What Constitutional authority President Paul would have to eliminate the CIA, DEA, NSA, FBI, NEA, FDA, FTC, IRS, and all the other things he says he will eliminate. Wouldn̢۪t that have to originate in Congress?
If he leaves Congress, who is left to sponsor a bill to do these things?
Of course you’re right, he has no authority to do that as president.
However, he does have authority to veto everything coming across his desk until congress does it. If he wins the presidency (unlikely or not), congress often works to accomplish what he president ran and won on (as they value their jobs). Paul has talked about the fact that despite his seemingly ‘radical agenda’, he would move slowly and measured and not seek to abolish all these bloated and useless agencies, Dept of Edu, Dept of Enviro, HUD etc... all at once, but rather dismantle it piece by piece in the most feasible way.
You're argument is hollow but I'll attempt an answer anyway.The reason I say it's hollow is that EVERY OTHER CANDIDATE gives their opinion on a range of issues,not just the ones over which the executive has any control."Why do we care how X feels about this,when it is congress that makes the laws."That goes for all candidates.You might just as well ask,"Why do we care what Romney thinks about abortion,what can the president do?Doesn't that have to originate with congress?"(I think we would all agree it does NOT originate with the courts).
To begin with,if elected he would run the Unitary Executive branch.If you aren't familiar with the Unitary Executive debate,there's much on-line Google is your friend.
The Supreme Court's embrace of the “unitary executive” would sound the death knell for independent regulatory agencies as they have existed since the Great Depression, when they were structured with shared control between the Congress and the President. Putting the agencies under the President’s thumb would tip the balance of Washington power to the White House and invite abuses by letting the Executive turn on and off enforcement investigations.
During the Reagan administration in 1983, (now Chief Justice)Roberts said it was time to “reconsider the existence” of independent regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission, and to “take action to bring them back within the Executive Branch.”
I don't think this has been resolved yet to anyone's satifaction,but it's out there. The founders wanted to ensure that congress couldn't exercise undue influence with the executive,so besides the Senate confirming the heads of departments,the president is free to run these departments as he sees fit.I don't know any reason that on his first day in office he couldn't just dismiss every employee of the departments you've cited.Any of the organizations under the executive branch would come under his jurisdiction,along with the ability to hire and fire as he sees fit(would that our government allow private companies to do the same without fear of legal repercussions).
Secondly,supposing that this argument doesn't convince the Supreme Court,all of these agencies need funding to exist.Let's give Dr. No a chance with the veto pen.I'd love to see a president veto all the garbage that comes to his desk.It's funny that he introduced a bill to make sure that congressmen had adequate time to read legislation before they voted on it(the nerve of him!).The damn medical prescription bill and the patriot act would still be in the process of being digested.LOL!
I don't know that he's called for the elimination of all the bureaus you've cited,but I trust him to do what's right,and I don't trust many politicians.I for one wouldn't shed any tears at the demise of the NEA,DEA and IRS.One thing I'm sure of is that he is not in this for himself.
If he leaves Congress, who is left to sponsor a bill to do these things?
This is a sorry argument.One congressman,who typically gets 2 (if that)sponsors for these bills can only express his opinion.As president,he would see that 2/3 of each house would have to agree to pass odiuos legislation.