The Consistent Constitutionalist
by Max Raskin
by
Max Raskin
DIGG THIS
What can be
said of a Republican congressman from Texas who votes against giving
the Congressional Gold Medal to Rosa Parks? Not knowing Dr. Ron
Paul, one could charge him with racism or bigotry, but his colleagues
in Congress know better. They understand he is a legislator guided
solely by his dedication to the Constitution. To Paul, even the
most routine vote, where "yea" is often taken for granted,
offers him a chance to take a stand. Ron Paul’s vote against giving
the Congressional Gold Medal to Rosa Parks not only shows his personal
courage, but also more importantly, demonstrates his fundamental
belief in and unwavering defense of the Constitution, and thus fully
embodies John Kennedy’s conception of political courage.
On April
20, 1999, Ron Paul rose in opposition to HR 573, the Congressional
Gold Medal for Rosa Parks Act; his was the sole dissenting vote
("Roll Call 92"). The reason for Ron Paul’s vote was simple:
The Constitution does not enumerate awarding $30,000 medals as a
power of Congress. That every congressman voted for the bill did
not make it right, nor did the vote change Paul’s conviction. In
his dissenting speech, he did not question the moral integrity of
Rosa Parks, but rather proudly proclaimed that, "Because of
my continuing and uncompromising opposition to appropriations not
authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, I must
remain consistent" ("During Debate on HR 573" 1).
Not afraid of looking bad, a rare quality in an age of political
correctness, Paul followed his sworn political duty of protecting
the Constitution.
Although as
a legislator his principles won’t allow him to reward the honorable
achievements of Parks, it is all the more telling of his character
that he will stand by those principles in his personal life. For
this reason he says, "I have many times offered to contribute
$100 of my own money, to be matched by other members, to finance
these medals." Not surprisingly, he was the only Congressman
to do so (Paul 1). As he would be the first one to point out, "It
is, of course, easier to be generous with other people's money"
("During Debate on HR 573" 1). It is this personalization
of the issues that makes him a scrupulous person and politician,
which sadly do not often go together.
While Rosa
Parks certainly deserves some kind of honor, Paul understands that
the Founding Fathers designed our country to be, in the words of
John Adams, "…of laws, and not men," meaning that the
rule of law should take precedence over the subjective wishes of
capricious rulers (McCullough 222). Paul notes that while bending
the rules in this instance may not seem too harmful, it could lead
to a dangerous way of governing. As Thomas Jefferson pointed out,
"In questions of powers, then, let no more be heard of confidence
in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution"
(Jefferson 1). Paul has an erudite knowledge of the Constitution’s
importance. When only Congressional approval is needed to circumvent
the Constitution, any number of despotic measures could be justified
by the subjective urges of the government. Instead of blindly following
the Constitution, he does so with sound reasoning and an appreciation
for its principles.
John F. Kennedy,
in Profiles
in Courage, praises the courage needed to defend the Constitution.
His description of Robert A. Taft, one of Paul’s political heroes,
could easily be applied to Paul: "The Constitution of the United
States was the gospel which guided the policy decisions of the Senator
from Ohio. It was his source, his weapon, and his salvation"
(Kennedy 198). Paul shows that even if we feel that someone is deserving
of recognition, there are better ways to do so than by compromising
the basic foundation of our government.
Paul’s votes
on minor issues, like the medal, show that consistency allows him
to serve his country, even if his votes contradict his own personal
beliefs. A pro-life politician, like Paul, must be consistent in
his commitment to states’ rights, even if he must vote against a
federal anti-abortion bill, as he has done (Copeland D01).
While Paul decries drug use, he is unflinching in his call for a
repeal of drug laws – our government was not designed to legislate
morality. Moreover, that he has voted against giving the medal to
dignitaries like fellow Republican Ronald Reagan, Pope John Paul
II, and Mother Teresa definitively dispels any charges of racism
or partisanship. Debra Medina, Wharton County Republican chairwoman,
succinctly sums up Paul: "He's just consistent, consistent, consistent"
(Copeland D01).
Even though
a vote may not radically alter the course of American history, it
can still be praiseworthy. Honoring courage simply for courage’s
sake teaches Americans to value such worthy principles. As Kennedy
points out, "…as a piece of sheer candor in a period when candor
was out of favor…it [Taft’s action] is worth remembering here"
(Kennedy 197). Kennedy recognizes that issues do not need to be
of vast importance to demonstrate political courage. A subtle understanding
of the issues involved shows both an appreciation for society’s
rule of law, as well as an effective way of voicing dissent.
Whether it
is standing against his party in adamantly opposing the military
invasion of Iraq or attacking both parties’ spendthrift ways, Ron
Paul lacks "…blind devotion to the party line…," but is
instead dedicated to society and its laws (Kennedy 195). In his
essay Mises and Austrian Economics, Paul quotes economist
Ludwig von Mises in summing up his own feelings towards social responsibility:
"Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders; no one
is relieved of his share of responsibility by others" (Mises
515). A courageous man does not expect someone to do the right thing
for him. When Ron Paul stands up for the sake of truth, he is not
only the Honorable Congressman from Texas, but also, more importantly,
a courageous defender of America.
Works
Cited
- Copeland,
Libby. "Congressman Paul's Legislative Strategy? He'd Rather Say
Not." Washington Post 9 July 2006, sec. D: 01.
- "Final
Vote Results for Roll Call 92." Office of the Clerk.
20 Apr. 1999. House of Representatives. 3 Dec. 2006.
- Jefferson,
Thomas. "Kentucky
Resolution 1799." The Avalon Project. 3 Dec. 1799.
Yale Law School. 3 Dec. 2006.
- Kennedy,
John F. Profiles
in Courage. New York City: HarperCollins, 2003.
- McCullough,
David. John
Adams. New York City: Simon & Schuster, 2001.
- Mises, Ludwig
von. Socialism.
New Haven: Yale UP, 1951.
- Paul, Ronald
E. "Does
Tony Blair Deserve a Congressional Medal?" House of Representatives.
U.S. Capitol, Washington D.C. 25 June 2003. 3 Dec. 2006.
- Paul, Ronald
E. "During
Debate on HR 573." Congressional Record. 20 Apr. 1999.
United States House of Representatives. 3 Dec. 2006.
April
21, 2007
Max
Raskin [send him mail]
goes to high school in New Jersey.
Copyright
© 2007 LewRockwell.com
Max
Raskin Archives
|