dangerous. They write:
Economic theory and massive amounts of empirical evidence make a strong case for maintaining the Fed’s independence. When central banks are subjected to political pressure, authorities often pursue excessively expansionary monetary policy in order to lower unemployment in the short run. This produces higher inflation and higher interest rates without lowering unemployment in the long term. This has happened over and over again in the past, not only in the United States but in many other countries throughout the world.
The Fed’s independence is critical to its credibility. During the financial crisis, this credibility allowed the Fed to take extraordinary action to prevent a possible depression without triggering inflation. But eventually the Fed will have to scale back its unprecedented monetary accommodation. When it does move to tighten monetary conditions, it must be allowed to do so without political interference.
This is a tired argument at this point. The bottom line, once again, is that the Fed cannot “maintain its independence” when it is not independent to begin with. It is politicized already and it is plainly obvious to most observers without an axe to grind. The fact that this opinion piece appears in the WSJ at all is evidence in itself of this. It’s always important to consider the sources. The authors of the piece are both “in bed with the Fed”, so to speak.
Anil Kashyup was “an economist for the Board of Governors for the Federal Reserve System. He currently works as a consultant for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, and serves as a member of the Economic Advisory Panel of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and as a Research Associate for the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).” His faculty bio page is here.
Frederic Mishkin is a former member of the board of governors of the Federal Reserve (2006-2008). Perhaps more telling is the following juicy bit:
In 2006, Mishkin co-authored a report called “Financial Stability in Iceland”. The report maintained that Iceland’s economic fundamentals were strong. The report was commissioned by the Icelandic Chamber of Commerce in response to critical coverage of the Icelandic economy and certain Icelandic companies in the international business media.
Iceland subsequently experienced a spectacular collapse within a year of Mishkin’s good report.
So, considering the sources, this WSJ opinion piece should be ignored and ostracized as the comments on the article are already showing.
Many people just assumed that Rand Paul would be an afterthought going into the Kentucky GOP Primary against establishment favorite Trey Grayson. Many people were wrong.
Following the gigantic shift in poll numbers, showing that Paul now has a slim lead over Grayson in the contest, Dr. Paul is getting serious. He’s going to break some bread with the establishment. He’s going to meet with Senator Mitch McConnell.
(WHAS11) – The surprise candidate in Kentucky’s Republican U.S. Senate primary tells WHAS11 News he is reaching out to senior Senator, Mitch McConnell.
Rand Paul is a Bowling Green eye surgeon. His campaign’s poll numbers and fundraising success have stunned party leaders and it is early in the game.
So who is he and does he have a chance?
Most Kentucky political observers expected the democrats to duke it out in the senate primary while Republican Trey Grayson sat back and prepared for the fall campaign.
But Rand Paul and the sudden uprising of fiscal conservatism in the tea party movement appears to have changed all that.
Some people who have supported Rand Paul’s father, Ron Paul, had concerns that Rand would abandon his principles once (or if) he get to DC. Truth be told, it must be extremely difficult to resist doing so. But the younger Paul has the blood of his father coursing through his veins. He’s given no indication thus far that any liberty-loving principles will be abandoned. I expect that to continue right on through his coming 12 years in the Senate.
At this point no one except Paul and McConnell know what will be discussed at their meeting. Is Paul trying to win over the establishment to his anti-establishment ways? Was the meeting set up by McConnell to twist Paul’s arm toward the “center”, politically?
In any case, the meeting is an encouraging sign for Paul. If Paul didn’t raise over a million and follow it up with a jump in the polls this meeting would probably not be taking place. The bottom line is that Rand Paul has an “it” factor that many do not have. He’s likable. He’s pragmatic. He articulates his positions in a manner that would make his father jealous. He has the potential to take the cause of liberty to new levels of popularity.
With Ron Paul I was hoping against hope he would be our next President. With Rand Paul I am not merely hoping, I’m expecting him to win.
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” – H. L. Mencken
I’m tired of the health care debate. It’s not much of a debate anymore when the Republican lawmakers are arguing for socialism-lite and the Democrats are arguing for maximum strength socialism. It’s like asking the patient, “Do you want a government doctor or do you want a government physician?”
I’m tired of everyone calling it health “insurance”. It should be called health welfare. Medicare and medicaid are welfare programs. The proposed health care reform is nothing more than medicare on steroids. It’s certainly not insurance. Does auto insurance cover oil changes and tune-ups?
I’m tired of the argument that we should force insurers to cover preexisting conditions. We don’t force home owner’s insurance companies to cover a house already engulfed in flames. Forcing this upon insurers marks the beginning of the slow regulatory death of private insurance. This reeks of progressive incrementalism–a phasing out of private insurance to create a monopoly for government insurance. In other words, the public option becomes the only option. Obama highlighted his plan for this back in 2003 (see the video).
