The Ron Paul Plan to Restore America

Every four years brings a new presidential campaign, new promises, and new agendas. Each candidate presents the public with a plan that the candidates believe is the best option for creating a better future for our country. The issues vary, based mostly on current affairs and the concerns stemming from the years of the prior presidency. However, each plan always contains some element addressing the economic state of the nation. The candidate's plans, in theory, often sound promising and hopeful. Yet, no campaign promise is infallible, and few U.S. presidents have successfully implemented any long-term economic plans that have met with universal approval or have been as successful as initially predicted. Ron Paul, campaigning for the 2012 election year, has announced an economic restoration plan that many have referred to as being ambitious. If elected, he will implement this economic restoration plan aimed at cutting government spending, cutting taxes, and reforming the current system. Americans have heard such promises before; cutting government spending, cutting taxes, and focusing on reform are the keys to boosting and maintaining a stable U.S. economy. Yet, the implementation of such plans never seems to be in agreement with the promises presented during the presidential campaign. Government spending continues to spiral out of control, tax cuts are rarely beneficial to the people as a whole, and reform becomes a perpetual priority on the backburner. For the upcoming election, Paul's plan is the only one that takes a serious look at U.S. economic and budget concerns and proposes a plausible solution. Ambitious and aggressive, this plan calls for drastic measures and a tight timeline. Yet, if Paul's restoration plan proceeds without any deviation, it could lead to the recovery that Americans have been seeking.

THE PLAN

Ron Paul acknowledges that the U.S. continues to suffer the effects of economic crisis. Despite the Obama administration's assurances that recovery is imminent, most Americans would agree that they are not seeing any noticeable improvements. Paul has proposed a solution to ease America's economic woes by restoring the government to the founding principles ignored for far too long. A country whose foundations lie on liberty, free markets, and a limited constitutional government has become a nation where liberty is in question and the government cedes little power to the people. Paul believes his plan is achievable; fundamental reform can take place if the balance of power returns and the voice of freedom -the voice of the people - receives the attention it deserves. Unlike the other 2012 presidential hopefuls, Ron Paul is not just talking about balancing the U.S. budget. He has addressed the entire economic crisis, creating a comprehensive plan to solve the problem (Paul, n.d.).

The Plan to Restore America includes provisions to cut government spending, to honor entitlements, to curb government waste, to lower taxes, and to regulate governmental procedures and monetary policy. The plan involves cutting one trillion dollars from the U.S. budget within the first year of Paul's term in office and delivery of a balanced budget no later than year three (Paul). In order to accomplish this bold task, Paul first proposes the elimination of five federal departments. He suggests cutting the Departments of Energy, Education, Commerce, Interior, Housing and Urban Development, and the Transportation Security Administration. Freeing the budget of obligations to these departments would bring the balance sheet in line with 2006 levels; however, many agencies still receiving funding would have to cut some of their programs as well (Condon, 2011). The plan further calls for cutting the federal workforce by 10%, lowering the salaries of Congress, and slashing the presidential salary down to the equivalent of the current median U.S. income. (Paul). The plan calls for an extension of Bush-era tax cuts, and the implementation of many other tax benefits to improve the American economy by encouraging more investments, more jobs, and allowing families and individuals to save more money for the future (Condon; Paul).

Paul wants to impose tighter regulations on all government departments and activity. He plans to eliminate all burdensome regulations issued by past executive orders. All new regulations would go to Congress for review and authorization. A repeal of ObamaCare is imminent, while healthcare overhauls will continue (Paul). In an attempt to strengthen the value of the dollar and to stabilize the ever-increasing inflation, competing currency legislation is necessary, as well as a full audit of the Federal Reserve. Despite the call for such deep cuts to free-up and balance the budget, Ron Paul assures his constituents that he is dedicated to serving Americans through the maintenance of existing entitlement programs for the elderly, the poor, and veterans. Social Security would remain intact, and state governments would receive federally funded block grants, allowing them to continue serving their citizens through welfare programs, food stamps, and Medicaid. These block grants offer flexibility for solving individual State program problems without affecting benefit recipients (Paul). Ron Paul firmly believes the current system is strongly biased against middles class and poor Americans ("Ron Paul: The System..." 2011).

OPPOSITION

In politics, there is no way to avoid opposition. No matter how large his following, how solid and comprehensive the plan, and how appealing Ron Paul's campaign promises may be, he has his fair share of opponents who do not want to see him elected for various reasons. Some of those reasons are personal matters of opinion; others are a difference in political viewpoints. Ron Paul is a libertarian who carries with him a mixture of political views. Paul is dedicated to the mission of bringing back the American tradition of liberty. His vision is that of a small, limited Constitutional government. With provisions in place for a noninterventionist foreign policy; free markets; opposition to the Federal Reserve System; local self-governments (as opposed to all issues being settled at the federal level); and a strong stance on retaining American sovereignty (among other views), Ron Paul has not gained popularity amongst the opposition ("About the Campaign For Liberty," n.d.). Neither is he favored by those who believe he does not represent a single political party on a wide array of issues (Joyner, 2007).

Many libertarians are against Paul because, while his views on limited government represent the libertarian cause, a number of nonlibertarian elements exist in his positions. Because of this, many libertarians refuse to back Paul's bid for the presidency. They claim he stands in opposition to free trade, holds a conservative view on immigration issues, and has aligned himself with conspiracy theorists (though, admittedly, he may not agree with their ideas and has simply failed to repudiate them for the sake of their support). The libertarians further claim that Ron Paul's belief that the government played a role in early American racism is a ludicrous notion; others claim he is not libertarian at all (Joyner).

While Paul's small government views also reflect some of the ideals of conservatives, they too feel that he poorly represents conservatives as a whole. Conservatives agree with libertarians in their claims that Paul encourages conspiracy theorists and has racial viewpoints that do not align with current events, statistical reports, or conservative views. They stand in opposition to what they refer to as "isolationist ideals." Because of Paul's noninterventionist foreign policy and wish to pull out of the war in Iraq immediately, conservatives believe he is not facing reality and is setting the United States up to face consequences of catastrophic proportions. Conservatives further claim that they will not support Ron Paul because he has made excuses for the September 11, 2001 Al-Qaeda attacks, saying America was reaping what it had sown (Hawkins, 2007).

Republicans and Democrats remain split on the issue of Ron Paul's candidacy. He has both opponents and supporters in both parties. Although Paul technically is a Republican, his views are not wholly Republican. While he shares some of the same concerns as the Democratic Party, the majority of Ron Paul's views on small government, foreign policy, central banking, and the interpretation of the constitution are not in line with the common Democratic sentiment (Woodhouse, 2011). Having spoken out against issues with both parties, especially the debt-ceiling crisis, Paul has been, of course, the recipient of the political equivalent of revenge with scathing remarks made by opponents (Guzman, 2011; Dolan, 2011). However, many Democrats have jumped on the Ron Paul bandwagon. Given that they have only one candidate to support in the 2012 presidential election, Democrats are beginning to panic (Day). Barack Obama's approval rating has sunk to an all time low (Hetchkopf, 2011). While it cannot be predicated whether American's will ultimately re- elect Obama for a second term, it is clear that many people do not feel that he has kept his campaign promises, nor has he successfully brought visible change to this country. Still, Democratic backing of Ron Paul seems like questionable shenanigans at best. Not only is Paul not running on the Democratic ticket; no comparison exists between Barack Obama and Ron Paul (Day, 2011). Their ideas, policies, and strategies have little in common. In fact, the only parallel that exists is the desire for change. However, the definition of change differs between the two candidates; Obama has proven that he cannot deliver. Ron Paul, on the other hand, is likely to do what presidents of the recent past have failed to do: focus on the people, bring liberty back to the forefront, and implement much needed system reform.

