Fighting for liberty
on Capitol Hill
Committee seeks restoration of constitutional governing
By Jon Dougherty
© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com
Hawking pet causes is an art form in Washington, D.C., and one that is nearly as old as the republic itself. But as evidenced by the myriad of groups vying for influence among the nation's 535 elected representatives, there are distinct differences between players and especially in how the "game of politics" is played.
Seasoned politicos know that the name of the game in the nation's capital for the dozens of experienced lobbyist organizations is to grab a piece of that huge pie for constituents. Most lawmakers abide by the same tradition. And, in an era where the taxpayer is funding American government to the tune of about $2 trillion a year, analysts say it's easy to figure out that such a large honey pot naturally attracts lots of bees.
But not all political action committees were created equally. Indeed, for the overburdened taxpayer, the 17 members of The Liberty Committee caucus – all current or former lawmakers – could be their knights in shining armor, for this group's mantra, when it comes to government, is, "Less is more."
"The Liberty Committee's purpose is to defend and advance liberty in the United States by actively supporting or opposing legislation in Congress," said Kent Snyder, the group's executive director.
What kinds of issues are embodied in the committee's legislative support?
"Think of them as common-sense issues," Snyder said. "Once you cut through special-interest hype surrounding an issue – and all the money they can focus on that issue – you get down to a great many people losing a little more of their liberty so that a much smaller number of people can get a government-managed handout/privilege. Many people understand that."
Long-time supporters of the group's founder, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, a medical doctor well-known for his libertarian leanings, have often heard a similar pro-Constitution theme.
Rep. Ron Paul, R-TexasOf his committee – and its more than 62,000 members nationwide – Paul says, "These activists for liberty are Americans; divided not by race, gender, education, occupation, geography, religion or national origin, but united by the knowledge that liberty improves the well-being of every person. … I organized the caucus for the benefit of my congressional colleagues who also embrace the treasured proclamation of 1776 and who want to take a position for or against legislation based on constitutional principle."
Everyone seems to have a "cause" these days, but Snyder says the Liberty Committee is different because its founder is a different kind of lawmaker.
"There is no one in Congress who more consistently votes on legislation according to the U.S. Constitution than Dr. Paul," he said. "We are partisans – partisans to the principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence and codified by the Constitution."
In their view, less government is better government. And that is a constitutionally correct position, Snyder says.
Curbing government growth and power
While most political action groups seek an expansion of federal power, the Liberty Committee backs legislation that would, if passed, produce just the opposite effect. Liberty means freedom, the group says, and freedom is most effective when Washington – as well as state and local governments – do as little as possible to "manage" the lives of Americans.
Indeed, to demonstrate the destructive excess of government, Liberty Committee members usually have a story ready to tell any listener that chronicles some government injustice – like a story told by Rep. John Duncan Jr., R-Tenn., a committee member, who relayed the injustice of a private property owner in Michigan on the House floor in June:
"Mr. Speaker, John A. Rapanos owned a 175-acre tract of land a few miles west of Bay City, Mich. He cut some timber, removed the stumps and brought in a considerable quantity of sand as fill.
"Now, this was on his own private property. However, the Michigan state government ruled that 29 acres contained wetlands, and a federal permit should have been obtained first. Mr. Rapanos was indicted, convicted and the judge reluctantly imposed a $185,000 fine, put him on probation for three years and required 200 hours of community service.
"Then a few months ago, the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the judge, because, incredibly, they said he had given Mr. Rapanos too lenient a sentence.
"Mr. Speaker, when something like this can take place, I wonder if we really live in a free country any more. The judge whom the 6th Circuit unbelievably found to be too lenient said at one point, 'I don't know if it's just a coincidence that I just sentenced Mr. Gonzales, a person selling dope on the streets of the United States. He is an illegal person here. He's not an American citizen. He has a prior criminal record. So here we have a person who comes to the United States and commits crimes of selling dope, and the government asks me to put him in prison for 10 months. And then we have an American citizen who buys land, pays for it with his own money, and he moves some sand from one end to the other and the government wants me to give him 63 months in prison.'
"And the judge said, 'Now, if that isn't our system gone crazy, I don't know what is. And I am not going to do it.'
"Of course, he was reversed."
'Freedom over Big Brother'
For the Liberty Committee, it's not all sad stories and legislative defeats. And though members cannot count a significant number of legislative victories, the few that have been achieved were significant in terms of the group's founding doctrine – smaller government.
To achieve these victories, there is a lot of work that "the Liberty Committee does that the public never really knows about, because major media reports what is easiest and most available – and what's the official Washington PR line," Snyder said.
Lots of "behind-the-scenes" work was done to block legislation that would have created a national identification card, which all Americans would have been required to carry at all times – an idea that has been considered again in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.
It would have been passed, Snyder says, were it not for the fast and furious work of Paul and his 16 Liberty Committee caucus colleagues.
"This is a classic victory of freedom over Big Brother. Because we acted quickly, no American will have to carry a national ID card," said House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, before he went on to congratulate Paul for his leadership in stopping the legislation.
Though some lawmakers like Armey and the press only reported that the idea had been killed, Snyder said the national ID card measure had actually been kept alive by the full House.
"It was finally killed in a conference committee, but not by the House leadership. And not by Republicans in general," he said.
"The Liberty Committee brought public pressure to bear on each member of the conference committee, and on its chairman in particular. The man who headed up the House side of the conference really was impartial but would have let the ID card survive so as not to offend his colleague whose language authorizing a national ID card was at stake," Snyder explained.
"That's the old 'go along to get along' mentality that people despise but usually can't do anything about. We did something about it," he continued.
"Thousands of messages were sent over the critical three-day period, as well as a few, key personal contacts from people these committee members feel they must listen to," he said.
It worked; the national ID card provision was stripped out of the bill and so far has never made it back.
In another case, Snyder said – "thanks to the Internet and the way the Liberty Committee is organized to take advantage of it" – with only 72 hours notice, the committee increased support for getting the U.S. out of the U.N.
That bill, H.R. 1146, which was sponsored in the House by Paul, saw its support increase by "a whopping 37 percent," Snyder said. "Our side went from 54 votes to 74 votes to withdraw the U.S. from the U.N. It wasn't enough, but think about it – in a year's time to increase that much. That's a major success, and because we won't give up we are building on that success."
In one other case, the committee managed to generate over 60,000 messages of support in 90 days from constituents and others around the country for a Paul-sponsored bill to end President Clinton's alleged abuse of executive orders.
"That's an avalanche of messages for Capitol Hill, and all were urging the House and Senate to act," Snyder said.
By the end of that 90 days, Snyder said, "not just one but two hearings on executive orders were held in the House."
"Executive orders weren't even on the radar screen for most members of the House before we began our campaign," he said.
Country before politics
One of the things that seems to irk committee members most is the fact that too many Americans have been allowed to become constitutionally ignorant over the 11 generations or so that have passed since the Revolutionary War.
"There can be little doubt that the signers of our Constitution would be shocked to learn that polls show that only 5 percent of Americans can correctly answer 10 rudimentary questions about the Constitution," says Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind. "More than half do not know that there are 100 U.S. Senators; only 6 percent can name all four rights guaranteed by the First Amendment; … two in five Americans do not know that three branches of government exist, much less what they are."
Fashioning himself a "citizen-legislator," committee member Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., says, "I'm not interested in politics. … I'm interested in my country. I am a conservative who wants to help restore the limited federal government envisioned and established in the Constitution by our nation's founders. I want to ensure that future generations of Americans will have the same opportunities for success that I did."
"Upholding the Constitution, including the entire Bill of Rights, and maintaining a strong defense should be our priorities. If we don't get these priorities right, nothing else will matter," Bartlett says.
"Taxpayers deserve a government that works better, costs less and solves problems," adds caucus member Rep. Walter Jones Jr., R-N.C. "Whether it's balancing the budget or giving states more control," Jones says he "is dedicated to making the federal government smaller and more efficient."
As Montana's lone congressman, committee member Rep. Denny Rehberg, a Republican, shares other members' fiscal and social conservatism. Prior to his election in 2000, Rehberg – during the early 1990s – served as the state's lieutenant governor, where he took the time to travel to all 56 counties every year. He was first elected to Montana's House of Representatives in 1984, serving three terms; he and other team members devised a plan to balance the state's books without raising one penny in new taxes.
Earlier this year, another caucus member, Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., became so frustrated with what he views as Washington's unconstitutional taxation he introduced a bill known as the "Top Ten Terrible Tax Act," which "would completely eliminate ten of the most unfair and egregious taxes on the American people."
He says he believes that "pulling individual taxes out by the roots – the estate tax, the excise tax on vaccines, the capital gains tax or the phone excise tax, for example – is a more effective way of reducing the tax burden than just simply cutting or reducing taxes."
Bartlett agrees, especially on the issue of taxation. He has agreed to help sponsor so-called "tax honesty" hearings in Washington in February; they were originally scheduled for Sept. 25 and 26 but were canceled in the wake of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
Selling out not an option
It's clear that neither Paul nor any member of the committee is giving up on their causes anytime soon.
"Don't think of what we promote as 'constitutional' issues – think of what we promote as a continuation of the limited-government policies that have made this the most prosperous and free society in recorded history," said Snyder. Such policies, he adds, "have created more wealth for and elevated the greatest number of people in history."
Every day, Paul and his caucus members hear from people who had recently heard some of the group's limited-government ideas. These are people who "were ready to simply give up on government," Snyder said, but decided to stick it out after learning about the committee.
"Our people are out there; it's a big country," said Snyder. "They see through the managed-news spin. They understand that socialism, no matter how you dress it up in words of 'compassion,' doesn't work. They value the freedom they have experienced on the Internet, or for one reason or another know free markets and individual liberty are the best way to go."
"What separates The Liberty Committee from any other organization," he explained, is the fact that "we are never going to abandon principle for political expediency. We're never going to sell out."
That kind of principle makes a politician's job tougher, but the Liberty Committee is betting it is the one principle that endears lawmakers to their constituencies.
Related story:
For Education And Discussion Only. Not For Commercial Use.
