Ron Paul’s Bill To Audit The Federal Reserve Now Has 91 Co-Sponsors


Ron Paul’s bill to audit the Federal Reserve (HR 1207) now has 91 co-sponsors, and the numbers keep growing!

This is history in the making, and victory is within reach. Imagine what will happen if HR 1207, The Federal Reserve Transparency Act, comes up for vote in Congress! With more than 20% of Congress already co-sponsoring this bill, it has real potential to pass — BUT only if we educate and rally the people to support it and get our Congresspeople to put it to vote and pass it.

Step 1: Your Representative

If your representative is not on the following list of HR 1207 co-sponsors, call their offices, write to them, email them, etc. Let them know they need to support HR 1207. If you live in their district, let them know. Go to their office.

Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121

HR 1207 Co-Sponsors (as of 4/24/2009)

Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] - 2/26/2009
Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 3/19/2009
Rep Alexander, Rodney [LA-5] - 3/10/2009
Rep Bachmann, Michele [MN-6] - 2/26/2009
Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] - 4/21/2009
Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. [MD-6] - 2/26/2009
Rep Bilbray, Brian P. [CA-50] - 4/21/2009
Rep Bishop, Rob [UT-1] - 4/21/2009
Rep Blackburn, Marsha [TN-7] - 3/16/2009
Rep Blunt, Roy [MO-7] - 3/24/2009
Rep Brady, Kevin [TX-8] - 4/22/2009
Rep Broun, Paul C. [GA-10] - 2/26/2009
Rep Buchanan, Vern [FL-13] - 3/17/2009
Rep Burgess, Michael C. [TX-26] - 3/19/2009
Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 2/26/2009
Rep Capito, Shelley Moore [WV-2] - 4/1/2009
Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31] - 3/31/2009
Rep Castle, Michael N. [DE] - 3/17/2009
Rep Chaffetz, Jason [UT-3] - 3/6/2009
Rep Cole, Tom [OK-4] - 4/21/2009
Rep Culberson, John Abney [TX-7] - 3/26/2009
Rep Deal, Nathan [GA-9] - 3/23/2009
Rep DeFazio, Peter A. [OR-4] - 3/9/2009
Rep Doggett, Lloyd [TX-25] - 4/21/2009
Rep Duncan, John J., Jr. [TN-2] - 3/6/2009
Rep Ehlers, Vernon J. [MI-3] - 4/21/2009
Rep Fallin, Mary [OK-5] - 4/2/2009
Rep Fleming, John [LA-4] - 3/18/2009
Rep Foxx, Virginia [NC-5] - 3/10/2009
Rep Franks, Trent [AZ-2] - 3/23/2009
Rep Garrett, Scott [NJ-5] - 3/5/2009
Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 3/30/2009
Rep Gohmert, Louie [TX-1] - 4/23/2009
Rep Graves, Sam [MO-6] - 4/22/2009
Rep Grayson, Alan [FL-8] - 3/11/2009
Rep Heller, Dean [NV-2] - 3/6/2009
Rep Herger, Wally [CA-2] - 4/21/2009
Rep Inglis, Bob [SC-4] - 4/23/2009
Rep Jenkins, Lynn [KS-2] - 4/23/2009
Rep Johnson, Sam [TX-3] - 4/22/2009
Rep Johnson, Timothy V. [IL-15] - 4/23/2009
Rep Jones, Walter B., Jr. [NC-3] - 2/26/2009
Rep Kagen, Steve [WI-8] - 2/26/2009
Rep Kaptur, Marcy [OH-9] - 4/23/2009
Rep Kingston, Jack [GA-1] - 3/6/2009
Rep Lamborn, Doug [CO-5] - 4/21/2009
Rep Latham, Tom [IA-4] - 4/21/2009
Rep Lucas, Frank D. [OK-3] - 4/21/2009
Rep Luetkemeyer, Blaine [MO-9] - 4/21/2009
Rep Lummis, Cynthia M. [WY] - 3/19/2009
Rep Manzullo, Donald A. [IL-16] - 4/21/2009
Rep Marchant, Kenny [TX-24] - 3/11/2009
Rep Massa, Eric J. J. [NY-29] - 4/22/2009
Rep McCaul, Michael T. [TX-10] - 4/21/2009
Rep McClintock, Tom [CA-4] - 3/6/2009
Rep McCotter, Thaddeus G. [MI-11] - 3/19/2009
Rep Miller, Jeff [FL-1] - 3/24/2009
Rep Olson, Pete [TX-22] - 4/21/2009
Rep Paulsen, Erik [MN-3] - 3/30/2009
Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 4/21/2009
Rep Peterson, Collin C. [MN-7] - 3/19/2009
Rep Petri, Thomas E. [WI-6] - 3/10/2009
Rep Platts, Todd Russell [PA-19] - 3/19/2009
Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] - 2/26/2009
Rep Posey, Bill [FL-15] - 2/26/2009
Rep Price, Tom [GA-6] - 3/10/2009
Rep Rehberg, Denny [MT] - 2/26/2009
Rep Roe, David P. [TN-1] - 4/21/2009
Rep Rohrabacher, Dana [CA-46] - 3/6/2009
Rep Rooney, Thomas J. [FL-16] - 4/22/2009
Rep Sessions, Pete [TX-32] - 3/23/2009
Rep Shimkus, John [IL-19] - 4/22/2009
Rep Smith, Adam [WA-9] - 4/22/2009
Rep Smith, Lamar [TX-21] - 4/2/2009
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 3/26/2009
Rep Stearns, Cliff [FL-6] - 3/6/2009
Rep Taylor, Gene [MS-4] - 3/6/2009
Rep Terry, Lee [NE-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Thompson, Glenn [PA-5] - 4/22/2009
Rep Wamp, Zach [TN-3] - 3/16/2009
Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [GA-3] - 4/2/2009
Rep Wittman, Robert J. [VA-1] - 4/1/2009
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] - 2/26/2009
Rep Young, Don [AK] - 3/6/2009