I’m tired of many arguing that health care is a “right”. Calling health care a right is a patently absurd and immoral logical fallacy. One cannot have a right to property or labor owned by someone else. Rights can only be based upon an individual’s own action. Leonard Peikoff put it best during the Hillary-care debate back in 1993.
Observe that all legitimate rights have one thing in common: they are rights to action, not to rewards from other people. The American rights impose no obligations on other people, merely the negative obligation to leave you alone. The system guarantees you the chance to work for what you want — not to be given it without effort by somebody else.
I’m tired of hearing Obama and his minions claim that the health care reform proposals will lower health care premiums and costs. My fatigue forces me to be blunt. If you buy in to this argument, find a mirror, look into it, and you will see an “It takes a village” idiot. After you wipe the drool from your chin and lumber away from the mirror, ponder the following 5 items:
We already have partial socialized medicine in the form of Medicare (elderly) and Medicaid (poor).
As of 2008 the number of people on these government-provided plans totaled 87.4 million.
Medicare will run out of money in 2017 according to last year’s government statistics. The previous year the government said it would be insolvent in 2019. I wonder what next year’s numbers will reveal, considering the rising unemployment and the struggling economy (less payroll taxes).
As of 2008 there were 46.3 million people without health insurance. About 36 million of these people are promised coverage with the House health welfare bill passed on Saturday evening.
How can anyone claim with a straight face that increasing demand for a product by nearly 50% in a newly taxed and regulated market will lower prices? (Better go find that mirror again)
I’m tired of writing about national health care. Part of me thinks that those of us fighting against it should just cave in and give the thieving looters what they want. They would certainly get it “good and hard”.
I then look into the faces of my children and see their complete innocence on display. They deserve better. In fact, we all do.
We may be beaten down and tired, but we must never stop fighting.
We live in a time when government is a form of theater; that is, it manages us by appearing to manage us. The current administration, perhaps because it came in with so much support, has broken new ground in what I’m calling Fantasy Government. It rails against health insurance companies, after giving them everything they want; it makes a show about debating our presence in Afghanistan, when all that is debated is the number of troops; it bemoans excessive bonuses on Wall Street, after making those bonuses possible. And now, it demands that public schools “reform” themselves, in terms so vague that any school can appear to comply while doing nothing.
The latest administration push is to promote merit pay for public school teachers rather than the guaranteed pay scales achieved by teachers unions. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is using the $4.35 billion “Race to the Top” funds as incentive for “progress towards” merit pay.
It is at this point that the reader will be wondering whether I’m a pro-union stooge defending the status quo or a “change agent” who sees how merit pay works in the private sector to enhance performance, and wants to extend that benefit to teaching.
Sorry to disappoint: I’m not really in either camp. I write here to suggest only that the Obama administration, and the states reacting to its efforts, are not promoting a policy on teacher merit pay, but merely broaching the subject, or, if you will, making noise. In pursuance of the Race to the Top funds, the California state legislature and Governor Schwarzenneger have eliminated a law that forbade use of student test scores in evaluating teachers. That’s the easy part.
On Wednesday, October 28th, I traveled down to the Drexel University campus to appear on FOX New’s Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano, Drexel’s Student Liberty Front, Pennsylvania State Representative Sam Rohrer, and Jacob Hornberger of the Future of Freedom Foundation. I was a panel member for the first two sessions covering the concept of “just war” and also the current “financial fiasco” which can be seen below, or watched on this playlist link.
On the first session, my plank on the Iraq War can be read here, and the “War is a Racket” essay by USMC General Smedley Butler can be read here. In the second session, my plank on the Federal Reserve is here, and I highly recommend “Fractional Reserve Banking in Pictures” to understand the current fraudulent monetary system.
Republicans displaying their “Red State pride” following the results of Tuesday’s elections need to face reality. The two GOP gubernatorial election victories in Virginia and New Jersey were unsurprising and expected. Now if a true limited government conservative beat out Bloomberg in the New York mayoral race there would be a reason for celebration.
The reason Bob McDonnell beat out Creigh Deeds in Virginia was not because McDonnell represents some new style small government Republican. McDonnell won because Deeds made campaign mistakes. McDonnell made none. Deeds lost the race more than McDonnell won it.
The same is true for the New Jersey race. Corzine, a former chairman at Goldman Sachs, easily became a scapegoat for a failing economy and political corruption. So, he lost.
What Tuesday’s election results really demonstrated was a lack of conviction for either Democrats or Republicans. When the political spectrum shines red, then blue, then red, then blue, over and over again something tangible comes to light:
America is not rooting for either party to win. America is rooting for the underdog.
Liberty Maven
Follow LM on Twitter