How the Nazis Used Gun Control

Last night the Senate passed the Omnibus spending bill which includes two gun control measures one “fixing” the dangerous and unconstitutional National Instant Check Background System (NCIS) which will lead to many Americans losing their second amendment rights without due process, in fact some might even loss their rights because of a computer error. The other provision lets the Center for Disease Control spend taxpayer money studying gun violence as a public health issue. This will provide new justifications for gun control in the name of improving public health.

This is not the end of the gun control defense as the gun grabbers will feel emboldened by this victory and push for more limitations on our right to keep and bear arms. As the gun control debate continues it is useful to look at historical examples of the effects of gun control, so here and below is an excerpt, originally published in National Review, from gun rights attorney Steve Halbrook’s book Gun Control in the Third Reich: Disarming the Jews and “Enemies of the State.”

Campaign for Liberty Chairman Ron Paul said Halbrook’s book “….provides a stark example of why defenders of liberty must oppose any attempts to limit our ability to defend ourselves from private and public criminals. Halbrook’s work is especially timely since so many in Washington are once again trying to convince the people they have nothing to fear from gun registration and other infringements on our Second Amendment rights.”

You can help Campaign for Liberty by purchasing Mr Halbrook’s book here .


How the Nazis Used Gun Control


December 2, 2013 9:00 AM



The Weimar Republic’s well-intentioned gun registry became a tool for evil.

The perennial gun-control debate in America did not begin here. The same arguments for and against were made in the 1920s in the chaos of Germany’s Weimar Republic, which opted for gun registration. Law-abiding persons complied with the law, but the Communists and Nazis committing acts of political violence did not.

In 1931, Weimar authorities discovered plans for a Nazi takeover in which Jews would be denied food and persons refusing to surrender their guns within 24 hours would be executed. They were written by Werner Best, a future Gestapo official. In reaction to such threats, the government authorized the registration of all firearms and the confiscation thereof, if required for “public safety.” The interior minister warned that the records must not fall into the hands of any extremist group.#ad#

In 1933, the ultimate extremist group, led by Adolf Hitler, seized power and used the records to identify, disarm, and attack political opponents and Jews. Constitutional rights were suspended, and mass searches for and seizures of guns and dissident publications ensued. Police revoked gun licenses of Social Democrats and others who were not “politically reliable.”

During the five years of repression that followed, society was “cleansed” by the National Socialist regime. Undesirables were placed in camps where labor made them “free,” and normal rights of citizenship were taken from Jews. The Gestapo banned independent gun clubs and arrested their leaders. Gestapo counsel Werner Best issued a directive to the police forbidding issuance of firearm permits to Jews.

In 1938, Hitler signed a new Gun Control Act. Now that many “enemies of the state” had been removed from society, some restrictions could be slightly liberalized, especially for Nazi Party members. But Jews were prohibited from working in the firearms industry, and .22 caliber hollow-point ammunition was banned.

The time had come to launch a decisive blow to the Jewish community, to render it defenseless so that its “ill-gotten” property could be redistributed as an entitlement to the German “Volk.” The German Jews were ordered to surrender all their weapons, and the police had the records on all who had registered them. Even those who gave up their weapons voluntarily were turned over to the Gestapo.

This took place in the weeks before what became known as the Night of the Broken Glass, or Kristallnacht, occurred in November 1938. That the Jews were disarmed before it, minimizing any risk of resistance, is the strongest evidence that the pogrom was planned in advance. An incident was needed to justify unleashing the attack.

That incident would be the shooting of a German diplomat in Paris by a teenage Polish Jew. Hitler directed propaganda minister Josef Goebbels to orchestrate the Night of the Broken Glass. This massive operation, allegedly conducted as a search for weapons, entailed the ransacking of homes and businesses, and the arson of synagogues.

SS chief Heinrich Himmler decreed that 20 years be served in a concentration camp by any Jew possessing a firearm. Rusty revolvers and bayonets from the Great War were confiscated from Jewish veterans who had served with distinction. Twenty thousand Jewish men were thrown into concentration camps, and had to pay ransoms to get released.

The U.S. media covered the above events. And when France fell to Nazi invasion in 1940, the New York Times reported that the French were deprived of rights such as free speech and firearm possession just as the Germans had been. Frenchmen who failed to surrender their firearms within 24 hours were subject to the death penalty.

No wonder that in 1941, just days before the Pearl Harbor attack, Congress reaffirmed Second Amendment rights and prohibited gun registration. In 1968, bills to register guns were debated, with opponents recalling the Nazi experience and supporters denying that the Nazis ever used registration records to confiscate guns. The bills were defeated, as every such proposal has been ever since, including recent “universal background check” bills.

