Article Image

Ron Paul “Responds” to Petitions for Redress, Sort Of

Written by Subject: Constitution
Join the WTP D.C. Constitution Day Petition Protest and Hunger Fast September 16-17 on the National Mall

Thus far, Texas Rep. Ron Paul has “responded” to the Petitions for Redress by having them “forwarded to the Clerk of the House.” 

While such a move is unique among the Members of the House, and is not a bad first step in etching the concept of Government accountability into the minds of some of the Members and advancing ever so slightly the question of the constitutional meaning of the last ten words of the First Amendment, it is highly unlikely that the Petitions for Redress will advance to House Committees for consideration, much less a vote to provide Redress. With the possible exception of Ron Paul, we know of no other politician willing to consider the notion of being held accountable to the People outside the periodic electoral process. 

Whether or not the Petitions for Redress served on Ron Paul advance beyond the Office of the Speaker of the House, a constituent’s Right to Redress (like that of Religion, Speech, Press and Assembly) is an individual Right that does not depend on the will of any person or majority, not in the House, not in the Senate, not on any Court bench, and not among those voting in any election.  

Forwarding the Petitions for Redress to the Clerk of the House has not relieved Rep. Ron Paul of his individual obligation to respond by answering the questions embedded in each of the seven Petitions for Redress. Even if his answer is, “I lack knowledge enough to admit or deny,” he has a legal (constitutional) obligation to respond.  

We pray Rep. Paul will personally respond to the Petitions for Redress.

His staff appears to be against it.

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: