Economic and fiscal policyEdit
He is a libertarian conservative on economic issues, believing the federal government should be limited, taxes should be low, spending should be cut, foreign aid should be cut, and the federal budget should be balanced. Paul has sought to reduce the funds lent by the Export-Import Bank of the United States to countries that hold U.S. debt. He compared the practice to corporate welfare and stated that it was wrong that we "borrow billions of dollars from China, India, and Saudi Arabia then we loan it back to them again."[7]
For his presidential campaign he stated, "As President of the United States, I will work to balance our budget and only spend what comes in. We must cut spending in all areas, particularly areas that are better run by state and local governments."[8] Paul supports cutting government federal spending, a balanced budget amendment, and lowering taxes. He has criticized both Republicans and Democrats on deficit spending.[9] Paul has been a longtime opponent of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.
For his presidential campaign, he has stated that he wants to audit the Federal Reserve. He said, "A complete and thorough audit of the Fed will finally allow the American people to know exactly how their money is being spent by Washington. For too long, the Fed has been operating under a cloak of secrecy. The American people have a right to know what the Federal Reserve is doing with our nation's money supply."[10]
He also opposes the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and the Federal Reserve's control of the money supply and interest rates. He has advocated allowing the free market to regulate interest rates, and supports Congress' constitutional role in controlling the money supply. Paul endorses the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, a bill, originally introduced by his father as HR 1207 and reintroduced in the 114th US Congress as S 264 (by Sen. Paul),[11] and as HR 24 (by Rep. Thomas Massie),[12] mandating an audit of the Federal Reserve.[13]
He is currently campaigning for lower taxes for all Americans, stressing his support for Fair and Flat Taxes. He had stated that if he was elected he will strive to eliminate the FICA Workers Tax, end corporate welfare, eliminate lobbyist and tax lawyers. He supports a 14.5% tax rate on all Americans.[14] In each year from 2011 through 2013, Paul has received a grade of A from the National Taxpayers Union, a conservative taxpayers advocacy organization.[15]
The Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies has identified Paul as a "free trader" during his U.S. Senate tenure, indicating a pro-free trade, pro-market, and anti-subsidies voting record.[16]
Paul is uncertain regarding the causes behind global warming; he believes the scientific opinion on climate change is "not conclusive." Paul said pollution emissions are subject to "onerous regulation."[17][18] Paul supports allowing the free market to compete and dictate which forms of energy to use. He opposes subsidizing energy companies, but would support allowing tax breaks for companies that produce alternative energy such as wind, solar, or geothermal. He has said that subsidizing the energy industry will only add incentive for companies to lobby the federal government.[19]
Paul opposes the USA PATRIOT Act, including warrantless searches.[20] He has also proposed eliminating the Transportation Security Administration[21] and opposes the extrajudicial killing of American citizens in the United States who are terrorism suspects.[22] He opposes the domestic use of drones as a means of surveillance, deeming it a violation of "the right to privacy that all Americans have",[23] but supports drones being used in response to an imminent threat.[24]
Paul voted against the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA)[25] and 2013,[26] both of which contain provisions in it that allow the US government to indefinitely detain US citizens without due process. He did however vote for the Feinstein-Lee NDAA Amendment to the NDAA 2013,[27] which added in Section 1033 which states: "An authorization to use military force, a declaration of war, or any similar authority shall not authorize the detention without charge or trial of a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States apprehended in the United States, unless an Act of Congress expressly authorizes such detention."[28][29][30] Civil liberties groups, such as the ACLU, were concerned with this amendment because they think anyone on American soil should be given a trial if accused of a crime, given that the U.S. Constitution protects "persons," rather than "citizens."[27][31][32][33] and also worried that the amendment could be construed to actually imply that the U.S. government has the constitutional authority for indefinite detention without charge and trial.[27][34]
Paul is opposed to abortion.[35] However, in a 2013 interview he said that he would not oppose abortion in some individual cases involving a woman's health.[36] He opposes the use of federal, state, or local government funds for abortion.[37]
During a 2014 CNN interview with Pete Hamby, he said that he supported the use of medications (such as the morning-after pill) to prevent pregnancy because Plan B is basically "taking two birth control pills in the morning and two in the evening and I'm not opposed to that".
