Time: Fri Jun 13 11:56:05 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA18523; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 11:56:07 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 11:55:03 -0700 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: Ron Paul: Legislative Update - June 9, 1997 (fwd) <snip> > >Copied from: http://syninfo.com/IAN/Wed11079.htm > >The Ron Paul >Legislative Update >The Week of June 9, 1997 > > >Hello, this is Ron Paul with the Legislative Update for the Week of June >9. > > >Last week our side had some reason to be pleased. However, the upcoming >week will present an interesting challenge to the Bill of Rights and the >inextricable nature of property rights and free expression when a measure >to amend the Constitution to allow Congress to prohibit the physical >desecration of the U.S. flag comes to the floor of the house. > > >Last week the House considered HR 1757, the Foreign Relations >Authorization Act. Debate on this measure will continue into this week >with a vote expected sometime Tuesday or Wednesday. On Wednesday, of last >week I introduced an amendment to this bill. This amendment called for the >US to withdraw completely from the United Nations. While there have been >over 100 amendments to the legislation, my amendment commanded more >attention and heated discussion on the House floor than most others. > > >I stood alone on the House floor defending this position as not a single >Congressman came to defend the proposition of national sovereignty or >constitutional government. Yet, each of the congressmen who spoke in favor >of the United Nations continued to prove our point -- they refused, >absolutely refused, to discuss the reasons present to withdraw from the >U.N. Those reasons, for me, are very simple. First, the Constitution does >not allow the federal government to cede power and authority to an >international entity of foreign government. Second, the cost of being in >the UN is, quite simply, more than we can afford. > > >Each of those who embraced the United Nations on the House floor spoke >almost hysterically about how we need a global police force and how the >future peace of mankind can only be ensured by the UN. But no one would >address the constitutionality or the cost of our participation. American >taxpayers, since creation of the U.N. in 1947, have spent over one hundred >billion dollars in U.N. contributions. Instead, the U.N. advocates "felt" >compelled to defend the merits of taxing Americans to pay for such >programs as international family planning and military "peacekeeping" >operations around the world. > > >When I asked for a recorded vote on my amendment, however, I was no longer >alone. While my amendment did not "carry the day," fifty-two Republicans >and two Democrats had the courage to vote for United States withdrawal >from the UN and FOR American sovereignty. Each of these men and women >should be congratulated for their stand. > > >The battle on this issue is not yet over, however. Currently, I have a >separate piece of legislation, H.R. 1146, the American Sovereignty >Restoration Act which is working its way through the House committee >process. This measure would accomplish the same goal as the amendment >offered last week. To find out where individual members of congress stand >on this bill and urge them to co-sponsor, you should call their offices >directly as well as contact members of the House subcommittee on >International Operations and Human Rights of which Chris Smith is the >Chair. > > >This week, Congress will have before it a Constitutionally-complicated >piece of legislation. It is a measure which would amend the Constitution >to allow Congress to pass laws making illegal "desecration of any American >flag." As someone who has proudly served this nation in the United States >Air Force, I personally find flag-degrading acts very offensive. But as a >Member of Congress, sworn to uphold the Constitution and Bill of Rights, >(including property rights and free speech), it is difficult to support a >constitutional amendment which undermines the existing bill of rights in >the name of protecting a flag symbolizing that for which the amendment >undermines. > > >As such, I will introduce a substitute bill which I believe is >significantly more respective of the Bill of Rights. Because the issue of >burning one's own flag is a property rights issue, my substitute would >strip the power of the federal courts from overturning the laws which are >constitutionally reserved to the states the ninth and tenth amendments. >While everyone should have the right to be free of government censorship >of their speech, an important distinction is they have no right to express >themselves at another's expense and certainly not at the expense of the >taxpayer. Moreover, as a property rights issue, the Constitutionally >proper venue for adjudicating this issue rests with the respective state >courts. I encourage your support for my amendment which preserves property >rights, freedom from censorship, federalism, and is otherwise consistent >with the Bill of Rights. > > >This line does not record messages, but you can reach my Washington staff >by calling, 202-225-2831. Thank you for calling the toll-free Ron Paul >Legislative Update. The next message will be available June 16. Thanks >for calling. > ># # # > > > > >-> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com >-> Posted by: burro@panama.gulf.net > > > ======================================================================== Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.2 on 586 CPU website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. ======================================================================== [This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail