This is easier..
I do not agree with anything he stands for, with the possible exception of some of his foreign policy thinking...but for different reasons
If your boy can run away from the bulk of his previous bad jazz by 2016, he is Houdini, but still not presidential..
Rand Paul, the son of long-term United States Representative Ron Paul, is a member of the Republican Party and a U.S. Senator representing the state of Kentucky. He received score of 100% from the American Conservative Union in 2012, [1] and his voting record was rated 26% liberal in 2011 by National Journal. [1]
Paul considers himself to be a Tea Party follower, who wants smaller government. [2] [3] Paul has said that he identifies as both a " constitutional conservative" [4] [5] and a " libertarian conservative." [5]
Economic and fiscal policy[ edit]
Paul supports cutting government spending, a balanced budget amendment, and lowering taxes. He has criticized both Republicans and Democrats on deficit spending. [6] Paul has been a longtime opponent of the bank and auto industry bailouts.
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 H.R. 1207, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, a bill, introduced by his father, mandating an audit of the Federal Reserve. Paul supports transparency and accountability of the semi-private institution. Additionally, Paul opposes inflation and supports "restoring the value of the dollar that has devalued by approximately 95% since the Federal Reserve's inception in 1913". [7]
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." [8]
Energy and environmental security[ edit]Paul supports allowing the free market to compete and dictate which forms of energy to use. He opposes subsidizing energy companies, and 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. [9]
National security and defense policy[ edit]Paul opposes the USA PATRIOT Act, including warrantless searches and breach of individual privacy. [10] He has also proposed that the TSA be eliminated [11] and opposes the extrajudicial killing of American citizens in the United States who are terrorism suspects. [12] He did however express support for domestic use of armed drones for law enforcement to use. [13]
Paul says that American citizens have a right to privacy. [14]
Paul voted against the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA) [15] and 2013, [16] 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, [17] 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." [18] [19] [20] 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.” [17] [21] [22] [23] 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. [17] [24]
Abortion and bioethics[ edit]Paul is opposed to abortion, even in cases of rape or incest. [25] [26] [27] During his senate primary campaign in 2009, he said that he believed abortion should also be illegal in cases in which the woman's life is at risk from the pregnancy, [25] [26] and he called for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to ban all abortions. [28] However, in a 2013 interview he said that he might not oppose abortion in some individual cases involving a woman's health. [29] He opposes the use of federal, state, or local government funds for abortion. [27]
During his senate primary campaign, he said that he opposed the use of medications (such as the morning-after pill) to prevent a newly formed human embryo from implanting into a woman's womb in cases in which the woman has been raped. [30] [27]
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." [31] 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. [32] [33] [34] [35]
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. [36]
During his senate campaign, Paul said he received a 100% pro-life score on a Kentucky Right to Life survey [37] 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. [30] 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. [30] [38] He received a perfect score from the National Right to Life Committee.[ citation needed]
Civil rights[ edit]Same-sex marriage[ edit]Paul personally opposes same-sex marriage, but he believes the issue should be left to the states to decide. [39] [40] He has said he thought that the Supreme Court's ruling in Windsor v. United States, which struck down the portion of the Defense of Marriage Act that defined marriage at a federal level (as between a man and a woman), was appropriate. [41]
In April 2013, in an interview with the National Review, he said, "I’m an old-fashioned traditionalist. I believe in the historic and religious definition of marriage,” and “That being said, I’m not for eliminating contracts between adults. I think there are ways to make the tax code more neutral, so it doesn’t mention marriage. Then we don’t have to redefine what marriage is; we just don’t have marriage in the tax code.” [42]
Anti-discrimination legislation[ edit]In a 2002 letter to the Bowling Green 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.” [43] In April 2010, in an interview on 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." [43] 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. [43] 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. He also appeared to reverse himself on whether private enterprise could discriminate. [43]
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 a long, 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." [43]
On July 10, 2013, he voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which 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. [44] 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. [45] 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,” [46] In November 2013, he once again voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. [47] 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 Rand Paul voting for a future Employment Non-Discrimination Act bill, but only with stronger religious exceptions to it. [48]
Felon disenfranchisement[ edit]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. [49] [50]
Education[ edit]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. [51] [52] Paul opposes federal regulation of homeschooling. [53] Paul has also authored and shown support for school voucher legislation and competitive public schooling. [54] [55]
Gun control[ edit]Paul opposes all gun control legislation, a position he says is supported by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. [56] He received a perfect score from the Gun Owners of America. Paul has lent his name to a fundraising effort by the National Association for Gun Rights which called attention to the so-called "United Nations Small Arms Treaty". The description of the proposed treaty, put forth over Paul's signature in the fundraising materials, has been criticized as mischaracterization of the proposed treaty, which seeks to establish stronger controls over international trade in tanks, missile systems, warships, and other conventional weapons as well as small arms.[ citation needed]
Healthcare[ edit]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". [57] 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 healthcare, including tax deductions for medical expenses. He opposes federal regulations discouraging businesses from providing coverage. He supports Health Savings Accounts(HSAs). [57] 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." [58] Paul also stated that he does not support such changes for current retirees or people nearing retirement. [58]
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 PPACA, Senator 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." [59]
Immigration[ edit]Paul has proposed adding security to the border by installing an electronic fence and helicopter stations to respond to breaches. [60] He opposes birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants. [61] Paul has said that courts should review the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," to conclude whether or not it should apply to the children of illegal immigrants. If court challenges fail, he would support a constitutional amendment that would deny citizenship to children of illegal immigrants who are born in the United States. [62] Paul has, however, stated that he would support allowing undocumented immigrants to apply for citizenship. [63]
In June 2013, Paul called for legal residency for illegal immigrants contingent on better border security with the issue of citizenship itself to be addressed after implementation of said policy. [64]
Marijuana[ edit]Paul believes the issue of medical marijuana is a states' rights issue and that the federal government should not interfere. [65] In August, the Associated Press reported that Paul said he was opposed to the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes, [66] but the Paul campaign states he was misquoted. [65] 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. [66] He announced plans to propose eliminating mandatory minimum sentences for marijuana possession, in November 2012. [67]
Structure of government[ edit]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.
Mandatory minimum sentencing[ edit]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. [68] 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.
Campaign finance reform[ edit]Paul opposes the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 and has called it a "dangerous piece of legislation". [69] 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." [69] [70]
Foreign policy[ edit]Paul holds that the primary Constitutional function of the federal government is national defense, and that the greatest national security threat is the lack of border security. He supports eliminating issuance of visas to people from “about ten rogue nations.” He supports trying terrorists caught on the battlefield in military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay detention camp. Paul believes that when the United States goes to war, Congress must declare war as mandated by the United States Constitution. [71]
Unlike his more stridently "non-interventionist" father, Rand sees a role for American armed forces abroad, including in permanent foreign military bases. [72]
Afghanistan and Iraq[ edit]During his 2010 Senate campaign Paul questioned the idea that U.S. Middle East policy is "killing more terrorists than it creates." He supported the war in Afghanistan and opposed rapid withdrawal from Iraq. [73] He says he would have voted against the invasion of Iraq and questioned whether the intelligence was manipulated. [74]
Upon returning from a week-long trip to the Middle East, Senator Paul asserted "it is none of our business whether Israel builds new neighborhoods in east Jerusalem or withdraws from the Golan Heights; the U.S. should not tell Israel how to defend itself. [75]
Paul reiterated that the U.S. needs to reassess who it is giving financial and military assistance to. He said the U.S. should begin cutting aid to countries who are burning the U.S. flag and chanting ‘Death to America.’ Paul raised concerns on continuing to give weapons and financial aid to Egypt. The Senator said he was “very disappointed that after giving Egypt $60 billion in financial assistance over the past 30 years, Egyptian rioters climbed onto the roof of the U.S. Embassy, took down the U.S. flag and burned it. That should never have happened and is inexcusable.” [75]
Senator Paul also spoke against U.S. overseas military bases. [76]
In 2009, Paul put forth the theory that Dick Cheney exploited the September 11 attacks in order to push for war against Iraq so that Halliburton, Cheney's old company, would profit from it. [77]
Reducing foreign aid to Israel[ edit]Paul called for reducing foreign aid to Israel, [78] but when later asked to clarify his position he said he has never proposed any legislation to do so. [79] In 2011, Paul had proposed budget cuts of US$500 billion from the federal budget in part by cutting off foreign aid to all countries, including financial grants to Israel, [80] and in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer in 2001 he pointedly said he would favor a halt to U.S. aid to Israel. [81] [82]
Paul complained that the portrayal in the media stating that "Rand Paul wants to end aid to Israel" are "not true, inappropriate and inflammatory". [83]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Rand_Paul |
