Jan Mickelson: Good morning, friends. Welcome, welcome, to our Monday Morning get together, it’s Mickelson here with you. We have a chance this morning to talk with another presidential candidate, Congressman Ron Paul is joining us here in the studio. Whenever he is here, people listen in from all over the country. You have probably one of the most hardcore groups of people following you than any of the other presidential candidates. I should say that’s not exactly correct. You have more volunteers who will follow you and crawl over broken glass for you. There are a couple of other candidates, and one I’m thinking of in particular has more paid people who participate. But you have a real dedicated core of people, don’t you?
Ron Paul: We do, and I’m very pleased and very proud of that. And I claim that the message is a good message and it’s very pro-American, pro-constitutional message, and it has good economics behind it and good policies, and I think that’s why they hear it and decide, “Well, this is what we want to stand for, this is what we want to work for”. Well, this morning, in just about an hour, we’re going to let people listen in on the Obama press conference on raising the debt ceiling. And he’s going to have a press conference. He doesn’t have them too often, especially since August 2nd is the theoretical debt ceiling deadline. This is kind of an important moment in U.S. History. We’ve only defaulted, or technically defaulted, a couple of times in our history. I think once it was in 1790, the other was in 1933, I think, when they started to call [gold] back in and they said, “Hey, it’s illegal for Americans to own gold”, and sort of a semi-default in 1971 with Nixon saying, “Not only are we not going to allow people to own gold, we’re going to just get of the gold standard.” So some people are saying that this is unprecedented, that’s not exactly correct, is it?
Ron Paul: You’re absolutely right. Matter of fact, we’re currently defaulting all the time, because when you get dollars back, if you invested in a treasury bill 10 years ago, and you’re taking your money today, you might be getting 50 cents on the dollar. I mean, it’s been very, very bad. But that is the purpose of a central bank; it’s to deceive the people and to fraud the people.
Jan Mickelson: It’s been working.
Ron Paul: Because if you would have done it a 100 years ago when the Fed was started, you would be getting 2 cents back on the dollar, and back then they actually had 100 year bonds. And, of course, they defaulted with the gold. And they’re going to continue to default. These are scare tactics and I suspect what the President will say is that, you know, it’s going to be a total disaster if we don’t raise the debt limit to justify the continued spending. And my guess is that there will be some type of agreement. I think they’ll scare the people enough; they did it with the bailouts, saying if we didn’t bail out the banks and Wall Street, it would be the end of our western civilization, and yet it didn’t help the people at all. I mean, we still have a very bad recession, we’re still in the middle of it, and people are still losing their houses.
Jan Mickelson: They did the same thing internationally, they said, “If we don’t bail out Greece, the whole system can come down”. And they gave them access to billions more over the weekend. Now they’re talking about Italy, saying if that falls, everything else falls apart. Now we’re talking about the United States of America. Who’s going to bail us out?
Ron Paul: There’s nobody else, and yet we’re still bailing out those other countries indirectly, because the IMF is involved and we put money in the IMF. So the burden has always been falling on the dollar, but there’ll be a time when people will finally say that the whole system is at fault. Even this morning the dollar was up rather sharply against other currencies, except the one currency, gold. You know, that is the ultimate currency.
Jan Mickelson: 15.50 today.
Ron Paul: Yea, and that’s the ultimate currency. But because the dollar might go up a few days against the Euro, even long term against other currencies, if you look at the last 30 years, it’s been straight down. There was a time in 1971 when we finally got rid of all linkage to gold. I think we got around 4 Swiss Francs to the dollar, now you get 1 Swiss Francs. So we’ve lost 75% against that currency. But ultimately, when the dollar goes down and you don’t weigh it just against other paper currencies, what you weigh it against is what will the dollar buy. And I think that’s what the American people are waking up to. They know every single day our dollars are buying less.
Jan Mickelson: Well, you’re one of the smart guys who saw this a generation ago, and the last time you were here, I went through some of the investments you’ve been making; all have been gold and mining stocks, and you’ve been kicking butt for the last 30 years. Your investments are doing extremely well. It took the rest of us a lot longer to catch on, you think most of us did, or at least are we beginning?
Ron Paul: Well, there’s a lot more. I can remember not too many years ago when people still believed in the stock market, somebody on the air made fun of me, they said, “Just think of all the money you missed by not buying stocks”. And I said, “Yea, I was overly cautious, I was way too conservative, it was awfully foolish of me buying these gold coins at $35 an ounce.”
Jan Mickelson: So, it’s none of my darn business, but just how many did you buy?
Ron Paul: Oh, that is a top secret.
Jan Mickelson: Ha ha ha. I’ll ask your wife later.
Ron Paul: But coin collecting is still legitimate.
Jan Mickelson: Put on your earphones, sir, because I want you to hear a sound bite from secretary Geithner who, over this weekend, was talking about what we’re talking about.
Geitherner: Remember, we spend … we have to now borrow 40 cents for every dollar we spend. Now, on August 2nd if Congress hasn’t acted, we’re left with the cash we have and the cash we’re going to take in.
Jan Mickelson: Wow. Stay put with me here a second, because he embellishes that.
Geithenr: The longer we go into July, the more risk there will be in financial markets, more concern that America cannot gets its act together to figure out how to solve this problem, and you’ll see that reflected in higher interest rates and more customer loss of confidence. And let me explain what happens on august 2nd. On august 2nd, at that point, we will run out of the ability to borrow to meet our obligations.
Ron Paul: My question to him would be, “compared to what?” Compared to continuing to raise the debt limit, and continue to spend? Then the catastrophe is much worse.
Jan Mickelson: Why?
Ron Paul: Because that’s when you have runaway inflation, destruction of the dollar, loss of confidence in the dollar. So he says it’s better to temporize, raise the debt limit and continue to spend. And the two are very, very difficult, but I just think that if we continue on this process, then the destruction of the dollar and the disruption, politically speaking, as well as economically speaking, is much, much worse than saying, “We have to live within our means”. But he paints this much worse than it really is, because you can have priorities. He doesn’t have to default on not paying the interest. But it’s a serious problem, but they have to agree to quit raising the debt limit and quit spending the money, and have priorities on the way we pay. Even the last time I was on your show, we brought up this subject about why do we go through this manipulation of making token payments or payments at least, you know, to the Federal Reserve for the debt we have there. And that debt is part of the national debt. Technically, you could take that off and have another year or so. I don’t want to say that that is the ultimate solution, I’m just saying that the crisis isn’t nearly as bad as they paint it to be. They want the members of Congress to panic into doing their bidding.
Jan Mickelson: Would that be different than paying the interest on the bonds that other countries have brought?
Ron Paul: Absolutely. I mean, the Fed owns 1.7 trillion dollars, so that interest has to be rather significant. And the Chinese don’t even hold approximately that much.
Jan Mickelson: They’ve been bailing us out, as a matter of fact.
Ron Paul: Yea, their having less all the time, so you never have to (?) on paying that. But the destruction of a currency is much worse than getting your house in order. And I argue that if the markets took what we were doing seriously, let’s say we wiped off 1.7 trillion dollars of debt, that alone might just encourage them to continue to do it too, thinking it’s just temporary, we’ll go back to spending for another year. But if it was in a package where the markets and the people realize, “Boy, they are serious. We got our house in order and we’re going to cut and we’re going to look at everything, we’re going to not keep increasing military spending, we’re not going to continue to increase our entitlement system”. This very year, our entitlements went up 5 trillion dollars in new obligations. So something has to be done about that.
Jan Mickelson: What was the cause of that spike?
Ron Paul: The spike of the entitlements?
Jan Mickelson: Right.
Ron Paul: Oh, that’s just routine, you know, the baby boomers retiring.