Step 2: Financial Services Committee

HR 1207 is now in the House Committee on Financial Services. This is THE MOST IMPORTANT STEP in this legislation! If it doesn’t get out of committee it will not come to a vote! There are 71 members on this committee and they are all listed below.

We need to let all members of the House Committee on Financial Services know that we want them to allow full House consideration of HR 1207 so it can move forward; we need them to support this. Now is the time.

Call their offices, write to them, email them, etc. Let them know they need to support HR 1207. If you live in their district, let them know. Go to their office.

Start with Barney Frank! His staff said that his office isn’t receiving a lot of calls about HR 1207… let’s change that!

House Committee on Financial Services

Chairman Barney Frank, MA

Republican Members

Rep. Michele Bachmann, MN [co-sponsor]
Rep. Spencer Bachus, AL
Rep. J. Gresham Barrett, SC
Rep. Judy Biggert, IL
Rep. John Campbell, CA
Rep. Michael N. Castle, DE [co-sponsor]
Rep. Scott Garrett, NJ [co-sponsor]
Rep. Jim Gerlach, PA
Rep. Jeb Hensarling, TX
Rep. Lynn Jenkins, KS
Rep. Walter B. Jones , NC [co-sponsor]
Rep. Peter King, NY
Rep. Christopher Lee, NY
Rep. Leonard Lance, NJ
Rep. Frank D. Lucas, OK [co-sponsor]
Rep. Donald A. Manzullo, IL [co-sponsor]
Rep. Kenny Marchant, TX [co-sponsor]
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, MI [co-sponsor]
Rep. Kevin McCarthy, CA
Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, NC
Rep. Gary G. Miller, CA
Rep. Randy Neugebauer, TX
Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, WV [co-sponsor]
Rep. Ron Paul, TX [sponsor]
Rep. Erik Paulsen, MN [co-sponsor]
Rep. Bill Posey, FL [co-sponsor]
Rep. Tom Price, GA [co-sponsor]
Rep. Adam Putnam, FL
Rep. Edward R. Royce, CA

Democratic Members

Rep. Gary L. Ackerman, NY
Rep. John Adler, NJ
Rep. Joe Baca, CA
Rep. Melissa L. Bean, IL
Rep. Michael E. Capuano, MA
Rep. Andre Carson, IN
Rep. Travis Childers, MS
Rep. William Lacy Clay, MO
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, MO
Rep. Joe Donnelly, IN
Rep. Steve Driehaus, OH
Rep. Keith Ellison, MN
Rep. Bill Foster, IL
Rep. Alan Grayson, FL [co-sponsor]
Rep. Al Green, TX
Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, IL
Rep. Rubén Hinojosa, TX
Rep. Jim Himes, CT
Rep. Paul W. Hodes, NH
Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski, PA
Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, MA
Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy, OH
Rep. Ron Klein, FL
Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, FL
Rep. Dan Maffei, NY
Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, NY
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, NY
Rep. Gregory W. Meeks, NY
Rep. Brad Miller, NC
Rep. Walt Minnick, ID
Rep. Dennis Moore, KS
Rep. Gwen Moore, WI
Rep. Ed Perlmutter, CO
Rep. Gary Peters, MI
Rep. David Scott, GA
Rep. Brad Sherman, CA
Rep. Jackie Speier, CA
Rep. Nydia M. Velázquez, NY
Rep. Maxine Waters, CA
Rep. Melvin L. Watt, NC
Rep. Charles Wilson, OH

