Ron Paul: The Trouble With Forced Integration
As Ron Paul today said he will continue his campaign for the
Presidency with a reduced staff, it may be appropriate to recognize
one of the most im****tant votes he cast during his political career
when Ron Paul was the only Congressman to vote against a resolution
saluting the 40th Anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Here is the text of his speech.
by Rep. Ron Paul, MD
>>"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
sup****ters 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 dimini****ng 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."<<
July 3, 2004
http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/ron_paul_the_trouble_with_forced_integration/
|