Describing himself as "100% pro life," Paul has said, "I believe life begins at conception and it is the duty of our government to protect this life.... I have stated many times that I will always vote for any and all legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion."[38] He has been a sponsor or cosponsor of several legislative measures to effectively ban virtually all abortions by recognizing a legal right to life of human embryos from the moment of fertilization.[39][40][41][42][43]
Paul favors a federal ban on abortion, but he has said that until the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade or the nation passes a constitutional amendment to ban abortions nationwide, the legality of abortion should be left to the individual states to decide without federal involvement.[44]
During his senate campaign, Paul said he received a 100% pro-life score on a Kentucky Right to Life survey[45] and said he had indicated on the survey form that he opposed human cloning for use in embryonic stem-cell research or medical treatments. This was disputed by Kentucky Right to Life, however, who endorsed Paul's primary opponent instead and said that Paul had not, in fact, answered the stem-cell research question.[46] As reported by the Cincinnati Enquirer at the time, the Kentucky Right to Life produced a hard-copy of the survey form from Paul showing that he had not answered the question while Paul's campaign produced an electronic copy of the form showing that he had answered the question.[46][47] He received a perfect score from the National Right to Life Committee.[citation needed]
Paul has spoken out against racial discrimination, particularly with in law enforcement and the United States prison system.[48]
He opposes protecting sexual orientation or gender identity at the federal level,[49] supported marriage privatization (since June 28, 2015),[50] "contracts between adults",[51] opposes the Equality Act of 2015,[52] supported the United States v. Windsor ruling declaring Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional,"[53] opposed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013,[54] supports the Obama Administration policy of tying foreign aid to LGBT rights,[55] said he doesn't believe in the concept of gay rights because he didn't believe in "rights based on your behavior,"[56] opposed the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2011 and 2013,[57][58] supports a neutral federal tax code on marriage,[59] supports Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act,[60] supports the First Amendment Defense Act,[61] opposes Executive Order 12968, Executive Order 13087, and Executive Order 13672.[62] His views on LGBT rights are aligned with libertarian perspectives on LGBT rights, with the exception of his support for Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act and First Amendment Defense Act. He has received support from prominent LGBT libertarians/conservatives such as Peter Thiel[63][64] and Gregory Angelo.[65]
On August 11, 2003, Paul opposed the De-facto legalisation of homosexuality as a result of Lawrence v. Texas, stating that "the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards".[66]
On November 25, 2009, Paul stated that he opposes same-sex marriage and believes the issue of same-sex marriage should be left to the states to decide.[67]
On the May 19, 2010 The Rachel Maddow Show, Paul defended his views of freedom of association.[68]
On May 20, 2010, Paul told the Louisville Courier-Journal that he thinks Don't Ask, Don't Tell has "worked relatively well" and supported a "non-fraternization" policy for everyone in the US military.[69][70]
On August 11, 2010, Paul completed a Christian Coalition voter guide. In the voter guide, he answered in support of a Federal Marriage Amendment to prevent same sex marriage, opposed making sexual preference a protected minority status under existing civil rights laws, and in favor of enforcing the 1993 law banning homosexuals from serving in the military openly.[71]
On September 23, 2010, Paul's campaign spokesman, Gary Howard, said in an e-mail about Paul's position on Don't ask, don't tell that, "Dr. Paul believes this is a matter that should be decided by the leadership of the military, not through political posturing."[72]
On July 18, 2011, Paul voted against the nomination of J. Paul Oetken to serve as U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York, making him the first-ever openly gay male Article III judge in history.[73]
On October 13, 2011, Paul voted against the nomination of Alison J. Nathan to serve as U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York, making her the second openly lesbian Article III judge in history.[74]
On April 26, 2012, Paul voted against the Hutchison Amendment to the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2011, which would have stripped key provisions prohibiting discrimination against, and expanding services to, victims of domestic violence based on sexual orientation or gender identity.[75] That same day, he voted against the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2011.[57]
