WASHINGTON — Presidents of both parties, over the past several decades, have shown a willingness to interpret Senate resolutions in the broadest imaginable way when it comes to war, whether it’s to launch a 10-year land-war in Southeast Asia or Afghanistan, to torture detainees picked up in foreign countries or to eavesdrop without a warrant on American citizens.
This time around, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) wants to make sure there are no misunderstandings.
The Senate is debating legislation that would impose strict sanctions on Iran, including penalizing U.S. companies whose subsidiaries have ties to the country.
The bill, S. Res. 380, would not explicitly allow war with Iran. But Paul, who has been a critic of U.S. involvement in both Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn’t want to take any chances. His amendment would make clear that nothing in the bill “shall be construed as a declaration of war or an authorization of use of force against Iran or Syria.”
WASHINGTON, D.C – Today, Sen. Rand Paul testified at the U.S. House of Representatives Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs Subcommittee hearing regarding the Freedom from Over-Criminalization and Unjust Seizures Act of 2012 – or FOCUS Act, which was introduced in the House by Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.). Earlier this year, Sen. Paul introduced the FOCUS Act in the Senate. This legislation aims to amend the Lacey Act, a law that currently allows the federal government to apply foreign law to American citizens and businesses. Below is the video and transcript of the hearing.
TRANSCRIPT:
Thank you Chairman Fleming, and thank you for inviting me over here to talk about this important issue.
When I first heard about the raid at Gibson Guitars I was appalled that this could happen in the United States of America; That we would send in federal agents from Fish and Wildlife [Services] with automatic weapons to invade a company that hires 2,800 people around our country.
These are law-abiding people that are making guitars. There are no grizzly bears in downtown Nashville or in Gibson Guitar that we need to be concerned with. I was aghast when I learned that what they were accused of was not breaking a U.S. law. They were accused of breaking a foreign law.
The more we looked into this, I was then incensed to find out that the foreign law they were accused of breaking has nothing to do with conservation, has nothing to do with the rainforest. That all that hyperbole about rainforest and conservation has nothing to do with the issue here.
They’re accused of breaking an Indian labor law. This is a law that says the wood has to be finished in India. The same wood can come here, they just want the jobs over in India and not over here. They have actually said, in their legal pleadings, that if Gibson Guitar would finish the wood over there they won’t be in violation.
So if we send the jobs we have in Nashville over to India everything is fine? This is ridiculous. I could not believe we have a law on our books saying we have to obey all foreign laws. How could that possibly be an American law and how could that possibly be constitutional. Not just all past foreign laws, we’ve agreed to obey all future foreign laws.
There was a case a few years ago of two fisherman off the coast of Florida – Abner Schoenwetter and David McNab. They got six years in prison for breaking a law that wasn’t a U.S. law, but for breaking a Honduran fishing regulation.
There’s something from the tradition of due process that you have to have fair notice and it comes out of our common-law tradition. How are you supposed to have fair notice of a Honduran law? What if you don’t speak Spanish? What if you don’t speak Mandarin and its Chinese fishing regulation?
We’re expected to obey all the laws of the entire world? It really smacks at our sovereignty and smacks at the concept that we create the laws in our country and that we’re of any importance here, than we’re going agree to accept all past and future laws of foreign countries?
So I think really this is something that is long overdue and it really grieves me that we put two people in jail for six years for breaking laws of a foreign country. And in their case, the Honduran government actually came and testified on their behalf and said they hadn’t broken the laws.
One of the laws that they were accused of breaking was that the fish were not in cardboard, they were in plastic. You know to put someone in jail for that – you can be put in jail a year for each one of these misdemeanor crimes. What if you brought in 30,000 lobsters and they found 10,000, you could get 10,000 years in prison.
It is out of control, it’s outrageous, and we need to do something to stop it. Really you need to say look, if we’re in favor of the environment, and I am, and you want to protect against illegal logging or protect certain species, if you don’t people cutting off the horns of a rhinoceros and importing it; make a law, that’s what were here for.
Make the law, but then it would be a U.S. law, but don’t say that we’re going to accept all the laws in Kenya or that we’re going to accept all the laws of South Africa. That is absurd on its face, its Pandora’s box, we’ve gone too far. There now are forty-five hundred federal crimes; the Constitution only authorizes us to deal with four crimes: treason, counterfeiting, and a couple of other crimes, laws against nations.
But it doesn’t authorize us to be involved in all of this. We can have some restrictions on importation, but I see no reason to have criminal penalties. Our bill is very simple; we get rid of all reference to obeying foreign laws, which doesn’t do anything to the Lacey Act. You still have restrictions in the Lacey Act and if you need more, pass them.
But don’t obey foreign laws and it says we should have civil penalties, not criminal penalties. I don’t think we should be putting Americans in jail for this. Thank you Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.
RICHMOND — The gasoline prices are nearly double what they were a year ago because the value of the U.S. dollar is shrinking, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told a join meeting of the Richmond and Berea chambers of commerce Friday.
“Gasoline is not more scarce than it was a year ago,” he said. “The value of your dollar is shrinking because your government runs up a massive debt and then prints money to pay it.”
Working-class people, the elderly on fixed incomes and new graduates entering the work force need to realize, “Big government is not your friend,” the senator said.
“When they say, ‘We’re going to give you this. It’s free.’ It’s not free. They’re destroying the dollar,” he said. “This year you’ll pay four bucks for a gallon of gas. Next year you’ll pay five.”
About 40 percent of every dollar the federal government spends is borrowed, Paul continued. That is about $4 billion a day and adds up to more than $1 trillion a year.
U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) has just introduced legislation designed to reign in out-of- control federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers. The bill, if enacted, will be a vital blow to the enforcement of radical environmental/Agenda 21- inspired regulations. The bill is called the Defense of Environment and Property Act of 2012 (S.2122).
A little history: in 1972, as the environmental movement was getting its start through popular efforts to stop pollution in our rivers and air, Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (later called the Clean Water Act).The law prohibited the discharge of pollutants into “navigable waters” without a federal permit. The problems began when the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers made a power grab by enforcing the act over ponds, occasional mud puddles, and even dry lands by labeling them as wet lands.
The result has been disastrous to property owners and businesses, sometimes even leading to jail sentences to “violators.”
The result of such outrageous interpretations of the Clean Water Act has led Senator Paul to introduce his bill to do the following:
The Obama administration could soon resume sending military aid to Egypt as early as next week. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to issue a waiver that would restore most, but not all of the $1.3 billion slated for the Egyptian government. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)supports resuming the aid, arguing it’s needed for “a strong and stable Egypt.” But this move would bypass Congress.
On December 23, 2011, President Obama signed the 2012 Consolidated Appropriations Act. This act makes military aid to Egypt conditional. The aid can only resume if the Secretary of State certifies that the Egyptian government is “implementing policies to protect freedom of expression, association, and religion, and due process of law.”
But the Egyptian government has made little progress since the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak. According to Amnesty International, the ruling military council has still not repealed the emergency laws implemented under Mubarak and has actually killed more than 100 protesters since October 2011. In addition, the military council has harassed over 400 non-government organizations (NGOs), including Freedom House and the National Democratic Institute, and even detained the Secretary of Transportation’s son.
However, the certification process can be sidestepped if Secretary Clinton issues a waiver citing that the aid is necessary on national security grounds. Such a waiver is expected next week, and would then lead to most of the aid moving forward to Egypt.
Yesterday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) issued a joint statement urging Secretary Clinton to delay the military aid:
A decision to waive the conditions on military aid would send the wrong message to the Egyptian government that U.S. taxpayers will subsidize the Egyptian military while it continues to oversee the crackdown on civil society and to commit human rights abuses.
The two outlined their criteria for deciding on the aid package:
WASHINGTON — Presidents of both parties, over the past several decades, have shown a willingness to interpret Senate resolutions in the broadest imaginable way when it comes to war, whether it’s to launch a 10-year land-war in Southeast Asia or Afghanistan, to torture detainees picked up in foreign countries or to eavesdrop without a warrant on American citizens.