As in Weimar Germany, some well-meaning people today advocate severe restrictions, including bans and registration, on gun ownership by law-abiding persons. Such proponents are in no sense “Nazis,” any more than were the Weimar officials who promoted similar restrictions. And it would be a travesty to compare today’s situation to the horrors of Nazi Germany.

Still, as history teaches, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.


Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog


Gun control vote today

Buried in this massive 1.3 trillion dollar Omnibus spending bill are two provisions empowering federal bureaucrats to wage war on your Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

The House is scheduled to vote on the Omnibus bill in a few hours, so we must act fast.

Campaign for Liberty staffers are faxing House and Senate offices with your pro-Second Amendment directives, but with the vote hours away, we need to do more to put maximum  pressure on Congress.

So please call your Representative immediately at 202-224-3121 and tell them to vote NO on the big spending, gun-grabbing deal.

Then please forward this link to as many of your pro-Second Amendment friends and family as you can, and if you are able to, please share this message on social media to make sure as many people as possible learn about this latest threat  to our Second Amendment rights and help Campaign for Liberty turn up the heat on Congress.

The first anti-gun provision in the Omnibus is a so-called “fix” to the unconstitutional National Instant Check Background System (NICS). NICS is the database gun dealers are “required to use to determine if a potential customer has federal “permission” to buy a gun.

Of course, the NICS is totally ineffective at stopping gun crime as criminals do not purchase their guns through legal dealers and most mass shooters are not in the federal database. What the NICS is effective at is threatening the rights of ordinary Americans and making it more difficult for innocent people to defend themselves.

And the NICS “fix” will mean more Americans — especially veterans — will have their names added to NICS database and will lose their Second Amendment rights without due process. Many more will lose their rights because of a clerical or computer error.

So please call your representative at 202-224-3121 and tell them to vote no on the Omnibus bill

As bad as the NICS “fix” is, it is not the most dangerous anti-gun rights provision in the bill!

You see, the Centers for Disease Control uses your tax dollars to produce “studies” justifying treating the right to keep and bear arms as a public health issue, requiring massive government intervention . . .

These studies will be used to justify expanded gun control measures such as giving government even more power to take away our Second Amendment rights without due process, creating more “gun -free” zones, increasing surveillance of lawful gun owners,  bans on specific types of weapons,  and  restricting the rights of those deemed too young or too old to own a gun.

Even worse, touting gun ownership as a “public health issue” will deputize every health professional in the nation to look for reasons why their patients should lose their Second Amendment rights.  Those who resist could suffer severe consequences — including malpractice suits and loss of their license to practice medicine.

So please call your representative at 202-224-3121 and tell them to oppose the Omnibus spending bill.

Then please forward this link to as many of your pro-Second Amendment  friends and family as you can, and if you are able to, please share this message on social media to make sure as many people as possible learn about this latest threat to our Second Amendment rights and help Campaign for Liberty turn up the heat on Congress.

Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog

Ron Paul: Will Congress side with Jeff Sessions or with the people and the Constitution

Congress is still negotiating the final Omnibus spending deal. As of this writing, there is still an effort to add new gun control in the form of “fixing” the national instant background check system.

Another issue that still needs to be “fixed” is whether Congress will continue to prohibit federal prosecutors from using taxpayer dollars to enforce federal marijuana laws against those using it for medicinal purposes in compliance with state law.

Medical marijuana is overwhelmingly popular with the American people, but not with Attorney General Jeff Sessions who has asked Congress to remove the provision.

Campaign for Liberty Chairman Ron Paul recently wrote about this issue for Newsweek. You can read Dr. Paul’s article here and below.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions not only violated the principles of federalism with his recent memorandum allowing federal prosecutors to resume prosecuting Americans in states with legalized medical or recreational marijuana. Sessions’s reversion to an 80s war “just say no” policy also defies the will of Congress.

Every year since 2014, Congress has passed the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment. This amendment, named after its sponsors California Congressmen Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican, and Sam Farr, a Democrat (who is no longer in Congress), forbids the use of federal funds to prosecute individuals for using medical marijuana in states that have legalized marijuana for medicinal use.

The Rohrabacher Amendment was part of the spending bill signed into law by President Trump last year. A similar amendment sponsored by Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democrat from Vermont, was voice voted by the Senate Commerce Justice, Science Committee in 2017.

The Rohrabacher Amendment is one of the increasing rare items enjoying widespread bipartisan support. This is hardly surprising, as a majority of Americans live in states that have legalized medical marijuana. Only 14 percent of Americans oppose such laws, according to a Yahoo/Marist College poll from April of last year.