On May 12, 2012, Paul said at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition that "Call me cynical, but I wasn't sure his views on marriage could get any gayer."[76]
The Human Rights Campaign gave him a score of 47% for the 112th United States Congress. During his 112th career, he didn't co-sponsor the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the Respect for Marriage Act, the Tax Parity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act, the Uniting American Families Act, the Tax Parity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act, the Uniting American Families Act, and the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act.[77]
On January 30, 2013, Rand, appearing on Focal Point, stated that he believes in "traditional marriage" and didn't "understand any other kind of marriage." He also expressed support for Kentucky's state constitutional ban and stated that states should decide the issue and the federal government shouldn't be involved. When asked about the Defense of Marriage Act, he was "not sure" what his position was on it.[78]
On February 4, 2013, Paul voted against a motion to proceed the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013.[79] On February 7, 2013, he voted against Grassley Amendment to the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 that would have stripped key provisions prohibiting discrimination against, and expanding services to, victims of domestic violence based on sexual orientation or gender identity.[80] On February 12, 2013, he voted against the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013.[58]
On March 12, 2013, during an interview with the National Review, Paul said he wanted the federal tax code neutral on marriage and expressed support for contracts between adults.[59]
On March 24, 2013, Paul suggested on Fox News that he wouldn't mind if the US Supreme Court struck down "the federalization part" of the Defense of Marriage Act and he believes the issue should be left up to the states.[81]
On May 12, 2013, Paul told Commonwealth Network 2 in an interview that "I don't think I've ever used the words 'gay rights' because I really don't believe in rights based on your behavior."[56]
On June 26, 2013, Paul told ABC News that the ruling in United States v. Windsor by the US Supreme Court was appropriate and the issue should be left to the states. He stated that "As a country we can agree to disagree," and "As a Republican Party, that's kind of where we are as well. The party is going to have to agree to disagree on some of these issues." He praised and agreed with Justice Anthony Kennedy for preventing a "culture war", whom he called "someone who doesn't just want to be in front of opinion but wants government to keep up with opinion." He said Kennedy "tried to strike a balance."[53] Also that same day, while talking with Glenn Beck, Paul responded to Glenn Beck by asking whether or not the United States v. Windsor has to apply only to humans, but later clarified his remarks on Fox News by saying "I don't think it will be with multiple humans and I think it will be human and human."[82][83]
On July 10, 2013, Paul voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013 in the United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. Paul had introduced an amendment to broaden the religious exemption, but then he did not show up for the committee hearing.[84] On the same day, he said "All I can say is, we have a zero tolerance policy for anybody who displays discriminatory behavior or belief in discriminating against people based on the color of their skin, their religion, their sexual orientation, anything like that,"[85] On November 4, 2013, he voted against cloture for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013.[86] On November 7, 2013, he voted in favor of the Toomey Amendment, which would have excepted employees, who engages in secular activities as well as religious activities, shall not be subject to this act if the employee is employer by substantial part owned, controlled, or managed by a particular religion or by a particular religious corporation, association, or society.[87][88] On November 7, 2013, he voted again against cloture for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013.[89] On November 7, 2013, he voted again against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013.[54] ON November 14, 2013, after the Senate passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, he stated that his vote had nothing to do with supporting employment discrimination, but his support for Sen. Pat Toomey's amendment that would exempt religious groups to the bill. After Toomey's amendment was defeated in the Senate, he said it was nearly impossible for him to support Employment Non-Discrimination Act as it stood, thus leaving the possibility of him voting for a future Employment Non-Discrimination Act bill, but only with stronger religious exceptions to it.[90]
