Ron Paul’s big government position on right-to-work

by

To libertarians like Ron Paul, respect for private property and legal contracts is the only governance a society needs. For instance:

Should businesses be allowed to discriminate against customers based on race?

Of course. The owner is within his rights as a property owner to only admit his racial brethren, and for the government to require him to do otherwise is a violation of the holiest of a civilized society’s principles. Paul explains in his 2004 speech on the House floor decrying the Civil Rights Act of 1964:

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.

Given that reasoning, shouldn’t we assume that Paul would also support the rights of businesses to enter into contracts with unions that require workers to pay union dues? From his website:

While Ron Paul supports the right of every American to join a private sector union if they wish, he believes, like most Americans, that forcing workers to pay union dues just to get or keep a job is wrong.

Unfortunately, over 75 years ago, the right to decide freely whether or not to join a labor union was taken away from American workers by Congress.

 Ron Paul’s exceptional record on Right to Work issues earned him the prestigious Everett Dirksen Award from the National Right to Work Committee.

At the very least, Paul’s position on right-to-work is anti-libertarian because it advocates the government outlaw a type of contract between individuals. To outlaw businesses from entering into certain contracts with unions is no different than outlawing sex contracts between a prostitute and a client or outlawing the sale of drugs, both positions that Paul vehemently opposes.

Advertisement

Tags: , , , , ,

4 Responses to “Ron Paul’s big government position on right-to-work”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    Ahhhhh the freedom of being able to post a comment without some ass telling me I’m not logged in :) . But yeah that is one of the bigger deficiencies of his platform – along with his utopian idea of how free trade deals should be signed.

  2. mairsy doates Says:

    he did not say the government should outlaw businesses contracting with unions. they are free to do so.government should not force businesses to contract only with union workers he said unions have no right to force people to join them in order to have a job. and unions have no right to spend forcibly-extracted money money on political activities.

    • Earthling Says:

      I think you’re confused. The “right to work” does indeed outlaw certain types of contracts between employers and unions. Since it prevents businesses from requiring union membership as a prerequisite of employment, it also prevents businesses from contracting with unions who would require all workers to be unionized. It prevents them from entering into mutually agreeable contracts where both sides agree that all labor must be supplied by the union. Supporting right to work is antithetical to libertarian philosophy and Im surprised Ron Paul would take such a position.

  3. Just Off Of Center Says:

    The deeper we delve into Ron Paul’s psyche, the more I move away from him. It’s really difficult to tell where he stands on most issues and that’s what’s scary.
    From the sounds of some of his rhetoric, if he were president and had the ability to over turn anything, we’d all be starting from square one with civil rights again.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.