Ron Paul: Debt Ceiling Drama

by Ron Paul

The debt ceiling debate is providing plenty of opportunity for political theater in Washington. Proponents of raising the debt ceiling are throwing around the usual scare tactics and misinformation in order to intimidate opponents into accepting more debt and taxes. It is important to distinguish the truth from the propaganda.

First of all, politicians need to understand that without real change default is inevitable. In fact, default happens every day through monetary policy tricks. Every time the Federal Reserve engages in more quantitative easing and devalues the dollar, it is defaulting on the American people by eroding their purchasing power and inflating their savings away. The dollar has lost nearly 50% of its value against gold since 2008. The Fed claims inflation is 2% or less over the past few years; however economists who compile alternate data show a 9% inflation rate if calculated more traditionally. Alarmingly, the administration is talking about changing the methodology of the CPI calculation yet again to hide the damage of the government’s policies. Changing the CPI will also enable the government to avoid giving seniors a COLA (cost of living adjustment) on their social security checks, and raise taxes via the hidden means of “bracket creep.” This is a default. Just because it is a default on the people and not the banks and foreign holders of our debt does not mean it doesn’t count.


Reality Check for the Commerce Clause

From the Wall Street Journal:

MISSOULA, Mont.—“With a homemade .22-caliber rifle he calls the Montana Buckaroo, Gary Marbut dreams of taking down the federal regulatory state.
Montana passed a law that tries to exempt the state from federal gun regulation. But the law is now before the courts, in a test of states’ rights. WSJ’s Jess Bravin reports.

He’s not planning to fire his gun. Instead, he wants to sell it, free from federal laws requiring him to record transactions, pay license fees and open his business to government inspectors.

For years, Mr. Marbut argued that a wide range of federal laws, not just gun regulations, should be invalid because they were based on an erroneous interpretation of Congress’s constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce. In his corner were a handful of conservative lawyers and academics. Now, with the rise of the tea-party movement, the self-employed shooting-range supplier finds himself leading a movement.

Ten state attorneys general, dozens of elected officials and an array of conservative groups are backing the legal challenge he engineered to get his constitutional theory before the Supreme Court. A federal appeals court in San Francisco is now considering his case.“

Read the rest here

Gary Marbut has a colossal fight on his hands, but it is one I believe he can win. To me the issue lies not in the word “commerce,” but in the word “regulate.” Wikipedia, in its coverage of the commerce clause, is overly concerned with the definition and application of the word “commerce.” (Let’s put aside for now the common-sense definition of the word commerce as pertaining to economic activity only.) In doing so, they (as with many courts in the past) are focusing on the wrong word. The key word in the clause is “regulate.”


What exactly is supreme?

St. George Tucker wrote the first extended, systematic commentary on the Constitution after ratification. View of the Constitution of the United States was published in 1803 and served as an important handbook for American law students, lawyers, judges,  jurists and statesmen  for the first half of the 19th century. The following excerpt explains the “supremacy clause.”

SUPREMACY CLAUSE: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

It may seem extraordinary, that a people jealous of their liberty, and not insensible of the allurement of power, should have entrusted the federal government with such extensive authority as this article conveys: controlling not only the acts of their ordinary legislatures, but their very constitutions, also.


Tenther Radio 07-20-11. Guests, Stewart Rhodes, Derrick Sontag

Please join us for TRX: Tenther Radio on July 20, 2011 right here – listen live by clicking the play button at that time on the right. Join the conversation with your comments and questions by calling (323) 843-6008.

We’re honored to have as the show’s guests, Stewart Rhodes and Derrick Sontag.

Add to iTunes

Stewart Rhodes is the founder and Director of Oath Keepers. He served as a U.S. Army paratrooper until disabled in a rough terrain parachuting accident during a night jump. He is a former firearms instructor and former member of Rep. Ron Paul’s DC staff. Stewart currently writes the monthly Enemy at the Gates column for S.W.A.T. Magazine


Will the Tenth Amendment shoot down Commerce Clause Abuse?