The Rohrabacher Amendment not only reflects public opinion, it  also upholds an important constitutional principle: states have the authority to decide for themselves what activities shall, and shall not, be criminalized within their borders.

The Rohrabacher Amendment also protects individuals’ right to make their own decisions regarding medical treatments free from federal interference. Many Americans have used medical marijuana for conditions such as cancer and glaucoma.

There is no more justification for the federal government to deprive individuals of the option to use medical marijuana then there is for the federal government to force every America to purchase health insurance.
Medical marijuana can also serve as an effective pain reliever, making it a viable alternative to opioids. This may be why states that have legalized medical marijuana have fewer deaths related to opioid abuse. These states have also experienced a decrease in crime and black-market activity.

Since the Rohrabacher Amendment is a “rider” to the spending bills, it must be renewed every year. The amendment defunds the Justice Department from interfering with states that have implemented medical marijuana laws. Fortunately, the Rohrabacher Amendment remains in effect as it was extended in the short-term continuing resolution Congress passed in December.

Because of the funding rider, Jeff Sessions’s “Justice Department” cannot yet begin throwing cancer patients in jail for actions protected by their state laws.

However, there are troubling signs that the Congressional leadership may try to drop Rohrabacher’s amendment from a long-term budget deal. Sessions has written Congress requesting the original Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment that has been in place on every appropriations bill since 2014 not be extended.

This past year, House leadership blocked a vote on Rohrabacher when they considered a “minibus” spending bill in September.

Unfortunately, while President Trump endorsed the federalism approach to medical marijuana during the campaign, his signing statement accompanying last year’s spending bill suggested he was open to reversing course on the issue. President Trump had not made a statement on medical marijuana since then, leaving the impression that he agrees with his Attorney General and has changed his often repeated campaign promises.

President Trump and the rest of the GOP would be foolish to stand with Sessions. Eliminating the Rohrabacher Amendment would expose the Republicans as “fair weather federalists,”’who only support state autonomy when the state policies conform to the GOP’s agenda. This would cause the GOP to lose support of younger liberty-minded voters who expect their elected officials to consistently defend limited government and individual liberty.

Allowing states to decide whether or not to legalize medical marijuana is a case where the politically popular thing to do is also the right thing to do. President Trump and the Republican Congress should stand for federalism and liberty and preserve the Rohrabacher Amendment.

Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog

This Week in Congress

The big event this week is the passage of a $1.3 trillion Omnibus spending bill, which follows on the heels of an announcement that the national debt has topped $21 trillion for the first time in history. The biggest source of controversy over the bill has not been over the spending levels but over some controversial riders.

Two riders of particular interest to Campaign for Liberty members that will not be in the Omnibus bill are an internet sales tax and a bailout for insurance companies who lost money on the Obamacare exchanges, although there maybe an effort to add the Obamacare bailout in the Senate.

Campaign for Liberty staff are keeping an eye out for any attempt to sneak gun control into the Omnibus.

Here is a letter co-signed by Campaign for Liberty against including the insurance company bailout:


Dear Members of Congress:

On behalf of our organizations and the millions of American taxpayers we represent, we write to express our strong opposition to taxpayer bailouts for private health insurance companies. We especially oppose including such bailouts in any upcoming spending bills.

Proposed “solutions” to Obamacare’s rising costs, such as providing new federal funding for risk mitigation programs (like “reinsurance” and “invisible high-risk pools”) or cost-sharing reduction subsidies are bad ideas. These proposals are costly, likely to become permanent, and unnecessary. Worst of all, bailout payments keep the failed Obamacare infrastructure in place and do nothing to address the real reasons premiums and deductibles are rising–the law’s regulations, mandates, and subsidy structure.

Lawmakers should not be fooled by ludicrous claims that spending new federal money on Obamacare bailouts will save the federal government money. Creating a new Obamacare corporate welfare program will increase government spending. Nor should lawmakers fall for the argument that bailouts are only temporary. The same insurers who are lobbying for bailout money this year will be back again when funding expires, threatening to withdraw from the exchanges or raise premiums if bailouts aren’t extended.

Bailouts are unnecessary. States can already establish risk mitigation programs by obtaining federal waivers. Alaska’s “reinsurance” waiver reduced premiums in its first year without requiring a single new dime in federal spending. Instead of creating new Obamacare spending, Congress should make it easier for states to obtain budget-neutral waivers.

Americans deserve relief from Obamacare’s damage and rising premiums through real reform, not ill-conceived policies like bailouts that simply paper over the underlying causes.

