text: National Review cited the ASRA as an example of grassroots effort "to educate the American people about the efforts of foreign tyrants to disarm them".
  On its front page, the Victoria, Texas, Advocate, a newspaper in Paul's district, expressed pride for the Act in the face of what it called several undeclared "United Nations wars".
  Henry Lamb considers it "the only way to be sure that the U.S. will win the showdown at the U.N. Corral", considering that without withdrawal, U.N. claims of diplomatic immunity and Congressional subpoena power threaten each other, as in the oil-for-food scandal.
  Critics say it "undoubtedly paints a bull's-eye across the entire country". Tim Wirth, president of the United Nations Foundation, finds the bill contrary to United States interests: "This piece of legislation has been brought by Ron Paul every year over the last 20 [sic] years and it never goes anywhere."
  A policy review of U.S.–Canada relations describes the Act as reflecting "extreme views", but indicative of a majority pro-sovereignty view in Congress, expressed in tighter border and immigration policy, unilateralism in foreign policy, and increased national security focus.
  The 2002 Republican Party of Texas platform explicitly urged passage of the ASRA; withdrawal from the U.N. had been on the platform at least since 1998.