SUPPORT

Ron Paul supporters are those who value the vision of our forefathers and the foundation of liberty that is the core value of the United States. His followers are sickened by big money and a government that hoards power, ignores the voice of the people, dictates all activity and action, and bends the constitution to fit the current agenda. Supporters are those who yearn for hope and change in a country that has abandoned liberty and stability for the sake of wealth, big business, and aspirations to be the most powerful government in the world. Despite being disappointed by broken promises for change repeatedly, American citizens retain a hope and belief that someday, voters will get it right by finally electing a candidate who can and will follow through with a plan to reform our government, fix a broken system, and recreate a burgeoning economy that will benefit the people (Paul). Support for Ron Paul continues to grow. The numbers show that he is Obama's greatest foe and has an excellent chance of surpassing Obama once all of the votes are in ("Obama 41%, Ron Paul 37%," 2011).

Paul's plan appeals to many Americans. Outraged by broken promises, a lack of results, and hopelessness in the aftermath of an economic recession of phenomenal proportions, voters are becoming more aware of what this country needs and are no longer asking for change; they demand it. American's have long awaited a comprehensive solution to the economic crisis and government reform. Ron Paul is the only candidate who has listened and stepped up to the challenge. While opponents claim that Paul has formed an alliance with conspiracy theorists, has unrealistic policies, and is setting this country up for even more failure, it is obvious that these opponents have failed to see the big picture from the perspective of those who firmly back the Ron Paul campaign ("Why I Support Ron Paul," 2011).

The opportunity for true recovery from economic fallout has mass appeal. Americans have endured enough financial struggles, high taxes, outlandish inflation, and the inability to save money, or to even get by from paycheck to paycheck. Obama promised America a solution to massive unemployment rates and government waste. Yet, jobs remain scarce ("United Sates Unemployment Rate..." 2011). The disgusting tradition of earmarking and spending government funds to bail out big business, to fund war, provide financial backing for projects which overlap or do not benefit the American people continues. ("Government Waste..." 2011). Unfathomable amounts in government salaries are paid (Cauchon, 2010), while the people the government serves typically fall somewhere between living life below the poverty level and barely attaining the median income ("Income, Poverty, and..." 2011). The government has failed to put a stop to such excess and has allowed the citizens of this country to suffer because of a tight budget and over-the-top deficit. Essential programs cuts have dramatically affected the elderly, disabled, veterans, low-income families, and children. These people are left to wonder what devastating cuts will come next, yet Ron Paul's solution of block grants for State programs will allow each state to better control funding and issues for those essential programs without adversely affecting those who need the benefits most. For those opposed to war, especially American involvement in foreign affairs as their "saving grace," and lengthy conflicts that cost our country untold amounts of money and even worse, massive loss of life, Paul's noninterventionist policy makes sense. Topped off with stricter government regulations, lower taxes, the promise of more jobs and a better economy, and a return to liberty and more power to the people, it is no wonder Ron Paul's approval rating is on the rise. Opponents simply cannot see the logic beyond the dollar signs and their irrational fear of change. As for an alliance with conspiracy theorists, perhaps Ron Paul opponents would do well to double check the definition of liberty, and then realize that while Paul may not be in collusion with such theorists, his lack of repudiation is a reflection of the constitutional freedoms that are the foundation of this country.

CONCLUSION

Americans align themselves with one political party or another because of the issues they support and their stance on those issues. Even if a voter does not fully agree with their party's position on every American concern, they are likely to choose the party whose values most reflect their own or to remain with a party out of loyalty. Few voters take into consideration the fact that politics is often a popularity contest, especially amongst the dominant parties. Each side is going to push their viewpoints in order to influence public sentiment, and they will stop at nothing to ensure their party reigns supreme. It is a political tradition to present scathing and biased information about the opposing party or candidate in the media. That does not mean that one political party is being completely honest or that one will deliver on their promises more than the other will.