Lawmakers should fulfill their longstanding promise of repealing and replacing Obamacare, not setting the dangerous precedent of bailing it out. President Trump’s budget endorsed a fresh approach to jumpstart this process. This proposal provides a path towards providing much-needed relief from many of Obamacare’s cost-raising mandates and instituting consumer-friendly reforms.

We, the undersigned organizations, urge all members of Congress to repeal and replace Obamacare and to reject taxpayer bailouts for Obamacare and private health insurance companies, particularly in upcoming government spending bills.


Michael A. Needham, CEO
Heritage Action for America

Adam Brandon, President

David McIntosh, President
Club for Growth

Brent Gardner, Vice President of Government Affairs
Americans for Prosperity

Nathan Nascimento, Executive Vice President
Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce

David Williams, President
Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Heather R. Higgins, CEO
Independent Women’s Voice

Iain Murray, Vice President for Strategy
Competitive Enterprise Institute

Allen Johnson, Director of Government Affairs
Council for Citizens Against Government Waste

Dan Caldwell, Executive Director
Concerned Veterans for America

Jonathan Bydlak, President
Coalition to Reduce Spending

David Barnes, Policy Director
Generation Opportunity

Daniel Garza, President
The LIBRE Initiative

Phil Kerpen, President
American Commitment

Norm Singleton, President
Campaign for Liberty


Here is a coalition letter against the latest version of the O Trent Sales Tax, H.R. 2193:


Dear Representative,

On behalf of the millions of citizens represented by the undersigned organizations, we write in strong opposition to H.R. 2193, the so-called Remote Transactions Parity Act (RTPA), and any other bill intended to dismantle proper limits on state tax-collection authority. This legislation is bad policy, bad politics, and bad precedent.

The Remote Transactions Parity Act would enable an enormous expansion in state tax-collection authority by wiping away the “physical presence standard,” a baseline protection that shields taxpayers from harassment by out-of-state collectors. Current law dictates that a state can only require a business to collect its sales tax if it is physically present within its boundaries. Dismantling the physical presence protection for remote retail sales could throw open the floodgates for states to aggressively attempt enforcement of not just their sales tax laws, but also business and individual income tax rules, and even activist regulatory obligations on out-of-state entities.

Furthermore, claims of the supposed “harm” being done to state budgets by this basic taxpayer protection are misleading. While remote commerce is growing, more than $0.90 of every retail dollar is still spent in brick-and-mortar establishments, and a huge portion of online sales already have tax collected because so many are made by businesses like Amazon and Walmart that have widespread physical presence.

That’s why the Government Accountability Office’s estimates of potential state revenue only amounts to between one-half and one percent of current state receipts. Additionally, GAO estimated that 80 percent of this revenue is already collectible under current law. But rather than enforcing their existing laws, states are asking Congress to bless a dangerous expansion in their power allowing them to force out-of-state businesses to collect tax for them.

It is no surprise that Americans have shown strong opposition to such schemes. A September 2017 poll by Rasmussen found that Americans oppose internet sales tax legislation by a 45-point margin, and earlier polling of Republican voters found that they preferred candidates that oppose such laws by a 54-point margin.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of South Dakota v. Wayfair, which deals with a state law forcing certain out-of-state retailers to collect South Dakota tax. Proponents of RTPA claim that this strengthens the case for passage of their bill, when in fact it weakens it. If the Court acts to dismantle limits on state power, Congress must act to rebuild them. RTPA does the opposite by granting states new tax powers over interstate commerce. Congress should oppose this unwise legislation and instead work to preserve federalism, strengthen geographical limits to tax authority, and encourage tax competition.




Andrew Moylan

National Taxpayers Union

Lisa B. Nelson ALEC Action

Phil Kerpen

American Commitment

Brent Gardner Americans for Prosperity

Grover Norquist Americans for Tax Reform

Norm Singleton Campaign for Liberty

Andrew F. Quinlan

Center for Freedom and Prosperity

Jeff Mazzella

Center for Individual Freedom

Jessica Melugin

Competitive Enterprise Institute

Tom Schatz

Council for Citizens Against Government Waste

Katie McAuliffe Digital Liberty

Nathan Nascimento

Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce

Jason Pye FreedomWorks

David Barnes Generation Opportunity

Tim Huelskamp

The Heartland Institute

Michael Needham

Heritage Action for America

Tom Giovanetti

Institute for Policy Innovation

Daniel Garza

The LIBRE Initiative

Clark Packard

R Street Institute

David Williams

Taxpayers Protection Alliance


The Senate will also be voting on H.R. 1865, legislation holding internet companies liable for the criminal acts committed by those who use their platforms. Read about that bill here and here.

The Senate will also vote on the resolution invoking the war powers resolution to end U.S. involvement in the Yemen Civil War. Senator Rand Paul is trying to amend the resolution to take out language allowing continued U.S. military action if the action is related to Al-Queda. Read about the resolution here.

The House may consider H.R. 5247, legislation giving terminally ill patients the right to try unapproved medications. This bill failed under suspension last week but should pass this week.

The House will also vote on legislation easing some of the stress tests and regulations of the Dodd-Frank law.

The House will also consider the following bills under suspension this week:


  1. S 2030– Changes the date for compliance with ceiling fan energy conservation standards

  1. H.R. 5094– Requires the Department of Homeland Security cybersecurity and interrogation center to create cyber hunt and incident response teams.

  2. H.R. 4176– Directs the TSA to to: (1) establish an air cargo security office, (2) conduct a pilot program to test the use of screening equipment using computed tomography technology, (3) report to Congress on actions to improve the Certified Cargo Screening Program, (4) develop standards for the use of third-party explosives detection canines for the primary screening of air cargo, and  (5) request a review and assessment of the known shipper program. The Government Accountability Office must review the TSA’s screening processes and procedures for examining air cargo entering the United States and assess its risk-based strategy for examining such cargo.

  3. H.R. 5099– Creates a cushion center technical assistance program. Fusion centers are known for labeling Campaign for Liberty members potential terrorists. Read about fusion centers here and here.

  4. H.R. 4227– Directs the Department of Homeland Security to conduct a study on preventing vehicular terrorism.

  5. H.R. 5079– Requires the Department of Homeland Security to develop an “engagement strategy” with fusion centers so more Campaign for Liberty activists can be labeled terrorists.

  6. H.R. 5131– Directs comptroller to review national surface train station security strategy to make sure it is functioning properly and calls on Homeland Security to prepare risk scenarios to help set priorities for funding.

  7. H.R. 5089– Uses terrorism as an excuse to increased federal “assistance” to state and local law enforcement.

Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog

Pompeo and Haspel are Symptoms of a Deeper Problem

President Trump’s recent cabinet shake-up looks to be a real boost to hard-line militarism and neo-conservatism. If his nominees to head the State Department and CIA are confirmed, we may well have moved closer to war.

Before being chosen by Trump to head up the CIA, Secretary of State nominee Mike Pompeo was one of the most pro-war Members of Congress. He has been militantly hostile toward Iran, and many times has erroneously claimed that Iran is the world’s number one state sponsor of terror. The truth is, Iran neither attacks nor threatens the United States.

At a time when President Trump appears set to make history by meeting North Korean leader Kim Jong-un face-to-face, Pompeo remains dedicated to a “regime change” policy that leads to war, not diplomacy and peace. He blames Iran – rather than the 2003 US invasion – for the ongoing disaster in Iraq. He enthusiastically embraced the Bush policy of “enhanced interrogation,” which the rest of us call “torture.”

Speaking of torture, even if some of the details of Trump’s CIA nominee Gina Haspel’s involvement in the torture of Abu Zubaydah are disputed, the mere fact that she helped develop an interrogation regimen that our own government admitted was torture, that she oversaw an infamous “black site” where torture took place, and that she covered up the evidence of her crimes should automatically disqualify her for further government service.

In a society that actually valued the rule of law, Haspel may be facing time in a much different kind of federal facility than CIA headquarters.

While it may be disappointing to see people like Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State and Gina Haspel as the head of the CIA, it shouldn’t be all that surprising. The few areas where President Trump’s actions are consistent with candidate Trump’s promises are ripping up the nuclear deal with Iran and embracing the torture policies of President George W. Bush. Candidate Trump in late 2015 promised to bring back waterboarding “and a whole lot worse” if he became president. It seems that is his intention with the elevation of Pompeo and Haspel to the most senior positions in his Administration.

We should be concerned, of course, but the real problem is not really Mike Pompeo or Gina Haspel. It is partly true that “personnel is policy,” but it’s more than just that. It matters less who fills the position of Secretary of State or CIA director when the real issue is that both federal agencies are routinely engaged in activities that are both unconstitutional and anti-American. It is the current Executive Branch over-reach that threatens our republic more than the individuals who fill positions in that Executive Branch. As long as Congress refuses to exercise its Constitutional authority and oversight obligations – especially in matters of war and peace – we will continue our slide toward authoritarianism, where the president becomes a kind of king who takes us to war whenever he wishes.

I am heartened to see some Senators – including Sen. Rand Paul – pledging to oppose President Trump’s nominees for State and CIA. Let’s hope many more join him – and let’s hope the rest of the Congress wakes up to its role as first among equals in our political system!

Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog

Rand Paul: Audit the Fed NOW

Senator Rand Paul penned an op-ed on why it is time for Congress to pass Audit the Fed. With Mitch McConnell denying a floor vote to Audit the Fed this week, which has forced Campaign for Liberty to turn up the heat on Senator McConnell to make him hold a Senate vote on Audit the Fed, Senator Paul’s op-ed remains timely.

You can read Senator Paul’s op-ed here and below:

Sen. Rand Paul –

Despite overwhelming support from the American people for action, and a grassroots push that has led to multiple victories in the U.S. House of Representatives, the Senate has so far failed to follow the lead of our colleagues across the Capitol to Audit the Fed.

So the Federal Reserve continues to largely dictate the terms of its own transparency, the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) hands remain tied from conducting a thorough audit, and you pay the price through devalued savings, higher costs, and devastating economic crashes ushered in by market manipulation.

I plan to give Congress another chance to set things right with my Audit the Fed amendment this week.

Audit the Fed is only a few, short pages of making government work for the American people again.

My legislation authorizes the first-ever full audit of the entire Federal Reserve System in its nearly 105-year history, including its agreements with foreign governments and central banks, discount window and open market operations, member bank reserves, and Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) directives.

Audit the Fed would require the GAO to conduct this complete audit within one year of the bill’s passage and report back to Congress within 90 days of finishing the review.

I ran for Senate to fight Washington’s desire to throw billions of dollars at anything that moves, yet for all the disregard Congress has shown in accumulating a $20 trillion-plus national debt, we can still debate its habits in front of the American people.

Meanwhile, the Fed can create new money to spend on whatever financial assets it wants, whenever it wants, while giving the new money to whichever banks it wants – with the Fed’s interest rate manipulation acting as a hidden tax on the less well-to-do.

That’s why I was disappointed to see Audit the Fed blocked on a procedural vote in 2016 by a majority of Democrats, who otherwise love to paint Republicans as being against the little guy yet voted to keep the biggest, most well-connected bank of them all free from this common-sense reform.

I hope they will take this new opportunity to stand up for the American people, who, despite the Fed’s mandate to keep prices stable, have had to stretch their dollars to provide for their families and meet basic needs. The Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank’s website hosts a calculator that reveals that the amount of goods and services $1 would have gotten you in 1913, the year Congress created the Fed, would now require almost $25.

When you hear the usual talking points about Fed “independence,” remember that key idea – the Fed is a creation of Congress, making it subject to the legislative branch’s oversight. No matter how many times the Fed has predicted doom and gloom for being forced to increase its transparency, the world and the financial sector have continued on.

After the GAO made seven recommendations to improve the Fed’s operations following Congress authorizing a one-time audit of the Fed’s emergency lending activities, it noted, “The Federal Reserve Board agreed that GAO’s recommendations would benefit its response to future crises and agreed to strongly consider how best to respond to them.”

In his response to the GAO’s report, former Fed General Counsel Scott Alvarez wrote, “We appreciate the GAO’s substantial efforts to review these complex programs and the understanding of these programs that your report demonstrates.”

These are professionals that will carry out their responsibilities under Audit the Fed accordingly.

Ultimately, if we do not take on the enabler of government’s massive debt-and-spending addiction, we will undermine the full potential of the regulatory reform and tax cuts we have fought hard to achieve.

So those of us who believe that Congress must exercise its oversight responsibilities seriously, and who want to put America on firm financial footing for the long term, will continue to push back against fierce resistance and work to make this grassroots effort a reality.

I urge my colleagues to join me.

Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog

Press Release: Wyoming Joins Neighboring States and Ends Taxation of Precious Metals

For Immediate Release: March 14, 2018

Contact: Cathy Ide,

Wyoming Joins Neighboring States and Ends Taxation of Precious Metals

Cheyenne, Wyoming – Campaign for Liberty Chairman Ron Paul and Wyoming Campaign for Liberty State Coordinator Cathy Ide issued the following statements regarding the Wyoming Legislature’s passage of HB 103 — the Wyoming Legal Tender Act.

The Wyoming Legislature, by overwhelming majorities, passed the Wyoming Legal Tender Act this year. The bill, which restores sound money in Wyoming, officially became law today without Governor Matt Mead’s signature.

This important effort, led by Campaign for Liberty grassroots activists in Wyoming and a coalition of supportive groups, reaffirms Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution by recognizing gold and silver as legal tender and removing all forms of taxation on specie precious metals.

