On July 3, 2004, Ron Paul was the only Congressman to vote against a bill hailing the 40th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In this speech to Congress, Ron Paul courageously spoke out on the often controversial issues of race relations and affirmative action. He explained why the Civil Right Act had failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society.
Ron Paul: Mr. Speaker, I rise to explain my objection to H.Res. 676. I certainly join my colleagues in urging Americans to celebrate the progress this country has made in race relations. However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.
This expansion of federal power was based on an erroneous interpretation of the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The framers of the Constitution intended the interstate commerce clause to create a free trade zone among the states, not to give the federal government regulatory power over every business that has any connection with interstate commerce.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business’s workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge’s defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife.
Of course, America has made great strides in race relations over the past forty years. However, this progress is due to changes in public attitudes and private efforts. Relations between the races have improved despite, not because of, the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while I join the sponsors of H.Res. 676 in promoting racial harmony and individual liberty, the fact is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not accomplish these goals. Instead, this law unconstitutionally expanded federal power, thus reducing liberty. Furthermore, by prompting raced-based quotas, this law undermined efforts to achieve a color-blind society and increased racial strife. Therefore, I must oppose H.Res. 676.
Lets not forget here that under our esteemed President George W. Bush the American public lost more rights then any under any other president.. Do you realize Beverly Weaver that the things you complained about a republican passed.. Keep that in mind, also anyone who supports the trickle down effect is a fool
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
This is the year 2010 and it still amazes me that we have the black and white issue at all as human beings our intellect should have moved on from this issue decades and decades ago but from reading some of these comments I can see not much has changed.
Ron Paul is a man of honor and his word means something he is not advocating racism here- he is saying all people deserve equality. We as Americans should be for fewer laws and invasion in to our private lifes and civil liberties. Less Goverment is essential to preserve American Democracy.
Do you realize that the Goverment is trying to screw with the 4th Amendement and push thhru a bill that will allow the warrent less monitoring of Face book, other social sites, cell phones, landlines without due process and anyone can be arrested and detained without representation just because you might know someone on your page they think is a terorist. This is where we are headed in this War Complex Hidden Agenda ~ “Be like US or we kill you mentality”. When the Homeland Security Act was passed we signed away our civil liberties. So People I wouldn’t worry so much about if you are black or white ~ I would be worried about living in a FREE Society. I don’t need the Goverment to wipe my ass thank you!
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
U.S. NAVY TESTING PROGRAMS, NEW THREAT TO THE PACIFIC
http://www.newswithviews.com/Peterson/rosalind128.htm
We have a right to live free of toxic chemicals in our air, land, water and food!
And, we also have the right to stop the US Federal corporation from harming us!
I’m sure this appears to be “testing” but they know the damage they are doing, purposefully and with intention. These are acts of war against the American people. As in the Gulf of Mexico, they are intentional killing our food supply and spraying us with harmful chemicals.
If a spouse poisons their husband/wife, they are put in jail because it is a criminal act. It is no less of a criminal act when any branch of this federal corporation we mistakenly call our government does it! How is it they commit one crime after another and no one goes to jail, is confined so they cannot harm anyone else again?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Question: How many libertarians does it take to screw in a light bulb?
Answer: None. The invisible hand of the free market will install the bulb.
Like or Dislike:
4 
3
The civil rights act does nothing for our current people. African Americans are being discriminated against at a much higher rate in terms of employment. Espeally in construction where illegal entrents into our nation are being being favored because they work cheaply.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I don’t agree with not serving or selling something to someone due to race. But I would like the liberty to refuse to sell or serve someone with their pants below their butts. Can I at least have that?
Like or Dislike:
4 
0