On December 12, 2013, Paul voted against cloture of the nomination of Chai Rachel Feldblum to serve a second term as a Commissioner on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. On the same day, he voted against the nomination of Chai Rachel Feldblum.[91][92]
In 2014, Paul, talking about Arizona SB 1062, said "I think that the right to associate and the right to be free in your business decisions is out there," and "I'm not real excited about laws that sort of say you can deny people service."[93]
On August 6, 2014, Paul said he is "in favor of the concept," of a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, along with saying "And the loss of the idea of marriage is probably the leading cause of poverty in our country," but he also said "I don't want to register my guns in Washington or my marriage,"[94]
On September 11, 2014, Paul stated he would repeal all previous executive orders if he were president.[62]
On October 3, 2014, Paul told CNN that "I believe in old-fashioned traditional marriage but I don't really think the government needs to be too involved in this and I think the Republican Party can have people on both sides of the issue," and when asked if he could rethink his own position at some point he then threw his hands up in a half-shrug, half-grimace.[95]
On October 21, 2014, at Allen County Republican BBQ and Rally, Paul said he "can't understand why you have to have three bathrooms."[96]
The Human Rights Campaign gave Paul a score of 20% for the 113th United States Congress. During his 113th career, he didn't co-sponsor the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the Respect for Marriage Act, the Student Non-Discrimination Act, and the Safe Schools Improvement Act.[92]
On February 24, 2015, Light Wins: How to Overcome the Criminalization of Christianity premiered returning Paul in the documentary. The documentary was controversial because it featured ex-homosexuals and Scott Lively, who claimed credit for Russian LGBT propaganda law and is linked to the 2014 Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Act.[97]
On March 24, 2015, in an interview with Bloomberg, Paul would continue to support the Obama Administration policy of tying foreign aid to LGBT rights.[55]
On April 7, 2015, Paul defended the Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act during an interview broadcast on Hannity.[60] Also that same day, Gregory Angelo, executive director of Log Cabin Republicans, said Paul has a "tremendous network of grassroots supporters," including members of the LGBT community who hold libertarian views along the lines of these expressed by him. "The most refreshing thing about Sen. Paul's speech was that it was so optimistic, so visionary," and "Rather than using the doldrums of the present as his launching pad, Sen. Paul focused on the promise of tomorrow a tomorrow, at least as far as his speech was concerned, that did not focus on social issues one iota; the only constitutional amendment he mentioned was a Balanced Budget Amendment." Angelo said.[65]
On June 28, 2015, after the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling, Paul stated that he disagreed with the ruling and that government should get out of the marriage business altogether.[98]
On July 6, 2015, Paul cosponsored the First Amendment Defense Act.[61]
On August 6, 2015, Paul of Kentucky was asked during the first GOP presidential debate of 2016 from Fox News panelist Megyn Kelly that "What would you do to ensure Christians are not prosecuted for speaking out against gay marriage and will Christians be forced to conduct business that conflicts with their religious beliefs?" He responded that "Look, I don't want my marriage or my guns registered in Washington, and if people have an opinion, it's a religious opinion that's heartily felt, obviously they should be allowed to practice that, and no government should interfere with that." From there, Paul launched into an attack on Houston's openly lesbian mayor, Annise Parker, though he did not mention her by name. "One of the things that really got to me was the thing in Houston, where you had the government, the mayor actually trying to get the sermons of ministers," and "When the government tries to invade the church to enforce its own opinion on marriage, that's when it's time to resist." he said.[99]
On August 31, 2015, Paul stated about the Kim Davis case that "Whether or not people who still work for the state can do it without the legislature changing it is something I'm going to leave up to the courts exactly how to do it."[100]
In a 2014 op-ed in Time, Paul criticized the increased militarization of law enforcement.[101] Paul noted: "When you couple this militarization of law enforcement with an erosion of civil liberties and due process that allows the police to become judge and jurynational security letters, no-knock searches, broad general warrants, pre-conviction forfeiturewe begin to have a very serious problem on our hands." Paul believes that the criminal justice system unjustly impacts African Americans, noting that "Anyone who thinks that race does not still, even if inadvertently, skew the application of criminal justice in this country is just not paying close enough attention." Paul believes the militarization of police has been caused by the US Federal Government through subsidies, equipment, and other incentives as well as the drug war by its creation of a "culture of violence."[102]