Help with this all important public outreach. NOW REALLY IS THE TIME!

Here’s a sample letter you can use:

Dear Representative,

Please co-sponsor and/or support H.R.1207, an effort to audit the Federal Reserve.

Recently, it has come to light that there is little to no accountability to the people on the part of the Federal Reserve. While the citizens of this country are required by law to give an accounting of every penny they come in contact with, the Federal Reserve has never been held to the same standard. During this time of extreme economic crisis, the people deserve an accounting of where our money is going.

Currently there are 91 co-sponsors for this legislation, and it is enjoying bi-partisan support. Your efforts in supporting this important legislation would go a long way in proving to your constituents that you not only hold the Federal Reserve to the same standard as you do your constituents, but it would also show that you believe in transparency. Anything less than support for this resolution suggests that you are in favor of secrecy and a lack of accountability to the people who pay the bills. We pay the tab; we have a right to know where our money is going.

Unlike recent bills that you voted in favor of that had hundreds of pages and just a few hours to read, this bill can be read in under 5 minutes. I encourage you to take the time to read it, and then move to support it.

Thank you in advance for your attention on this important legislation. I have every expectation that you will do right by your constituents and support this measure.


Step 3: The People

Tell everyone you know about HR 1207 and ask them to support it and to contact their representative as well. Link to this page and to

This initiative is crucial and we need to redouble our efforts to get HR 1207 passed.


Ron Paul on Alex Jones TV

No comments yet

Part 1:
Part 2:

Show: Alex Jones Show
Date: 4/24/2009


Alex Jones: Okay ladies and gentlemen, we are now simulcasting at, the syndicated radio program at For the next 30 minutes or so we are joined by Congressman Ron Paul, joining us from Texas. Congressman Ron Paul needs no introduction. Congressman, I have a ton of important questions to ask you, a bunch of listener emails that I promised to read on air and to bring up to you. But out of the gates, what is most important right now on your plate that you think the American people should be made aware of?

Ron Paul: Oh boy, there’s so many. I guess overall my biggest worry and concern is the attitude of this administration and the aggressiveness that they’re expressing against Pakistan, and I think it looks like they’re more willing to expand the war into Pakistan and less likely into Iran, but if Israel goes into Iran we’re going to be obligated. Which might be the precipitating event that will cause a collapse of the dollar because how are we going to be able to afford this? So that to me is strategically the big issue.

In a more casual way I guess the project I’m working on is trying to get as many people as possible to support this audit bill, you know, 1207, which I think last time I looked we’re up to 86 on this, we got a bunch of new co-sponsors after they heard from their constituents back at home in this two week break. So what you do on the radio and what others do elsewhere must be alerting a lot of people because some members came up to me and they said, “Boy, I had a couple of town hall meetings, and low and behold, every time I had them they were 3 or 4 or 5 people saying, ‘Are you going to support the audit bill?’”. So these two issues would be the things that I have been thinking about mostly. (more…)


Ron Paul’s Speech at Wake Forest University

No comments yet

Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Part 4:
Part 5:

Location: Lake Forest University
Date: 4/20/2009


Ron Paul: Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, thank you. Thank you. You’d think a campaign was going on or something like that. It’s great to see so many young people interested in what we’ve been talking about. I assume most of you have heard about the Internet and you get a little information from the Internet now and then. I am just so pleased to see the excitement that has continued since the campaign a year or so ago and along with the Campaign for Liberty. Because evidently there is still a lot of people in this country who care about liberty and freedom and all that has made American great and I’m delighted to have you here.

Probably most of what I will talk about tonight will be warning you about what you are inheriting, because it’s a mess and I don’t need to tell you that, because everybody knows it. There’s something different. There’s something in the atmosphere now that is different than it’s ever been since I’ve been involved in politics. And the very first time I ran was in 1974, and something really is going on that is getting the attention of the entire world. It is usually the financial problems that we’re facing that’s getting everybody’s attention, and rightfully so. It is a major, major crisis. It is something I have written about and talked about for many years.

I believe very sincerely that the financial bubble that burst here about a year and a half ago was the largest financial bubble in the history of the world. Unfortunately, this could have been prevented. It could have been prevented by really just paying a lot more attention to our Constitution. Just doing that would have solved a lot of our problems.

The issue of money was something I talked about as early as 1974. Matter of fact, it was the issue of money that prompted me to speak out in those early years because I had witnessed and remember very clearly 1971, and that was when the previous monetary situation came to an end. The Bretton Woods agreement which was established in 1944 lasted till 1971 and it collapsed. It collapsed and that was the last linkage that we had to gold. And I was convinced it would usher in a bad age. The 1970s were very, very bad. I guess to some of our surprises the situation after that worked out a little bit better and it lasted a little bit longer because it had become more sophisticated and more aggressive at inflating the bubble. And yet, it was inevitable that a financial bubble based on printed money and created credit and debt always comes to an end. (more…)


Audit The Fed Song by Steve Dore

No comments yet

Download the song as an MP3 file here (3:42 minutes).


We must audit the FED.
Open those books and let the record be read.
Audit the FED.
No more cover up. Let’s get the truth out instead.

Call your representative. Get them out of bed.
We need it right now, We need a transparent FED.
Wouldn’t you just love it to see the scam exposed?
People will revolt when they see how they’ve been hosed.


The FED is responsible for this mess we’re in.
No accountability, it’s the way it’s always been.
The financial system’s down and won’t be getting up.
With more of the same thing that got us in this rut.


We must audit the FED.
Open those books and let the record be read.
Audit the FED.
No more cover up. Let’s get the truth out instead.

Ron Paul and his bill are leading the way.
HR 1207, the most critical today.
No longer any time for us to get it right.
The dollar’s death march is coming into sight.


Where’s the truth? The accountability?
Sooner or later… we will find out.
And (hopefully) it will bring the end
of the FED!


Song by Steve Dore


Ron Paul on AntiWar Radio

1 comment

In this April 22 interview with AntiWar Radio’s Scott Horton, Ron Paul discusses the lack of change in Afghanistan and Iraq policy despite the Obama administration’s rhetoric, how a single high U.S.-casualty incident abroad could garner the support of Americans for more military intervention, the unwillingness of Democrats or Republicans to cut the Pentagon’s budget, the expansive new powers over the economy being exercised by the government and why he favors the prosecution of the previous administration for war crimes.

Download the interview as an MP3 file here (19:03 minutes).


Scott Horton: For I’m Scott Horton, this is AntiWar Radio. And introducing our first guest today, it’s Dr. Ron Paul. He’s a Congressman representing District 14 on Texas’ gulf coast in the House of Representatives and, of course, you all know he ran for president last time and also he’s the author of the excellent libertarian primer “The Revolution: A Manifesto” which I highly recommend you go out and get and share with everybody you care about.

Welcome back to the show Ron. How are you, sir?

Ron Paul: Thank you, Scott. I’m good, thank you.

Scott Horton: It’s very good to have you here on the show today. Let’s talk about warfare. What’s going on in Afghanistan? Looks like they went from… I forget how many troops were there in the first place… they said they were going to add 17,000 more troops, and then they made that 20,000 and I think they added another 10,000 troops on top of that. Is America kind of starting that war all over again and how long do you think we’re going to stay in Afghanistan?

Ron Paul: Well, it’s a continuation, I guess there is nothing brand new. The expansion of the war into Pakistan had already started with the last administration, which proves our point that foreign policy stays the same. Interestingly enough, recently within the last hour or two, I came from the foreign affairs committee where Hillary Clinton was testifying about foreign policy.

Scott Horton: Oh yeah?

Ron Paul: And I got my five minutes in and brought up the subject and actually told her that I was pleased because I heard the rhetoric and tone of the foreign policy was changing, and they were reaching out a little bit, but I said words are one thing but actions are even more important. So I tried to get her to tell me where have we seen any significant changes. Have we brought any troops home? Have we done anything to emphasize the fact that Obama immediately increased the military budget by 9% and expanded the number of troops in Afghanistan?

And I asked her, “Is there is any place where you can give me a little encouragement that we’ve actually had a change in policy?” And the only thing that she could offer was not that they brought any troops home or they cut back in any way, because they haven’t. She was saying, “Yes, we will be out of Iraq”, but I think that’s a pipe dream, quite frankly. I think there is chaos there and I think it’s stirring and I think if it’s gets a little worse there is no way they’re going to walk away from Iraq and the troops will stay there. (more…)


Barney Frank Discusses HR 1207, Ron Paul’s Bill to Audit The Fed

No comments yet

From purplepamphleteer:

“I asked Barney Frank if H.R. 1207 would die in committee - HIS committee - just like H.R. 28: a bill that HE co-sponsored in 1993, called the Federal Reserve Accountability Act. Since the earlier bill called for an annual audit of the Fed (among other things), and since the newer bill calls ONLY for ONE audit of the Fed, it seems like there could be no way for Frank not to support this bill, and work to see it through to a vote.”


Ron Paul Questions Hillary Clinton on Foreign Policy Priorities

No comments yet

Date: 4/22/2009
Venue: House Foreign Affairs Committee
Channel: C-SPAN 3


Howard Berman: The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Paul, is recognized for five minutes.

Ron Paul: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And welcome, Madame Secretary.

I have a general question I want to ask about foreign policy, but leading up to that question I would like to mention first that the election had something to do with bringing about change in tone with our foreign policy. And I think there have been some very positive changes in tone and many of us have argued for more diplomacy rather than more threats, so many of us are pleased with that. It goes back to the old saying of, “Speaking softly and still be willing to carry a big stick”. But sometimes I wonder whether that big stick doesn’t get wielded a little too often.

But I do want to caution all of us that what we say is very important and can be very beneficial, but what we do is also very important. So that may cancel out the benefits of speaking more softly and being willing to talk and negotiate. Some people say that we shouldn’t talk to our enemies, but I remember the cold war rather well, and we did talk to kruchev and Mao Tse Tung when they were great threats to us. So, sometimes I think that when we look at how we stood up to tens of thousands of nuclear weapons, that we should be cautious as far as what we might do in Pakistan and put it into a proper perspective.

But my big concern is whether or not we can reverse the empire mentality that I think we have adopted over these many, many decades, and also the relationship of this to our financial burden. Though we are speaking more softly and would like to get some troops home, the first thing that was done was that our DOD budget was increased by 9% in a time when our national debt in the last 12 months went up 2 trillion dollars.

All great nations have been brought to their knees for economic reasons. We didn’t have to fight the Soviets. The Afghanistan adventure that the Soviets were involved with was very significant and I don’t know how we can ignore that. (more…)


Ron Paul on Freedom Watch

No comments yet

This afternoon, Ron Paul joined Shepherd Smith, James Bovard, Pastor Stephen Anderson and Shelly Roche on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s online show “Freedom Watch” in an insightful discussion about torture, the Federal Reserve, HR 1207, secession, border patrol brutality, the DHS report on right-wing extremism, the PATRIOT Act and other important issues.

Part 1:
Part 2: (Ron Paul)
Part 3: (Ron Paul)
Part 4:
Part 5:
Part 6:

Channel: Fox News Strategy Room (online only)
Show: Freedom Watch
Host: Judge Andrew Napolitano
Date: 4/22/2009

Transcript of Ron Paul’s appearance: (starting here)

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Congressman Paul, welcome back to Freedom Watch.

Ron Paul: Thank you.

Judge Andrew Napolitano: We just finished, as you probably heard, a very lively segment with my colleague, Shepard Smith and my colleague, Trace Gallagher, which was simulcast on the Fox News channel.

There is a big uproar everywhere, as you know, over these torture memos. I have argued, as you may have heard me, that the logic behind them was highly disingenuous, that the writers of them were predisposed to authorize the government to do whatever it wanted and then I heard from Bob Bear, the former CIA agent undercover who appears in the media a lot who told me on my radio show this morning that the CIA exaggerated the need for these procedures, manipulated the Justice Department into authorizing them, and there was no second or third wave of attacks planned on the United States, but yet the CIA claimed credit for having stopped them. Does any of this, Congressman Ron Paul, surprise you?

Ron Paul: No, not really. It surprises me that maybe that Obama hasn’t been a little more aggressive. You know, I don’t think he wants to pursue it because, you know, he likes the position of defending state secret and what all that has been done here in the last administration.

