 
Rand Paul is a member of the Republican Party, a U.S. Senator representing the state of Kentucky since 2011, and a former candidate for president of the United States. His voting record was rated 26% liberal in 2011 by "National Journal".
Paul identifies as both a "constitutional conservative" and a "libertarian conservative."
 ;templatestyles src="Template:TOC limit/styles.css" / ;
Domestic policy.
Economic and fiscal policy.
Paul is a libertarian conservative on economic issues, and believes the federal government should be limited, taxes should be low, spending and foreign aid should be cut, and the U.S. federal budget should be balanced. Paul has sought to reduce the funds lent by the Export-Import Bank of the United States to countries that hold U.S. debt. He compared the practice to corporate welfare and stated that it was wrong that we "borrow billions of dollars from China, India, and Saudi Arabia then we loan it back to them again."
Budget.
For his 2016 presidential campaign he stated, "As president of the United States, I will work to balance our budget and only spend what comes in. We must cut spending in all areas, particularly areas that are better run by state and local governments." Paul supports cutting government federal spending, a balanced budget amendment, and lowering taxes. He has criticized both Republicans and Democrats on deficit spending. Paul has been a longtime opponent of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.
Federal Reserve.
For his presidential campaign, he stated that he wanted to audit the Federal Reserve. Paul opposes the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and the Federal Reserve's control of the money supply and interest rates, has advocated allowing the free market to regulate interest rates, and supports Congress' constitutional role in controlling the money supply. Paul endorses the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, a bill originally introduced by his father as HR 1207 and reintroduced in the 114th U.S. Congress as S 264 (by Senator Paul), and as HR 24 (by Rep. Thomas Massie), mandating an audit of the Federal Reserve. Paul has also expressed support for abolition of the Federal Reserve.
Taxes.
Paul supports a flat 14.5% tax rate on all Americans. In each year from 2011 through 2013, Paul has received a grade of A from the National Taxpayers Union, a conservative taxpayers advocacy organization.
In 2014, with attorney James Bopp and Republicans Overseas, among others, Paul sued the IRS, challenging the constitutionality of FATCA, in "Crawford v. U.S. Department of Treasury", which argued that FATCA and related intergovernmental agreements violated the Senate's power with respect to treaties, the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment, or the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizures. In 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio dismissed the suit, determining that the plaintiffs lacked standing. In 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the dismissal. In 2017, Rand introduced S 869 to Congress, in an effort to repeal FATCA.
Trade.
The Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies has identified Paul as a "free trader" during his Senate tenure, indicating a pro-free trade, pro-market, and anti-subsidies voting record. In January 2018, Paul was one of thirty-six Republican senators to sign a letter to President Trump requesting he preserve the North American Free Trade Agreement by modernizing it for the current and future economy.
Energy and the environment.
Paul does not accept the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change, claiming that it is "not conclusive." Paul has said that pollution emissions are subject to "onerous regulation," and supports allowing the free market to determine which forms of energy to use. He opposes subsidizing energy companies, but would support allowing tax breaks for companies that produce alternative energy such as wind, solar, or geothermal. He has said that subsidizing the energy industry will only add incentive for companies to lobby the federal government.
National security and defense policy.
Paul opposes the USA PATRIOT Act, including warrantless searches. He has also proposed eliminating the Transportation Security Administration and opposes the extrajudicial killing of American citizens in the United States who are terrorism suspects. He opposes the domestic use of drones as a means of surveillance, deeming it a violation of "the right to privacy that all Americans have", but supports drones being used in response to an imminent threat.
Paul voted against the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA) and 2013, both of which contain provisions in it that allow the U.S. government to indefinitely detain its citizens without due process.
He did however vote for the Feinstein-Lee NDAA Amendment to Section 1033 in the NDAA 2013, which states: "An authorization to use military force, a declaration of war, or any similar authority shall not authorize the detention without charge or trial of a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States apprehended in the United States, unless an Act of Congress expressly authorizes such detention." Civil liberties groups, such as the ACLU, were concerned with this amendment because they think anyone on American soil should be given a trial if accused of a crime, given that the U.S. Constitution protects "persons," rather than "citizens." and also worried that the amendment could be construed to actually imply that the U.S. government has the constitutional authority for indefinite detention without charge and trial.
Abortion and bioethics.
Paul is opposed to abortion. However, in a 2013 interview, he said that he would not oppose abortion in some individual cases involving a woman's health. He opposes the use of federal, state, or local government funds for abortion.
During a 2014 CNN interview with Pete Hamby, he said that he supported the use of medications (such as the morning-after pill) to prevent pregnancy because Plan B is basically "taking two birth control pills in the morning and two in the evening and I'm not opposed to that."
Describing himself as "100% pro life," Paul has said, "I believe life begins at conception and it is the duty of our government to protect this life... I have stated many times that I will always vote for any and all legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion." He has been a sponsor or cosponsor of several legislative measures to effectively ban virtually all abortions by recognizing a legal right to life of human embryos from the moment of fertilization.
Paul favors a federal ban on abortion, but he has said that until the U.S. Supreme Court overturns "Roe v. Wade" or the nation passes a constitutional amendment to ban abortions nationwide, the legality of abortion should be left to the individual states to decide without federal involvement.
During his senate campaign, Paul said he received a 100% pro-life score on a Kentucky Right to Life survey and said he had indicated on the survey form that he opposed human cloning for use in embryonic stem-cell research or medical treatments. This was disputed by Kentucky Right to Life, however, who endorsed Paul's primary opponent instead and said that Paul had not, in fact, answered the stem-cell research question. As reported by the "Cincinnati Enquirer" at the time, the Kentucky Right to Life produced a hard-copy of the survey form from Paul showing that he had not answered the question while his campaign produced an electronic copy of the form showing that he had answered the question. He received a perfect score from the National Right to Life Committee.
Civil rights.
Rand Paul's views on civil rights have evolved over time, particularly on the issue of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In the early 2010s, Paul expressed some opposition to the Civil Rights Act, arguing that it violated the rights of private business owners to discriminate against their customers. However, in recent years, Paul has softened his stance on the Civil Rights Act. In 2014, he praised the act during a commemoration of its 50th anniversary. He said that the act had changed the future of the nation by enforcing the belief that all men and women are created equal. 
Paul has spoken out against racial discrimination, particularly with in law enforcement and the U.S. prison system.
LGBT rights.
Paul opposes protecting sexual orientation or gender identity at the federal level, supports marriage privatization (since June 28, 2015), "contracts between adults", opposes the Equality Act of 2015, supported the "United States v. Windsor" ruling declaring Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional," opposed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013, supported the Obama Administration policy of tying foreign aid to LGBT rights, said he doesn't believe in the concept of gay rights because he didn't believe in "rights based on your behavior," opposed the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2011 and 2013, supports a neutral federal tax code on marriage, supports Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act, supports the First Amendment Defense Act, opposes Executive Order 12968, Executive Order 13087, and Executive Order 13672. His views on LGBT rights are aligned with libertarian perspectives on LGBT rights, with the exception of his support for Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act and First Amendment Defense Act. He has received support from prominent LGBT libertarians/conservatives such as Peter Thiel and Gregory Angelo. In 2010, he supported a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage nationwide.
On the basis of his support for policy-based protections for LGBT people, the Human Rights Campaign gave him a score of 47% for the 112th United States Congress. Between 2011 and 2013, he didn't co-sponsor the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the Respect for Marriage Act, the Tax Parity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act, the Uniting American Families Act, the Tax Parity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act, the Uniting American Families Act, and the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act.
The Human Rights Campaign gave Paul a score of 20% for the 113th U.S. Congress. During his 113th career, he didn't co-sponsor the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the Respect for Marriage Act, the Student Non-Discrimination Act, and the Safe Schools Improvement Act.
Views on Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
In May 2010, Paul told the Louisville Courier-Journal that he thinks "Don't ask, don't tell" has "worked relatively well" and supported a "non-fraternization" policy for everyone in the U.S. military. In August 2010, he completed a voter guide that indicated he was in favor of enforcing the policy.
On September 23, 2010, Paul's campaign spokesman, Gary Howard, said in an e-mail about Paul's position on "Don't ask, don't tell" that, "Dr. Paul believes this is a matter that should be decided by the leadership of the military, not through political posturing."
Views on same-sex marriage.
In 2009, Paul stated that he opposes same-sex marriage and believes the issue of same-sex marriage should be left to the states to decide. In August 2010 in a voter guide, Paul answered in support of a Federal Marriage Amendment to prevent same-sex marriage.
On May 12, 2012, Paul said at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition that "Call me cynical, but I wasn't sure his views on marriage could get any gayer."
On January 30, 2013, Rand, appearing on "Focal Point", stated that he believes in "traditional marriage" and didn't "understand any other kind of marriage." He also expressed support for Kentucky's state constitutional ban and stated that states should decide the issue and the federal government shouldn't be involved. When asked about the Defense of Marriage Act, he was "not sure" what his position was on it.
On March 24, 2013, Paul suggested on Fox News that he wouldn't mind if the U.S. Supreme Court struck down "the federalization part" of the Defense of Marriage Act and he believes the issue should be left up to the states.
On June 26, 2013, Paul told ABC News that the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in "United States v. Windsor" was appropriate and the issue should be left to the states. He stated that "As a country we can agree to disagree," and "As a Republican Party, that's kind of where we are as well. The party is going to have to agree to disagree on some of these issues." He praised and agreed with Justice Anthony Kennedy for preventing a "culture war", whom he called "someone who doesn't just want to be in front of opinion but wants government to keep up with opinion." He said Kennedy "tried to strike a balance." Also that same day, while talking with Glenn Beck, Paul responded to Glenn Beck by asking whether or not the "United States v. Windsor" has to apply only to