LONE STAR LIBERTARIAN
Liberty Watch goes face to face with Ron Paul,
Congress' most-feared constitutionalist
BY JARRET KEENE

You've got to hand it to the Independent American Party of Nevada. Its members either have balls of steel or are simply confident enough to believe that people of Mexican descent will interpret their group's anti-immigration stance on purely ideological, rather than emotional, grounds. We note this because on April 28, the IAP state chairman Chris Hansen and 100 of his like-minded cohorts enjoyed a standing-room-only dinner at a ballroom in Palace Station, which - like every Las Vegas hotel-casino on or off the Strip - was soon thereafter affected by the May 1 employee walkout in protest against an anti-immigration bill winding its way through Congress. 

Listening to Hansen express anxiety about our nation's borders while observing a woman named Lucensia serve up strawberry shortcake is an ironic and uncomfortable experience. With no disrespect toward anyone, Liberty Watch is happy to have skipped the actual meal. 

Instead, the magazine and its staff showed up early in order to interview and photograph U.S. Representative Ron Paul, the closest thing Libertarians have to a real live congressman. Paul runs as a Republican, but is a strict Constitutionalist with deep ties to the Libertarian party. In 1988, he was the Libertarian presidential candidate, and his independent stance on issues has garnered him the nickname "Dr. No." He has served in Congress since the late '70s, but was elected to represent Texas' 14th District in 1997. 

Paul claims Republican affiliation so as to more easily win elections. His presence at a dinner preceding the State Independent American Party Convention is further evidence of his maverick status. (Unlike, say, Republican Sen. John McCain, who is too busy these days cozying up to Reverend Jerry Falwell to be a genuine voice of reason.) 

Other noteworthy folks attending the dinner include Nevada State Senator and Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Beers, whose Tax and Spending Control (TASC) initiative is the cornerstone of his campaign. Also, Republican Congressional candidate Kenneth Wegner was present, as were members of a Nevada non-profit, Secured Borders U.S.A.

Judging Ron Paul based on his website, you would think Paul is just another old, pinch-faced, hard-assed Texan. In fact, he's a gentle, soft-spoken Pittsburgh native with an M.D. degree. He has delivered more than 4,000 babies (which explains his pro-life position), and he explains his pro-gun views entirely within the framework of the Constitution. In other words, every facet of the man's political beliefs seems firmly grounded in the reality of the Constitution, which is not something that can be said of many politicians, who, regardless of their party, consistently cast votes in favor of deficit spending. 

A veteran of the Vietnam War, Paul is also the author of three books: Challenge to Liberty, The Case for Gold, and A Republic, If You Can Keep It. His is a literate, patient intelligence, and the following interview is further evidence of the man's independent spirit and thought. 

You're a member of the Libertarian party and yet you've been elected as a Republican. In your heart of hearts, what is your affiliation? 

I am identified as a Libertarian. I was the Libertarian presidential candidate in '88, and I'm a lifetime member of the Libertarian party, which qualifies me as a Libertarian. If I'm in my district, I don't include the word "Libertarian," but everybody knows it, and every newspaper tends to write it. [The media does this] not because they think they're helping me; they do it to needle me. I don't volunteer [the information that] "I'm a Republican." Nor do I volunteer the word "conservative." I tell [my constituents] that people call me a Libertarian, and I am. But I really refer to myself as a "strict Constitutionalist," and fortunately the Constitution is pretty Libertarian. My obligation in Congress for the moment is to apply the law, and fortunately we have a pretty good law. And that law is the Constitution - not all that nonsense [lawmakers] pass illegally. 

Where are the largest pockets of Libertarian thought in this country; where people are trying to wrest control away from government and into the people's hands? 

Well, the places where I am often invited to speak are Texas - my home state - and New Hampshire, and we know there are some Libertarians up there. Of course, Arizona is where I have a lot of people on my mailing list, as well as Nevada. I think of Nevada is coming our way, and there are sections of California, too. I don't think of it too much in terms of exactly of where Libertarians are, but that we are everywhere. We're such a small number when we look at the total.

How can we increase our numbers? 

It's only going to increase when our message gets out, and the average person realizes that it's in his or her best interest to get the government off their backs and out of their lives. More and more people are coming to know that. See, I love the modern communications. Your magazine has a webpage? 

Absolutely. 