In a 2002 letter to Bowling Green, Kentucky's Daily News, Paul said that the U.S. Fair Housing Act, "ignores the distinction between private and public property." He added: "Decisions concerning private property and associations should in a free society be unhindered. As a consequence, some associations will discriminate."[103] In April 2010, in an interview for the Louisville Courier-Journal, he said "I think it's a bad business decision to exclude anybody from your restaurant but, at the same time, I do believe in private ownership."[103] On May 20, 2010, in an interview on MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show, he suggested he would have wanted to modify one section of the Civil Rights Act that dealt with private institutions, while keeping the parts prohibiting discrimination in the public sector.[103] On May 22, 2010, in an interview on CNN's The Situation Room, he expressed there was "a need for federal intervention" and declared he would have voted for the law. Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post felt there Paul had discrepancies on whether private enterprise could discriminate.[103]
In April 2013, in a speech at Howard University, he said "It's a mischaracterization of my position. I've never been against the Civil Rights Act, ever, and I continue to be for the Civil Rights Act as well as the Voting Rights Act. There was one interview that had a long, extended conversation about the ramifications beyond race, and I have been concerned about the ramifications of certain portions of the Civil Rights Act beyond race, as they are now being applied to smoking, menus, listing calories and things on menus, and guns. And so I do question some of the ramifications and the extensions but I never questioned the Civil Rights Act and never came out in opposition to the Civil Rights Act or ever introduced anything to alter the Civil Rights Act."[103]
On July 10, 2013, he voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, that would prohibit discrimination in hiring and employment on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity by private sector employers with at least 15 employees.[104] Paul had introduced an amendment to broaden the religious exemptions to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, but failed to show up for the committee hearing for it.[105] A day after the vote, he said "All I can say is, we have a zero tolerance policy for anybody who displays discriminatory behavior or belief in discriminating against people based on the color of their skin, their religion, their sexual orientation, anything like that,"[85] In November 2013, he once again voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.[106] After the Senate passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, he stated that his vote had nothing to do with supporting employment discrimination, but his support for Sen. Pat Toomey's amendment that would exempt religious groups to the bill. After Toomey's amendment was defeated in the Senate, Paul said it was nearly impossible for him to support Employment Non-Discrimination Act as it stood, thus leaving the possibility of him voting for a future Employment Non-Discrimination Act bill, but only with stronger religious exceptions to it.[90]
Paul supported a Kentucky bill that would restore voting rights to felons after a five-year waiting period. The current system requires felons to petition the governor for a partial pardon.[107][108]
Paul supports returning control of education to local communities and parents and thus eliminating the federal Department of Education, but he says that some functions of the Department of Education, such as disbursing student loans and Pell Grants, should be transferred to other departments instead of being eliminated.[109][110] Paul opposes federal regulation of homeschooling.[111] Paul has also authored and shown support for school voucher legislation and competitive public schooling.[112][113] He also voted against the Every Student Succeeds Act.[114]
Paul generally opposes gun control legislation, a position he says is supported by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.[115]
In response to a question from radio host Laura Ingraham in February 2015, Paul said that while he is not "anti-vaccine" at all, he does think they should be voluntary. Closing Bell co-anchor Kelly Evans attacked Paul's position during an interview with him on CNBC, to which Paul responded that some parents have (likely unfounded) fears, as he has "heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines."[116] Paul clarified his comments a few days later, stating that, "The point is that I have heard of I mean who hasn't ever met a child who has a profound disability and in the parents' mind they see a connection. But I didn't allege there is a connection. I said I heard of people who believe there is a connection. I do think that vaccines are a good idea. I've been vaccinated. My kids have been vaccinated."[117]
Paul, a medical doctor who practiced ophthalmology prior to seeking political office, opposes federal government involvement in healthcare. He has stated that he would repeal the HMO Act of 1973 that "drives a wedge between the patient and his doctor".[118] He believes that government has driven up the cost of healthcare and causes the quality and coverage to decrease. Paul would support a free-market approach to health care, including tax deductions for medical expenses. He opposes federal regulations discouraging businesses from providing coverage. He supports Health Savings Accounts (HSAs).[118] On Medicare, Paul has suggested higher deductibles as well as changes to premiums or eligibility rules as ways to address what he sees as the program's looming financial problems, saying "You want to have more participation by the person who's receiving the entitlement... by that I mean that they need to be more involved with some sort of economic transaction every time they use their entitlement, and that means they have to bear more of the burden."[119] Paul also stated that he does not support such changes for current retirees or people nearing retirement.[119]
He is in favor of repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly referred to as Obamacare. Following the Supreme Court decision which upheld the constitutionality of most of Obamacare, Paul released a statement saying, "Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be 'constitutional' does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional."[120]
Paul supports immigration reform with a strong emphasis on border security.[121]
He has proposed adding patrols and physical barriers at the border as well as the use of drones, but does not advocate the deportation of illegal immigrants except criminals.[122]
Paul supports granting legal status in the form of temporary visas to illegal immigrants but opposes a special path to citizenship for them.[123]
His reform proposal would require annual votes by Congress based on an annual report of an investigator general of the Government Accountability Office certifying whether or not border security is progressing. Only if Congress votes to confirm progressing border security the annual contingent of 2 million temporary visas should be approved according to Pauls proposal.[122]
Paul voted against the bipartisan immigration reform bill of 2013 after an amendment he proposed that would have established this procedure was rejected by the Senate.[124]
His proposal would allow illegal immigrants who obtained a temporary visa eventually to apply for permanent residency or citizenship but Paul opposes the establishment of additional annual contingents for illegal immigrants stating that "...[they would] get in the normal line that everyone else gets."[125]
Paul believes the issue of medical marijuana is a states' rights issue and that the federal government should not interfere.[126] Paul was one of three U.S. senators in 2015 to introduce a bipartisan bill, CARERS, that would legalize medical marijuana under federal law.[127]
Though Paul describes himself as a "social conservative," he was nonetheless described by the AP reporter as holding "libertarian leanings on drugs" as well as believing some drug sentences were too harsh.[128] He announced plans to propose eliminating mandatory minimum sentences for marijuana possession in November 2012.[129] Paul is a critic of the "War on Drugs" and does not believe marijuana users should be put in jail. He supports the legalization of hemp for industrial purposes.[130]
Paul supports term limits, a balanced budget amendment, and the Read the Bills Act, in addition to the widespread reduction of federal spending and taxation.
Paul has expressed doubt about the fairness of mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines, which require judges and prosecutors to impose substantial penalties, often including incarceration, on non-violent drug offenders.[131] He believes that these laws are applied disproportionately to African Americans, arguing that non-violent drug offenses have contributed to a third of African American males being unable to vote.
Paul opposes the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 and has called it a "dangerous piece of legislation".[132] Instead, he supports regulating the contracts given out by Congress and placing limits on corporations receiving government contracts. He opposes legislation limiting the amount of money individuals, corporations, and organizations can give to candidates. Additionally, Paul has proposed "mandating a clause in all federal contracts over $1 million that requires the recipient to pledge not to lobby government or contribute to campaigns during the terms of the contract."[132][133]
Go here to read the rest:
Political positions of Rand Paul - Wikipedia