The Firearms Freedom Act movement has been at the forefront of the Tenth Amendment Movement for some time now. Good to see Gary Marbut – author of the original bill that first passed in Montana, then 7 other states, get some mainstream media coverage. From the Wall Street Journal: Gary Marbut, 65, lives alone outside…


No Phony Gold Standards

Tom Woods will be a featured speaker at Nullify Now! Kansas City. Get tickets here – – or by calling 888-71-TICKETS When you hear talk about returning to the “gold standard,” be sure you know what the speaker means by the term.  There are plenty of phony gold standards out there.  The supply-sider/neocon version,…


Tenther Radio Episode 4: Paul Armentano, Robert Scott Bell

Add to iTunes

In this episode, hosts Phil Russo and Michael Boldin are joined by Paul Armentano, the Deputy Director of NORML and the NORML Foundation. His recent op-ed at (read here) discusses the Ron Paul-Barney Frank legislation to return marijuana decision-making to the states, and he discusses his view that such decisions should be decentralized, and not in the hands of the federal government.

Paul also talks about the Obama administration’s about-face on marijuana policy and its recent use of threats to individual states to get them to stop implementation of medical marijuana programs in New Jersey and elsewhere. He also points out that in Vermont, Maine and other states, they ignored the threats and have gotten away with it. A blueprint for other issues too?


The Power to Make and Fund War Belong to Congress Alone

We finally did what John McCain, a Republican Party Presidential candidate, said that we should do in Libya and it was Barak Obama, the Democratic Party Presidential candidate and ultimate victor, who then did it—enforce a no-fly zone on another country who poised no military threat to the United States. Are there any real differences between the two major parties on foreign policy? Where is the authority for a single person to approve military action against another country which action has always been considered an act of war?

Although I have no sympathy for Moammar Gadhafi, how would we feel if Libya was the super power and did the same to us? Of course, I realize that this was done by coalition forces (mostly France and Britain) through the power of the United Nations, but whose kidding who: it is mostly our aircraft, our pilots, our ships and our Mohawk Missiles.

I am concerned about the constitutionality of this action by either a Democratic or a Republican President. The making and funding of war were clearly denied the President in the Constitution because he “had the most propensity for war.” Only Congress has the right “to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water.” War requires the blood of our young warriors and this requires the permission of the people who are required to be the fodder in such. Only the peoples’ representatives can “provide and maintain a navy or make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces” and for “calling forth the militia…to repel invasions “ or “provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States….” Congress is directly responsible for any acquisition of property for military use. All of this is in Article I, Section 8 and belongs to the legislative branch alone.


Petition Drive for Freedom of Choice In Pennsylvania’s Health Care

Editor’s Note: One of the Pennsylvania Tenth Amendment Coalition members received this message in e-mail from the Lehigh Valley Tea Party.  The message has been formatted by the PA Tenth Amendment Center for web display, but is otherwise unchanged.  If you are a Tea Party member, you may want to customize it for your own group to join the petition drive.  Going by the text of the message, if you want to join the Lehigh Valley Tea Party petition as an individual, it needs to be e-mailed today, July 13.  The sooner the better, it would appear.

Harrisburg will only act if they hear us speaking with one voice.   It is the position of the Pennsylvania Tenth Amendment Center that HB42 and SB220 (a similar bill in the senate), represent the best alternatives available in this year’s legislative session for Tenth Amendment protection from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.


Tenther Radio: Tom Woods with Phil Russo and Michael Boldin

Add to iTunes EDITOR’S NOTE: Tom Woods will be the keynote speaker at Nullify Now! Kansas City. Get tickets here – – or by calling 888-71-TICKETS ******* Tom Woods discusses his recent blockbuster speech at Nullify Now! Los Angeles, how government is out of control in both domestic and foreign policy, a general overview…