# Ron Paul attacks the 1964 Civil Rights Act; Ron Paul doesn't get America **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 3, 2012, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262 "2012-01-03T16:25:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/21 "2012-01-03T18:58:59Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Will you please answer the question? How does title II of the Civil Rights act help to “maintain our democratic republic”? Not every law passed by Congress is done so in order to “maintain our democratic republic.” So, your question makes no sense. It is like asking how a bill to rename a post office or Federal courthouse will help the military defend our borders against aggression: both defending our country and maintaining our system of government are valid exercises of governmental power, but not everything that our government does is required to relate to those two powers. There are other compelling interests that our government may legitimately act upon, such as eliminating discrimination in order to promote the equal treatment of all Americans under the law. Back to your loaded question, though: Is it your position that you would want the Federal government protect racist, sexist, and otherwise discriminatory businesses from laws such as Title II of the Civil Rights Act? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/22 "2012-01-03T19:13:59Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Hard core libertarian beliefs inhabit the fringes of American politics. News at 11. [Moderate libertarian ideas, OTOH, now command the loyalty of about 9% of the population, 10% of registered voters.](http://www.people-press.org/2011/05/04/beyond-red-vs-blue-the-political-typology/) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/23 "2012-01-03T19:15:26Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > It’s hit or miss. The problem is, even the Southerners who fought tooth and nail against the Civil Rights act _in 1964_ would not be considered libertarians by any means. They were against the government telling them who they had to serve in their restaurants, but they were heavily in favor of the government saying blacks couldn’t marry whites, criminalization of homosexuality and other things that are fundamentally at odds with libertarianism. All based (ostensibly) on the principle of “states’ rights” or local autonomy. Which is an important idea in American history, but **not** a Libertarian idea. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/24 "2012-01-03T19:36:24Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > All irrelevant. As I understand Paul’s position here – “the principle of private property and private choices”. “They can come into our houses, our bedrooms our businesses …” – it’s **not** a federal-vs.-state thing, it’s government-vs.-individuals/organizations thing, and all – Patriot Act and Civil Rights Act – would be equally objectionable as state-level policy. Libertarians have always supported Paul’s position in the OP. His son supported it when he ran for the Senate in Kentucky. Although I can’t get on board with it because it would make me icky to see a “No Blacks Allowed” sign on a restaurant, I understand the idea behind it. That private property rights are something the government shouldn’t mess with. So if I am a racist and only allow whites in my restaurant, then as the property owner, my say should be higher than the community because I am the one that bought the property, pay taxes on it, organize the business, etc. If you don’t like my racist policies, you can “punish” me by not doing business with me. If a number of people feel the same way, then I lose out to the restaurant across the street that is non-discriminatory. However, most people feel that the community interests outweigh the private property right, and this legislation is appropriate. That runs counter to the Libertarian idea and always has. No breaking news here. ---
**Author:** ![newcomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/e5b9ba/32.png) [@newcomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newcomer)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/25 "2012-01-03T19:40:30Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > There are other compelling interests that our government may legitimately act upon, such as eliminating discrimination in order to promote the equal treatment of all Americans under the law. Compelling interests that our government may legitimately act upon? > **[Mortgage discrimination](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_discrimination)** > > Mortgage discrimination or mortgage lending discrimination is the practice of banks, governments or other lending institutions denying loans to one or more groups of people primarily on the basis of race, ethnic origin, sex or religion. > Instances of mortgage discrimination occurred in United States inner city neighborhoods from the 1930s and there is evidence that the practice continues to a degree in the United States today. In the United States, banks practiced redlining or denial of financ... > [@](#): > > In 1993 President Bill Clinton made changes to the Community Reinvestment Act to make mortgages more obtainable for lower and lower-middle class families. The changes ushered in during the Clinton Presidency encouraged banks to make mortgage loans to people who otherwise would not have qualified for them. In 1998 the Federal Bank of Boston issued a report entitled “Closing the Gap: A Guide to Equal Opportunity Lending." The 30 page document was intended to serve as a guide to loan officers to help curb discriminatory lending [10] “Closing the Gap,” instructs banks to hire based upon diversity needs, sweeten the compensation structure for working with lower income applicants, encourages shifting high risk, low income applications to the sub prime market, by saying “the secondary market [Subprime Market] is willing to consider ratios above the standard 28/36,” and “Lack of credit history should not be seen as a negative factor.” > > While, “Closing the Gap” was not an industry-wide mandate, it illustrates the efforts banks took to meet public pressure to overcome perceived mortgage discrimination. Under the Clinton administration community organizers pressured banks to increase their loans to minorities even though many minority applicants could not qualify for traditional 30-year fix mortgages. Karen Wegmann, the head of Wells Fargo’s community development group in 1993 told the New York Times, “The atmosphere now is one of saying yes.” [11] The same New York Times article echoed “Closing the Gap,” writing, “The banks have also modified some standards for credit approval. Many low-income people do not have credit-bureau files because they do not have credit cards. So lenders are accepting records of continuously paid utility bills as evidence of creditworthiness. Similarly, they will accept steady income from several employers instead of the length of time at one job.” > > Because of looser loan restrictions many people who could not find themselves qualifying for a mortgage before now could own a home. Under pressure from activist organizations such as ACORN, then President Bill Clinton, and influential Democrats in Congress like Barny Frank,[12], banks began loans to people who should not have qualified for loans. Because banks were pressured to loan to minorities and low income applicants, and because the applicants were low-income who had rented homes for generations the banks could reap profits by selling products loaded with fees because the applicants did not either know, or care to read the fine print that would eventually raise their mortgage payments [13] > > Minorities willingly entered sub-prime mortgages in far great numbers than whites and represented a disproportional percentage of foreclosures,[14] [15] The resulting wave of minority foreclosures tipped a fading housing market into a dive and contributed to the economic fall of 2008/2009. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/26 "2012-01-03T19:45:50Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Libertarians have always supported Paul’s position in the OP. His son supported it when he ran for the Senate in Kentucky. Not really. Rand Paul briefly hedged on the Civil Rights Act, but then everyone started yelling at him and he walked it back pretty unequivocally within 24 hours or so. Here’s the statement his then Senate campaign released: > [@Rand Paul](#): > > “Let me be clear: I support the Civil Rights Act because I overwhelmingly agree with the intent of the legislation, which was to stop discrimination in the public sphere and halt the abhorrent practice of segregation and Jim Crow laws.” > > “As I have said in previous statements, sections of the Civil Rights Act were debated on Constitutional grounds when the legislation was passed. Those issues have been settled by federal courts in the intervening years.” ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/27 "2012-01-03T19:48:19Z")
> [@Rand Paul](#): > > Those issues have been settled by federal courts in the intervening years. “Settled”? He speaks heresy! ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/28 "2012-01-03T19:49:23Z")
> [@newcomer](#): > > Compelling interests that our government may legitimately act upon? > > [Mortgage discrimination - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_discrimination) Certainly. The example you pick might be wise or unwise as policy; but, neither unjust nor unconstitutional. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/29 "2012-01-03T19:50:41Z")
> [@newcomer](#): > > Compelling interests that our government may legitimately act upon? > > [Mortgage discrimination - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_discrimination) Care to find a cite that hasn’t been thoroughly debunked? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/30 "2012-01-03T19:57:20Z")
> [@Simplicio](#): > > Not really. Rand Paul briefly hedged on the Civil Rights Act, but then everyone started yelling at him and he walked it back pretty unequivocally within 24 hours or so. Here’s the statement his then Senate campaign released: I stand corrected. It seems like he has more political smarts than his dad, but I’ll bet a shiny nickel that they both believe the same thing and that Rand’s advisers told him that he could either continue on his constitutional discussion or become the next Senator from Kentucky. But not both. And Rand chose…wisely. ---
**Author:** ![newcomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/e5b9ba/32.png) [@newcomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newcomer)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/31 "2012-01-03T20:26:58Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Care to find a cite that hasn’t been thoroughly debunked? Huh?! ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/32 "2012-01-03T20:51:45Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Rolling eyes back at you, it is not only \*\*BrainGlutton \*\*who says so, you need to check history and why we got here: > > [Answers - The Most Trusted Place for Answering Life's Questions](http://www.answers.com/topic/civil-rights-act-of-1964) > Incidentally, as it happens in many places in the USA nowadays, the voting booths themselves are located in public places, but before the act a good number of those “public” places discriminated actively, meaning that Blacks and other minorities had to go to locations that were either far or not convenient for the minorities to vote. Or not even that, as a minority they could also be prevented before hand from settling in a place were some peculiar politicians would be appalled to represent “that kind” of people. > > So I would tell Ron Paul stop telling us that we will get