“Many thanks go to our bill sponsor, Representative Roy Edwards . His hard work on HB 103 and that of our dedicated grassroots supporters, led to an astounding 55-5 favorable House vote and 25-5 Senate vote,” said Cathy Ide. “As a result, Wyoming citizens will no longer be punished with any taxes simply for choosing to use gold as money, as laid out by the U.S. Constitution.”

“Passage of the Wyoming Legal Tender Act is the latest sign that dissatisfaction with the Federal Reserve’s money monopoly — and the movement to change our fiat currency system led by my Campaign for Liberty — is alive and growing,” said Campaign for Liberty Chairman Ron Paul.

“As the economy slides into another Fed-created downturn, I predict the movement to pass state legal tender laws will grow. My Campaign for Liberty group is ready to help pass these laws in as many states as possible.”

Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog

Ron Paul and Norm Singleton on President Trump’s School Safety Plan

Campaign for Liberty Chairman Ron Paul and President Norm Singleton issued the following statements regarding President Trump’s school safety plan.

Ron Paul—  By introducing the “if you see something say something” mentality to public schools, President Trump’s plan will lead countless teenagers to lose their liberties for nothing more than typical teenager behavior. The extended use of “extreme risk protection” orders will cause many Americans to lose their second amendment rights, as will support for “fixing the National instant background check system.” President Trump’s plan also suggests that mental health patients may lose their privacy rights, and that movies, video games, and other media may soon face federal regulation to ensure they do not contain excessive violence. Left unanswered is who in D.C. has the wisdom to decide when violence becomes excessive and how does this new power coexist with the First Amendment.

Some gun rights advocates may cheer the President’s proposal to provide grants for school personnel to receive firearms training. But federal funding means federal control. This could be a Trojan horse that will lead to federal gun regulation. A federal gun safety program will likely be as difficult for school employees to take advantage of just as the armed pilots program. If the administration was serious about school safety they would urge Congress to pass Representative Thomas Massie’s H.R. 34, which repeals the gun-free schools act.

Norm Singleton— President Trump’s school safety plan expands federal control of the schools and violates the first, second, and tenth amendments. Campaign for Liberty will do all we can to stop this from becoming law, and pressure Congress to provide real school safety by passing H.R. 34.

Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog

This Week in Congress

The Senate will be voting on amendments to S. 2155, legislation reforming Dodd-Frank. As of this writing there has not yet been a final decision on whether Senator Rand Paul’s Audit the Fed amendment will be voted on, so there is still time to call Senator Mitch McConnell and tell him to let the Senate vote on Audit the Fed. Since Senator McConnell’s DC Office is not accepting phone calls, you should call one of his district offices:

Paducah (Western Kentucky Office)
Phone: (270) 442-4554

Louisville (Louisville Metro Area Office)
Phone: (502) 582-6304

London (Eastern Kentucky Office)
Phone: (606) 864-2026

Bowling Green (South Central Kentucky Office)
Phone: (270) 781-1673

Fort Wright (Northern Kentucky Office)
Phone: (859) 578-0188

Lexington (Bluegrass Area Office)
Phone: (859) 224-8286

Following the vote on Audit the Fed, the Senate will turn its attention to H.R. 1865, legislation holding internet service providers accountable for bad acts done by those using their platforms. For more on this see here and here.

The Senate may vote on S.J.Res. 54, a resolution invoking the War Powers Act and the Espionage Act to force the Senate to vote to end continued U.S. support for Saudi Arabia’s intervention in the Yemen civil war. The Department of Defense has released a letter claiming the War Powers Act is not valid in this situation because U.S. troops are not involved in hostilities. They therefore plan to ignore the resolution which they view as dangerous encroachment on the President’s inherent power as Commander-In-Chief.

Here is a good summary of the argument and here is a letter from conservative legal scholar Bruce Fein and progressive legal scholar Bruce Ackerman debunking the DOD’s arguments.

Concerns have been raised by Senator Rand Paul and the American Civil Liberties Union over a section of the bill that allows continued involvement in Yemen if the action is related to the fight against Al Qaeda. The objection is that this implicitly authorizes military action against Al Qaeda in Yemen, something that is not currently explicitly authorized (contrary to what a lot of  people think the 2001 authorization of force did not authorize a permanent war against Al Qaeda but only against those “individuals or organizations invoked in the September 11 attacks” so whether it authorizes military involvement in Yemen 17 years after 9-11 is a debatable question). So this resolution would affirmatively authorize military intervention to get Al Qaeda while limiting intervention in Yemen’s civil war.