Jan Mickelson: Inconsiderate jerks? What makes them think they can quit work like that?
Ron Paul: Just because they were paying in to these … you know, a lot of people get this idea that this is government insurance, and we’ve been paying into it for 30 years, don’t we get something back? And they say, “Oh well, no sorry, we’ve already spent that money, it’s already been blown overseas someplace.”
Jan Mickelson: Right, exactly. Well, the last part of the Geithner thing says, “Hey, we’re going to have to go begging”.
Geithner: And every week, starting the week of august 2nd, we have to go out and finance roughly a 100 billion dollars in maturing obligations of the government. We make 80 million checks a month to Americans, 55 million people on Social Security benefits, millions more Americans on veterans’ benefits, Medicare, Medicaid, people who supply our troops in combat. 80 million checks a month. So on august 2nd we’re left with a cash in hand the cash we take in. And we have to convince people to come and re-finance 500 million dollars in maturing principal payments that come to in August.
Jan Mickelson: Yea, we have to actually convince people to buy our junk.
Ron Paul: Yea, and he’s correct, it is a problem, but it sounds to me like he wants to paper it over, say that the debt can go up and we can continue to do this.
Jan Mickelson: Well, the Obama Administration wants to increase taxes by a trillion dollars. And the Boehner side of the aisle, your side of the aisle, wants to cut spending by 4 trillion dollars. I’m not sure if I’m up on the exact figures here at the moment, but I saw over the weekend Obama wants to get into the economy to, what they call, “bring in more revenue”, which means increasing taxes by a trillion. And the Boehner side says, “Well, we’re not going to increase the debt ceiling”. Or at least the bargaining chip is, “We’ll ponder that, but you have to commit to 4 trillion dollars of cuts down the road”. So what’s the current state of the art her?
Ron Paul: Well, I think its credibility. For me, to promise, “If I would only vote to raise the national debt limit, they’re going to promise to cut in the next 10 years 4 trillion dollars.” I mean, who’s going to believe that? I argue that only this year is what counts, that’s the only budget that counts. Next year is another budget process, there’s another emergency, there’s another Congress coming. So these promises to cut later on have no meaning, and that’s why the American people are upset. They want to be able to believe what the government is doing, and there’s no trustworthiness, people don’t trust the government with what they tell us and they can see this continuing. That’s why people are saying, “Enough is enough, don’t raise the debt limit”. And that would be one way where we could be forced to start cutting.
Jan Mickelson: But there’s another factor here. One of the things they were kicking into the debate was, “We’ll ponder this if you will commit to starting the process of a Balanced Budget Amendment”. And I was wondering what Ron Paul thinks of the whole idea of a Balanced Budget Amendment?
Ron Paul: Well, we should have had that, I guess, when the constitution was written; it might have helped. But then again, it’s a lot of fluff. I’ll vote for it and hope it works, but I’m not that optimistic. How many years might it take to get a Balanced Budget Amendment?
Jan Mickelson: If it can get through every single … if the President would sign on it. I think the President doesn’t have to sign on this, does he?
Ron Paul: No, it goes to the states.
Jan Mickelson: Yea, and if it passes a couple of times by what, two thirds? And then it comes back to the people for a vote?
Ron Paul: And the amendments they are proposing all have loopholes, like, “Well, if there’s an emergency, if there is a war going on, 2/3rds can cancel it out.”
Jan Mickelson: We’ve got three wars going on.
Ron Paul: Yea, so they’d cancel it out in the first week they pass it. But the other point I make about this, and we should have learnt our lesson with this bailout: the Federal Reserve spent more money on the bailouts than the Congress did. They didn’t get any permission, no appropriation, no authorization, and they did it in secret. And we’re fighting hard to get the information of what they’ve done. They messed around with 3 trillion dollars and bailed out their friends. So it is absolutely out of control.
Jan Mickelson: Last week, Greenspan said that was kind of an illusion anyway, because a lot of that money never got spent, it’s just sitting still. Banks are sitting on that money.
Ron Paul: That is true, but they are making money on it, too. They get it for free from the Fed, and they can make 2% or 3% maybe buying treasury bills. Their balance sheets have worked out real well, at the same time, the depression that they were preventing ended up with the people who lost their jobs. So yes, they did park a lot of money in the banks, but that money is going to eventually leak out. There’s going to be a way and it’s going to start building up prices, which it has already down. There’s going to be a lot of inflation yet to come.
Jan Mickelson: Congressman Ron Paul is here in the studio. I know what we’re talking about is extremely technical. This is a totally un-sexy conversation. However, literally our livelihoods and our wellbeing depend upon us understanding exactly what’s been done to us by the political class. Ron Paul has been a consistent viewer of what the political class intended to do, what they were doing, and he was standing up there in the deck of the titanic with the flags going back and forth, shouting, “Pay attention, pay attention. Iceberg ahead.” Well, we hit the iceberg several times, and when we come back here in a moment … you’re so smart, Congressman Ron Paul, now that we’ve destroyed it, now that we’ve ignored you for all these years, now that we made the mess, what would you do to fix it? Hang on, we’ll come back to that process. You’re welcome to join us too at 2841040, or 8004694295. We’ll be back in a moment.
Jan Mickelson: Congressman Ron Paul is here in the studio with us, and he is running for president and the economy. Everybody says the economy is No.1, unemployment numbers were bumping up against the 10% figure again last weekend. The economy is not churning out jobs, and people are rightfully concerned over this. And one of the President’s spokesmen said people aren’t going to be voting on the basis of unemployment. I think his name was Fluff or something like that. That was one of the statements bouncing around all over the weekend. Alright, so you’re in a position where if you get elected president tomorrow, what do you do? You’re stuck with this. And why would you even want the job, considering what a mess you’re dealing with here?
Ron Paul: That’s the best question asked ever, because if you realize how bad this is, nobody should really want the job under conventional methods. Because it is assumed now that the President’s supposed to run the world and run the economy and tell people how to live their lives. So under those conditions, everything is out of control, so nobody should want the job. What I want to do is exactly the opposite; I don’t want to run the world and do all these things, I want to reverse the course and get this notion out of our minds that it’s government that’s supposed to run the economy. What we’re supposed to do is produce a healthy environment. But you cannot solve any of these problems if you don’t recognize how we got there, that’s why I emphasis the business cycle, the Federal Reserve, how they create the bubbles, and how the necessary corrections come; they’re called recessions and depressions, and we’re in the middle of one right now. Our unemployment rate is much higher than 9%. If you count the people that are under-employed, it’s 17%. If you count the people who don’t look for work anymore, it’s 22%. But, the correction is the most important thing to get back to growth. In the 1930s, we did everything like we’re doing now, we’re propping up bad debt, we don’t allow the liquidation, then we go into a war that wasn’t until way after World War II, like 1946 to 1948, where economic growth came back again. So it’s like 15 or 18 years of very, very bad growth by not allowing the correction to occur. So that’s the tough part, because politically we just have to allow the bankruptcies to occur. You don’t bail out the banks and the big businesses and throw this burden on the economy and on the people. And that can’t be achieved by one person waving a wand; people have to understand that you can’t bail out people, you got to cut spending, you got to cut taxes, you got to de-regulate, you got to invite capital back home again, you have to have a strong currency, because a strong currency brings capital. Today we have a weak currency, capital goes overseas, we’re unfriendly to businesses, so jobs go overseas. Nobody likes the fact that jobs go overseas. They talk about it all the time, but they don’t quite understand that it’s our policy, it isn’t because China is doing harm to us, it’s because we’ve done harm to ourselves and our business people can’t exist. And that’s why they go overseas or they park their profits overseas because we’re going to overtax them here at home.
Jan Mickelson: Alright. I was thinking about all that stuff you can do that through an executive order, (?) get all that started. They have to deal with the sewer there in the Congress. I’m sorry, Congressman, but have to deal with all the conflicting interests. And everybody has a different motivation for showing up for work on Monday. If you’re coming from different constituencies, people have different expectations, and different philosophies. And you have clashes of civilization every time the doors are opened.
Ron Paul: Well, my solution or my plan would be to go to the Democrats and say it’s up to you to cut a trillion dollars, what would you like to cut the most? And let them pick. And they would probably pick military.
Jan Mickelson: Defense?
Ron Paul: Not defense, I don’t want to cut any defense, I want to cut military. So they would come up with their trillion and go to the Republicans and say, what are you going to do? And have them come together, they have a principle that they believe in, they cut one here and another one has to set a principle, so they cut. And bring the two groups together, because I’m satisfied with cutting both, because I think the problem is so serious.
Jan Mickelson: The interesting thing that occurred towards the closing of last week was the Democrats were toying with the idea of using a phrase that stuck in the middle of the 14th Amendment to say we have to increase the debt ceiling, because the 14th Amendment says the debts of the United States cannot be repudiated, the debts of the United States must be paid, you cannot repudiate the debts in the United States. They used the 14th amendment, which was a Civil War era legacy so the South could not refuse to pay their war debts.
Ron Paul: And Geithenr had the nerve to hold up the constitution and say that. Why doesn’t he read the part that says only gold and silver can be legal tender a there’s no authority for a central bank? But all of a sudden he’s going to take this one phrase that was written in the Civil War period, which didn’t mean that you can cancel out the Congress’s ability to try to restrain spending by having a debt limit. And it has nothing to do with reneging on the debt. It might mean that you have to have priorities, and you might have to slow up your payment of debt, but it is not to renege on the debt. That is not what we’re talking about. So once again, he’s is now, which is really a little bit annoying for somebody like that to actually say that he’s going to defend all this with the constitution. That gets pretty silly.
Jan Mickelson: You’ve talked about auditing the Federal Reserve. Did you make some headway in this last session about that?
Ron Paul: Well, last year we did. Every Republican Congressman signed on, and we had a lot of Democrats. And the financial reform package, which I voted against , ironically had that amendment in there. So yes, we got it passed in the committee, we got it put in the bill, so we did. We got it passed in the House, but it wouldn’t be passed in the Senate. But as a consequence of that, they passed a very small audit bill. There have been some law suits that have been won, and we are getting more information, and our sub-committee is working on this, so we are learning a lot more about the Fed.
Jan Mickelson: What I don’t understand is, since the Fed is a creation of Congress, why Congress doesn’t have final jurisdiction?
Ron Paul: Well, they do, but they just haven’t exerted it. I’ve been struggling for a good many decades on insisting that they do, but they figure, “Well, things are going well, we don’t know how that works, it’s supposed to be private and secret and we’re not supposed to know.”
Jan Mickelson: Why is it supposed to be private and secret?
Ron Paul: But, the whole idea is when the problems hit and the desire for more transparency of the government in general was very helpful in getting that bill passed. So the bill has been re-introduced. We don’t have as much momentum right now. But I think the sentiment is still very, very strong. I think 80% of the American people support my position that the Federal Reserve should be audited and we should know what they’re doing.
Jan Mickelson: On paper, the United States is the largest holder of gold on the planet, followed, I think, by the European market, I think followed by the IMF. There’s a list somewhere about the chief gold holders, the United States being the biggest holder of gold. But are we sure? I mean, when was the last time anybody walked into the bullion banks or the Fort Knox and had done an audit of that?
Ron Paul: More than 50 years ago. And since that time, the Fed and central banks around the world have been very much in the gold market. Many banks and many central banks sold gold over the last 10 or 15 years when they shouldn’t have been, because that’s when the gold was weighed down. But other central banks are buying. The Western Banks who were convinced that gold is un-important were selling. Guess who was buying? India and Japan and China and Indonesia. So it was shifting from the west to the east because it is the ultimate money. So I’ve introduced legislation, I’ve held hearings on this, and that is, we need to audit the gold and find out if it’s there. And they get hysterical about it; “Oh no, why do you want to do that? You know, it’s going to cost money to do it”. But we should know.
Jan Mickelson: Can you, as a congressman, just say, “I’m coming tomorrow”, and show up at Fort Knox. You can say, “A handful of us are coming over tomorrow,” or whenever it is, you can just going to show up. Can’t you use own jurisdiction to go monitor and scrutinize our gold supply?
Ron Paul: So far nobody’s done that, I think somebody that might not have been a member of Congress, tried that. And, of course, they wouldn’t have any part about it. But I intend to follow up with this, because we have the bill, we’re trying to get it done in a deliberate fashion, and have an audit of the gold. But if not, we should pursue it that way. And I’m willing to do that, I’m willing to say, “Look, we want to know”. But the truth is, you can march in.
Jan Mickelson: Right.
Ron Paul: That itself doesn’t solve your problem. They can show you a room full of gold and say, “Yea, there it is”. But who’s going to weigh it and who’s going to test it? How about the contracts? How about the contracts that these ..
Jan Mickelson: Who actually owns it…
Ron Paul: Yea, because they might have loaned the gold out, which a lot of the central banks have done.
Jan Mickelson: Also the over-the-counter trading for gold, the ETF, expires on the 15th of July. The Obama administration has said, “We’re not going to allow that kind of trading. You still buy the bullion, you can still buy the hard stuff. But, we’re not going to put gold and silver, we’re not going to allow that to the same kind of commodity as any other commodity.” And why did they do that?
Ron Paul: Well, they’ll do anything to dampen a message that shows that the dollar is not doing well. They always want to prop up the dollar against real money. This is the reason they pick on individuals who might want to use gold and silver, as the constitution dictates, and they put them in jail for it. Literally, if you go out and try to use gold and silver as currency, you could end up in prison. You know, let’s say you and I had transaction in old silver dollars. Okay, I owe you a dollar and you accept it, that’s legal tender, it still says legal tender; 1 dollar U.S. government. But if we did that and said that’s a dollar, that’s what you said, you’re in big trouble.
Jan Mickelson: I have an insider, my own sources of information, who says this is to protect Goldman Sachs because they’re short and they way over extended on gold futures and if that all hit the fan, then Goldman Sachs would blow up.
Ron Paul: I’ve heard those stories, I don’t know. I mean, my suspicion would be very high because we know that Goldman Sachs was treated goldenly when the bailouts came, they got a much better treatment than some of the other banks.
Jan Mickelson: My guest is Congressman Ron Paul, he’s running for president. Folks, you’ve heard him a number of times, he is area of expertise, as you’ve been listening, is what’s in your back pocket, or what should be, and it’s not. This has been a central part of his campaign, to get our currency back healthy, and the economy back in line. If there are any questions you’d like to ask him about this or any other questions at all, it’s your opportunity to talk with Congressman Ron Paul right now at 1040WHO radio. The president is going to have a press conference in about 20 minutes time, talking about raising the debt ceiling. Congressman Ron Paul is here in the studio with us talking about your money. What do you expect the president to say, and what can be said this morning, what’s left to say?
Ron Paul: He’s going to urge the Congress to raise the debt limit, and say if we don’t raise the debt limit, we’re going to default – that’s his definition of default – and that our financial markets will collapse, it will be the most serious financial crisis in our history. And I think he’ll be exaggerating a bit, of course, because it isn’t that desperate. But I think he’ll again use fear tactics and frighten the members of Congress and frighten the American people to get on their Congressmen to raise the debt limit.
Jan Mickelson: The Washington Post on their Fact Checker section said this about some of what we’ve been talking about: The Congressional Research Service crunched the numbers, they’re pretty grim, the timeframe is a little different than the august default, the CRS report measures spending between April and September 30th. But the radio is about the same. Assuming revenue could not be raised, that is taxes cannot be raised, the cuts in spending immediately would have to be 42%. Even if all this discretionary spending were eliminated, that would include defense spending, mandatory spending, such as Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid would have to be reduced. This is not an option to halt border security, air traffic control, wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. Payments to the elderly will have to be delayed, health procedures not funded. In theory, some payment suppliers could be put off for a period of time, what in the business world is known is “leaning on the trade”. For what it’s worth, the treasury department argues this would be perceived as a default by another name.
Ron Paul: Yea, that’s possible, but the real big default is to continue to do what we’re doing and default by destroying the money. And I think that he will probably carry the day, people are going to be frightened, which means the debt limit will be increased and we’ll continue to do what we’ve been doing, and that will just delay the inevitable, which is ongoing right now because of the inflation that’s coming. So next year it will be much, much worse.
Jan Mickelson: So if we don’t increase taxes, and if we don’t reduce spending, and continue to borrow, what’s the inevitable result of that?
Ron Paul: Well, if we don’t cut the spending – of course, I’m not going to raise taxes – but if we don’t cut the spending, it’s going to destroy the dollar. And that’s going to be much, much worse than what he’s claiming that we have to do. Raising taxes right now, I mean, it’s just unbearable, under these circumstances. But there’s not going to be..
Jan Mickelson: Just on the rich.
Ron Paul: The ones who can create the jobs.
Jan Mickelson: Those people driving around in tax-subsidized jets. I think the president went after jets about 8 times in the last few years.
Ron Paul: Remember a couple of years ago when they went after the yachts?
Jan Mickelson: Yes, they destroyed the yacht industry.
Ron Paul: Yea, and who got it reversed? It was the workers that got it reversed, it wasn’t the people who owned the Yacht companies. The workers said, “Hey, we’ve lost our jobs”, and that, of course, is what would happen.
Jan Mickelson: Let’s talk to some of the folks who have been very patient with us. Congressman Ron Paul is here in the studio with us. The subject that we’ve been talking about today is difficult, but I think it is pivotal to our economic wellbeing. This is a State Representative Glen Massie joining in on this conversation.
Glen Massie: Yes, hello Jan, how are you this morning.
Jan Mickelson: Doing great.
Glen Massie: Dr. Paul, it’s good to hear you on the radio again.
Ron Paul: Thank you.
Glenn: You know, on this subject of the auditing the Federal Reserve, I wanted to remind you that the state of Iowa is the first state to have all 5 of our elected representatives in Washington onboard to participate in that audit.
Ron Paul: Wonderful.
Glen Massie: … peeled of later to a more watered down toothless version, but they initially were there. And I wanted to let you know also that this session in the Iowa House, we did pass a resolution to audit the Federal Reserve and there is consent from our colleagues in Washington to help you in that fight.
Ron Paul: Well, that is wonderful, and what I like about it is the results of getting that bill passed last summer, at least in the House, came from the grassroots, it wasn’t because I was able to twist arms because I didn’t have any clout in Washington as much as I had influence with people outside of Washington. So people like you and others went to their members of Congress, and that’s the way it has to come. So there are other states, too, that have passed resolutions on sound money and the Federal Reserve. I consider that very, very healthy. This is the most exciting thing that we’ve had in the discussion of money in many, many decades ago, probably even since the Federal Reserve existed that the American people are waking up, they know it’s important, and they know that we have to look into it and the monetary issue is a big deal. When you think about it, central economic planning is done by manipulation of the entire economy, and the money is one half of the entire economy. So they’re in every transaction, and they’re pretending that they can take a monetary unit and change its value every single day. That’s like building a skyscraper with a yardstick that changes its measurement every single day. The building is not a sound building, it’s a shaky building. Our economy is shaky because we do not have a sound currency, we vary the value of it continuously every single day.
