Thread: Two member of the U.S. House voted against E-verify

MW:

You're speculating. IMO, there is no legitimate excuse for his vote against E-Verify or against banning lead from our children's toys. I'm sure he has his reason, but so doesn't Sen. Ted Kennedy, Obama, McCain, etc. for wanting amnesty for illigal aliens.

He's my candidate MW!
I've listened to many of his speeches and read many of his articles. I've heard some of his reasonings.
I've watched about 60 - 75 youtubes he put out in his campaign. Remember he was the one that went to the Internet first! He made the most campaign money in one day, FIRST!!!
His campaign was mostly on the Internet as both parties just ignored him as crazy. So which party is crazy now ... ?
I've been a part of his www.ronpaul2008.com group till it ended... that's why I'm NOT speculating.
YOU are uninformed... IMHO

Question MW:
If Bush agreed to do everything that we in this group wanted, BUT we had to pay triple taxes, would you be for it?
NO because the last part is a deal breaker.
Congressman Paul actually reads the Bills! The other jokers just pass them on ignorance of our Constitutional rights!

He is not willing to"get" and at the same time give up our rights too. He would vote yes, on a cleaner bill, it's a statement to all, for gods sake.
Someone has to make one. I'd say he was paid to do a thurough job, but he gets NO pay!
It's not like he throws the vote to the other side.

Wow Ron Paul is an evil evil man, he supports the Rights of the People according to the Constitution. Shame on him supporting Liberty and Freedom. Shame on him for trying to uphold the Constitution. What kind of country would we have without people like Ron Paul holding up the Constitution to protect the Rights of Americans. Shame on him for taking his oath of office seriously. Shame on Ron Paul for reading the bills before he votes on them.

WorriedAmerican wrote:

He's my candidate MW!
I've listened to many of his speeches and read many of his articles. I've heard some of his reasonings.
I've watched about 60 - 75 youtubes he put out in his campaign. Remember he was the one that went to the Internet first! He made the most campaign money in one day, FIRST!!!
His campaign was mostly on the Internet as both parties just ignored him as crazy. So which party is crazy now ... ?
I've been a part of his www.ronpaul2008.com group till it ended... that's why I'm NOT speculating.

You are speculating because you've provided nothing from Ron Paul on why he specifically voted against E-Verify and the banning of lead paint from our children's toys. Utilizing generic statements he's made doesn't explain anything, nor does it excuse his actions. Until you or someone else can provide facts that address the specific vote(s) in question, it's speculation.

He is not willing to"get" and at the same time give up our rights too. He would vote yes, on a cleaner bill, it's a statement to all, for gods sake.

What rights are you talking about? What rights are 'we the people' surrendering with E-Verify and a bill to ban lead paint in toys? What rights were we surrendering by allowing our military troops at the border? What rights are we surrendering by not giving illegal aliens driver's licenses? There are other questionable votes (that don't support our cause) but I'll not bore you with the details because this is about Ron Paul's position on E-Verify and lead paint in toys. By the way, how do you know these two bills didn't meet the smell test on being clean? According to NumberUSA, E-Verify was clean.


BEARFLAGREPUBLIC wrote:

What was the constitutional basis for Paul voting FOR federal guest worker programs?

What was the constitutional basis for Paul voting FOR what NumbersUSA considers amnesty?

What is the constitutional basis for Paul advocating free trade and abolition of tariffs?

Is it really the constitution that is being upheld??..........or libertarian dogmatism?

Excellent question, especially the last one.

By the way, how do you know these two bills didn't meet the smell test on being clean? According to NumberUSA, E-Verify was clean.

There isn't a bill ever presented in Congress that has passed the smell test.

Originally Posted by cayla99

Originally Posted by Anna-Anna

Yes, this was reported on Lou Dobbs yesterday and I am wondering WHY Ron Paul would do this? Unfortunately, it was too late to call his office but I plan on doing so first thing Monday.

If you get an answer, would you please post it? If you don't, will you please tell us that also?

Sorry for taking so long, but I'm only just now getting a chance to share my exchange with a staffer in Ron Paul's office about this.

I gotta say, I was NOT impressed by this person. In fact I was shocked by his lack of clarity and his bumbling and stuttering. I was told by the receptionist that he was the ONLY person on staff who could address my questions. (In addition to asking why Ron Paul voted against E-Verify, I also asked why he was the only congressman to vote against a bill to ban lead in children's toys.)

1) E-Verify
I was told that Paul voted against e-verify because he was concerned that it would set up a national database of every American citizen, giving too much power to the government. When I pointed out that the government ALREADY knew everyone's ss# -- how could this be any more of an intrusion -- his staffer responded that Paul preferred that we get back to the original use/intention of the social security number. As we went back and forth on this for a while, I caught this fellow contradicting himself several times and I called him on it. He insisted he was not contradicting himself.

When I mentioned that Paul had supported e-verify in the past -- in fact, according to someone I know who attended a Ron Paul speech in Chicago, Paul in that speech was very vocal about his support of it -- the staffer said that my friend must have heard incorrectly and that Paul has never supported e-verify. (I think this guy just has no clue. I don't know HOW they could put him forward as a representative for Ron Paul -- he was an embarrassment.)

2) Ban on Lead in Toys
After he explained Paul's opposition to this, I could see somewhat why Paul was against it. Apparently, there was a section calling for federal standards for cigarette lighters and garage-door openers, which had nothing to do with lead in toys.

This bill also granted state attorneys general the power to launch class action lawsuits, as well as for assets forfeiture without due process, plus a cost of $626 million without offsets. Paul wanted a cleaner bill, then wanted the government first to cut spending in a similar amount before taking on any new spending.

I don't know, Paul just seems to be against all kinds of regulation against trade and industry, but without us being on a gold standard, how can fiat currency provide for fair trade without regulation?? Look at what de-regulation has gotten us with the banking industry, etc. A big MESS! If Paul does not want regulation of any kind, then he has to wait until we've abandoned fiat currency, IMO. It's contradictions like this I don't understand about Paul.

Originally Posted by cayla99

Originally Posted by CitizenJustice

According to the latest gov info, e-verify is now 99.5% accurate.

Do you have any links or sources for this? I could use this info in a report I am doing.

E-Verify is accurate. 98 percent of eligible workers are confirmed to work instantaneously. Fewer than one percent of eligible workers need to update their records to be confirmed.2

It is true, as some have testified, that the Social Security Administration database used by E-Verify does have some records with incorrect information (an estimated 17.8 million out of 435 million). However, the auditors noted that many of the records with discrepancies belong to individuals who are not in the work force, such as elderly, children, or deceased individuals, and thus would not be relevant to E-Verify. That same audit actually complimented the Social Security Administration for the accuracy of the database.3

According to Verification Office officials, minor typographical errors rarely result in a tentative non-confirmation, or “yellow light,â€

IS IT THE WORDING THAT HE DIDN'T LIKE ABOUT E-VERIFY?

FEDERAL CONTRACTORS ONLY USE WHEN THEY WANT TO?

WE NEED TO KNOW AND FIND OUT ABOUT THIS MORE?

RELATED: http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-745696-.html#745696