Ron Paul Says Head Start Is Not Constitutional, But Wouldn't Eliminate It

Ron Paul appeared on several morning shows following his strong second-place finish in the New Hampshire primary, and was pressed on whether he would eliminate federal programs that help low-income children.

On MSNBC's "Morning Joe," Time's Mark Halperin asked him whether he thought Head Start, the program run by the Department of Health and Human Services to promote school readiness for low-income children, is constitutional.

"It's not constitutional, but I wouldn't put that on the list," he said. "You know, if we want a perfectly free society, you can't wave a wand and get everything you want. So you have to work our way out of this."

"You know, Social Security, and these other programs are unconstitutional, but I'm only -- I believe I'm the only one that has a program that would protect us so that we can work our way out of it," he continued, then turning the discussion to his proposal to audit the Federal Reserve.

Halperin interrupted Paul. "But if you had your way, you'd eliminate Head Start," he said.

"You're just putting words in my mouth," the congressman responded. "I don't know what your goal is. I just explained myself very clearly."

Paul has made similar statements about programs such as the Peace Corps and Americorps, which pay for short-term service abroad or in the United States. But he has also said he would not make it a priority to eliminate such programs.

Later in the interview, "Morning Joe" host Joe Scarborough asked Paul what Congress should do to reduce the deficit, something current representatives failed to deliver to the people who elected them in 2010, he said.

"Joe, what they need is a backbone," Paul said of Congressional members. "That's what they need and they need to wake up and the people need to wake up to Congress."

Though Paul's message played well in libertarian-minded New Hampshire, he faces a more difficult challenge in the Jan. 21 South Carolina primary, with a strong evangelical Christian base. Paul finished a distant fifth in the state during his 2008 campaign.

Still, he continues to assert that he is electable as both the nominee and president.

"I've been electable. I've won 12 elections already," he said on CBS. "It's amazing that I do so much better than those other candidates that are all electable. They're in fourth, fifth and sixth place and they're electable. All of a sudden they say I'm not electable. I don't know how that adds up."

Comments

[piratesfan23]

09:44 PM on 01/12/2012

We're starting to at least talk about the issues more and break away from the bias.

I've always thought liberals to be the smartest party members in terms of knowledge - the question will continue to be if liberals can use reason even when it contradicts their desire for "progress"...

Or is their desire to see a government-built utopia, is there desire for collectivism so strong that their own freedoms and self will not matter.

Government is useful and laws can help make America better. But without freedom and liberty you have nothing but tyranny.

I also think it is funny that most liberals want to play God. They actually think they know what its like to be urban or blue-collar. They think what worked for them could work for everyone. Like education or wealth can just be magically transferred...Like equality can just be instantly created through laws...

Then they see the flaws and they begin to scapegoat everyone but themselves. Progression is good. But why don't you people progress in your own lives first...get smarter, stronger, and be a better person....rather than merely projecting your ideas on everyone else.

Following the bill of rights and the constitution is real equality. You give that up or you concede those rights to government - you're left with free food, health care, and education - but you lose the most important thing - yourself.

[maninal2]

02:33 PM on 01/12/2012

The real quandary for Ron Paul supporters is how to stay upbeat during Ron Paul's last failed attempt for the White House. Rand is not his father and with Ron's age he can't go on fooling the faithful for much longer.

[rtaylor1974]

03:34 PM on 01/12/2012

The real trick is how NOT to feel sorry for WWE like fan supporters of Obama cheering as their rights are stripped away year after year....

Voting for a sham twice cant be defended....

[ProudToBeVeryLiberal]

04:47 PM on 01/12/2012

You did vote for Bush twice, didn't you?

[The Real McCoy]

06:34 PM on 01/12/2012

I am just going to go with Bernie Sanders 2016 :) If our country makes it that long.

[ProudToBeVeryLiberal]

06:41 PM on 01/12/2012

Sanders/Warren 2016. I'd gladly vote for that. Sorry I thought you were just another RP supporter.

[maninal2]

08:49 AM on 01/13/2012

I'm all behind a Warren/Sanders ticket.

[ydocniruf]

10:15 AM on 01/12/2012

Ron Paul predicted the housing bubble: http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=16502

[maninal2]

02:13 PM on 01/12/2012

So did my Aunt Betty but I wouldn't want her in the White House either.

[Grumpy Old Dude]

07:58 AM on 01/12/2012

So Ron Paul thinks Social Security is unconstitutional, but he would not eliminate it! He thinks Head Start is unconstitutional, but he would not eliminate it! Paul claims to be a "Constitutionalist." I guess he should change it to Convenient Constitutionalist! This is why I don't trust this man, he speaks out of both side of his mouth!

[mrgneiss]

08:41 AM on 01/12/2012

Ron Paul haters like to have it both ways. They like to scare people by saying he will do away with social security and the like, but when Paul refutes that then they attack him for not being a strict Constititutionalist!

If you actually read what Ron Paul has said about social security, you would see he wouldn't eliminate it and actually is the only candidate with a sound plan to financially fix Social Security.

Get real, nobody wants an extremist, and Ron Paul is a realist, do you think a 1/4 of the people in the primaries would be voting for an extremist? He will get rid of programs that have no bet benefit at the Federal level and can be handled at the state and municipal levels, and keep the major portions of the Federal social safety net.

The truth hurts, but there it is. You people are chasing your tails with these arguments and working yourselves into a frenzy over nothing.

Why is Paul getting the student vote? Because they have the time to actually research what he is saying, they don't have jobs and kids, and don't get their info from corporate media soundbites.

Lack of critical thinking by the sheeple is the key to the Oligarchy keeping the status quo, they love people like you:

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/lack-critical-thinking-key-corrupt-status-quo-maintaining-their-power

[Grumpy Old Dude]

09:05 AM on 01/12/2012

First off, your post started with a Iie! I never used the words; "strict Constititu­tionalist," you did! I called him a Constitutionalist, which he called himself at the last debate! Sorry if the truth is inconvenient! BTW...critical thinkers don't misquote or make things up!

[carlgt1]

09:46 AM on 01/12/2012

Ron Paul is part of the oligarchy, as are all the Repugs and 90% of the Dems. In his (too) long political career, Ron Paul has done nothing but help enhance the oligarchy. The idea that a Randroid Libertarian would be "against" the oligarchy is laughable.

[MrSavage]

04:42 PM on 01/12/2012

Be honest. If he said SS, Medicare etc would be eliminated on his first day you still wouldn't like him. Then you'd be saying he just wasn't realistic.

[Grumpy Old Dude]

05:10 PM on 01/12/2012

Please quote me accurately....I said that I don't trust him! I don't trust anyone that claims what I paid into my entire life is not Constitutional, I'm living on it now! But the deal breaker for me, is his defense of the right of private property owners to discriminate against people! His belief that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was wrong makes him a scary little man!

[emncaity]

05:31 AM on 01/12/2012

No, Mr. Paul, you were not "very clear." You're walking both sides of the fence, because your way of governing isn't going to be acceptable to anybody and sounds good only as a novelty alternative. Not one single advanced nation in the world does it. Your response indicates that you don't want to say "Yes, my goal is to get rid of all of that"; you want to hold to the ideological position that getting rid of it is necessary, but that sounds too harsh, so you want to reassure people that you're not the kind of person who would cut things like Head Start and Social Security without a substitute, but when given a national platform to speak--which you didn't have to pay for, by the way--you're not going to give even the broadest outline, let alone any real specifics. We're just supposed to trust that it'll happen.

Got it. Meanwhile, the truth is, you're only for a lower level of redistribution of income. That is, unless you want to pave your own roads and have huge inefficiencies and state-to-state inequalities like separate food-and-drug safety organizations, auto and consumer goods testing, etc.

[MrSavage]

04:53 PM on 01/12/2012

He's said numerous times that he would propose winding down SS by allowing younger workers to opt out of it. He's also acknowledged that these sorts of things would require the support of Congress and the American people.

"Got it. Meanwhile, the truth is, you're only for a lower level of redistribu­tion of income. That is, unless you want to pave your own roads and have huge inefficien­cies and state-to-s­tate inequaliti­es like separate food-and-d­rug safety organizati­ons, auto and consumer goods testing, etc. "

Yes, how dare we allow the voters in individual states to decide just how much or how little "protection" they want from government.

[emncaity]

07:27 PM on 01/12/2012

"He's said numerous times that he would propose winding down SS by allowing younger workers to opt out of it."

Great. So why didn't he just say that on Scarborough's show, that simply? I mean, I think the idea is terrible and is characteristic of Paul's fatal flaw, pathological individualism over the community good, reminiscent of Margaret Thatcher's "there is no such thing as society." But at least he'd have given an answer.

The voters in individual states already decide this by voting for their own representatives and senators to federal office. If you want a loose federation of states each running every single part of its own show, and not a nation, you should go back and raise the Articles of Confederation again and see how they fly.

[Teri L]

01:49 AM on 01/14/2012

Its amazing to me that people actually don't take the time to look at what he has done to see if it matches to what he says. Have you even bothered to look at the bills he has submitted to Congress? H.R. 219: Social Security Preservation Act, H.R. 150: Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act and H.R. 147: Prescription Drug Affordability Act to name a few.

[PhilipTaylor]

03:44 AM on 01/12/2012

As Romney DROPS PAUL WILL GAIN!

PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR A MAN OF SUBSTANCE AND BELIEF IN SAVING AMERICA!

PAUL is that CHOICE!

[EdCorner]

03:55 AM on 01/12/2012

When Huntsman is out, Paul will get all the anti-war votes.

[bccmeteorites]

04:02 AM on 01/12/2012

Good insight.

[PhilipTaylor]

04:18 AM on 01/12/2012

YES and the sanity vote!

[emncaity]

05:33 AM on 01/12/2012

All-caps lettering doesn't make it true.

However, despite the fact that he _was_ vague in this exchange and continues to bristle at people for asking questions that naturally occur, at least Paul offers a real choice, and at least he's got some level of sanity on foreign policy and war policy, which Obama himself seems not to have.

[With Your Consent]

03:37 AM on 01/12/2012

Ron Paul officially has everyone talking.

[EdCorner]

03:47 AM on 01/12/2012

LOL, and it doesn't matter what the article is about, there's fervor from both sides. An article that should get a 1,000 post at the most, ends up getting 5-10k posts lol

[maninal2]

02:17 PM on 01/12/2012

When people are talking about what a kooook he is... that's not a good thing

[piratesfan23]

09:22 PM on 01/12/2012

i just read in one of your posts that you think Ron Paul is going to pollute the Earth till it dies. Meanwhile China and other countries pollute way more than us - and we can't stop them no matter what we do. Making your cause truly a moot point.

You picked "greenhouse gases" over stopping the wars, the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, and all the violations of our civil liberties...

At least make an argument about health care or education - but it is very kooky to choose an issue we can't control over the lives of hundreds of thousands as most hope Ron Paul gets elected so we dont have another war in the middle east.

[Teri L]

01:51 AM on 01/14/2012

Can't you come up with anything better than the kook label?

[Eyeful]

02:28 AM on 01/12/2012

"I believe I'm the only one that has a program that would protect us so that we can work our way out of it,"

Social Security already is a retirement protection system. That's how it's designed. We "work" our way out of it through taxable contributions. You want to get elected? Lay off the rant about how SS is broke and you are how you're the only one who can fix it. Boomers may be old, but not stupid. And please remind the other (G)et (O)nly (P)rofit running mates that this IS an entitlement program because WE PAID INTO IT. We're entitled to our money back, however it's calculated to dribble back in.

[Julie Baker Morse]

03:02 AM on 01/12/2012

Look into the ISEE solution for fixing Social Security for the long haul. Four simple points that fully fund SS, stabilize it long term, and even use it to jumpstart the economy.

[EdCorner]

03:36 AM on 01/12/2012

I'm going to look into that, thanks. Solutions like that are good for all

[EdCorner]

03:38 AM on 01/12/2012

Hahahaha, it's you! At salon. I'm definitely going to read it

[EdCorner]

03:04 AM on 01/12/2012

Cutting payroll taxes = defunding SS. And the shortage will be made up by the general fund, which moves SS into the general fund area where it can be cut. Thank O ba ma

[EdCorner]

02:17 AM on 01/12/2012

For all you anti-Paul bots, know this, that the result of your efforts will be getting Mitt elected. You may not realize it - but that is what you are doing. O ba ma will not win re-election so you are choosing Mitt for us all. Ron will not go 3rd party because if he did, that would split the vote and O ba ma might win. And his son in the Senate would pay the price for this seeming bet_rayal of the party by his dad.

So, when we end up with a President Mitt, don't be to shy to proclaim to all how much you helped get him there. All the 1/2 truths, outright li es and misrepresentations of a good man 24/7.

[ProudToBeVeryLiberal]

02:21 AM on 01/12/2012

"Ron will not go 3rd party because if he did, that would split the vote and O ba ma might win."

My point exactly. So, you're confirming that PauI is just a Republican tool and he would never do anything to hurt HIS PARTY.

[EdCorner]

02:27 AM on 01/12/2012

Keep going, you're going to get Mitt

[EdCorner]

02:28 AM on 01/12/2012

O ba ma is not going to win. The economy is in too poor a shape and people are waking up to the conman after his signing of NDAA.

He's just not going to win

[emncaity]

05:34 AM on 01/12/2012

You think Obama can't get re-elected? Against Mitt Romney? Do you have any idea what kind of massive ammunition they have against Romney already, just from what's come up during the GOP primary season?

[EdCorner]

01:13 PM on 01/12/2012

O ba ma has already beat O ba ma, even if he does raise $1 billion from corporations all over the world. Whatisthematterwithyou? YouwantaknowncoporateslugforPresident? I'mdisgusted

[EdCorner]

01:34 PM on 01/13/2012

I have to reply here. Can you say the regulations, or the lack thereof, since the 90's have been for the benefit of the people? I can't. The CDS market right now is $700 trillion. It's obscene and should be illegal - because it's more money than there is in the world ! It's beyond the ken of people to imagine that much money. And these instruments are beyond the understanding of the regulators and our government. They know the risks and yet allow it to continue. The banks are sitting on $2 trillion in reserves of taxpayer money - for their next big gambles and failures, which you know are coming. Then that money will be forced to be spent and we will be in hyper-inflation with that kind of money entering the system.
My contention is that any instrument that is beyond the understanding of even the regulators to understand, should not be allowed to exist. And yet that's what we have. Our government and all regulators are captured by those they're regulating.

[ArchStanton400]

02:14 AM on 01/12/2012

Congressman Ron Paul. A hero and inspiriation to the un-educated, the Little Orphan Annie's and the South Park Underwear Gnomes everywhere.

[Jeremy Echols]

02:00 AM on 01/12/2012

There's a huge difference between cutting a federal program and cutting help to everybody everywhere.

Ron Paul wants the states to decide on things like head starts, education, and so forth. When the federal government has that kind of power, we end up with BS one-size-fits-all plans like the horrible failure of "No Child Left Behind".

Paul supports constitutional amendments which EXPAND liberties, not those which try to dictate behavior. The right for women to vote, that's expanding a liberty. The requirement that a public establishment not be allowed to choose its customers is dictating behavior.

While I disagree with Paul on some issues (abortion, his belief we didn't need the civil rights act), his point is very often misinterpreted by people who are just downright ignorant... or trolls.

[ProudToBeVeryLiberal]

02:35 AM on 01/12/2012

"Ron Paul wants the states to decide on things like head starts, education, and so forth. When the federal government has that kind of power, we end up with BS one-size-f­its-all plans like the horrible failure of "No Child Left Behind"

BS. All the 47 nations doing better than us in education have centralized national education policies, strong public schools and government-funded college. The reason behind public education failures in the US is the GOP sabotaging and undermining public education, the same party RP bows to and which will tell him not to run as an independent candidate. He will obey like he's ALWAYS done.

[Julie Baker Morse]

03:09 AM on 01/12/2012

When one examines the actions of the parties, and the rationale or lack thereof behind the votes, one finds that there is very little functional difference between the parties. One is more obvious about who they work for, and evidence for the other party's employers can easily be found on their campaign donor lists.

[Jordan Goldstein]

10:05 AM on 01/12/2012

How many of those counties have over 300 million people and are almost 10 000 000 squared kilometers? How many of these countries embrace multiculturalism and actively support legal immigration and eventual citizenship? I live in Canada and we have a far better education system than you, but I'll let you in on a secret...we don't have a Federal Board of Education! We let our provinces handle education without any Federal interference (except in cases of Constitutional malfeasance). We don't accept one size fits all programs from Ottawa since our country is almost 10 000 000 square kilometers and no Federal authority could ever manage such a large distance efficiently. We only have 1/10 of the population of America, why do you think a Federal program would ever work in such a large and diverse country?

[Eyeful]

01:55 AM on 01/12/2012

What is the difference between "not make it a priority" and simply not considering it? One is on the schedule, the other missing from the list.

[Y3rMawm]

01:49 AM on 01/12/2012

A pragmatic approach. You simply cannot yank the free drugs out from under the feet of the addicts. For now, we can make the choices. If we keep kicking the can, the tough choices will be made for us.

[Banana Republic 2012]

01:16 AM on 01/12/2012

Anti Ron Paul people: You'll only have yourselves to thank when the government takes over every aspect of your lives.

Romney will sellout America just like he did numerous companies at Bain Capital; Just like Papandreou did to Greece. Get ready for the yoke of debt slavery and punitive government laws that prod you along your dismal lives. Get ready for the complete evisceration of the middle-class under Romney...

Obama's America will continue shifting towards a more over-regulated cleptocrat Banana Republic run by Banksters from Wall Street (Very similar to Romney). Very similar to the way China and Russia are run nowadays; before our country implodes from debt and we get bank holidays (i.e. you can't get your money).

Ron Paul is the people's best choice for President.

If you seriously believe Goldman Sachs Stooges Romney or Obama will do ANYTHING FOR YOU AT ALL, you may be right (to trick your votes) but THEY'LL DESTROY THE COUNTRY in the process.

Go ahead and vote for one of the two Goldman Sachs stooges if you like, it's your life and your country BUT, when the reckoning comes and USA goes down the drain, don't say that Ron Paul and his people didn't tell you so.

You and your children will be the ones left holding the bag.

As for the ridiculous comments here about Ron Paul; I feel sorry for you people, your children and families.

[mflorian]

01:35 AM on 01/12/2012

When Ron Paul loses again, are you going to leave the country?

[Jeremy Echols]

01:53 AM on 01/12/2012

No, but when the median income is $10k here, due to corporate greed, maybe then we will.

[ProudToBeVeryLiberal]

02:25 AM on 01/12/2012

You created another s0ckpuppet? You never get tired! It's time for the HP to start posting IP numbers, so that your silly tricks are out in the open...

[rctiger2004]

01:11 AM on 01/12/2012

I guess all those campaign contributions to Obama from big corporations sure paid for a lot of trolls. I guess that's what he was talking about when he said he was going to create more jobs.