Government Bullies: How Everyday Americans Are Being Harassed, Abused, and Imprisoned by the Feds

by Rand Paul

  Regulations that help keep America’s waterways clean and safe are indeed important, but these days the EPA and the Army Corps are abusing the authority they were given for a power grab at the expense of private property owners. Your legislation would rein in these out-of-control agencies and restore balance between the important goals of controlling water pollution and protecting private property rights.

  The American Land Rights Association, a long-standing nationwide defender of property rights, joined the fight and promised to “do our best to encourage our members and allies to support S.2122 and ultimately help it pass Congress. [S.2122] is a necessary step toward protecting private property rights from overkill by the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers.”

  The Kentucky Farm Bureau, the largest general farm organization in our commonwealth, representing over half a million member families, wrote that it “compliments you for introducing S.2122. Your legislation reflects our concern about the economic well-being of not only Kentucky’s farmers, but also many small business owners who are affected by excessive regulatory oversight.”

  James Delong, author of Property Matters: How Property Rights Are Under Assault—And Why You Should Care, added his support:

  Congress enacted the laws protecting the nation’s waters to promote navigation and prevent pollution. Aggressive federal agencies and their environmental extremist clients have, instead, hijacked them, converting them into tools to prevent reasonable land uses and extort money from property owners for the benefit of favored environmental groups and causes. The Defense of Environment and Property Act of 2012 (S.2122) is a step toward returning federal water laws to their original purposes, and toward restoring fairness and predictability to environmental protection.

  The Beseechers and the Old Guard

  There are two things I have found most disturbing during my time in Washington. The first is the omnipresent groups of lobbyists and special interests who every day descend upon every Capitol Hill office in droves.

  I have come to refer to them as the Beseechers. Their hands are always out. They are here to tell me why their cause/product/disease/group is by far the most—in fact possibly the only—one deserving of large amounts of federal dollars, tax breaks, subsidies, or special rules and privileges.

  I will admit, with some pride, that unlike many of my colleagues, my day is not filled with these types of meetings. That’s because word tends to spread quickly among this rather incestuous Capitol Hill community that while my door is always open to taxpayers, my office demands that anyone wanting money—for any cause no matter how necessary or noble—must first explain where the money will come from. What existing program will they delete to pay for their desired program?

  If you’ve come for more federal money, well, guess what—we’re broke.

  If you’ve come for a special-interest tax break, you’ll get yours when everyone does—no special favors.

  If you’ve come to have a rule written to stifle your competition—you’ll more likely find my office hard at work repealing rules, not creating them.

  You get the idea. And often, so have the Beseechers.

  But I have been very clear, if you are a person, company, industry—anyone at all who is looking to get the government out of your way—by all means, please step into my office, I’m all ears.

  If you are among those trying to repeal bureaucracy and slash through red tape—I am the one who will help you.

  If you are trying to fight back against government abuse and tyranny—I am fighting for you and with you every day.

  Often the interests of liberty-loving individuals and the interests of job-creating industries will intersect. One such place (or so I thought) was in fighting the out-of-control EPA.

  You see, for every Sackett family trying to build a small project, there is also a mall or shopping center developer who is so harassed to death by the government that they give up on their project.

  For every John Pozsgai who wants to build on one small plot of land, there is a farming conglomerate or coal mining company that wants to use hundreds or thousands of acres.

  The small businessman who wants to earn a living and create jobs is stifled, but so are larger companies interested in profits and that can create even more jobs.

  Helping them all should have been easy. And as you can see from those who support the bill, those who are on the ground creating jobs in these industries did in fact support our efforts. There were many major businesses and business leaders who supported my efforts. But not all of them.

  So who did not?

  The Beseechers. That special, entitled class of Washington swamp dwellers who are supposed to be in the nation’s capital to represent interests like farmers and coal miners, but whose main interest seems to be fat paychecks, the status quo, and currying favor with elected officials in senior positions that affect their industries.

  As my staff and I worked on the Defense of Environment and Property Act, I continually heard two very different stories.

  Back home in Kentucky, when talking to property owners, farmers, coal miners, and operators, I heard great support, even great joy, when I told them about the bill. The EPA, the Corps, and the various wetlands regulations were considered a complete nightmare for many constituents I spoke to. Indeed, it seemed half of the business owners in my state had a story to tell on this particular method of bullying by Washington bureaucrats.

  But when I would ask my staff about the national farming, mining, or developers’ groups—each representing thousands of business owners who shared this outrage at the EPA—I was told they were not helpful or supportive of the little guys. In fact, they discouraged any attempts to provide an ultimate fix, preferring to nibble around the edges and limit the damage of regulations but allow the incremental loss of property rights.

  Their lobbyists and officials in Washington varied from refusing to work with my staff to actively discouraging us from putting forth this legislation.

  They instead favored leaving the status quo alone and simply going after the new, even more far-reaching regulations being put forward by the EPA under President Obama. Their logic? They maintain that we would anger the environmentalists if we attempted to define “navigable waters.” I responded that the environmental extremists who drive this debate already live in a constant state of angry emotionalism.

  This tactical surrender was also supported by senior members of my caucus—the Old Guard—with an interest in these issues.

  I was less than amused. The senior senators who were supposed to keep the EPA under control and the Washington representatives of the major effected industries were colluding to stop my bill.

  Let me be clear. They weren’t just quietly trying to persuade me from doing this. These big business interests and senior senators were actively and vocally undermining my efforts to help. I drew laughs in my caucus when I joked that even though Senator So-and-so was actively opposing my Defense of Property bill, I would actively support his incrementalist approach, as I did not see them as mutually exclusive.

  I spent the better part of six months trying to work with all sides here, offering to craft specific legislative language. Admitting that perhaps others who had been dealing with these issues longer might have something to add to the solution, I repeatedly attempted to engage them on how to better the bill.

  Finally, growing frustrated and sensing that those involved thus far really did not want to fully fix the problem, I let it be known before leaving Capitol Hill at the end of one week that I would be introducing this legislation when Congress resumed the following week.

  I was immediately summoned to a meeting. This meeting involved a senior Republican senator with an interest in the wetlands issue. It also involved the lobbyists for nearly a dozen interest groups. I already had the support of many of the members these groups purported to represent here, but I was in for a surprise.

  I was basically told to sit down and shut up. Industry was not interested in fighting t
he battle, I was told. This particular senior senator told me there was no point, that we would lose.

  The Old Guard and the Beseechers sensed someone messing with their turf.

  I was having none of it. In fact, it just made me more sure what I was doing was right, and more determined to take this battle forward.

  I left the room and immediately began making phone calls. I called some of the major dues-paying CEOs of the national groups. They were astounded at what their supposed representatives were doing.

  I called the state chapters—many of whom I knew to be on my side—to urge them to go on record with their support, to shame their national groups into action.

  Outside groups like the American Land Rights Association and FreedomWorks began what I expect to be a long battle for support for my bill.

  When an agency gets as out of control as the EPA has become, it is madness to simply allow the damage it has done for thirty years to stand. Waiting around to perhaps fight the EPA when they make another bad move is not exactly a prudent or productive strategy.

  Yet this is exactly what the Old Guard and the Beseechers wanted to do.

  In the end, I am reminded that those who make a living in Washington peddling influence rarely want to see major change. Change is the enemy of the entrenched establishment, be it the Tea Party challenging the big-spending Republicans, or liberty activists challenging the corporate welfare of Washington.

  The battle for this bill will go on. John Rapanos fought for over twenty years. Mike and Chantell Sackett have been fighting for nearly fifteen years. Robert Lucas has rotted in jail for ten years and his eighty-year-old engineer suffers the same fate. I just arrived in Congress last year, but it is clear to me that what they were up against wasn’t just the EPA. It wasn’t just the Army Corps of Engineers. It wasn’t a Democratic regulator versus a Republican regulator. It was, and is, the most powerful Leviathan of all—the Establishment and all its inertia and bureaucracy combining to maintain the status quo.

  If Americans demand change, the Establishment demands that they endure the status quo. If citizens stand up, the Establishment insists that they stand down. If we mouth our grievances, the Establishment will insist that we shut up.

  But I, for one, will not watch quietly as unelected bureaucrats continue to bleed us of our freedoms. I will not remain quiet. I cannot. And I will fight until I have no voice left to fight.

  PART 2

  The Lacey Act—An Open License for Government Bullying

  “HE has combined with others to subject us to a Jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our Laws… FOR transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended Offences…”

  —THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE’S

  GRIEVANCES AGAINST KING GEORGE III

  8

  Leave American Businesses Alone

  “The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would steal them away.”

  —RONALD REAGAN

  When I first heard that federal agents had raided the Gibson Guitar Corporation brandishing automatic weapons and confiscating millions of dollars in merchandise, computers, and equipment—well, I was horrified. My horror turned into absolute disbelief when I heard what Gibson was actually being accused of: violating a foreign law. Astonishingly, the U.S. Justice Department was trying to hold Gibson executives criminally liable for this. Our government wanted to prosecute these private businessmen and throw them in jail.

  I personally called the CEO of Gibson, Henry Juszkiewicz, and invited him to come to Capitol Hill to testify about his ordeal. Most CEOs would have declined, choosing instead to shield themselves from any possible trouble that could arise from speaking out. Facing possible criminal charges, most men in Mr. Juszkiewicz’s position would have simply taken solace in the safety of their attorneys.

  Not him.

  Mr. Juszkiewicz showed up on Capitol Hill, without any attorney, and publicly told the story of what his own government was trying to do to him and to Gibson.

  The details of the story are as bad as you might expect—but as Mr. Juszkiewicz himself mentioned to me that day in Washington, at least he was big enough to fight back. The government can try to bully him and his company all they want, but Gibson can afford to hire an army of lawyers. The government can seize millions from Gibson—but Mr. Juszkiewicz has millions more.

  But there are many more—hundreds if not thousands—of Americans who simply cannot afford to fight back against their own government. It is for these people, the countless hardworking, taxpaying citizens just trying to play by the rules and do what’s right, that Mr. Juszkiewicz and I fight this battle.

  The Lacey Act is a frightening example of our government criminalizing activity that really shouldn’t be criminal. David McNab and Abner Schoenwetter are victims of the Lacey Act who spent years in federal prison for “violating” invalid Honduran fishing regulations. Even Honduras’s government insisted that they did not want these businessmen imprisoned—yet this did not deter the U.S. government from doing it anyway.

  This is insane. We’ve lost our way.

  The Lacey Act is a primary example of the infuriating tyranny that typically accompanies government expansion. The original intent was conservation—to prohibit trafficking in “illegal” wildlife, fish, and plants. The act was first signed into law in 1900, and has had subsequent amendments (in 1935, 1969, 1981, 1988, and most recently in 2008).

  Legal scholars seem to agree that the end result of this act is an extremely broad law that contains harsh criminal penalties for the vaguest of reasons. The original maximum penalty for violating the Lacey Act was a $200 fine. No imprisonment was envisioned for such violations. But mere $200 fines don’t make legislators seem “tough on crime,” apparently, even if the “crime” amounts to bickering over the size of a lobster tail (the difference between four and six ounces can be a major criminal offense).

  The Lacey Act’s broad and unspecific delegation of congressional power to foreign governments runs completely afoul of Article I of the Constitution, which vests all legislative powers in the United States Congress.

  It also runs afoul of common sense. Try explaining to any American that they could go to jail simply for buying or selling a product that is illegal under foreign law—not U.S. law. Try explaining to them that it wouldn’t really matter if they were aware they were breaking these laws or not.

  Of course, most Americans would look at you like you’d lost your mind. This is exactly how we should be looking at our government right now—like it has lost its mind.

  It would be easy for a conservative Republican to look at the most recent high-profile Lacey Act atrocity—the action taken against Gibson—and see an overzealous Obama administration at fault. There’s some merit to this. The Gibson case began under the Obama administration. The first raid was in 2009 and the second was in 2011.

  But if you look deeper, the problem isn’t as simple as an overly aggressive Obama administration. It is similar to what causes so many of the other problems in our government—the U.S. Congress.

  The Lacey Act amendments that passed in 2008 are at the root of Gibson’s struggle. And they are, once again, examples of our myriad of problems in Washington.

  First, these amendments were not passed as a stand-alone bill. Two of the reforms I have advocated in Congress—“Read the Bills” and “One Subject at a Time”—would have likely stopped these amendments from ever passing.

  You see, the 2008 additions to the Lacey Act were passed as part of the multiyear gigantic farm bill. What problem, exactly, were these changes trying to solve?

  Deforestation in Malaysia.

  I’ll pause while you wonder why Congress was thinking for even one nanosecond that it either needs to address or somehow could impact deforestation in Malaysia.

  Still, there was our Congress, international busybodies at work. While most Americans are worried about trillion-dollar deficits, a health care crisis, and a crumbling infr
astructure, in 2008 our illustrious Capitol Hill leaders were more concerned with Malaysian deforestation.

  Rosewood and ebony, two of the most prized woods for making quality guitar fretboards, are found in Malaysian forests. But the guitar manufacturers of the world—Gibson only being one of them—are responsible for barely 5 percent of the consumption of Malaysian rosewood and ebony. So what accounts for the other 95 percent? Who, or what, is the primary culprit (if there is one) in the destruction of Malaysian forests?

  Wealthy Chinese, who use this wood for furniture.

  For some reason we will probably never really know, the U.S. Congress is interested in fixing an alleged problem in Malaysian forests. So they pass a law that even at its best hope of success would only fix 5 percent of the problem—leaving the Chinese to do whatever damage they like with the other 95 percent.

  American jobs will be lost. Americans will be left scratching their heads, wondering how these legislators even managed to get into high office in the first place. Let’s not leave out that this amendment to the Lacey Act passed under the Bush administration, not President Obama’s.

  Now we are left trying to fix the problem.

  To explain the Lacey Act a bit more, I’m going to tell you three horror stories—that of Gibson, that of some Honduran fishermen, and that of a Kentucky family harvesting “caviar” from fish in the Ohio River. These stories will shock you, anger you, and, hopefully, motivate you to join the fight to restore sanity to our country’s laws.

  9

  Stringing Up Gibson Guitar

  “ ‘The godfather of rock ’n’ roll,’ I call him. Without him, none of us would have a job.”

  —BON JOVI GUITARIST RICHIE SAMBORA ON GIBSON GUITAR LEGEND LES PAUL