Its due time that U.S. voters stopped paying so much credence to Democrat vs. Republican, libertarian vs. conservative, or whatever opposing parties and views provide dominating influence in the political arena. While we all want our chosen candidate to carry the same viewpoints as we do, it is not logical to think that every opinion of a single presidential candidate will mirror our own. We, the voters, need to scrutinize the information and plans provided by each candidate, without the influence of political bias and bashing, and come to our own conclusions about who to support based on what is the best possible plan in the best interest of this country and its citizens. Compromises may occur, but if an elected president can successfully deliver the results America needs, then he or she is the right person for the office.

Ron Paul has taken the time to address the concerns of the American people and to offer the most comprehensive plan aimed at bringing forth much needed and reform. He is not talking about the budget and deficit alone; he is concerned with the American economy as a whole, the woes of the American people, and bringing this country back to its roots: an America for the people, by the people and of the people. He is not standing at the podium making vague statements about "change," about having grown up poor himself, or telling people what they need to hear just to gain supporters. He has been open, honest, critical of our current system, and has taken action to begin implementing a plan that more than promises to turn the United States around. If that does not make Ron Paul a president for the people, then no other 2012 candidate can possibly live up to this claim. As Americans, we must stop debating trivial issues and aligning ourselves with one party or another. We must elect the person whose foremost priority is the people of this country; otherwise, the United States will either stagnate in unresolved issues or will continue its abysmal spiral into the depths of despair with no hope for recovery.

Works Cited

"About the Campaign For Liberty.' CampaignForLiberty.com. Web. 17 October 2011.

Cauchon, Dennis. "Federal workers earning double their private counterparts." USAToday.com. 13 August 2010. Web. 17 October 2011.

Condon, Stephanie. "Ron Paul proposes saving $1T by scrapping five federal departments." CBSNews.com. 17 October 2011. Web. 17 October 2011.

Day, K.B. "Democrats gone scared, push Ron Paul to help Obama." theusreport.com. 10 June 2011. Web. 17 October 2011.

Dolan, E.W. "Republican strategist: Ron Paul nothing but a 'gadfly' and 'distraction.'" RawStory.com. Raw Relay. 19 September 2011. Web. 17 October 2011.

"Government Waste by the Numbers: Report Identifies Dozens of Overlapping Programs." FoxNews.com. 1 March 2011. Web. 17 October 2011.

Guzman, C.A. "Ron Paul slams Republicans and Democrats on Debt-Ceiling Crisis in First TV Campaign Ad." caivn.org. California Independent Voter Network. 15 July 2011. Web. 17 October 2011.

Hawkins, John. "The Conservative Case Against Ron Paul." Townhall.com. 15 June 2007. Web. 17 October 2011.

Hetchkopf, Kevin. "Obama's approval rating drops to all-time low; Public spilt on jobs plan." CBSNews.com. 16 September 2011. Web. 17 October 2011.

Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance in the United States: 2010. U.S. Department of Commerce. September 2011. PDF File. 17 October 2011.

Joyner, James. "Libertarians Against Ron Paul." OutsidetheBeltway.com. 21 November 2007. Web. 17 October 2011.

"Obama 41%, Ron Paul 37%." RasmussenReports.com. 22 July 2011. Web. 17 October 2011.

Paul, Ron. Ron Paul "Plan to Restore America." n.d. PDF file.

"Ron Paul Announces Ambitious 'Plan to Restore America.' " RonPaul2012.com. n.d. Web. 17 October 2011.

"Ron Paul: The System Is Biased against the Middle Class and the Poor." RonPaul.com. 6 October 2011. Web. 17 October 2011.

"United States Unemployment rate at 9.10 Percent." TradingEconomics.com. September 2011. Web. 17 October 2011.

"Why I Support Ron Paul." RonPaul.com. n.d. Web. 17 October 2011.

Woodhouse, Brad. "You Should Know Five Facts About Ron Paul." Democrats.org. 11 June 2011. Web. 17 October 2011.