I think the Internet is sensational. I think people like [Liberty Watch columnist] John Stossel are just fantastic in that they reach millions. I have a little group in Washington, D.C. called the Liberty Committee. I have only 20 people who belong and 10 are serious about it, and we have frequent meetings, sometimes luncheons every week. And every once in a while we get a special speaker in; A couple of weeks ago, [Fox News Channel Judge Andrew] Napolitano flew down from New York, and though he's on Fox, he's good - he's very good on civil liberties. He calls himself a Libertarian, and says one of the people he admires most is Lew Rockwell of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. This is all good stuff. When I got interested in Libertarian views, back in the '60s when I was in medical school, to get any literature was difficult. 

Although we're not getting any closer to becoming a Libertarian country, the seeds are planted. A lot of things are happening. It's getting worse on the surface, but at the same time, our numbers are growing. It's going to be a tough fight. I see it as an ideological struggle. When we have more of the John Stossels and the Andrew Napolitanos on TV, the better off we'll be. But I am encouraged by the people I meet. They don't want a welfare/warfare state. 

So Libertarians need a stronger appearance on TV? That's all it takes? 

That's the most important thing. Generally, the masses of people never get too interested in policy, whether it was our own Revolution or the taking over of Russia by the Communists. These were small, determined believers who had a precise philosophy. Another example is how a very effective, determined, small group of people who believed in something was able to take over our foreign policy. The neoconservatives demonstrate how powerful philosophy is if you're in the right places. Libertarians have to have a very precise philosophy and eventually have an influence. Of course, the way I see it, our influence would be a positive one. Our [American] Revolution was very positive; the right ideas prevailed. The influence has been negative for Communism and negative for the neoconservatives. I think if we get our ideas out, then they will have a positive influence. 

On May 1, there will be a protest against immigration reform. You've some expressed some concern about current immigration trends. 

There are some negative and positive sides to immigration. I've seen some immigrants who are more American than some Americans. They get in here and they know what the work ethic is. But I still haven't come around to rejecting the notion that we ought to have some law and order and [accepting the idea] that people who break the law and come here should get priority. Otherwise, there's too much chaos. 

My approach has been more to get away from the welfare state. The welfare state encourages too many of our people not to take jobs, creates a vacuum, and then there's a need, and then we encourage immigrants to come over, and then we reward them for coming by, granting them amnesty. Their family gets citizenship by being born here. They get food stamps immediately if they need them. They get to into our emergency rooms and our schools, so there is an economic burden. The very good things you can say about immigration are probably true in a truly Libertarian society.

But in the midst of a welfare system gone broke, it's not a very easy thing to deal with. So I just have three steps: Obey the law; no amnesty; no benefits. 

The gold standard: Will we ever get back to it? 

Yes, I think we're moving that way rather quickly. The major thing that has happened in my lifetime is that it became legal again to buy gold and silver coins. In a way, those people who are knowledgeable can buy gold if they don't trust the government. I think the world will go back to the gold standard, because paper never works. Gold is not an investment; gold does not go up. It's just a place to park your money and to preserve some wealth, because you don't trust paper money. Yes, I think we will go back when paper money quits working. The collapse will happen rather quickly. The dollar is not immune. It's had a free ride because it was the reserve currency. But it will definitely collapse. 

Will the dollar collapse in a horrible, apocalyptic way? 

Well, there's not enough common sense out there for it change on its own. So, yes, the dollar will have to crash first. 

You've been named the No. 1 tax-cutter in Congress. Is there such a thing as blindly cutting taxes? 

I always vote for tax cuts. And that is annoying and sometimes aggravating because I vote for all tax credits. If you're running a business and I can give you a tax credit for some reason, I do. But I'd like to give the same tax credit to everyone. If you're only giving a tax credit to someone who makes ethanol from corn but not from sugarcane, then it's very unfair. But I still vote for all tax benefits, tax credits, tax cuts, arguing that if I had my way, everybody would be treated fairly. But I cannot see denying somebody a tax credit because nobody else has one. Making everybody suffer equally is not good. So if I can restore some of the money to somebody and restore somebody's liberty, I do it. 

What's the story with this $100 gas credit Republicans are proposing in Washington? 

Totally nuts. It's not a tax credit; it's a $100 check they want to send to everybody. That one is crazy, because the people in Washington created the problem of high gasoline prices. 

Do you believe the U.S. government will really attack Iran in the coming months? 

We're on the verge of bombs dropping over there. People I've talked to, who are more knowledgeable than I about the things going on over there, think it's imminent. LW


To learn more about Ron Paul and his views, you can read his congressional speeches and weekly column at www.house.gov/paul.