Post by PapaSmurerf on Dec 3, 2007 13:39:51 GMT -5
Paul Right To Vote Against Rosa Parks Medal
Our Opinion
Issue date: 12/3/07
When Congress voted to give Rosa Parks the Congressional Gold Medal, there was only one voice of dissent. Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) has voted against giving the Congressional Gold Medal to Rosa Parks, Mother Theresa and the Pope. Many people, given only this snippet of information have concluded that Congressman Paul is a bigot, a racist and just plain intolerant. Yet he raises an interesting additional argument.
The Congressional Gold Medal is made of solid gold, and in every instance it is awarded, it can cost taxpayers upwards of $30,000. This money not only pays for the gold to make the medal, but also the mold that needs to be specially created since each medal is tailored to its recipient. Congressman Paul voted against awarding this medal over and over because he does not think it is a good use of taxpayer dollars.
However, Paul has not just voted against spending taxpayer money for the medal - he has proposed a workable alternative. Instead of shelling out $30,000 of taxpayers' money, Paul proposed that each member of Congress ought to pay $100 out of his or her own pocket. This way, the money for the medal would be raised and each member of Congress would be contributing to the cause that he or she values so much. He also stressed his respect for Parks, saying that she was a courageous woman who committed herself to the cause of freedom and against an overbearing government that is unanswerable to the people it serves. Spending $30,000 of taxpayer money on frivolous medals, Paul believes, is an act of an overbearing government that is not in touch with its people.
Besides Parks and the other aforementioned medal recipients, Paul has also voted against Congressional Gold Medals given to Tony Blair, Ronald Reagan and the Dalai Lama. In the case of Tony Blair, Paul said that spending $30,000 to award "the most unpopular man in Great Britain" with a Congressional medal violated the sanctity of the medal itself in addition to robbing taxpayers. Paul also lamented the "supreme irony" of awarding a Buddhist leader with such a costly material gift when Buddhism eschews worldly possessions in favor of spiritual wealth.
Congressman Paul has a sign on his desk that reads, "Don't steal, the government hates competition," and has said numerous times that "it is easy to be generous with someone else's money." In this assertion, he is absolutely correct. Every member of Congress who votes in favor of the awarding the Congressional Gold Medal ought to contribute enough money to raise the funds for the medal, since the implied powers of Congress don't include robbing the American people to pay for feel-good political gestures.
Reposted from The DailyCampus.com
Read Not Yours to Give for the tradition Ron Paul observes in being a good steward with the Taxpayers check book.
It is not the role of government to fund every feel-good notion that comes down the pike.
Sure, it would be nice to do a lot of things, but philanthropy is not a role of government.
What does issuing gold medals have to do with promoting the general welfare? Not a whole lot.
Our Opinion
Issue date: 12/3/07
When Congress voted to give Rosa Parks the Congressional Gold Medal, there was only one voice of dissent. Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) has voted against giving the Congressional Gold Medal to Rosa Parks, Mother Theresa and the Pope. Many people, given only this snippet of information have concluded that Congressman Paul is a bigot, a racist and just plain intolerant. Yet he raises an interesting additional argument.
The Congressional Gold Medal is made of solid gold, and in every instance it is awarded, it can cost taxpayers upwards of $30,000. This money not only pays for the gold to make the medal, but also the mold that needs to be specially created since each medal is tailored to its recipient. Congressman Paul voted against awarding this medal over and over because he does not think it is a good use of taxpayer dollars.
However, Paul has not just voted against spending taxpayer money for the medal - he has proposed a workable alternative. Instead of shelling out $30,000 of taxpayers' money, Paul proposed that each member of Congress ought to pay $100 out of his or her own pocket. This way, the money for the medal would be raised and each member of Congress would be contributing to the cause that he or she values so much. He also stressed his respect for Parks, saying that she was a courageous woman who committed herself to the cause of freedom and against an overbearing government that is unanswerable to the people it serves. Spending $30,000 of taxpayer money on frivolous medals, Paul believes, is an act of an overbearing government that is not in touch with its people.
Besides Parks and the other aforementioned medal recipients, Paul has also voted against Congressional Gold Medals given to Tony Blair, Ronald Reagan and the Dalai Lama. In the case of Tony Blair, Paul said that spending $30,000 to award "the most unpopular man in Great Britain" with a Congressional medal violated the sanctity of the medal itself in addition to robbing taxpayers. Paul also lamented the "supreme irony" of awarding a Buddhist leader with such a costly material gift when Buddhism eschews worldly possessions in favor of spiritual wealth.
Congressman Paul has a sign on his desk that reads, "Don't steal, the government hates competition," and has said numerous times that "it is easy to be generous with someone else's money." In this assertion, he is absolutely correct. Every member of Congress who votes in favor of the awarding the Congressional Gold Medal ought to contribute enough money to raise the funds for the medal, since the implied powers of Congress don't include robbing the American people to pay for feel-good political gestures.
Reposted from The DailyCampus.com
Read Not Yours to Give for the tradition Ron Paul observes in being a good steward with the Taxpayers check book.
It is not the role of government to fund every feel-good notion that comes down the pike.
Sure, it would be nice to do a lot of things, but philanthropy is not a role of government.
What does issuing gold medals have to do with promoting the general welfare? Not a whole lot.