Glen Massie: Ron, I know you’re aware of this, but there’s an excellent book that will help people understand this rather difficult subject, although it’s fairly simple if you follow it right down. It’s called “The Creature from Jekyll Island”, and it’s a very interesting read on how this whole house of cards was built and what it’s going to take to dismantle it.
Ron Paul: Absolutely, it’s a very good book, and I wrote a statement as an introduction to that book.
Jan Mickelson: Who wrote it?
Ron Paul: Griffon.
Jan Mickelson: Griffon, yea. I remember, I’ve had a chance to interview him a couple of times over the years. A brief timeout, folks. If you’d like to be part of the conversation, join us right now. We are waiting, we are about 10 minutes away from the scheduled press conference. President Obama wants to talk to us about the very thing we’re discussing right now. And we’ll be back in a moment at 1040WHO radio. Coming up is the presidential press conference in just a few moments. My in-studio guest Congressman Ron Paul is here, and this is Larry. Good morning, Larry.
Larry: Yes, my question to the Congressman is, they keep talking about messing with Medicare and with Social Security. I want to know if this is also going to include their retirement plan and their medical plan.
Ron Paul: As of now, I haven’t heard any talk along that line. Because of the benefits that the members of Congress get with their retirement plans … even from the very first day I went in, I thought it was a little bit more than I should expect, so I’ve never participated in that. And I don’t think any tinkering will involve the congressional pension plans, but I don’t think that far long because it’s such dynamite to even talk about the plans. But if you did Social Security, members of Congress, you know, are into the Social Security system as well. So if you change Social Security, you would change the congressional Social Security, but not necessarily their pension funds. And the group that will probably protect them are the union government workers, because they’re going to have a strong lobbying effort. So I think we have a long way to go to know the details of what they might do when changing the entitlement system.
Larry: Okay, thank you very much.
Jan Mickelson: Thank you. Did I just hear you say that you did not choose to participate in the congressional pension fund?
Ron Paul: No, I never did. Actually it has been toned down a little bit, but when I first went in, it was really, really a great benefit.
Jan Mickelson: So why did you choose not to then?
Ron Paul: Because I didn’t think it was morally right to do so, so I didn’t join it.
Jan Mickelson: So, you have Social Security, though?
Ron Paul: Yea, I’ve been paying into Social Security.
Jan Mickelson: Okay. And you’ve been buying gold?
Ron Paul: I’ve been shorting the dollar. I’m an insider and I tell people that the dollar is in trouble.
Jan Mickelson: You might be the only one I’ve ever talked to who is a member of Congress who said, “I’m not going to participate in the pension plan”.
Ron Paul: Well, I’ll have to say that I did talk to one other person, because he came up to me and said, “You know, Ron, I think you and I are the only two in the Congress”, and his name is Howard Coble from North Carolina. He came up to me and made that conversation. Whether others rejected it or not, I don’t know. But it is hard to turn down, you know, when you think about it strictly in terms of the dollar amounts. Because when they were talking about what Weiner was going to benefit, you think, “Hey, maybe I made a mistake. That sounds like a pretty good deal.”
Jan Mickelson: Well, the other thing is, though, why should somebody who’s had to leave, or sent to jail even, even be eligible for pension benefits, like Rostenkowski, for instance?
Ron Paul: That’s a pretty good question.
Jan Mickelson: Now Weiner gets pushed out because of his indiscretions. People just step down, but they’re still going to collect.
Ron Paul: Well, why shouldn’t we just get rid of the whole pension program altogether?
Jan Mickelson: Okay.
Ron Paul: Deal. I’ll sign that bill when I’m president.
Jan Mickelson: You would?
Ron Paul: Sure.
Jan Mickelson: Somebody has to introduce it, however.
Ron Paul: I won’t be there in the House to introduce it.
Jan Mickelson: Thank you, Congressman Ron Paul, I really appreciate your time.