Showing posts with label The Hill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Hill. Show all posts

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Ron Paul, Conservatives and the War on Drugs


I’ve often argued that for every supposedly “controversial” position Ron Paul holds amongst Republicans, you can find some of the most iconic names in the conservative movement agreeing with Dr. Paul on these issues. Russell Kirk (the man most responsible for “conservative” becoming a popular term) agreed with Ron Paul on foreign policy and even concepts like “blowback.” Jack Kemp and Robert Novak were both opposed to the Iraq War from the beginning, just as Paul was. It’s no secret that Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul share very similar foreign policy views. Toward the end of his life, Buckley was essentially calling Bush’s foreign policy liberal. Today, George Will is perhaps as fierce a critic of our mindless ongoing presence in Afghanistan as Paul.

Foreign policy is an issue many conventional conservatives have taken issue with Ron Paul on, despite the fact that some of conservatism’s most famous figures have agreed with Paul on the issue.

The same is true of the War on Drugs.

Ron Paul is right when he says that the federal War on Drugs has been an abysmal failure. William F. Buckley and National Review were right when they said the same thing in 1996. Milton Friedman was right when he said the same thing in 1972 when President Nixon created the federal War on Drugs.

Despite having some major conservative intellectual backup on this issue, changing conservatives’ minds about it will likely not happen overnight. As Dr. Paul said about raising awareness about the Federal Reserve issue yesterday “I’d like to say that we’re on the verge of total victory — we’re not. We’re on an incremental victory” the same will be true of progress made on failed federal drug prohibition.

Reports The Hill today:

A bipartisan group of House members has proposed legislation that would make it easier for people to defend themselves in federal cases for possessing marijuana, if they can show that they are using marijuana for medical purposes in line with relevant state laws.

The Hill headline emphasizes that this legislation was co-sponsored by Ron Paul and Barney Frank. No surprise there. The more significant part of the story is Paul’s Republican co-sponsors:

Other Republicans on the bill are Reps. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) and Justin Amash (R-Mich.).

Amash and Rohrabacher are not moderate Republicans, but strong conservatives. True, this is only three conservative Republicans promoting a bill that merely protects medical marijuana patients. But it is three more (or at least two more) Republicans than you would have seen taking such a stance before Ron Paul became a household name.

Recent polls have shown that more Americans than ever are fed up with the failed War on Drugs, with 18-29 years olds comprising the most irritated portion of the populace. These are the same young people who now flock to Ron Paul and his message.

I see an opportunity in the years to come for more conservatives to take a stand on what will increasingly become the winning side of this battle–ending the federal War on Drugs, standing up for states’ rights on substance laws, and getting rid of what is essentially modern day Prohibition.

Ron Paul will be leaving Congress at the end of this term. But on this issue, as will be the case with so many other issues, many Americans–including conservative Republicans–will look back knowing that Ron Paul was right.

Source: Paulitical Ticker with Jack Hunter

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Democrats fear Obama will lose the case

Excerpts from The Hill
By Julian Pecquet
 
“Democrats on Capitol Hill are worried that the Supreme Court will rule against President Obama’s healthcare reform law.
 
“Over the last couple weeks, congressional Democrats have told The Hill that the law faces danger in the hands of the Supreme Court, which The New York Times editorial page recently labeled the most conservative high court since the 1950s.
 
“While the lawmakers are not second-guessing the administration’s legal strategy, some are clearly bracing for defeat.
 
“‘Of course I’m concerned,’ said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)…
 
“The comments underscore the gamble the White House took when it opted not to seek to delay the high court’s review until after the 2012 election. That decision leaves the fate of Democrats’ signature domestic achievement in the hands of a right-leaning court that has consistently ruled against liberals on everything from campaign finance to the District of Columbia’s gun ban to Bush v. Gore…
 
“Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) said he has no problem with the White House wanting a decision as soon as possible.
 
“‘We need certainty,’ Carper said.
 
“‘Politically, there are arguments both ways,’ Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) told The Hill. ‘But dispelling uncertainty and seeking to resolve important questions of constitutional law when there are very grave practical implications is certainly the responsible course to take.’ …
 
“Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), a former state attorney general who sits on the Judiciary Committee, said that the individual mandate might very well fall…
 
“‘So the mandate falls? Big deal,’ Whitehouse said…
 
“The law’s individual mandate ‘is both unpopular and unconstitutional,’ Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-Mich.) and Health subcommittee Chairman Wally Herger (R-Calif.) said in a joint statement, ‘and [we are] pleased that the court is acting swiftly to address the issues in this case.’”
 
Click Here To Read The Full Article.