Get US out!
Campaign Gets a Huge Boost
by John F. McManus

Our Constitution does not give us the authority to sell our sovereignty to an international body.... [E]ven under the treaty provisions of the Constitution, it is not permissible.

— Rep.Ron Paul (R-TX)
House Debate, June 4, 1997

For the first time in the history of the United Nations, a vote on a measure to Get Us out! of the United Nations was taken in Congress. It didn’t pass, we’re sorry to report, but the easily understood measure received more support than expected, even exceeding the expectations of the courageous congressman who authored it. A total of 54 truly patriotic congressmen stood tall and voted on June 4th to have this nation withdraw from the world body. This development supplies a significant boost to the campaign we John Birch Society members have been waging for nearly four decades.

Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) took the initiative and offered the provisions of his previously introduced H.R. 1146, the "American Sovereignty Restoration Act," as an amendment to a State Department authorization bill. Dr. Paul correctly surmised that forcing a vote on H.R. 1146 itself would not occur for a good while. So he seized the opportunity to have his colleagues take a stand regarding U.S. membership in the world body by repackaging the entire measure and attaching it as an amendment to another bill. (H.R. 1146 is still "in the hopper," however, and seeking cosponsors for it is still one of our major projects.)

After sending a single-page "Dear Colleague" letter to the entire House membership, Dr. Paul took to the House floor on June 4th to ask his fellow congressmen to support his amendment to H.R. 1757, the 1998-99 State Department Authorization Act. Speaking very plainly and forthrightly, he told his colleagues and a national C-SPAN audience, "Our Constitution does not give us the authority to sell our sovereignty to an international body." After making that fundamentally important constitutional point, he then informed fellow House members that "even under the treaty provisions of the Constitution, it [ceding sovereignty] is not permissible."

After reminding all of the loss of American lives in Somalia "under the UN banner," Dr. Paul cited President Clinton’s recent West Point commencement address wherein the nation’s chief executive stated his desire to have American forces in NATO put their lives on the line to defend even more foreign nations. Then he brought up the matter of the huge monetary cost to our nation incurred because of 50 years of involvement in the UN.

Of the more than 100 amendments offered to the State Department Act, the Paul measure received the most attention by far. It brought out eight UN supporters for a lively, revealing, and, as Dr. Paul stated, "almost hysterical" debate on the matter. As the Texas Republican later noted, each of the UN supporters (without realizing it) actually made admissions against interest supporting the case for withdrawal.

Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) defended the UN by claiming that "the United States will be called upon more and more often to intervene in conflicts around the world to protect our vital interests." Not surprisingly, those "vital interests" weren’t articulated by him or by anyone else. The undefined phrase continues to be employed to justify U.S. involvement in UN "peacekeeping" and "peace-enforcing" missions that are unconstitutional and dangerous. Like other UN supporters, Hastings took cover in admitting that the UN needs to be "reformed." But if he had cancer or tuberculosis, he wouldn’t want it "reformed"; he’d want it eliminated! The UN is a cancer on the American body politic; it needs to be removed!

The supposedly conservative Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) then jumped into the debate to oppose the Paul amendment. He claimed that U.S. participation is not only legitimate but vitally needed because of the "humanitarian assistance" rendered by the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the UN High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR), the International Labor Organization (ILO), and the UN Protection Force (UNPROFOR). Smith pointed to UNICEF’s "global effort to eradicate diseases," UNHCR’s work helping "26 million" refugees, the ILO’s campaign to stop "the exploitation of kids, child labor," and the "successful interventions" of UNPROFOR’s "peacekeeping missions."

These and similar arguments have been used for decades to tug at the heartstrings of the American people while the easily demonstrated criminal history of the UN is swept under a rug. Even more, we are supposed to focus only on inoculating some children against disease while our own leaders trash U.S. sovereignty in favor of a godless one-world tyranny in the making.

Before the UN helped to chase a multitude of private and church groups out of Third World countries, many noble individuals were already helping to eradicate diseases at far less cost, with no support for tyrannical dictators, and in conjunction with programs designed to help the people they served become self-sustaining. Smith and others need to be told that lame excuses for remaining in the UN are comparable to ignoring the crimes of a gangster because he was once seen helping an elderly lady cross the street. Of course, gangsters like Al Capone did perform highly visible charitable acts in order to gain public support and provide protective coloring for their not-so-visible criminal agenda. Cannot congressmen see the same deceptive strategy at work in the form of the UN’s "humanitarian" efforts?

Dr. Paul’s response to Smith granted that some persons support UNICEF and the work it claims to have accomplished. "But," he stated, "the question is, do we have this authority to take money from poor people in this country and make these attempts to do these social programs overseas. I do not see the authority...." Beyond that, of course, it must be recognized that much of the UN’s "humanitarian" efforts hurt the very people they are supposedly intended to help — the UN’s support for Communist China’s "forced abortion" program being a case in point.

Chris Smith was followed to the podium by Benjamin Gilman (D-NY), Chris Shays (R-CT), Sam Gejdenson (D-CT), Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Eliot Engel (D-NY), and Nita Lowey (D-NY). They provided an assortment of palaver about "vital interests," "abject world poverty that exists around the world," failure to join and support the League of Nations as a cause of World War II, the UN’s role in "bringing democracy to southern Africa," using the UN "to shape the world in terms of what we would like to see," meeting "our responsibilities as a leader in the world," etc.

Ron Paul did his best in very limited time to combat this assortment of falsehoods and absurdities. At one point, he mentioned that it was "lonely" being the only member of the House speaking in favor of withdrawal from the UN. Certainly, some of his allies on this measure should have presented themselves and aided him during the debate.

But Dr. Paul himself was pleased when 53 of his colleagues joined him in voting for his amendment. (The tally was 369-54 with 12 not voting.) Letters of thanks to the 54 anti-UN stalwarts are certainly called for. Each should also be asked to cosponsor H.R. 1146 if he hasn’t already done so. (H.R. 1146 contains the same language used in the amendment.) Please send your personal notes of thanks to as many of these congressmen as your time and budget will allow — starting of course with Dr. Paul. In addition, if your representative is one of the 369 who voted to keep our nation in the UN, he should hear from you and from others you can persuade to write (see the sidebar below).

We have been informed by congressional sources that some conservative congressmen are not supporting H.R. 1146 because it calls for immediate instead of gradual withdrawal from the UN. Such congressmen should be informed that if there is sufficient reason to withdraw from the UN during a phaseout period of several years, there is sufficient reason to withdraw from the UN now!

Some conservative congressmen who might otherwise support H.R. 1146 are also reportedly troubled by the bill’s no-nonsense provision to cancel diplomatic immunity for UN personnel. These lawmakers should be asked why foreign diplomats stationed at a mission having nothing to do with the U.S. should be allowed to skirt the laws of this country and abuse the privilege of living here.

We’re on a Roll!

In order to get another sense of what the June 4th vote meant, we contacted the New York headquarters of the United Nations Association of the United States of America (UNA-USA). As expected, spokesman John Tessitore claimed that he and his organization were "not surprised" that 54 representatives voted for Ron Paul’s Get US out! amendment. He even gloated that "this is only 13 percent of the House membership, a number that reflects what pollsters tell us is the percentage of the American public that wishes the U.S. to withdraw." Yet, even though he insisted that UNA-USA was not worried that the U.S. might withdraw from the UN, there is no doubt the vote on the Paul amendment got the organization’s attention. Not only was such a vote unprecedented (a fact Tessitore acknowledged), but it is doubtful that four years ago more than four congressmen would have voted for withdrawal! When advised that congressional support for Getting US out! will continue to grow and that his polling data did not coincide with the growing public opposition to the UN the JBS detects, he responded, "We shall see."

And so we shall! Having 54 members of the House on record for getting the U.S. out of the UN is a big step toward our ultimate goal. There has never been a more propitious time for revving up our Get US out! engine. We are advised that Ron Paul’s office is already receiving a tremendous number of inquiries about H.R. 1146 from other members of the House. These inquiries are the direct result of the letters and calls they are receiving from constituents. This interest provides a splendid opportunity for gaining more congressional support for Ron Paul’s bill.

We will continue to report on our progress in the months ahead.

ACTION SUMMARY

Send a personal note of thanks to as many of the 54 congressmen who voted for Ron Paul’s Get US out! amendment as your time and budget will allow. Ask congressmen to cosponsor Dr. Paul’s Get US out! bill (H.R. 1146). If your own congressman voted against the Paul amendment, express your disappointment and encourage him to reverse his position.

How They Voted on Ron Paul’s Amendment to Get US out! of the UN

— June 4, 1997 —

NOTE: Cosponsors of H.R. 1146, Ron Paul’s still-pending bill to Get US out!, are marked with an asterisk.

Voted Yea (54)
Robert Aderholt (R-AL), Bob Barr (R-GA)*, Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), Henry Bonilla (R-TX), Dan Burton (R-IN), Helen Chenoweth (R-ID)*, Tom Coburn (R-OK), Larry Combest (R-TX), Philip Crane (R-IL), Michael Crapo (R-ID), Barbara Cubin (R-WY), Randy Cunningham (R-CA), Tom DeLay (R-TX), Jay Dickey (R-AR), John Doolittle (R-CA)*, John Duncan (R-TN), John Ensign (R-NV), Terry Everett (R-AL), Mark Foley (R-FL), James Gibbons (R-NV), Ralph Hall (D-TX)*, Joel Hefley (R-CO), Kenny Hulshof (R-MO), Duncan Hunter (R-CA), Ernest Istook (R-OK), Sam Johnson (R-TX), Walter Jones (R-NC), Jack Kingston (R-GA), Steve Largent (R-OK), John Linder (R-GA), Frank Lucas (R-OK), Donald Manzullo (R-IL), David McIntosh (R-IN), Jerry Moran (R-KS), George Nethercutt (R-WA), Bob Ney (R-OH)*, Ron Paul (R-TX)*, Richard Pombo (R-CA), Bob Riley (R-AL), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Jim Ryun (R-KS), Matt Salmon (R-AZ), Joe Scarborough (R-FL), Dan Schaefer (R-CO), Bob Schaffer (R-CO), Pete Sessions (R-TX), John Shadegg (R-AZ), Gerald Solomon (R-NY), Bob Stump (R-AZ)*, Gene Taylor (D-MS), Zach Wamp (R-TN), David Weldon (R-FL), Don Young (R-AK)

Did Not Vote (12)
Robert Andrews (D-NJ), Howard Berman (D-CA), Steve Buyer (R-IN), Sam Farr (D-CA), Chaka Fattah (D-PA), Newt Gingrich (R-GA), Virgil Goode (D-VA), William Jefferson (D-LA), Tom Lantos (D-CA), Charles Pickering (R-MS), Edward Royce (R-CA), Steven Schiff (R-NM)

Voted Nay (369)
The remaining 369 representatives whose names are not listed above voted against the Get US out! amendment.

marble border by Windy's design Studio