Ron Paul on Free Trade Republican Representative (TX-14); previously Libertarian for President





Free trade helps all of Latin America, even Cuba

PAUL: Well, I think free trade is the answer. Free trade is an answer to a lot of conflicts around the world, so I'm always promoting free trade. And you might add Cuba, too. I think we would be a lot better off trading with Cuba.

But as far as us having an obligation, a military or a financial obligation to go down and dictate to them what government they should have, I don't like that idea. I would try to set a standard here where countries would want to emulate us. Unfortunately, sometimes we slip up on our standards and we go around the world and we try to force ourselves on others. And yet, I believe with friendship and trade, you can have a lot of influence, and I strongly believe that it's time we have friendship and trade with Cuba.

Source: CNN 2012 GOP primary debate on the eve of Florida primary , Jan 26, 2012

China trade benefits American consumers

PAUL: You have to create the right conditions to bring these companies back, and they have to bring their capital back and shouldn't be taxed. Apple's a great company, but the way you ask the question, it infers that because there's a bunch of workers overseas, it hasn't benefited a lot of people here. The consumers obviously have been benefited by a good company, well run. But a lot of people worry about us buying and the money going overseas. But if you send money to China, they have to spend those dollars. Unfortunately, they're buying our debt and perpetuating our consumerism here and our debt here. But also, when you get products, let's say the computer costs $100 instead of $1000. Well, the person's just saved $900. That helps the economy. That $900 stays in that person's pocket. So we shouldn't be frightened about trade or sending money on.

Source: South Carolina 2012 GOP debate hosted by CNN's John King , Jan 19, 2012

Trade sanctions never worked on Cuba, and won't work on Iran

A: Countries that you put sanctions on, you are more likely to fight them. I say a policy of peac is free trade. Stay out of their internal business. Don't get involved in these wars. And just bring our troops home.

Q: So your policy towards Iran is, if they want to develop a nuclear weapon, that's their right, no sanctions?

A: No, that makes it much worse. Why would that be so strange, if the Soviets and the Chinese have nuclear weapons? We tolerated the Soviets; we didn't attack them. And they were a much greater danger. You don't go to war against them. This whole idea of sanctions, all these pretend free traders, they're the ones who put on these trade sanctions. This is why we still don't have trade relationships with Cuba. It's about time we talked to Cuba and stopped fighting these wars that are about 30 or 40 years old.

Source: Iowa Straw Poll 2011 GOP debate in Ames Iowa , Aug 11, 2011

No embargoes & no tariffs; but no NAFTA too

Unlike protectionists, Ron Paul embraces the economic importance of free trade, but lives in a dream world if he thinks free trade will be realized absent agreements like NAFTA. Paul himself argues that "tariffs are simply taxes on consumers," but by opposing these trade agreements, he is actively opposing a decrease in those taxes. While Paul's rhetoric is soundly pro-free trade, his voting record mirrors those of Congress's worst protectionists.

Source: Club for Growth 2012 Presidential White Paper #8: Ron Paul , Jun 21, 2011

Fast-track cedes power from Congress to President

I oppose trade organizations because of flawed fast-track

Market can sort out mess created by central banks

We could not enter Afghanistan. But nearby there was a huge cave set up as an exchange post with goods as numerous as a giant department store's. Russian and Eastern goods were sold, as well as American ad other Western goods. It was peaceful under the earth. Here the people were permitted to trade and converse (authorities on both sides knew of the underground market) because it served the interests of both, while up above, the Cold War raged.

Governments & central banks mess things up, but the market, if it is permitted to operate, is capable of sorting out the mess even under duress. There will always be the underground, smugglers, and the black market, as long as we allow our governments to plunder and control us by making voluntary exchanges and associations illegal. It is government controls themselves that give us a rise to a black market.

Inflation is regressive & results in protectionism

Inflating is never a benefit to freedom-loving people. It destroys prosperity; feeds the fires of war; & is responsible for recessions. It's deceptive & addictive, and causes delusions of grandeur. Wealth cannot be achieved by creating money by fiat.

Depending on monetary fraud for national prosperity or a reversal of our downward spiral is riskier than depending on the lottery.

Inflation has been used to pay for empires since ancient Rome. And they all end badly. Inflationism and corporatism engender protectionism and trade wars. They prompt scapegoating: blaming foreigners, illegal immigrants, ethnic minorities, and too often freedom itself for the predictable events and suffering that result

Free trade agreements threaten national sovereignty

Source: The Revolution: A Manifesto, by Ron Paul, p. 96 , Apr 1, 2008

FactCheck: NAFTA Superhighway not a conspiracy; it’s I-35

The problem with Paul’s claim is that there are no plans to build a NAFTA Superhighway. Or a North American Union, for that matter.

Paul cites a map from the North America’s SuperCorridor Organization (NASCO), which is a consortium of public and private entities. But the map does not show a new highway. Those bright blue lines show only I-35 and I-29--interstates that already exist. NASCO says it and some of the local governments along I-35 have been referring to that route as the “NAFTA Superhighway” for years. NASCO advocates improvements to existing roads, but is not lobbying for, or planning to build, any new thoroughfares.

Look at the monetary system and deal with the trade issues

Source: 2007 Des Moines Register Republican Debate , Dec 12, 2007

Block international highway from Canada to Mexico

A: We have a bill in the Congress to stop all of the funding for this particular highway, and I think we have over 50 co-sponsors of it. To be in denial of this, that this is not planned, they’re not going to admit it. It’s subtle. They’ll say, we are just improving highways. But how come they had a meeting in April 2005 with the president of Mexico, the US & Canada, and they talk about these things? They do believe in globalism. So I don’t think there is any doubt about the plans.

Source: CNN Late Edition: 2007 presidential series with Wolf Blitzer , Dec 2, 2007

No North American Union; no WTO; no UN

A: Not only do I not want a North American Union, I want us out of the U.N., the IMF, the World Bank, the WTO, NAFTA and CAFTA. NAFTA has nothing to do for free trade. It’s a pretense to lower tariffs, but it’s a reason to go talk to the WTO to raise tariffs. We need free trade. That’s very, very important. But you don’t get that by world government.

Source: 2007 GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate , Sep 17, 2007

Inappropriate to impose sanctions for persecuting Christians

HUCKABEE: Yes.

TANCREDO: Yes.

COX: Yes.

BROWNBACK: Yes.

PAUL: No.

HUNTER: No.

KEYES: Yes.

Source: [Xref Hunter] 2007 GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate , Sep 17, 2007

China trade not contingent on human rights & product safety

HUCKABEE: Yes.

TANCREDO: Yes.

COX: Yes.

BROWNBACK: Yes.

PAUL: No.

HUNTER: Absolutely. Yes. Good question.

KEYES: Yes.

Source: 2007 GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate , Sep 17, 2007

No NAFTA Superhighway from Canada to Mexico

HUCKABEE: No.

TANCREDO: No.

COX: No.

BROWNBACK: No.

PAUL: No.

HUNTER: No.

KEYES: No.

Source: [Xref Hunter] 2007 GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate , Sep 17, 2007

NAFTA superhighway threatens widespread eminent domain

Source: 2008 House campaign website, www.ronpaul2008.com, “Issues” , Sep 1, 2007

IMF empowers politicians by causing inflation

At this UN Monetary and Financial Conference, the gold bullion standard was altered. Although the new system was hailed as an improvement, it was a way to institutionalize long-term inflation and transfer power to politicians and bankers. It was also the means to finance interventionist foreign policy, by creating money and credit out of thin air. Political pain and economic disruption at home were to be eased by exporting much of the inflation.

44 nations agreed to the establishment of a World Bank and an International Monetary Fund, which began operations in 1946. This permitted dollars--said to be “good as gold”--to be substituted for gold as the international reserve currency.

With this agreement, gold ceased to flow back and forth to settle balance of payment differences, thus eliminating an essential feature of a sound monetary system.

Allow Americans to own gold; end large-scale foreign sales

Historic Congressional hearings have been held on the gold standard and an amendment to establish a gold commission passed both Houses unanimously. The commission, composed of public and private sector representatives, will specifically study the role of gold in the domestic and international monetary systems.

We must also work on halting massive gold sales at below market prices to European central bankers and Arab sheiks. If the administration is still intent on “demonetizing” gold with gold sales, let’s at least sell it only in sizes that Americans can afford--one, one half, and one quarter ounce coins.

Voted NO on promoting free trade with Peru.

enforcement of textile and apparel rules of origin;

certain textile and apparel safeguard measures; and

enforcement of export laws governing trade of timber products from Peru.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Rep. RANGEL: It's absolutely ridiculous to believe that we can create jobs without trade. I had the opportunity to travel to Peru recently. I saw firsthand how important this agreement is to Peru and how this agreement will strengthen an important ally of ours in that region. Peru is resisting the efforts of Venezuela's authoritarian President Hugo Chavez to wage a war of words and ideas in Latin America against the US. Congress should acknowledge the support of the people of Peru and pass this legislation by a strong margin.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

Rep. WU: I regret that I cannot vote for this bill tonight because it does not put human rights on an equal footing with environmental and labor protections.

Rep. KILDEE: All trade agreements suffer from the same fundamental flaw: They are not self-enforcing. Trade agreements depend upon vigorous enforcement, which requires official complaints be made when violations occur. I have no faith in President Bush to show any enthusiasm to enforce this agreement. Congress should not hand this administration yet another trade agreement because past agreements have been more efficient at exporting jobs than goods and services. I appeal to all Members of Congress to vote NO on this. But I appeal especially to my fellow Democrats not to turn their backs on those American workers who suffer from the export of their jobs. They want a paycheck, not an unemployment check.

Reference: Peru Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act; Bill H.R. 3688 ; vote number 2007-1060 on Nov 8, 2007

Voted NO on implementing CAFTA, Central America Free Trade.

Progressively eliminate customs duties on all originating goods traded among the participating nations

Preserve U.S. duties on imports of sugar goods over a certain quota

Remove duties on textile and apparel goods traded among participating nations

Prohibit export subsidies for agricultural goods traded among participating nations

Provide for cooperation among participating nations on customs laws and import licensing procedures

Encourage each participating nation to adopt and enforce laws ensuring high levels of sanitation and environmental protection

Recommend that each participating nation uphold the International Labor Organization Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work

Urge each participating nation to obey various international agreements regarding intellectual property rights

Reference: CAFTA Implementation Bill; Bill HR 3045 ; vote number 2005-443 on Jul 28, 2005

Voted NO on implementing US-Australia Free Trade Agreement.

Reference: Bill sponsored by Rep Tom DeLay [R, TX-22]; Bill H.R.4759 ; vote number 2004-375 on Jul 14, 2004

Voted NO on implementing US-Singapore free trade agreement.

Reference: US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement; Bill HR 2739 ; vote number 2003-432 on Jul 24, 2003

Voted NO on implementing free trade agreement with Chile.

Reference: Bill sponsored by DeLay, R-TX; Bill HR 2738 ; vote number 2003-436 on Jul 24, 2003

Voted YES on withdrawing from the WTO.

Reference: Resolution sponsored by Paul, R-TX; Bill H J Res 90 ; vote number 2000-310 on Jun 21, 2000

Voted NO on 'Fast Track' authority for trade agreements.

Reference: Bill introduced by Archer, R-TX.; Bill HR 2621 ; vote number 1998-466 on Sep 25, 1998

No restrictions on import/export; but maintain sovereignty .

As adopted by the General Membership of the Republican Liberty Caucus at its Biannual Meeting held December 8, 2000. WHEREAS libertarian Republicans believe in limited government, individual freedom and personal responsibility;

libertarian Republicans believe in limited government, individual freedom and personal responsibility; WHEREAS we believe that government has no money nor power not derived from the consent of the people;

we believe that government has no money nor power not derived from the consent of the people; WHEREAS we believe that people have the right to keep the fruits of their labor; and

we believe that people have the right to keep the fruits of their labor; and WHEREAS we believe in upholding the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Liberty Caucus endorses the following [among its] principles: The US government should inhibit neither the exportation of US goods and services worldwide, nor the importation of goods and services. The United States should not be answerable to any governing body outside the United States for its trade policy.

Source: Republican Liberty Caucus Position Statement 00-RLC9 on Dec 8, 2000

End economic protectionism: let dairy compacts expire .

Declares that the Northeast Interstate Dairy Compact should be allowed to expire under its own terms on September 30, 2001. Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that Article I, section 10 of the United States Constitution should not be used to renew the interstate economic protectionism of our Nation's early history.

Source: House Resolution Sponsorship 01-HR230 on Aug 2, 2001

Rated 76% by CATO, indicating a pro-free trade voting record.

The mission of the Cato Institute Center for Trade Policy Studies is to increase public understanding of the benefits of free trade and the costs of protectionism.

The Cato Trade Center focuses not only on U.S. protectionism, but also on trade barriers around the world. Cato scholars examine how the negotiation of multilateral, regional, and bilateral trade agreements can reduce trade barriers and provide institutional support for open markets. Not all trade agreements, however, lead to genuine liberalization. In this regard, Trade Center studies scrutinize whether purportedly market-opening accords actually seek to dictate marketplace results, or increase bureaucratic interference in the economy as a condition of market access.

Studies by Cato Trade Center scholars show that the United States is most effective in encouraging open markets abroad when it leads by example. The relative openness and consequent strength of the U.S. economy already lend powerful support to the worldwide trend toward embracing open markets. Consistent adherence by the United States to free trade principles would give this trend even greater momentum. Thus, Cato scholars have found that unilateral liberalization supports rather than undermines productive trade negotiations.

Scholars at the Cato Trade Center aim at nothing less than changing the terms of the trade policy debate: away from the current mercantilist preoccupation with trade balances, and toward a recognition that open markets are their own reward.

The following ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.

Source: CATO website 02n-CATO on Dec 31, 2002

Block NAFTA Superhighway & North American Union.

This resolution urges disengaging from the NAFTA Superhighway System and the North American because these proposals threaten U.S. sovereignty:

Whereas US trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have significantly increased since the implementation of NAFTA;

Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System from the west coast of Mexico through the US and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union to facilitate trade;

Whereas the State of Texas has already begun planning of the Trans-Texas Corridor, a major multi-modal transportation project beginning at the US-Mexico border, which would serve as an initial section of a NAFTA Superhighway System;

Whereas it could be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies which employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents;

Whereas future unrestricted foreign trucking can act collaterally as a conduit for illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities; and

Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System would likely include be controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the US:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved: that the US should not engage in the construction of a NAFTA Superhighway System;

that the US should not engage in the construction of a NAFTA Superhighway System; that the US should not allow the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) to implement further regulations that would create a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and

the President should indicate strong opposition to these acts or any other proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the United States.

Source: Resolution against the NAFTA Superhighway (H.CON.RES.40) 2007-HCR40 on Jan 22, 2007

Search for...



X

Page last updated: Jun 12, 2012