Healthcare continues to dominate the agenda on Capitol Hill as House leadership and the administration try to ram through their big government healthcare plan.  Fortunately, they have been unsuccessful so far, as there are many horrifying provisions tucked into this massive piece of legislation.

One major issue is the public funding of elective abortions.  The administration has already removed many longstanding restrictions on abortion, and is unwilling to provide straight answers to questions regarding the public funding of abortion in their plan.  This is deeply troubling for those of us who do not want taxpayer dollars funding abortions.

Forcing pro-life taxpayers to subsidize abortion is evil and tyrannical.  I have introduced the Taxpayer’s Freedom of Conscience Act (HR 1233) which forbids the use of any taxpayer funds for abortion, both here and overseas.

The most basic function of government is to protect life.  It is unconscionable that government would enable the taking of it.  However this is to be expected when government oversteps its constitutional bounds instead of protecting rights.

When government supercedes this very limited role, it cannot help but advance the moral agenda of whoever is in power at the time, at the expense of the rights of others.

Free people should be left alone to follow their conscience and determine their own lifestyle as long as they do not interfere with other people doing the same.  If morality is dictated by government, morality will change with every election.  Even if you agree with the morality of the current politicians and think their ideas should be advanced, someday different people will inherit that power and use it for their own agendas.  The wisdom of the constitution is that it keeps government out of these issues altogether.

Many say we must reform healthcare and treat it as a right, because that is the moral thing to do.  Poor people should not go without healthcare in a just society.  But too many forget the immorality of stealing from others in order to make this so.  They also forget the morality and compassion that naturally exists in communities when government is not fomenting class warfare with wealth redistribution programs.

Many doctors willingly volunteer, accept barter or reduced payment from patients who can’t pay, or give away services for free.  Many charities help the poor with food, housing and healthcare.  These charities are much more responsive and accountable for helping people in need than government ever could be.

This is the moral way that private individuals voluntarily deal with access to healthcare, but government intervention threatens to pull the rug out from this sort of volunteerism and replace it with mandates, taxes, red tape, wealth redistribution, and force.

The fact that the national healthcare overhaul could force taxpayers to subsidize abortions and may even force private insurers to cover abortions is more reason that this bill and the ideas behind it, are neither constitutional, moral, nor in the American people’s best interest.

Ron Paul is a republican member of Congress from Texas.

Recently, he called upon the principle of States Rights in advocating drilling for oil off the coasts of California and Florida.

But, isn’t he violating this principle at the same time he’s invoking it?

Debra J. Saunders made a good point in the SF Chronicle:

Why does McCain believe in states’ rights for Californians and Floridians, but not Alaskans, who support drilling in ANWR? I asked Holtz-Eakin. His answer: Some places are simply too “special.”

And, some places just don’t have the votes to make much of a difference – so why pander to them, right?

The important point here is that McCain, once again, isn’t talking about States’ Rights at all.  He’s talking about power.  More power for the federal government, and more power for him.

What?

Well, it’s quite simple.  McCain isn’t calling for the States to have a right to make their own environmental regulation at all.  He just sees a political reality – that prices for gas are high – and he’s working to exploit that for votes.

His plan is all about “Washington offering financial incentives to get coastal states to agree to new offshore exploration.”

Think about that for just a moment.

What McCain calls “states rights” is, in fact, just the opposite.  He’s advocating taking money from some states, and giving it to others.  Or, more practically, he’s going to take your tax money, and give it to some huge corporation to do business in California and Florida.

That’s not even close to being states rights.

Taking money from one group and giving to another.  If he weren’t a politician, wouldn’t we say that he was advocating stealing?

A States Rights/10th Amendment viewpoint would be much different.  Each state could determine the policies that were best for their own areas…and would be held responsible for the outcome of their action(s).

This does not mean that they’d suddenly be entitled to your money, or the money of people in any other state.

Once again, McCain clearly misses the point, and is only pandering for more votes and more power.

Recently Congress sent the latest Farm Bill to the president. The bill features brand new federal programs, expansion of existing subsidies, more food stamps and more foreign food aid. This bill hits the taxpayer hard, while at the same time ensuring food prices will remain elevated. The president vetoed the bill, citing concerns over its costs and subsidies for the wealthy in a time of high food prices and record farm income. Nevertheless, this over-reaching, government-expanding Farm Bill will soon be law.

The truth is most farmers simply want honest pay for honest work. However, if the government is providing competing farms with advantages, and one wants to remain a farmer, one must seek a proportional advantage from government. It is a difficult position for the farmer. Some are better at qualifying for taxpayers’ largesse than others as evidenced by the fact that more than 60% of the subsidies go to just 10% of recipients, edging out the small family farm. This entire system is unfair and demoralizing. It disproportionately benefits big agribusiness at the expense of struggling family farms.

Third world countries also lose with these continued government manipulations. Agricultural subsidies lead to overproduction, which leads to foreign food aid as a form of dumping. By “dumping” government-created agricultural surpluses, agrarian economies are artificially kept in a constant state of economic depression. The would-be third world farmer cannot compete with “free” grain, thus he and his countrymen remain perpetual beggars rather than competitive producers. Also, by keeping food prices high, we keep more of our own citizens dependent on government food stamps, instead of paying fair market prices for food.

Free trade helps farmers and consumers much more than this convoluted system of subsidies, surpluses and central planning. Newly opened markets would create increased demand for what we produce. There is absolutely no reason we trade with China , yet not with Cuba . With energy and transportation prices as high as they are, opening up trade with a country as close as Cuba just makes sense. The recent power shift from Fidel Castro to his brother Raul, and the somewhat positive steps he has taken, provides an opportunity to lift the embargo.

Removing unreasonable, confiscatory tax policies would also make good farm policy. We need to permanently repeal the estate tax, which would again take a devastating 55% cut of family farms upon death of an owner. This tax will force the sale of many family farms, and further huge corporate agriculture.

Those who believe federal farm programs benefit independent farmers, should take note that after 70 years of this type of government intervention, small farms continue to struggle while large corporate farms control an ever-increasing share of the agricultural market. Subsidies for agribusiness should be stopped and the free market should be allowed to work. With commodity and food prices on the rise, Congress had an opportunity to scale down government controls and taxpayer funding of agriculture. Instead, despite the warning sent by an 18% approval rating, Congress stubbornly opted for more of the same.

Ron Paul is a republican member of Congress from Texas.