Civil Rights Act

On July 3, 2004, Ron Paul was the only Congressman to vote against a bill hailing the 40th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In this speech to Congress, Ron Paul courageously spoke out on the often controversial issues of race relations and affirmative action. He explained why the Civil Right Act had failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society.

Ron Paul: Mr. Speaker, I rise to explain my objection to H.Res. 676. I certainly join my colleagues in urging Americans to celebrate the progress this country has made in race relations. However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.

This expansion of federal power was based on an erroneous interpretation of the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The framers of the Constitution intended the interstate commerce clause to create a free trade zone among the states, not to give the federal government regulatory power over every business that has any connection with interstate commerce.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business’s workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge’s defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife.

Of course, America has made great strides in race relations over the past forty years. However, this progress is due to changes in public attitudes and private efforts. Relations between the races have improved despite, not because of, the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while I join the sponsors of H.Res. 676 in promoting racial harmony and individual liberty, the fact is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not accomplish these goals. Instead, this law unconstitutionally expanded federal power, thus reducing liberty. Furthermore, by prompting raced-based quotas, this law undermined efforts to achieve a color-blind society and increased racial strife. Therefore, I must oppose H.Res. 676.

  • Abraham Diaz

    racist ron paul at it again smh…


  • What’s up, every time i used to check weblog posts here in the early hours in
    the dawn, as i like to find out more and more.

  • Hi there this is kind of of off topic but I was wondering if blogs
    use WYSIWYG editors or if you have to manually code with HTML.
    I’m starting a blog soon but have no coding know-how so I wanted to get
    advice from someone with experience. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

  • You made some really good points there. I checked on the web to learn
    more about the issue and found most individuals will go along with your
    views on this site.

  • That is really fascinating, You are an overly professional blogger.
    I have joined your feed and sit up for seeking more of your magnificent post.
    Also, I have shared your website in my social networks

  • Hellо everyone, it’s my first go to see at this web site, and
    post is actually fruitful for me, keep up posting such posts.

  • Jeremy Dashawn Moore, 29, faces 15 counts of cocaine possession and distribution.
    If you bought an herb grinder together with your herb vaporizer,
    it is best for you to use it. Trees need to be removed only when they pose a risk to your home or
    when they are infected beyond treatment.

  • Very good info. Lucky me I discovered your blog by chance (stumbleupon).
    I’ve saved as a favorite for later!

  • I am truly glad to glance at this webpage posts which includes tons of valuable information, thanks for providing such information.

  • Way cool! Some very valid points! I appreciate you writing this article and also
    the rest of the website is also really good.

  • Aw, this was a very nice post. Spending some time and actual
    effort to generate a superb article… but what can I say…
    I hesitate a lot and never manage to get anything done.

  • My husband and i got satisfied Peter managed to finish off

    his studies because of the precious recommendations he obtained out of your web site.
    It is now and again perplexing to simply always

    be giving out tricks which often men and

    women could have been selling. We really keep
    in mind we have got you to give thanks to for this. The main explanations

    you have made, the straightforward web site

    navigation, the friendships your site assist to promote – it’s all spectacular, and
    it’s facilitating our son in addition to us reason why
    that issue is thrilling, and that is

    highly important. Thank you for all the pieces!

  • AntarmAcini

    dsuoub tfbnpl ognfmi shhyge faxucu roicqf ynhgbm lhjlgp oehfeu jxdslr ndsnzp iwqccj

  • I constantly emailed this web site post page to all my contacts, as if like to read it after
    that my links will too.

  • I just couldn’t depart your website before suggesting that I really enjoyed the standard information a person provide for
    your visitors? Is going to be back often in

    order to check up on new posts

  • Finally, never use all of your strength for a single
    throw because it could easily lead to an unnecessary injury.
    Each knife is manufactured by a different world-class Japanese knifemaker and the prices
    generally run from $120 to $170. With so many different types of
    Kershaw Knives to chose from you should consider the following information:.

  • Paul Mason


    From a scientific point of view, it is obvious that Blacks have an AVERAGE lower IQ than Whites or Asians. Africa loses. South Africa was fine and prosperous until the Blacks took over, and then it immediately reverted to being a poor “African” country.

    However, as I have predicted for years, a few weeks ago a scientist announced it is now possible to change the DNA of a living animal.

    I have recommended to both White and Black leaders, that they encourage their followers to adopt the latest scientific breakthroughs, to produce only “Einstein children”. Such kids would always have employment, and help design a better world. Any race that doesn’t get on board, will become retarded toast.

  • This is my first time pay a quick visit at here and i am actually impressed to
    read all at single place.

  • ronpaul_hates_theUS

    The Constitution prohibits discrimination. If you use your property engage in public affairs, your property is subject to public laws. If you dont like the American law, get out of here.

    • 1. Where inthe Constitution is workplace discrimination prohibited?
      2. A private company is not engaged in ‘public affairs,’ but rather private affairs.

    • 1. Where in the Constitution is workplace discrimination prohibited?
      2. A private company is not engaged in ‘public affairs,’ but rather private affairs.

  • jack

    When the government got into the business of regulating our choices through anti-discrimination law, it was attempting to regulate our thoughts. It first forbid certain kinds of choices when made “on grounds of” race, sex, religion, and national origin. That was expanded to disability, which includes “mental” disability. Nowadays, our whole society and economy are burden by the anti-discrimination police.

    This was the inevitable result of a 30-year old legal trick. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 didn’t forbid any particular racial or sexual configuration in school or the workplace. An employer or admissions officer is free to choose, so long as he doesn’t choose for the wrong reason. Single-race or single-sex workplaces–freedom of association’s acid test–were still allowed. But, according to law, they could not be consciously created. You can hire only white males, but you cannot intend to hire only white males.

    How can we prove intent? This is where the trouble begins. Every decision is made from a mixture of motivations. Not even the actor himself can fully know what went into a decision. Certainly the government cannot. But by forbidding certain kinds of discrimination, the government gives itself power to define what constitutes evidence for malintent.

    Courts, it’s hardly surprising, took the easiest path. To prove discrimination, look for circumstantial evidence. They discover “disproportionate effects” and “disparate impact.” This translates to: you’re guilty because you have not hired enough women and minorities. To avoid that fate, you must adopt affirmative action, quotas, goals, timetables, and set asides: the spoils system now poisoning American life: