Ron Paul Forms Exploratory Committee

Texas congressman Ron Paul announced earlier this week that he was forming a presidential exploratory committee.

Paul although elected as a Republican, is not popular with the Republican Party leadership. He is an outsider because he takes principled stands on the issues. Paul is one of the few politicians in Washington who actually believe that the the government should abide by the Constitution.

Paul does not compromise his values to gain popularity or win favors from the Party bosses.

He voted against the War in Iraq.

He voted against the Patriot Act.

He voted against "No Child Left Behind." He was one of only 3 Representatives to vote against it. 215 Republicans and 206 Democrats voted for it.

In Congress, Paul has earned the nickname "Dr. No" for voting against any bill he believes violates the Constitution.

Paul who was the Presidential candidate of the Libertarian Party in 1988, will be seeking the Republican nomination in 2008.

This is a comment Paul made about running as a Republican:

"Now it's a party of big government, corporate interests, and warmongering, and I think it's time that the Republican people had a chance to vote for something else."

Paul says he will base his campaign on the issues most important to him: free markets and individual liberty.

"The government should be out of regulating the economy. I think the monetary issue is important. I don't believe government should be able to print money out of thin air to pay their bills because that causes a lot of problems. I think the government should be out of our bedrooms. I don't think they should be regulating any personal behavior if it's non-violent. That means we have to tolerate people who do things that sometimes are dumb and sometimes are irritating, but in a free society you tolerate that."


Ron Paul is a long shot no doubt. But he should get more coverage as a Republican candidate and thereby get the issues of freedom and individual rights out there. You aren't going to get that from any of the usual suspects who run for the Republican and Democrat nominations.

Minnesota Legislators Are Just Plain Folk

Rules committees in both houses of the Minnesota Legislature voted to increase members per diems and housing allowance. The vote passed with the majority of Democrats and Republicans voting for the increases.

Under the new rules in addition to their salary of $31,140, State Senators now get $96 per day meal allowance and $1,200 per month housing allowance. The meal allowance is 7 days a week while the legislature is in session (January thru May) and the housing allowance is year around.


Senate DFL (Democrat Farmer Labor) Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller backed the per diem rate increases for senators: "It's reasonable to expect that members be reimbursed for reasonable expenses."

$96 per day for meals? Yeah right.

The thing is, St. Paul is not that expensive of a town. There is an abundance of reasonably priced restaurants in and around downtown. The Capitol building even has its own cafeteria. I just checked the menu, they serve all three meals and the cost for an entire meal ranges from $3.25 to $5.35.

So for about $15 per day they could eat without even leaving the building. Not bad, an extra $81 for fun money.

Another quote from a legislator:

"We're all entitled to a little cost of living allowance now and again," said Rep. Ron Erhardt, Republican, Edina.

Atlanta Police Lied in Shooting of Elderly Woman

You may have read shortly before Thanksgiving of an Atlanta Police Swat Team that busted down the door of an elderly black woman in Atlanta. The woman, apparently thinking her house was being invaded by criminals grabbed her hand gun and shot at the intruders. The police shot her multiple times, killing her.

The supposed goal of this no knock, middle of the night SWAT team raid was to seize drugs. The search warrant was based on information that the police said they received from an informant who made a drug buy in the house.

Just this past week one of the officers involved has apparently told investigators that there was no drug buy and that there was no informant who went into the house.

While the initial shooting story did receive national coverage, the latest development apparently hasn't. The press has more important things to cover like the Rosie - Donald feud.

These type of raids in the so called War on Drugs are far too common and too many innocent people suffer. But unfortunately this fact remains under the radar of most people as the stories only receive local coverage.

History of Trans Fat in Food

Now that the public smoking battle has been won by the big intrusive government supporters, the next front appears to be trans fat.

It is interesting to note that many of those who support banning trans fat are the same people who are to a large degree responsible for it.

The "consumer health" groups and the government both advocated a reduction of saturated fat in the diet. Consumer health groups put pressure on the restaurant industry to quit cooking in animal fat. The substitute was vegetable oil which is unsaturated fat. As the evidence against hydrogenated vegetable oils mounted, the Center for Science in the Public Interest kept on defending these oils with the exception of "tropical oils."

Now the Center for Science in the Public Interest is a leader in trying to ban trans fats and denies any blame for their widespread use.

