In keeping with his libertarian philosophy, Paul has long opposed any government regulation of the Internet, however well-intentioned. In the past, he’s co-sponsored (with liberal Rep. Barney Frank (D) of Massachusetts) a bill to allow greater Internet gambling, for instance. He was the first House Republican to come out against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) earlier this year, saying that it was a form of government censorship.
“Internet freedom” is the third issue Paul’s supporters have said they’d like to see become a plank in the 2012 GOP platform. Will the rest of the party agree? Perhaps, if the formulation is vague – after all, many party lawmakers did end up opposing SOPA, which helped lead to its defeat. Romney called SOPA a “threat to freedom of speech.”
But this is an area of law where interests clash, leading to unpredictable partisan effects. Would the GOP oppose all antipiracy efforts, for example? That seems unlikely, given the big businesses hurt by pirated movies, music, and so forth.
In any case, do platform planks matter? Few people read them, and few nominees feel bound by them, as conservative author Edward Morrissey pointed out in a recent piece in the newsmagazine “The Week.”
Paul’s real endgame, according to Mr. Morrissey, is not platform planks, but gradually gaining control over as many party organizations as possible, as we noted at the beginning of this article.
“The real goal was to seize control of party apparatuses in states that rely on caucuses. With that in hand, Paul’s organization can direct party funds and operations to recruit and support candidates that follow Paul’s platform, and in that way exert some influence on the national Republican Party as well, potentially for years to come,” writes Morrissey.