the rains of freedom when the intention is to give others the liberty to pee on us. Maybe you should read title II of the civil rights act before you start squawking about unfair voting practices ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/33 "2012-01-03T21:08:40Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Not every law passed by Congress is done so in order to “maintain our democratic republic.” So, your question makes no sense. It is like asking how a bill to rename a post office or Federal courthouse will help the military defend our borders against aggression: both defending our country and maintaining our system of government are valid exercises of governmental power, but not everything that our government does is required to relate to those two powers. There are other compelling interests that our government may legitimately act upon, such as eliminating discrimination in order to promote the equal treatment of all Americans under the law. Welcome to the thread. Maybe you should get a handle on what the author of the cite in the op was trying to say before you question my wuestion ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/34 "2012-01-03T21:09:42Z")
> [@newcomer](#): > > Huh?! How many times must we do this? [A more plausible explanation](http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/10/12/53802/private-sector-loans-not-fannie.html) > [@](#): > > Between 2004 and 2006, when subprime lending was exploding, Fannie and Freddie went from holding a high of 48 percent of the subprime loans that were sold into the secondary market to holding about 24 percent, according to data from Inside Mortgage Finance, a specialty publication. One reason is that Fannie and Freddie were subject to tougher standards than many of the unregulated players in the private sector who weakened lending standards, most of whom have gone bankrupt or are now in deep trouble.During those same explosive three years, private investment banks — not Fannie and Freddie — dominated the mortgage loans that were packaged and sold into the secondary mortgage market. In 2005 and 2006, the private sector securitized almost two thirds of all U.S. mortgages, supplanting Fannie and Freddie, according to a number of specialty publications that track this data. > > Read more here: [http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/10/12/53802/private-sector-loans-not-fannie.html#storylink=cpy](http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/10/12/53802/private-sector-loans-not-fannie.html#storylink=cpy) The crash was NOT, repeat NOT, caused by low-income borrowers taking out loans they couldn’t afford. There are news sources besides FOX, I suggest you broaden your horizon. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/35 "2012-01-03T21:19:14Z")
> [@newcomer](#): > > Huh?! Are you aware that the biggest culprits in the mortgage mess were not banks and not under CRA? Are you aware that studies of their loan portfolios indicate that minority applicants with similar scores to non-minority applicants got steered to subprime loans much more often, even though they qualified for standard loans. You might also point us to any law that requires lenders to write loans without documentation, as was done very often. Whether or not it was true, there was a perception, and some evidence that neighborhoods with similar income levels got treated very differently by banks depending on their racial makeup. That was the reason for CRA. Home ownership has very real benefits, as Bush II also said. The only thing that forced the lenders to write crap loans was that they made more money from them, and dumped the risk on the market, with help from the rating agencies. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/36 "2012-01-03T21:21:54Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Welcome to the thread. Maybe you should get a handle on what the author of the cite in the op was trying to say before you question my wuestion Why don’t you make a coherent argument? This is Great Debates, not Ask Loaded Questions and Make Other Posters Try to Satisfy Some Unclear Concern of Yours. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/37 "2012-01-03T21:24:28Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [Moderate libertarian ideas, OTOH, now command the loyalty of about 9% of the population, 10% of registered voters.](http://www.people-press.org/2011/05/04/beyond-red-vs-blue-the-political-typology/) That’s still fringe, or close enough to it, in my book. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/38 "2012-01-03T21:29:52Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Maybe you should read title II of the civil rights act before you start squawking about unfair voting practices I did, you did not understand it, my quote refers to what a public place is, you can have a club an make it exclusive and discriminate to your heart’s content, but the nanosecond you offer a service to the public you have to follow the rules. As the voting booths are in public places you are just reaching for an ignorance argument when you attempt to insinuate that it does not affect voting and other basic rights all people have. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/39 "2012-01-03T21:38:23Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > The crash was NOT, repeat NOT, caused by low-income borrowers taking out loans they couldn’t afford. And, if it had been, **that would be irrelevant to this discussion.** ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262/40 "2012-01-03T21:39:32Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > That’s still fringe, or close enough to it, in my book. Then the electorate is all made up of fringe groups, none forming more than 15% of the total population. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-attacks-the-1964-civil-rights-act-ron-paul-doesnt-get-america/608262.md?page=3)