On December 16, 2007, during the first political Tea Party in modern history, supporters of Ron Paul’s presidential campaign came together and raised over $6 million online in one day. That event is documented here.

Below is a promotional video for the Ron Paul Tea Party of 2007:

As activists across the country hold national tea parties today, April 15, 2009, Campaign for Liberty president John Tate issued the following statement:

“The concept of the modern day Tea Party began on December 16, 2007 when supporters of Ron Paul’s presidential campaign came together and raised over $6 million online in one day. The tremendous success of that event led activists in the freedom movement and members of the Campaign for Liberty to begin planning today’s Tax Day Tea Parties.

“Success always brings company, and it is very positive that so many conservatives, libertarians, Republicans, constitutionalists and even progressives have come together and joined our efforts. All Americans who are sincere about cutting out of control government spending are welcome to stand with Dr. Paul and the Campaign for Liberty as we fight to take our country back.”

Congressman Ron Paul is the honorary chairman of Campaign for Liberty. For more information, visit www.campaignforliberty.com

Other related websites worth a visit:

• Daily Paul
• Liberty Maven
• Ron Paul Forums
• Young Americans for Liberty
• Tax Day Coalition
• LewRockwell.com
• Mises.org

If you have a blog or website and are reporting on today’s tax day tea parties, post your URL in the comments.

Related posts:

1. Join the Rand Paul for Senate Money Bomb – August 20th, 2009 August 20th Rand Paul Money Bomb – Please Pledge Now...
2. How The National Media Ignored Ron Paul How the national media ignored Ron Paul and why it...
3. Tea Parties and the Role of Government Show: Montel Across America Date: 4/14/2009 Transcript: Montel Williams:...

An income tax is the most degrading and totalitarian of all possible taxes. Its implementation wrongly suggests that the government owns the lives and labor of the citizens it is supposed to represent. Tellingly, “a heavy progressive or graduated income tax” is Plank #2 of the Communist Manifesto, which was written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels and first published in 1848.

To provide funding for the federal government, Ron Paul supports excise taxes, non-protectionist tariffs, massive cuts in spending.

Ron Paul discusses the income tax and the “FAIR Tax” in May 2007:

On November 20, 2008 Ron Paul said in a New York Times / Freakonomics interview:

“I want to abolish the income tax, but I don’t want to replace it with anything. About 45 percent of all federal revenue comes from the personal income tax. That means that about 55 percent — over half of all revenue — comes from other sources, like excise taxes, fees, and corporate taxes.

We could eliminate the income tax, replace it with nothing, and still fund the same level of big government we had in the late 1990s. We don’t need to “replace” the income tax at all. I see a consumption tax as being a little better than the personal income tax, and I would vote for the Fair-Tax if it came up in the House of Representatives, but it is not my goal. We can do better.”

On May 7, 2001, Ron Paul wrote the following column:

The Case Against the Income Tax

Could America exist without an income tax? The idea seems radical, yet in truth America did just fine without a federal income tax for the first 126 years of its history. Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker’s paycheck. In the late 1800s, when Congress first attempted to impose an income tax, the notion of taxing a citizen’s hard work was considered radical! Public outcry ensued; more importantly, the Supreme Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional. Only with passage of the 16th Amendment did Congress gain the ability to tax the productive endeavors of its citizens.

Yet don’t we need an income tax to fund the important functions of the federal government? You may be surprised to know that the income tax accounts for only approximately one-third of federal revenue. Only 10 years ago, the federal budget was roughly one-third less than it is today. Surely we could find ways to cut spending back to 1990 levels, especially when the Treasury has single year tax surpluses for the past several years. So perhaps the idea of an America without an income tax is not so radical after all.

The harmful effects of the income tax are obvious. First and foremost, it has enabled government to expand far beyond its proper constitutional limits, regulating virtually every aspect of our lives. It has given government a claim on our lives and work, destroying our privacy in the process. It takes billions of dollars out of the legitimate private economy, with most Americans giving more than a third of everything they make to the federal government. This economic drain destroys jobs and penalizes productive behavior. The ridiculous complexity of the tax laws makes compliance a nightmare for both individuals and businesses. All things considered, our Founders would be dismayed by the income tax mess and the tragic loss of liberty which results.

America without an income tax would be far more prosperous and far more free, but we must be prepared to fight to regain the liberty we have lost incrementally over the past century. I recently introduced “The Liberty Amendment,” legislation which would repeal the 16th Amendment and effectively abolish the income tax. I truly believe that real tax reform, reform that so many frustrated Americans desperately want, requires bold legislation that challenges the Washington mind set. Congress talks about reform, but the current tax debate really involves nothing of substance. Both parties are content to continue tinkering with the edges of the tax code to please various special interests. The Liberty Amendment is an attempt to eliminate the system altogether, forcing Congress to find a simple and fair way to collect limited federal revenues. Most of all, the Liberty Amendment is an initiative aimed at reducing the size and scope of the federal government.

Is it impossible to end the income tax? I don’t believe so. In fact, I believe a serious groundswell movement of disaffected taxpayers is growing in this country. Millions of Americans are fed up with the current tax system, and they will bring pressure on Congress. Some sidestep Congress completely, bringing legal challenges questioning the validity of the tax code and the 16th Amendment itself. Ultimately, the Liberty Amendment could serve as a flashpoint for these millions of voices.

Related posts:

1. Ron Paul: Income Tax = Involuntary Servitude In his latest column, Ron Paul talks about Tax Freedom...
2. Ron Paul the Radical? For more than 30 years Ron Paul has been a...
3. Ron Paul Signs “No Climate Tax Pledge” The Texas chapter of the free-market grassroots group Americans for...

In his latest column, Ron Paul talks about Tax Freedom Day, a hypothetical holiday which is “celebrated” today, April 13, and symbolizes the fact that Americans are slaving away 3.5 months, or 28.2% of this year to fulfill the government’s voracious appetite for confiscatory taxes, corrupt bailouts and wasteful stimulus efforts. Ron Paul wants to abolish the income tax and replace it with nothing, and until that dream becomes a political reality, he fights for every tax cut and tax credit possible. — tmartin

Fewer Taxes for Real Economic Stimulus

by Ron Paul

Taxes are the issue this week as Americans struggle to make the April 15th deadline to file their returns. It is a good time to contemplate the effects of big government and what it does to our country. The income tax is one of the most egregious encroachments on our liberties today. It is a form of involuntary servitude, which was supposed to have been outlawed by the 13th Amendment.

Tax Freedom Day is defined as the day when the nation as a whole has theoretically earned enough income to fund its annual federal tax burden. For all of the days of the year before this day, you are a slave to government. For 2009, Tax Freedom Day will come on April 13th. Almost a century ago in 1910, before the mistakes of 1913-namely the inception of the Federal Reserve and our current income tax, Tax Freedom Day was January 19th, signifying a mere 5% tax burden. Somehow, our country functioned just fine.

If calculated to include government spending and the deficit, rather than just collections, Tax Freedom Day would actually fall on May 29. The annual deficit adds to the growing debt of future generations and adds insult to injury to those that struggle to make this economy work. It is a slap in the face that this is not enough to prevent this crushing governmental burden from falling on the next generation.

For months now, Washington has been desperately throwing taxpayers’ money at various programs to stimulate us out of the recession, to no avail. Seeing hard-earned money confiscated from the people and spent in such wasteful ways, such as the recent bailouts, is almost too much to bear. Getting rid of the income tax altogether, while very beneficial, may be a while in coming. In the meantime, I am fighting for every tax cut or tax credit possible.

I can think of no better economic stimulus than letting people keep their money and spend it how they see fit. For this reason, I am an original cosponsor on a bill that would give Americans a two month employment and income tax holiday, while taking unused TARP money back from the Secretary of the Treasury and putting it in the Social Security trust fund instead.

In addition, I have recently introduced the Child Health Care Affordability Act. If passed this legislation would provide parents with a tax credit of up to $500 for health care expenses of dependent children. I have also re-introduced the Tax Free Tips Act, which would make tips exempt from federal income and payroll taxes. I am also an original cosponsor of a bill that would make permanent the deduction of state and local sales taxes. My bill HR 162 exempts Social Security benefits from income tax.

These are just a few of the many tax related bills I am fighting for in Congress, but without a corresponding cut in the size of government, which I am also fighting for, we are simply adding to the future tax burden of our children.

Related posts:

1. End the Income Tax, Abolish the IRS Ron Paul supports the elimination of the income tax and...
2. Congressman Ron Paul Introduces Evacuees Tax Relief Act With hurricane season upon us, Congressman Ron Paul yesterday introduced...
3. Stop Bleeding the Social Security Trust Fund! Earlier this week, Congressman Ron Paul sent a letter to...

Event: Financial Regulation Hearing – House Financial Services Committee
Channel: C-SPAN3
Date: 3/26/2009

Transcript:

Barney Frank: The gentleman from Texas.

Ron Paul: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Chairman in his opening statement talked about the problem being excessive leverage and I certainly agree with that and others refer to that as pure emitting of debt, and then we ran into trouble and we come with the idea that regulations will solve this without asking the question, “Where did all this leveraging come from and how much of it was related to easy money from the Federal Reserve and artificially low interest rates.”

So I’m very skeptical of regulations per se because I don’t think that solves the problem, and of course, everybody knows I’m a proponent of the free market and this is certainly not free markets that had got us into trouble and this certainly won’t solve it.

But, you know, in other areas we never automatically resort to regulations. When it comes to the press, if we had regulations on the press, we would call it prior restraint and we would be outraged.

If we wanted to regulate personal behavior, we would be outraged and call this legislating morality. But when it comes to economics, it seems like we have been conditioned to say, “Oh, that is okay because that’s good economic policy.”

I accept it on the first two, but not in the third and therefore I challenge the whole system and it hasn’t been that way forever. It’s really been that way since the 1930s, about 75 years, that we in the Congress have deferred to the Executive Branch to write regulations, which are essentially laws. And yet the Constitution is very clear, all legislative power shall be vested in the Congress.

So we write laws and we transfer this power, so essentially we’ve done this for years. We have reneged on our responsibility. We have not met our prerogatives and therefore we participate in this.

But in your position, you’ve been trained throughout your life to be a regulator and that is something I know you can’t deal with, but there is one area that I think you might be able to shed some light on and work toward the rule of law.

Because, you know, traditionally, under common law, and our system has always assumed that we’re innocent until proven guilty, and yet when it comes to regulations, first we allow the Executive Branch to legislate as well as the court, but in the administrative courts, we’re assumed to be guilty until proven innocent.

You’re in charge of the IRS. The IRS does this. So this is some place where if there were a reasonable respect for the rule of law, then we can change that tone and assume that the taxpayer or the person that is on the receiving end of these regulations say, “Hey, at least, now is the burden of proof is on the government to prove that somebody broke these regulations”, and yet look at what we’re doing endlessly, and yet I see that as the real culprit in all this because we’re assuming the citizen is guilty.

Could you comment on that and tell me what might be able to do in changing the direction.

Tim Geithner: That was a very thoughtful set of questions. I would just want to correct one thing. I’ve never been a regulator, for better or worse. And I think you’re right to say that we have to be very skeptical that regulations can solve all of these problems.

We have postured our system, which are overwhelmed by regulations. Overwhelmed by regulations. It wasn’t the absence of regulations that was the problem, it was despite the presence of regulations, and you have huge risk built up.

But in banks, because banks by definition, take on leverage, transform short-term liability into long-term assets for the good of the system as a whole, they are vulnerable to runs. Because they’re vulnerable to runs, governments around the world have been put in place insurance protections to protect the inside risks.

Because of the existence of those protections, you have to impose standards on them on leverage to protect against the moral hazard created by the insurance. That is a good economic case for regulation –

Ron Paul: Excuse me. Excuse me. But I only have a couple of seconds left. But see if you can address the subject of giving more respect to that individual who is accused of a crime, can’t we assume that the government has the burden of proof?

Tim Geithner: You’re talking in a criminal context?

Ron Paul: Well, any way. I mean any time a regulator comes in and says that you’re guilty of something, why doesn’t the government have to prove he’s guilty, why can’t we assume –

Tim Geithner: Guilty of a criminal violation or of anything?

Ron Paul: Civil or criminal. Why not? I mean that’s a principal that has been around for more than a thousand years, at least 800 years.

Tim Geithner: I’m neither a regulator nor a lawyer, unfortunately. So I’m not sure I can give you adequate answers to that, but I’d be happy to think about it a little bit and get back to you with a view on –

Ron Paul: Well, I don’t think it’s complicated to think about the principle of innocent until proven guilty. How about the IRS? Can’t you advise the IRS and say, “don’t assume anything until you prove these guys did something wrong before we prosecute them and say that they owe $500,000.” I mean –

Tim Geithner: Well, Mr. Chairman, again, if this is about the IRS, I’d be happy to come talk to you about that and try to –

Barney Frank: The gentleman’s time has expired. The gentleman from Pennsylvania, the chairman of the sub-committee.

Related posts:

1. Ron Paul at the Financial Services Committee Hearing Date: 11/4/2009 Venue: Financial Services Committee Hearing Transcript: Ron...
2. Ron Paul Questions Timothy Geithner Venue: House Financial Services Committee Topic: Systemic Regulation, Prudential...
3. End The Fed & Consider Outlawing Fractional Reserve Banking Channel: CNBC Show: Squawk Box Date: 11/13/2009 Joe Kernen:...

Judge Andrew Napolitano recently asked, ‘Why should government agents spy on us? They work for us. How about we spy on them? On cops when they arrest and interrogate people or contemplate suspending freedom; on prosecutors when they decide whom to prosecute and what evidence to use; on judges when they rationalize away our guaranteed rights; and on members of Congress whenever they meet with a lobbyist, mark up a piece of legislation, or conspire to assault our liberties or our pocketbooks.’

That quote sums up what this country needs: Transparency. But what we need and what we get are two vastly divergent things these days. The federal government already has the guts to give us “economic stimulus refund” checks that amount to taking a $50 bill and making you change but leaving you with two $20 bills. They are also suspending the release of M3, which is a report that was used to monitor currency and money in the country based on the Fed’s actions. And the list goes on and on and on.

Why do we need transparency? Because it will help the American people realize what the government is really doing to them, and, more importantly, what it is not doing for them. The federal government is not designed to take care of you and feed you and clothe you throughout your life. And the government does not do those things, although lately it seems people are under the impression that it is their right to receive such items as “free” health care or to have the government bail them out of a risky loan. In short, the government is not a provider of economic growth, all the government really can do is stifle economic growth and development.

There is no incentive for anyone in government to do anything except maintain and push the status quo to new levels of big government. Take the war on drugs. For years we have been fighting this uphill battle with little to no success. We have spent and spent and spent and drug use has not seen any real drop, nor is there any reason to believe such a drop is forthcoming. But try telling that to a DEA officer, cop, probation officer, jail guard, or coroner. They need illegal, underground drugs or they are basically out of a (well paying, taxpayer funded) job. So the status quo remains.

Same with education. For all the talk of “No Child Left Behind” and improving test scores, students are failing miserably. Most high schoolers can’t add or subtract, let alone balance a checkbook or figure out simple mortgage payments. I myself never learned any basic life skills in 12 years of government education.

But for all the money we spend on education, the war on drugs, Social Security, etc etc, why don’t we at least get some kind of report on where exactly this money is going? And not just “old people” or “schools.” The American people deserve to know where every dollar is spent, and what goal it accomplished or is working towards. Of course this can never happen, because, similar to the illegal drug example above, the entire government as we know it today depends on being shady and mysterious with regard to our money. That’s right, our money. The people’s money. Remember, in the words of Napolitano, who “they” work for.

Related posts:

1. Ron Paul: Let the people decide on tobacco usage Date: 6/12/2009 Ron Paul: Thank you, Madame Speaker. I...
2. Ron Paul debates Stephen Baldwin on Ending the War on Drugs In Friday night’s debate with Stephen Baldwin on Larry King...
3. Ron Paul: The War on Drugs has failed Channel: CNN Show: CNN American Morning Date: 4/15/2009 Transcript:...

In the past few months, American workers, consumers, and businesses have experienced a sudden and dramatic rise in gasoline prices. In some parts of the country, gasoline costs as much as $4 per gallon. Some politicians claim that the way to reduce gas prices is by expanding the government’s power to regulate prices and control the supply of gasoline. For example, the House of Representatives has even passed legislation subjecting gas stations owners to criminal penalties if they charge more than a federal bureaucrat deems appropriate. Proponents of these measures must have forgotten the 1970s, when government controls on the oil industry resulted in gas lines and shortages. It was only after President Reagan lifted federal price controls that the gas lines disappeared.

Instead of imposing further restraints on the market, Congress should consider reforming the federal policies that raise gas prices. For example, federal and state taxes can account for as much as a third of what consumers’ pay at the pump. The Federal Government’s boom-and-bust monetary policy also makes consumers vulnerable to inflation and to constant fluctuations in the prices of essential goods such as oil. It is no coincidence that oil prices first became an issue shortly after President Nixon unilaterally severed the dollar’s last link to gold.

Basic economics says that when government restricts the supply of a good, the price will increase. Yet Congress continues to reject simple measures that could increase the supply of oil. For example, Congress refuses to allow reasonable, environmentally sensitive, offshore drilling. Congress also refuses to remove the numerous regulatory hurdles that add to the prohibitively expensive task of constructing new refineries. Building a new refinery requires billions of dollars in capital investment. It can take several years just to obtain the necessary federal permits. Even after the permits are obtained, construction of a refinery may still be delayed or even halted by frivolous lawsuits. It is no wonder that there has not been a new refinery constructed in the United States since 1976.

Last year, in order to provide the American people with relief from high oil prices, I introduced the Affordable Gas Price Act (HR 2415). This legislation protects the American people from gas price spikes by suspending the federal gas tax whenever the national average gas price exceeds $3.00 per gallon. The Affordable Gas Price Act also expands the supply of gasoline by repealing the federal moratorium on offshore drilling, including in the ANWR reserve in Alaska. HR 2415 also provides tax incentives and protection from nuisance lawsuits for those seeking to build new refineries. Finally, HR 2415 authorizes a federal study on the link between our nation’s monetary policy and the price of oil.

The free market can meet the American people’s demand for a reliable supply of gasoline as long as government does not distort the market through excessive taxation and regulation. Therefore, Congress should lower prices gas prices by pursuing an agenda of low taxes, regulatory relief, and sound money by passing legislation such as my Affordable Gas Act.

–

Ron Paul was interviewed by Neil Cavuto on Hillary Clinton’s proposal to lift federal gas taxes this summer and make up the difference in revenue by imposing a “windfall profits tax” on oil companies. Watch the video below:

Related posts:

1. Ron Paul Introduces Affordable Gas Price Act Statement of Congressman Ron Paul United States House of Representatives...
2. Rising prices and a weak economy? It’s a very real possibility, says Ron Paul. Show: The Kudlow Report Channel: CNBC Date: 7/21/2009 Transcript...
3. Government Statistics and Lies by Ron Paul There has been a lot of...

But the thing that encourages me most about this freedom movement is that for once the people of this beautiful country are being exposed to an authentic intellectual debate against statism in the United States and against imperialism throughout the world:

• For once, people are beginning to question the propaganda that is passed for knowledge in the government schools that we attended.
• For once, people are beginning to question where their money is coming from.
• For once, people are beginning to question interventionism and coercion.

Millions of individuals are turning to the freedom movement for answers, and luckily for them, Ron Paul is an excellent educator and spokesman for liberty.

Non-Agression and Private Property

It is often said that most people deep down inside are libertarians. As long as an individual does not partake in theft or aggression, that person can be considered at least in some part libertarian.

Indeed, civilization itself depends on the principles of non-aggression and private property. Without private property there can be no non-aggression and without non-aggression there can be no private property. If there is no private property, individuals cannot claim ownership in anything, including their lives.

But if we do not own our lives, our minds, and the fruits of our labor, then who is the rightful owner? Our neighbors? The IRS? The government? The absurdity of this should be plainly obvious.

In recent decades however, the government has made us believe both intellectually and intuitively that ultimately, all citizens and their property belong to the state. The state asks that we send our kids to government-run schools, and if we decline, they will be kidnapped and taken away from us. The state then uses our wealth and our children to fight wars of imperial aggression to keep us under control and to perpetuate itself.

The solution to this nightmare is freedom. Voluntary association between consenting individuals is at the root of a free society.

Freedom and Voluntary Association

Ron Paul does not want to run our lives. There is no midnight oil burning in the Ron Paul camp over the minute details of some new tax structure, energy regulation or education policy. The policy of Ron Paul is Freedom and Voluntary Association, and through this policy, the United States can once again be peaceful and prosperous.

People around the world are hearing the message and have started to act on it. That is why Ron Paul matters.

Related posts:

1. Congressman Ron Paul Introduces Evacuees Tax Relief Act With hurricane season upon us, Congressman Ron Paul yesterday introduced...
2. Ron Paul: Keep Fighting For Individual Liberty, Self-Reliance and Sound Money In his latest column, Ron Paul honors the American spirit...
3. Ron Paul on The Ed Show: “It’s not the gun that’s the danger, it’s the person that’s dangerous.” Show: The Ed Show Host: Ed Schultz Date: August...