Republican Ron Paul: Blurring the Lines

Emily Hoppler-Treichler

mast news reporter

Although some of PLU’s students said they had never heard of Dr. Ron Paul, he is arguably the most interesting candidate running for president in the 2008 election. Paul, a Texan Republican, has been a congressman on and off for different districts in Texas since the late 1970s. He also ran for president in 1988 under the Libertarian Party, coming in third and receiving 0.5 percent of the vote. He has been in the House of Representatives as the congressman from Texas’ 14th district since 1997.

However, what really makes Paul interesting has nothing to do with his lengthy experience, but his mixed bag of stances on the issues. Paul, who received his M.D. from the Duke University of Medicine and has delivered over 4,000 babies, is known as “Dr. No” in the House of Representatives because of his firm belief in never voting for something that isn’t clearly sanctioned as a government right in the Constitution.

This has included voting against the Iraq War, against a ban on same-sex marriages, against raising taxes of any kind and against sending aid money to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. Paul says that by voting against measures like these, he is keeping the federal government from overreaching.

“[Paul] is to the Republicans what Kucinich is to the Democrats. What would happen if someone really believed in the basic principles?” PLU political science professor Olufs said. “Democrats would be more like Kucinich and Republicans would be more like Paul.”

Paul is a devout subscriber to the fundamental Republican beliefs of limited government power, particularly for the executive branch, and letting states decided most social issues for themselves. Paul values liberty above all else.

Paul has aroused controversy not only through his insistence on keeping federal government out of non-Constitutionally based issues, but also through his mix of Republican and Libertarian stances. Paul is extremely pro-life and agrees with overturning Roe V. Wade. But Paul also believes that only states have the right to legislate abortion rights.

“Why would a Libertarian be anti-abortion? Why is he against same-sex marriage and federal court jurisdiction over laws about sexual practices (so that states can criminalize same-sex intimacy)? Why not a similarly standard Republican opinion on drugs?” Olufs asked.

He is also anti-gun control, another fundamental conservative view. But he is the only presidential candidate to vote against invading Iraq in 2003, a decision that helps him stand out to disgruntled citizens now.

PLU Democrats president Samantha Tolbert said Paul’s ability to “appeal to liberals on some issues and to conservatives on others” is both his greatest strength and his greatest weakness. Ultimately though, Tolbert says, “[Paul just] doesn’t hold true enough to either side to really inspire many votes.

It’s certainly appealing to Democrats that Paul is against the war. That’s a really divisive issue in today’s politics. At the same time, his extreme pro-life stance is going to lose him just as many votes as his ideas on the war will win him.”

PLU GOP president Geoff Smock thinks that Paul’s stance on Iraq could win him more than just a few votes. “If Senator Clinton is the Democrats’ nominee then it’s possible Congressman Paul could win some votes from the stringent anti-war left (that would traditionally go to Democrats) due to the fact that some in the Democratic Party are disillusioned with Senator Clinton’s previous support for the war in Iraq and her continued reticence to completely renounce the war effort,” Smock says.

Paul also has official stances on issues that no other presidential candidate has considered. For instance, Paul is in favor of legalizing medical marijuana, which Tolbert says is “a polarizing issue even for Democrats.” He has repeatedly criticized the war on drugs, calling it a “war on doctors.” He also opposes the Federal Drug Administration and has promoted abolishing it for many years, calling doctors and patients “victims” of the FDA’s “zealous” and “overreaching” policies.

Smock said that despite some controversy surrounding Paul, his greatest strength lies in “the strength and clarity of his opinions and principles, which has earned him a dedicated and enthusiastic base of support.” Smock believes although this base is “relatively small,” it has potential to grow and give Paul an edge over Republicans.

Olufs believes, however, that Paul’s Iraq stance is the only thing that has made him important to the 2008 election.

“My guess is that were it not for his initial opposition to the invasion of Iraq, he would be largely regarded as another strange Republican, too weird for wider responsibilities,” Olufs said.
Tolbert agrees with this to a certain extent, but also said that Paul’s eligibility really comes down to his party affiliation.

“A mixed bag is a hard thing to market in the political arena. At a certain point, you have to pick a side,” Tolbert said. “Paul is certainly on the Republican side, and that ‘R’ next to his name is a hard thing to ignore for Democrats.”

For more information on Ron Paul, check out his Web site, www.ronpaul2008.com.

Photo courtesy of ronpaul2008.com