After a little bit of googling, I found Ron Paul statement of him voting "NO" on extension of section 245(i). Here you go:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/653703/posts

Regarding the extension of section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, contained in the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act (HR 1885).

Rest assured, I am against general amnesty for illegal aliens. Many have suggested that section 244(i) grants "amnesty" to illegal aliens, but this is not true. In fact, it only applies to that group of people who meet the following criteria: they are eleligilble for permanent residency status have lived in this country since Dec. 2000 their application is based on a family relationship that existed prior to Aug. 15, 2001 or on an application for labor certification that was processed before Aug. 15, 2001.

This bill will also allow those who are "waiting in line" for their application to be processed to remain in this country, provided they have a sponsor. In addition, they will be required to pay a penalty of $1000 before they can reapply.

Other provisions of HR 1885 will go a long way toward addressing your concerns regarding border control and security. For example this bill provides for at least 200 additional INS inspectors. and at least 200 additional investigators. It requires the establishment of a government-wide, electronic data-sharing system on persons with terrorist ties, that federal officials could use to determine whether to grant visa application or permit an individual to enter the U.S. In addition, the Justice Dept. will be required to establish a system to electronically track all foreign visa students in the United States. Finally, it would prohibit the issuance of temporary visas to citizens of nations considered to be state sponsors of terrorism, unless it has been determined that the alien does not pose a threat to the safety of American or U.S. national security.

What has not been discussed in the current debate regarding immigration reform is that, rather than luring immigrants to a land of opportunity, our present welfare states draws those from other jurisdictions who come for the security guaranteed by government forced transfer payments. Genuine immigration reform can only result from elimination of the current welfare state and a renewed embracement of the constitutional principles under which transfer payments were the exception rather than the rule. Such a renewal will not only attract the industrious, but will deter those migrants merely looking for a free ride on the backs of taxpayers.

It is an outrage for our government to invite people over here for the express purpose of providing them with taxpayer-funded assistance. Rest assured, I believe that immigrants should not receive any form of welfare or public assistance, and this is why I am cosponsoring HR 190, which would revoke the automatic citizenship, and thus right to welfare benefits, currently granted to the children of illegal immigrants.