But politically, he got some pressure now, so he’s saying, “Well, we’re going to look at the people who wrote these memos, but I can’t get to look at everybody; the people who participated and contributed.”

You know, if you waterboard somebody a couple hundred times, don’t you think maybe it’s suspicious and that it could be torture? You know, I think the best way to settle this dispute is not so much to change a name and just calling torture, you know, “special techniques in intelligence”.

What we need to do, if somebody thinks this is not torture, say, “Take him in, and put a screw through his fingernail and see if he thinks it’s torture now.” I think we can come up with a definition of torture rather quickly. (more…)


Ron Paul on the Alan Colmes Show

1 comment

Part 1:

Part 2:

Show: Alan Colmes Show
Date: 4/21/2009


Alan Colmes: I’m Alan Colmes, and I want to welcome back to the microphone Ron Paul, the Congressman from Texas who served in Congress on and off for almost 30 years, ran for president in 1988 as a Libertarian Party candidate, sought the Republican nomination this time around. Dr. Paul, thank you so much for coming on once again.

Ron Paul: Good to be with you again.

Alan Colmes: Appreciate it very much. You recently were asked about the statements of Rick Perry, the governor of Texas, about what he said about secession and here is what you said.

Ron Paul: It stirred the media, and believe me, it really stirred some of the liberal media where they started really screaming about what is going on here. “This is un-American”, I heard one individual say, “This is treasonous to even talk about it”. Well, they don’t know their history very well because if they think about, it’s an American tradition, it’s very American to talk about secession. That’s how we came into being. Thirteen colonies seceded from the British and established a new country. So secession is very much of an American principle.

Alan Colmes: Now, people heard you say that, Dr. Paul. Do you prefer to be called Dr. Paul or Congressman Paul?

Ron Paul: Sometimes just Ron is okay too. It doesn’t matter. You know, doctors are still more popular than the politician.

Alan Colmes: Yes, I get you, I’m going with Dr. So a lot of people heard you say that and they felt, “Oh my God, he wants Texas to secede from the union”. That’s not what you were saying exactly, right?

Ron Paul: No. I mean I want the debate to go on. I want the principle to be alive. But, even the governor wasn’t advocating secession, but he was just pandering a bit to, you know, the very conservative element because he’s in a tough race. But, no. I don’t think it should be off the books because I think if you always have that hanging out there that if you abuse the individual states at a federal level they would have another option, I think there would be more cautious. There wouldn’t be overruling some of the state laws like they’re doing in California now with marijuana and the Feds come in and they arrest people like that. So under this threat where if the states get fed up, they could do something about it. So I was just arguing on principle that you should at least hold that as an option because some who say that you talk this way that it’s treasonous and un-American and I think that’s too strong of a criticism for anybody who [...]

Alan Colmes: You don’t think it’s likely, I mean… isn’t it unusual when you have a governor of a state talking about the secession of his state? That’s rather unusual.

Ron Paul: Yes, it is. But, once again I don’t think he was calling for it and it’s not likely. But I do think that something could happen because of the terrible climate that we live in economically where the federal government may lose control. If they lose control of the value of the dollar then all kinds of things could happen. We’ve never quite gone through that except at the time of our revolution when the continental dollar was destroyed.

But, that to me could invite people from just disregarding the federal government because the federal government couldn’t just keep creating money. Our national debt last year went up. The last previous 12 months it went up 2 trillion dollars. So, this is nothing to sneeze at and they can’t do it. Eventually, I have argued the case that the empire will end. I want to bring all the troops home and do it gradually and gracefully. The Soviet Empire ended for economic reasons and ours will end too, for economic reasons. (more…)


Ron Paul on Secession - CNN American Morning


Date: 4/21/2009
Show: American Morning
Channel: CNN


Commentator: What would happen if Texas filed for a divorce from the United States? Congressman Ron Paul thinks the idea of Texas leaving the Union should be taken seriously. He will tell us why when we talk to him live, coming up. It’s 23 minutes now after the hour.

Kiran Chetry: Well, for 10 years Texas was a sovereign territory before joining the United States in 1845. It’s the stuff of legend that the lone star state could end its ties with the U.S. if its constituents want it that way. Well, recently Texas governor Rick Perry, who has been highly critical of President Obama’s stimulus package, raised that possibility that his state may one day secede from the union.

Rick Perry: We got a great union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it, but if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, who knows what might come out of that.

Kiran Chetry: Well, the governor isn’t the only one suggesting secession isn’t out of the realms. Joining me now is Texas Congressman Ron Paul who’s live this morning in Winston, Salem, North Carolina. Thanks for being with us, Congressman Paul.

Ron Paul: Thank you.

Kiran Chetry: So how serious is this secession talk?

Ron Paul: I don’t think it’s very serious. I don’t think anybody called for secession, I don’t think the governor called for it. But he brings up an important issue and I think the biggest surprise to me was the outrage expressed by an individual that even thinks along these lines because I heard people say, “Well, this was treasonous and this was un-American”. But don’t they remember how we came into our being? We used secession. We seceeded from England. So it’s a very good principle. It’s a principle of a free society and it’s a shame we don’t have it anymore.

I argue that if we had the principle of secession our federal government wouldn’t be as intrusive into our state of affairs. That would be very good. We as a nation have endorsed secession all along. I mean, think of all the secession of the countries and the republics from the Soviet system. We were delighted, we loved it. And yet we get hysterical over this. Just because people want to debate and defend the principle of secession that doesn’t mean that they’re calling for secession. I think it’s that restraining element of secession that would keep the federal government from doing so much. In our early history, they accepted the principle of secession all along. (more…)


It’s Not Un-American To Talk About Secession


Source: Campaign for Liberty
Date: 4/19/2009


Ron Paul: This weekend I got a couple of calls from the media asking me questions about Rick Perry, our governor here in Texas and the statements he made about possible secession. Now, he didn’t call for secession, but he was restating a principle that was long held and at least in the original time of our country, and that is that there was a right to secession.

Actually, after the Civil War, nobody believes there is a so-called right to secession, but it is a very legitimate issue to debate because all of the states that came into the Union before the Civil War believed they have a right to secede and New England in the early part of the 19th century actually considered it, and nobody questioned them about whether they had the right to do it or not.

Since the Civil War, it’s been sort of a dead issue, but he brought it up. It stirred the media and believe me, it really stirred some of the liberal media where they started really screaming about what is going on here. “This is un-American”, I heard one individual say, “This is treasonous to even talk about it.”

Well, they don’t know their history very well because if they think about it, it’s an American tradition. It’s very American to talk about secession. That’s how we came into being. Thirteen colonies seceded from the British and established a new country, so secession is very much an American principle.

What about all the strong endorsements we have given over the past decade or two of those republics that seceded from the Soviet system? We were delighted with this. We never said, “Oh no. Secession is treasonous”.

No. Secession is a good principle. Just think of the benefits that would have come over these last 230-some years if the principle of secession had existed. That means the federal government would always have been restrained, not to overburden the states with too much federalism, too many federal rules and regulations.

But since that was all wiped out with the Civil War, the federal government has grown by leaps and bounds and we have suffered the consequences, and we need to reconsider this. It’s not un-American to think about the possibility of secession. This is something that’s voluntary. We came together voluntarily. A free society means you can dissolve it voluntarily. That was the whole issue was about.

Just remember one of the reasons that Wilson drove us in unnecessarily into World War I. He talked about what we have to give, have every country in the world the benefit of self-determination, a good principle. Of course, I don’t think he really believed that. But self-determination is a good principle. It’s a very American principle, so to me it’s a shame that we can’t discuss this.

You know, it’s interesting that so many of us have been taught for so many years, and as long as I can remember from the first grade on up taking the pledge of allegiance that we have a republic that’s “indivisible” and we have been preached that and preached it. So therefore, there is no contest, no question since the Civil War that we have even the thought that this could happen.

But you know what a lot of people don’t talk about and they really don’t even know about is who wrote the pledge to the flag. The pledge to the flag came from, for instance, Bellamy, an avowed Socialist who wanted to put into concrete in the pledge this principle of being indivisible, and he did it, you know, for the celebration ironically 400 years of the celebration of the landing of Christopher Columbus, so it was in 1892.

I mean, the pledge of allegiance has not been here, you know, all our history. So I think it’s worth of discussion. I think people should discuss this because right now, the American people are sick and tired of it all and I think the time will come when people will consider it much more seriously is when the federal government can no longer deliver. That time will come when the dollar collapses.

No matter what they do and how many promises they have and how many bailouts they have, they can’t do it if the money doesn’t work. So then, the independence of the states will come back and it doesn’t mean that you’ll be un-American to even contemplate what might have to be done once the dollar crashes.