Misplaced Faith

Here is something I wrote in 2000, but didn't manage to get published anywhere. Unfortunately it still applies:

Misplaced Faith

By Jim Rongstad

As we head into another political season we will be deluged with all the "wonderful" plans, programs and new laws that the politicians claim will solve our problems and improve our lives.

Most will promote these solutions out of genuine concern and belief in their cause. Some promote these solutions as means to increase their own power and authority. In either case we all lose. The advocates and supporters for these solutions have embraced a new religion: Statism. Statism is a faith in government (the state) to solve our problems. History demonstrates that this is a misplaced faith.

Whatever the problem, whether it is personal moral conduct or managing the economy, the government today is entrusted to provide and enforce a solution. Worshiping at the altar of the state is worshiping a false god. It is a grave threat to freedom and ultimately leads to a decline in both personal responsibility and virtue.

We have strayed far from the ideal of the founders of this country: a government with limited powers which were to be used to protect our unalienable rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. By giving increasing power to the government, we are reducing the influence of individuals, families, churches and private charitable institutions.

Advocates for increased state power like to call their ideas progressive, as if state power is a new idea. In reality the powerful state is an ancient idea. The history of Western Civilization leading up to the American Revolution is a story of the struggle of individuals versus the power of the state. Much of the history of the last century is a story of the massive death and destruction brought on by the statist philosophies of Communism and Fascism (Nazism).

The power of government is coercion (force). The only proper use of government force is to protect individuals life, liberty and property from force or fraud by others. When we try to control others, we end up having ourselves controlled. We reap what we sow. This can be seen in examples of the use of government force in economic matters and in personal matters.

Few of us would consider it just or moral to go over to our neighbor’s house and tell them that they had to contribute a certain amount of money to our favorite cause or charity. We certainly would not take the money by force or else imprison them if they refused to contribute. Most of us would rightfully view such action as theft, no matter how worthy the cause or charity. Yet somehow many people believe it is all right to use the force of government to require others to contribute to their favorite cause or charity through taxes and government spending.

Every day we see people trying to use government to support some activity which they find worthy. Recent examples include subsidizing wealthy sports owners by building their stadiums or arenas with tax dollars and supporting a new Guthrie Theater with a taxpayer subsidy. Locally we even see supposedly "limited government Republicans" supporting state funding for a Woodbury arts center. Personally you may support some or all of these causes. If you do, then you should support them with your own voluntary contribution. By using the power of government to force others to support these causes with the taxes they pay, you have opened yourself to paying for causes that you believe are unworthy or even immoral.

The support of one cause by government becomes the argument for government to support some other cause. You may support the art center in Woodbury, but because of the "art of political compromise" you are instead supporting, with your tax dollars, the Guthrie in Minneapolis and the Lanesboro Arts Center in southeastern Minnesota. In typical political horse-trading supporters of each of these facilities agreed to support the other in order to override Governor Ventura’s veto of this pork barrel spending.

In the area of personal conduct we are waging a government "War on Drugs," but as in most wars it is the innocent civilian who suffers the most harm. The initial reason for the "War on Drugs" was to prevent people from harming themselves by drug abuse. This of course was the same rationale for the war on alcohol (Prohibition) from 1920 to 1933. Prohibition was finally repealed because people tired of the gang warfare and corruption it created.

The Drug War has also resulted in gang warfare and corruption. The War on Drugs has also led to ever increasing government infringements on the rights of innocent citizens. As part of the "War on Drugs" the government requires banks to report any large financial transactions you make.

Last year the federal government tried to implement the "Know Your Customer" rule which would have forced banks to "monitor" your checking and savings account and report any "unusual transactions" to the federal government. Only a public outcry by 300,000 Americans stopped "Know Your Customer," at least for now.

The Drug War has led to Asset Forfeiture laws where various government agencies can seize your property without even prosecuting you for a crime. In fact 80% of all seizures occur without any criminal prosecution, so much for innocent until proven guilty. Even after all the billions of dollars spent and rights trampled on by the drug war, drug use is higher now than when the war began in 1972
.
We need to return to our libertarian roots with a political system that respects us as unique individuals. Individuals who are capable of planning for the future and are willing to take responsibility for themselves. Individuals who are compassionate of others, who can and will solve our own problems if we are allowed to. This is what distinguishes the Libertarian Party from all the other parties. Libertarians really do trust the people.