What is not debatable is that S.J.Res. 55, which may be offered as a substitute for S.J. 54, is bad. Rather than just prohibit involvement in Yemen’s civil war, S.J Res. 55 requires the Secretary of State to “certify” that Saudi Arabia is making a “good faith effort” to support peace talks in Yemen and is helping with humanitarian relief efforts. The resolution not only authorizes intervention to stop Al Qaeda but to counter Iranian action in Yemen thus authorizing US military action against Iran and taking a step toward full-fledged war.

Campaign for Liberty a Chairman Ron Paul and Daniel McAdams of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity dismissed the Defense Department letter, the upcoming Senate debate, and the situation in Yemen in yesterday’s edition of the Ron Paul Liberty Report.

The House is in session Tuesday through Friday. The most significant bill is actually on the suspension calendar for Tuesday, H.R. 4909. This bill renews school safety grants. The bill allows local schools to use grant money for metal detectors.

It also authorizes funds for “crisis intervention” and coordination with local law enforcement and threat assessment. This could lead to students being unfairly targeted by authorities because they are having personal problems or even normal teenage angst.

It also funds “evidence-based” school safety programs….you know what evidence shows is a good way to promote school safety? Not making schools gun-free zones.

This bill could be amended in the Senate to include other gun control measures, such as legislation expanding the unconstitutional national background check system.

The House will also consider H.R. 3949, which reauthorizes Project Safe Neighborhood. These grants are meant to combat gang violence by fostering cooperation between local governments and state governments.

The House will also consider legislation allowing terminally ill patients to use non-FDA approved treatments. This is good legislation, but the fact that Congress has to pass a law to affirm someone’s right to use a medical treatment that could save their lives shows just how far we are from a free society.

The House will also consider H.R. 1116, which requires financial regulatory agencies to tailor any regulatory actions so as to limit burdens on the institutions involved, with consideration of the risk profiles and business models of those institutions.

The House will also consider H.R. 4465, legislation extending funding for the Upper Colorado and San Juan Fish recovery program. Yes that’s actually a thing.

Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog

Tariffs Are Not the Answer

President Trump’s planned 25 percent tariff on steel imports and 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports may provide a temporary boost for those industries, but the tariffs will do tremendous long-term damage to the American and global economies. Tariffs raise the price of, and reduce demand for, imported goods. Tariffs ensure the preferences of politicians, instead of the preferences of consumers, to determine how resources are allocated. This reduces economic efficiency and living standards.

Some justify these economic inefficiencies as being worth it to save American jobs. This ignores how tariffs increase costs of production for industries reliant on imported materials to produce their products. These increased costs lead to job losses in those industries. For example, President Trump’s proposed steel tariff could cost nearly 40,000 jobs in the steel-dependent auto manufacturing industry. Tariffs also cause job losses in industries reliant on exports. This is especially true if — as is likely to be the case — other countries respond to President Trump’s actions by increasing tariffs on US products.

Many of President Trump’s critics do not themselves support true free trade, which is the voluntary exchange of goods and services across borders. Instead, they support the managed (by government) trade of NAFTA and the World Trade Organization (WTO). NAFTA and the WTO promote world government and crony capitalism, not free markets. Any libertarian or free-market conservative who thinks the WTO promotes economic liberty should remember that the WTO once ordered Congress to raise taxes!

Foreign manufacturers may make convenient scapegoats for the problems facing US industry. However, the truth is that most of the problems plaguing American businesses stem from the US government. American businesses are burdened by thousands of federal regulations controlling every aspect of their operations. The tax system also burdens businesses. Until last year’s tax reform bill, the US had the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world. The tax reform bill lowered corporate taxes, but the US corporate tax rate is still higher than that of many other developed countries.

The United States not only spends more on military weapons than the combined budgets of the next eight biggest spending countries, but also spends billions subsidizing the defense of developed counties like Germany, Japan, and South Korea. Bringing US troops home from these countries is an excellent place to start reducing spending on militarism.

The biggest cause of our economic problems is the Federal Reserve. America’s experiment with fiat currency has enabled a system based on private and public debt. This makes trade imbalances inevitable as the US government needs foreign investors to purchase its debt. Foreign investors get the money to purchase the US government’s debt by selling products to American consumers. A trade war could cause foreign investors to stop buying US debt instruments and could end the dollar’s world reserves currency status. This would cause a major economic crisis — but at least it would stop our shores from being flooded with “cheap foreign goods.”

President Trump’s claim that trade wars can be easily won is as credible as the neoconservative claim that the Iraq War would be a cakewalk. A trade war would likely push the global economy into a recession or worse. Instead of imposing costs on American businesses and consumers and putting those whose livelihoods depend on imports out of s job, President Trump should address the real causes of our economic problems: the welfare-warfare state, the IRS, and the Federal Reserve.

Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog