I'm skeptical the GOP falls completely in line with the idea to get rid of the Federal Reserve; I sense temporary schism on this issue. Using the Hastert rule, it might not even come to a vote in the House, but if it does there are probably 20-odd Republicans (at least) willing to vote against it and I doubt there are any Democrats willing to vote for it. The Senate is even bleaker if Democrats have a majority. I certainly doubt the GOP can manage a filibuster-proof majority on this one and the Democrats will certainly filibuster if necessary. But again, I don't think a filibuster is necessary, I think it fails to even make it to the floor.
The drug war would be incredibly interesting because there's a lot of required enforcement legislation that goes beyond executive prerogative. Convincing Congress to repeal that legislation is another uphill battle for a lot of Republicans who rely on the Christian Right to get elected. At the same time, Paul seems like the kind of guy who might just stop enforcement anyway and then fight it out in the courts. It'd be kind of hilarious to see someone like Paul, noted opponent of the strong executive, arguing fervently for a strong executive.
Getting out of Afghanistan is the least controversial item here and I can see it going forward at a quicker pace.
One thing Zacoftheaxes doesn't mention that I think is a more likely item on the agenda is tax reform. It's such a messy issue I don't feel confident making a prediction on what happens, but I can see him going for it in a big way.
And if we're talking about Paul being elected in 2012 or 2016 his first big push might very well be an attempt to roll back health care reform. Obviously some chance of success here if he's elected in 2012 (though I'm betting against total success.) I think he'd have less chance of success in 2016, as we're already seeing a lot of Republicans buying into the plan to one degree or another.
?