Liberty-minded Americans familiar with the voting records of Representative Justin Amash (R-Mich.; shown on left) and Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) likely were not surprised when Amash officially endorsed Paul for president on Monday. In The New American’s “Freedom Index,” a congressional scorecard that rates all members of the House and Senate based on the U.S. Constitution, Paul’s cumulative rating is 93 percent as of the end of 2014, and Amash’s rating is just one-percent different — 94 percent.
“Rand Paul is the strongest defender of liberty and the Constitution in the United States Senate. Every day, Senator Paul stands up to the Washington machine and puts regular Americans first,” Amash wrote on his Facebook page.
Paul seems to appreciate the support. “I’d say he’s a fellow wacko bird. Remember there was some old guy, I can’t remember his name, who called us wacko birds,” Newxmax quoted Paul saying of Amash. “How wacky is it to be somebody who actually believes in the Constitution and all of the Bill of Rights?
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
Paul went on to call Amash one of the “next generation of liberty lovers” in Congress.
Over the course of their yet young careers, Amash and Paul (in the House of Representatives and Senate, respectively) have fought similar fights. Both men are considered by many to be consistent constitutionalists.
The lawmakers have done much to deserve that reputation: from Paul’s epic 13-hour filibuster of the nomination of John Brennan to head the CIA, to Amash’s annual attempt to repeal the indefinite detention provision of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
That isn’t to say that either man is the perfect candidate when it comes to the Constitution.
Rand Paul recently remarked that there are times when due process doesn’t need to be extended to targets of the president’s drone war.
There are those in the libertarian-leaning corner of the GOP who aren’t convinced that Amash is as strict a constitutionalist as he seems to be. Last March, Forbes published the following opinion of Amash’s libertarian bona fides:
Amash is the latest in a long line of small-government talking Republicans fully willing to let the federal government grow by leaps and bounds. Evidence supporting this claim was his fixation on budget deficits over government spending, his view that massive tax increases will be required to pay the deficits off, and his strongly held belief that a balanced budget amendment is the solution to a federal government that always seems to grow no matter the political party in power.
There seems to be some evidence that Paul shares Amash’s acceptance of some unconstitutional federal presence.
From his support for continued foreign aid to Israel (as opposed to ending foreign aid to all countries including Israel) to his push for “a nearly $190 billion infusion to the defense budget over the next two years — a roughly 16 percent increase,” Paul doesn’t paint a purely libertarian picture.
Despite these undeniably Establishment-friendly positions, Paul and Amash have records to run on, records that reveal that they believe in individual liberty and that they want to reduce the reach of the federal government.
That said, there is something unsettling about the fascination of many on the Right with winning the White House.
Our Founders would be confused by so-called “conservatives” who think the solution to the problem of growing government is an appeal to those would one way or another benefit from the expansion.
Proof of this paradox is found in the wide-eyed, never blinking stalker-like obsession of the conservative press and pundits with every word spoken and misspoken in presidential campaigns and their corresponding complete disregard for state elections.
We need to quickly realize that more often than not in our speeches and screeds we, usually unwittingly, cede the central government powers beyond those given to it by the states in the Constitution.
By devoting so much attention and ink to following every gesture of the federal government and the candidates spending millions to become a part of it, we are falling for the sleight of hand perfected by the monied magicians. When we watch Washington so intently, we are following the misdirection designed to draw our attention away from the disappearance of our liberties.
As it stands, though, some 18 months before the next presidential election, the ring is getting full of hats and the contenders are counting on endorsements to spread the word.
When it comes to candidate Rand Paul, he and Justin Amash are certainly simpatico and the latter’s support will only solidify Paul’s reputation as a reliable defender of individual liberty.
A Washington Post article published May 4 reported Paul’s perception of his and Amash’s similarities, similarities based on being different:
Paul said he — and Amash — are different because they are advocates for privacy, criminal justice reform and due process. Paul spent much of his speech on privacy, an issue that rocketed himself and Amash to prominence, making the case that if the government has your phone or credit card records they know just about everything about you, from whether you drink or smoke to how you spend your time.
Amash summed up his support, saying he is “proud to stand with Rand as he runs to be a president for all Americans.”
