House GOP to Obama: Drop Net Neutrality Agenda
by Capitol ConfidentialTop Republican lawmakers last week sent President Barack Obama a letter protesting the Federal Communications Commission’s recent overture at adopting so-called net neutrality rules, asking that he block the agency’s controversial move to reclassify broadband.
House GOP leaders John Boehner and Eric Cantor said the FCC’s proposal to reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service “could hardly come at a worse time for our nation’s economy, which is already struggling against a steady flow of increased government spending and taxation from Washington.”
The plan, announced to much fan fare among liberal special interests groups, calls for broadband to be regulated under a framework developed in the 1930s for traditional telephone services. It was widely seen among Capitol Hill observers as an end-run around a recent appeals court ruling in which the FCC was found to be lacking regulatory authority in the realm of broadband services.
“As the pretext for this government takeover of yet another sector of our economy, the Chairman claims he cannot implement the broadband plan in the wake of the Comcast decision,” the pair’s letter read. “Even if this assertion were true, the Chairman’s proper course should be to seek additional authority from Congress.”
In the days and weeks following the landmark ruling, members of Congress expressed concern over the Commission’s direction. Discounting the court’s ruling and altogether avoiding Congressional action, they feared, would set a dangerous precedent for other federal agencies whose respective agendas have been dealt blows.
“Instead, the Chairman has chosen a politically-motivated end-run around both the courts and the Congress to implement his network neutrality regulations,” the two warned the president.
Separately, Texas Republican Joe Barton, who sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said federal programs to supplement broadband deployment by subsidizing its costs–another plank of a pro-net neutrality agenda- are unnecessary and counterproductive.
“We’ve got a broadband deployment program right now — it’s called free enterprise, Barton said at a hearing of the committee’s communications and internet subcommittee. “This is a solution that’s looking for a problem that I don’t believe exists.”
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
212 Comments
Oddly enough, they can mask it however they wish, and attempt to call it whatever they want, but lets cut to the bottom line. It is about one thing, and one thing only: generating new tax revenues. Period.
Thankfully, this is being opposed. It just kills me that everytime a Democrat is in the White House, this outright attempt at a communications monopoly gets floated out under the guise of neutrality. The Dems cannot stand the thought of a fair fight or a level playing field. They know they would lose on sheer principal (or lack thereof) alone…
The problem is they do not care, they are trying to wring out the last of the dollars to re-distribute the wealth and control all of us. The problem for them will still exist. We know how to make money and will thrive once again and the class that chooses to suck the government teat will still be waiting with their hands out for money they have never worked for.
Obama can't win the minds of the people without controlling the information highway.
The problem the chosen one has is that the believers don't worship him anymore.
The People no longer will allow the Socialists to tax us into oblivion. November is just around the corner and the Liberal machine is running out of gas and the car, now flaming is headed over a cliff. Can we pull it from the brink in time?
The internet joins Mack Daddy's growing hate-list that includes FoxNews, Arizona, Whitey, capitalism, sugar, coke, pizza and burgers, the iPod, Apple, SUV's, oil and gas, Sean Hannity and Rush, Investors Busimess Daily, the WSJ, Navy Seals, U.S. Marines, the National Guard, guns, big-oil, big-pharma, big-insurance, corporate profits, private healthcare, natural gas, coal, fishing, hunting, mining, fat people, climate change and cold winters, Christians, the Easter Bunny, Christmas, the Pope, our constitution, the Supreme Court, etc.
Actually it's about Two thing – Tax revenue AND Control.
You mean can WE get out of the car and LET the car (The Socialist Administration) keep going off the cliff.
Add AMERICAN TAXPAYER to the list too!
You know government bureaucracy is WAY outa hand when an unelected offical can be told DIRECTLY that his actions are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and their first thought is "I know how to get around this!"
Exactly.
Once the tax consequenses are in motion, that is how they take control.
"…a recent appeals court ruling in which the FCC was found to be lacking regulatory authority in the realm of broadband services…"
- BHO&Co.: "What's a court?"
“Even if this assertion were true, the Chairman’s proper course should be to seek additional authority from Congress.”
- should be ? What about "is" or "must" ?
- BHO&Co.: "Congess, what Congress?
"… members of Congress expressed concern …Discounting the court’s ruling and altogether avoiding Congressional action, they feared, would set a dangerous precedent for other federal agencies …"
- they "feared"? FEARED?? EXPRESSED CONCERN???
- American people: "What Congress?"
Disgusting !
If one controls the information, one controls the masses.
Gutenberg, with his printing press, and his Bible for the layman, did the same thing several hundred years ago. He revolutionized the world, with easily assimilated information. He did then, what the computer and the internet does now.
You forgot salt(except when used in wounds)
Welcome to the New World Socialists Order!! Obama is just following what other socialists countries are doing…it's up to US to STOP HIM!!!
The left is only happy when media goes their way. I discovered a toolkit for leftist activists that calls them to work and infiltrate the media, the church, the schools. They are talking about "active" media protecting them. http://www.bigbureaucracy.com/?p=1063 Neutrality is nonsense – attempt to shut us down.
It might help Cantor with the sympathy angle if he could demonstrate who's been shooting at him this week.
He who controls the internet…
Would they classify email spam as some sort of wire fraud?
Such a big bundle of love eh?! His hit list gets longer everyday -
In other words, everything we hold dear.
I don't mind rubbing some in O'Bummer's. How's his approval rating looking now?
I saw that as well Texas and yep, they were all inactive – I saved a few, for what it's worth
It's not about taxes for christ sake, it's about keeping people in the dark – how the he** else can the monsters keep rolling over us?
If someone did, it would probably be a progressive, fascist leaning, non-acount-holding internet troll, driven to such desperation over the lack of support by the public for his Oraacle, Obama, that he ventured out of the basement he had ben sequestered in for years under his parents' house……
(I can play that bloomberg game, too
)
try this one instead of google or bing,http://www13.wolframalpha.com/
Don't hold your breath waiting for Obama. He is FOR electronic brainwash.
Anytime this administration wants to "help" us (net NEUTRALITY, my eye), we'd best look for the underlying motives. For the longest time I could not understand why this administration refused to treat the war on terror as a war instead of a law enforcement issue. Then we got the multiple instances of where the Justice Department "mirandized" the terrorists, knowing and expecting a hue and cry from the people. Now, I understand. Attorney General holder wants to weaken Miranda so he'll have more leeway in going after these law-breakers who create "man caused disasters". The problem is that Miranda protects the American people from abuse by the government's law enforcement thugs. This move is to produce a result that is no different from the government using the RICO statutes designed to go after racketeers to pursue and punish the pro-life protesters. These people are scary smart.
Really OCG,
Don't you find yourself ever asking where the hell the NEWS went? We used to be able to watch breaking news and news updates on all sorts of stories all day long on CNN, open our morning paper and read ALL SORTS of news, every day.
Now if you go to sites like Yahoo news, google news, hell even here some days….there are maybe 3-4 actual news stories….all the same across the news services, all BOOOORRRRRIIINNNG and more op-ed than news.
There is not only no MSM…..there is a total LOCKDOWN on information and it's WORLD WIDE. You can't find any other country that's getting different news topics or a very different slant on the stories they print.
The control really is just astounding….even on the net. It would take most of the day to sus out 20 news stories of any real value across the whole web…..and even they would only agree on 3-4 common points of factual data.
Not good.
A Note for Andy (or site Admins) – you should add a Net Neutrality link for all these stories over the past year on the Categories list on the right. That way when the ignorant come in here, we can point them to all their questions already being answered in the past posts.
I asked a question of several friends in inetl, yesterday.
"If two housewives in AZ and NJ could connect dots on a news story about the Federal Mortgage Loan Forbearance Program….how could it possibly be of value, as intel on a bigger story of a gov't circumventing congress and nationalizing the mortgage loan industry.
Their unanimous reply was…."NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE NET." US Intel hires tens of thousands of analysts to do nothing but SURF ALL DAY picking up threads of real intel and information of the workings of governments and private companies and citizens.
THIS ONE CANNOT BE GIVEN A MISS. WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR ACCESS. WITHOUT IT, THERE WILL BE NO NEWS AT ALL, NO INFORMATION AT ALL, AND NO DISCOURSE BEYOND OUR IMMEDIATE CIRCLE OF FRIENDS.
THIS ON IS FOR THE WHOLE ENCHILADA. WE BETTER GET SERIOUS ABOUT IT.
The Jesus of HopeyChange will turn a deaf ear to opposition to his totalitarian plans. The CIA could – in an effort to wind back the hearts and minds of genuine Americans – arrange for Barack Obama to have an "incident" which would remove him from the Oval Office. You never know… Ambition and the quest for power have produced beneficial side-effects before…
Morning Texas;
These are the type of people with not only the will but the means to do whatever they want. They can't however, not yet anyway, because they haven't figured out how to use force to stop the opposition and they still believe they can fool most the people all of the time, giving them that needed advantage to complete the takeover of the nation's industries. Their lunacy is our key to stopping the trend and we're close to rockbottom as it is. The king has no clothes(birth certificate), his adherents know it and are scared and the people are wising up; will it be enough and in time?
If Glenn wasn't on the top of their "list" before, he sure is now. As much as I like Rush, Glenn has upped the ante and made some very powerful enemies.
This government and all its agencies are totally out of control, and show a stunning disregard for the American Citizen. To all you progressives we have already started to take back OUR government. If you try the martial law route you will see blood run in the streets.This not a call to arms but a warning based on overheard conversations in breakfast places.
Joe Biden and Nancy running the country now that is just as scary. But at least zero's apology tour would be finished.
Hey Lizard,
I don't see we can afford NOT TO. This one's for the money and whatever it takes is what we have to do. This is second only to the guarantee of clean elections. Without both, we got NO SYSTEM AT ALL. Game over.
Good news is, Constitutionally, we can do this. And as more and more folks wake up, find out our foil hats just might be actually tuned into something worth listening to, the more folks shine the light of day on their little schemes.
I find it of no small importance that the dems basically cannot not only capitalize on their congressional majority…..they can't even use congress to get these things done. Step back….what was the last congressionally proposed and passed legislation? HC? Dodd can't get banking reg through. Kerry can't get Cap and Tax through. Net Neutrality is already being challenged at just about every level.
So long as we REFUSE TO BACK DOWN we can't lose. The stakes are just too high. People are figuring that out and we WILL GO TO THE MATTRESSES. Socialism has only been able to creep into countries whose people lived for centuries under monarchies.
It's never been tried on a country of free people.
And it's goin over like a turd in a punchbowl!
Did you notice that no one bailed out anyone online when the dot-com bubble burst? Did you notice that the internet survived and that online businesses restructured or scaled back or adjusted all on their own accord with no government interference?
Do you know that internet-based businesses are some of the most looked-at candidates for venture capitalists?
This is a medium that is thriving without government involvement. Only a control freak and liberty hater would pick on the internet. Democrats and Obama, get your hands off my liberty.
Cowboy, don't forget it's also about "suppresion of oposition" per Karl Marx.
We're going to a cash only underground economy, the only way to survive under the Revenuers.
That's one long of a list! lol
GOOGLE SCRUBBING STORY:
"Internet behemoth Google apparently is clamping down further on consumers' access to a report about President Obama's Social Security number, which points out the number was designated for a Connecticut applicant, by warning that some sites carrying information on the situation "may harm your computer."
"WND had reported two days earlier, in the wake of the revelations about Obama's Social Security number and the questions raised by the report, that Google was suppressing access to information about the report, linking to completely unrelated stories when consumers would search for the issue on the site's news tab. "
Source: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pag...
Of course, that's all Democrats are always about, tax and control. Very shallow stupid people. They couldn't find their own a** if you gave them a flashlight!
No one has yet to explain why this is needed despite many attempts from liberal trolls. So I ask again… Why do we need this?
So, let me get this straight… The Repubs prefer to allow corporations (really only two or three–Comcast, AT&T, T-W Cable–thanks to monopolization) to decide what we can or can't access on the Internet instead of allowing the gov't to guarantee that we can access what we wish? Where's our "freedom" in that scenario?
Um, you seem to forget that it was the government that invented and deployed the Internet. I suppose you'd prefer that we all still be closed in AOL's playpen?
You're evidently one of those dopes who wants to keep the gov's hands off your Social Security. If you hate go'vt so much, why don't you say something about how over half of discretionary spending is military and that the fastest growing gov't expense is interest paid to bankers for all of the borrowing Bush and Obama have done?
Remember, we'd have zero deficits or debt were it not for the tax cuts Reagan and Bush gave to their rich pals.
It took this long for you idiots to finally come up with a couple Straw Man arguments for this blatant power grab? Lame excuses for your lame arguments.
TAX CUTS DON'T "CAUSE" ANYTHING – SPENDING DOES YOU IDIOT! (And Reagen INCREASED revenue incoming to the Fed with his Tax Cuts' but the Dems in Congress STILL over-spent even the increase in revenue…maybe you should actually LEARN something before you go spouting off.)
And the 'Government' didn't Invent anything – RESEARCHERS created it so they could communicate when they were on other ends of the country. PRIVATE business made it was it is today – NOT Government. You libs talking points are getting pretty pathetic lately, but then that's all you can do when the truth is shown.
Straight from le Wiki:
"The origins of the Internet reach back to the 1960s when the United States funded research projects of its military agencies to build robust, fault-tolerant and distributed computer networks. This research and a period of civilian funding of a new U.S. backbone by the National Science Foundation spawned worldwide participation in the development of new networking technologies and led to the commercialization of an international network in the mid 1990s, and resulted in the following popularization of countless applications in virtually every aspect of modern human life. As of 2009, an estimated quarter of Earth's population uses the services of the Internet.
The Internet has no centralized governance in either technological implementation or policies for access and usage; each constituent network sets its own standards. Only the overreaching definitions of the two principal name spaces in the Internet, the Internet Protocol address space and the Domain Name System, are directed by a maintainer organization, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). The technical underpinning and standardization of the core protocols (IPv4 and IPv6) is an activity of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), a non-profit organization of loosely affiliated international participants that anyone may associate with by contributing technical expertise."
You tell me where the heavy handed government interference fits into this picture.
Sigh….I'll tell you again: ONLY local governing bodies can "let" a monopoly exist. If you don't like a local monopoly – the FIRE those local politicians.
Agree R12, and it seems Beck has caused Rush to get a wee bit more serious about his job.
We hardly ever hear about his golf playing any more. Competition is always good for anyone.
I'm surprised Wiki has let that stand and hasn't changed it to "the gubment" did it all. Or are they still to busy edited the Global Warming lies?
BHO&Co. are experts at using the Alinsky tactic of – Rule 8: "Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”
It's like the carnival game "Whac-A-Mole".http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0n8N98mpes
Keep the public so busy and concentrating on what is popping up all around them, and they won't see what's going on behind their back.
Exactly dave. Remember this obama quote from an earlier article:
"First, if you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against them – or against the people you hire"
The expansion of high speed internet access by government entities is also a blatant attempt to take control over internet providers.
More than send a letter-Amen Brother!
The OBOTs only support the guys on 'their team' and falsely believe that any and all Dems will make their life cushy, safe with free stuff for all. But the elites in both parties have their best interests at heart – not ours. We need to reboot Congress & discard all the Corruptocrats before all is lost in america. I sure hope people stop letting the MSM tethemll you what to think, use theirr mind and free will come Nov. Will they stop trusting 'nice' politicians and lawyers-wether they're on 'their team' or not.
Democrats are better at pretending to represent the unwashed masses while accumulating ever more power & control over our individual lives – "for the collective good." The current Dems are absolute control freaks and we will suffer from their monstrous ego's, ambition & incompetence. Both parties are full of basically corrupt politicians (redundent). Look at the history of man & his relationship w/ those in power-never pretty.I hope voters look beyond party labels and at least give some newcomers a chance to save america, the old guard in both parties project no real hope just decay into a bankrupt welfare state while they become ever more powerful and wealthy at our expense – which is in fact the inevitable evolution of 'democracies' which is why our founders despised true 'democracies' and created instead a constitutional republic, once we started to ignore the constitution, rule of law and promote a mob-rule style 'democracy' our decay was inevitable as the Obots shall see once the printing presses stop and reality crashes in-right after elections I'd guess.
[...] » House GOP to Obama: Drop Net Neutrality Agenda – Big Government [...]
Nice quotation there, mozey. Trouble is, all that nice stuff is at the top level of the Net, esp at the backbone level. Yet the Net backbone is one thing, the last mile something else entirely. It's the last mile where local authorities allow corporate monopolies (davewolfgang is correct here) to squeeze us financially and where there's a danger of corporate filtering and choking. Net neutrality legislation would help guarantee that those monopolies not filter or choke, and in practical terms, that sort of protection for consumers/users can only be done in practical terms by national legislation, as the last mile is all over the USA, albeit widely disbursed.
I still don't get why people seem to trust Comcast more than the gov't. Comcast has very obvious financial incentives to block, filter, and censor. Examples: 1. they charge $40/mo for VoIP phone service, which can be had easily for half that price (I have such a service), 2. they offer [dreadful] video-on-demand that competes with streaming Netflix and the like. In each instance, without neutrality protection, Comcast could simply block competing VoIP and video services. This is the same Comcast that charges me $60/mo for the same channels I got 15 years ago for $17/mo. They've made so much gouging customers that they can now afford to buy NBC, thus using a monopoly over the last mile(s) to enter the content business at the very top.
And you trust Comcast? Please do tell me why.
Uncovered Audio: Obama’s Regulatory Czar Pushes Creepy Plan for Legally Controlling Internet Information
http://www.breitbart.tv/uncovered-audio-obamas-re...
Health Care was opposed.
Sorry, but you are wrong. People can FIRE Comcast! When was the last time ANY Government program, once enacted, has EVER ended?
And every single problem you bring up has been brought up and shot down over the last year, right here on this very site. You don't like their service – GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. That's the American Way. If you LOCAL government is LETTING a monopoly exist – FIRE THEM! Once you let D.C. get their little pinky in the door, ALL Freedoms are GONE. Why can't YOU understand that?
And YOU trust the Government more than Comcast?? You need to step away from the Koolaid bud – you're drunk.
LOL. Well, they don't classify robo calls and fax spam as wire fraud, so it's unlikely.
Depends on where you put the flashlight.
Though, some need to have Vick's smeared on it so they get a clue.
I'm all for Regime Change!!!!……however it happend.
<DIV>I will not go silently into tyranny.
</DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV>— On Mon, 5/17/10, IntenseDebate Notifications <notifications@intensedebatemail.com> wrote:
</DIV>
It was indeed, and as a result of the shotgun wedding legislation, there will be a large number of liberal congresspersons looking for follow-on employment this fall. The one upside, and pardon my overly optimistic outlook, of the health care debacle is that most of it doesn't become effective for 5 years. That allows a chance for a more fiscally conservative congress, and in two years, a more fiscally conservative administration to reverse the problem before it causes much damage.
I share those hopes with you, but I'm neither holding my breath or counting my chickens before they hatch. A lot can happen in 2-1/2 years.
So, just so you slower folks fully understand:
The Constitution didn't foresee things like health insurance or guns being used by drug cartels. Therefore, it's ok view the Constitution as ever changing. Modern issues we face today have to be addressed from a modern perspective. The writers of the Constitution didn't write it with today's issues in mind.
A bill governing the telephone industry written in the 1930s was certainly written with an eye towards the future. So, clearly, it's logical that it can be applied to broadband. No reason to believe that the bill can't be applied as if written in stone.
Carry on.
The Left is NEVER happy. Have you ever met a truly happy Leftie? I haven't. It's not in their DNA to be happy.
Where's the freedom in government control? At least corporations are subject to free market pressures. The government isn't accountable to anyone. They make the rules and you follow them or you disappear.
With any luck, the balance in congress will swing substanially right this fall. The one thing you can always rely on a Liberal to do, is underestimate the impact their arrogant and condescending nature has on alienating middle of the road voters. It's almost like they can't help it. Every time I see a liberal getting up on a soap box to hold court, I think of Dana Carvey on SNL as the Church Lady doing the superior dance.
I agree – they always whine about something.
Off subject, but very important none the less.
From the Desk of:
Brent Bozell, Founder, Media Research Center
Comedy Central has decided to lower the bar even further
by stepping up efforts to mock and defame Christians!
They recently announced that they are developing a cartoon
series about Jesus Christ called "JC." According to Comedy
Central, Jesus will move to New York City to "escape his
father's enormous shadow" and to live a normal life.
The network says that God will be portrayed in the show
as an "apathetic" father, obsessed with playing video games.
Brian, just two weeks ago, Comedy Central censored
South Park's depiction of the prophet Muhammad after intense
Muslim protest, yet they have a long history of ridiculing
Jesus and Christians in the same show.
This directly mirrors the way the liberal media have
treated Islam and Christianity for years now. While
going out of their way to respect Islam, they relentlessly
attack and defame Christianity and the 80 percent of
Americans that call themselves Christians.
Restore the Republic,
God Bless America
You want to give this power to a Democratic Party controlled Congress and a Democrat President. What are you going to do when the Republicans take power, as they will, sooner or later?
Power goes with a position. Only fools give a position extra power because they like and trust the person now in that position.
Unless, of course, the goal is to give the gov't absolute power.
Isn't that what "right wingers" are supposed to be doing?
It does not live, or breath, or evolve. Look at it as the Ten Commandment's written in stone. It is a contract for Us by Us, it is that simple. It is binding, and we will hold all in government today too it. PERIOD.
Restore the Republic,
GOD BLESS AMERICA
bozo boscowicz-
You forgot Sprint, Veriszon, Cox Cable, and several local providers.
Buy your logic the Fed should take over all of package delevery,
the big three: Fedex, UPS, Postal Service caontrol the market via monopolization.
or perhaps the should take over the tissue industry;
Puffs and Klenex have a stranglehold on the market.
Or better yet maybe the should break up a real monopoly: Mirosoft.
"guns being used by drug cartels" No, but they did have to contend with "drug cartels" of the era, specifically, moonshiners.
And the original gov't run health insurance was the Community Chest, which was destroyed by crooked politicians stealing from it.
If you want to change the Constitution, follow the procedure laid out to Amend it. The Consititution is not a "living document".
"Living document" translates to "whoever is in power gets to define what it means." Your lot did not like that when Bush II was in power, what leads you to think you are going to like that definition when the Republicans get back in power?
[...] » House GOP to Obama: Drop Net Neutrality Agenda – Big Government [...]
I had no problem with Bush. I voted for him.
The Founders actually DID put something in the Constitution for EVERYTHING that happens in the future. It's right there in the 10th Amendment.
Are you capable of reading and understanding it yourself? Or do we have to explain it to you like everything else?
If the Constitution needed to be re-defined on any given issue, there's a process for that … it called an amendment. Amend the Constitution if there are portions that you don't like or think are vague (not sure if many people will agree with you though). Again, with this 1930's law, if you want to increase your regulatory power over something, don't use doublespeak and legal gibberish to end around 2 of 3 branches of government … lobby for a new law!! Rationalizing the FCC's action is inane. Which leads me to believe that you … yourself are inane.
Without question, when a government agency feels it has the authority to devise a policy shift to usurp the spirit of the law it is nothing less but a mockery of the court and accordingly is a violation of the separation of powers.
It is absolutely astounding that from the very beginning and continuing today this Administration lacks the capacity to act in good conscience according to the will of the people and by the Constitution. If this is allowed to become precedent without Congressional approval then the government will have failed the people and all doubt is removed there is tyranny afoot.
At that point it will become the necessary right of the American people to rise as they may and declare this government null and void, and whether by threat or use of force make good its removal. For this we do at least have precedent from a founding father.
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." – Thomas Jefferson
The proposal itself is bad enough but the Obama administration has once again exhibited little respect for congress or the courts. He uses them when they agree with his agenda and circumvent them when he doesn't get his way. My friends this is a very dangerous administration. The government is boarding on if not over the line of tyrannical. Facts are facts and they can't be ignored.
[...] BigGovernment.com [...]
Also bills are SUPPOSED to be written with a clear and unwavering intent (aka in stone)… so as NOT to give rise to people's random interpretation. But you're clearly a legal expert so I'll cede the argument.
[...] » House GOP to Obama: Drop Net Neutrality Agenda – Big Government [...]
Woa! Hold your horses.
I'm just trying to help folks understand that sometimes we follow laws as they are, and sometimes we try to ensure that they are applicable to the situation at hand.
No need for the history lesson. I'm pretty well versed in that. Thanks.
Ten commandments?
What do they have to do with modern American governance?
I mean, they aren't researched, they aren't agreed on. Come on now. You'd do better to use Shar'ia law as your example.
You may "think" you are "pretty well versed" – but that's only in your own mind. Because you are so NOT versed, it's would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.
Just think of it a control of free speech and ideas opposed to the current mind-think in spin city east, capitol of socialism.
It's a much more efficient way of brainwashing than collges and universities… How could you blame Barry&Co.?
I don't have Comcast! I have choices, and I choose not to go to Comcast.
This administration isn't about maximizing choice, it's about concentrating control…in the government's hands. And simply put, that's why I don't trust it more than I do the free market.
Once government gets its dirty hands in the private sector, it doesn't let go easily.
You put your trust in government, I put my trust in the people from whom the government gets its consent to exist. That's the fundamental difference between us, and no amount of dissembling on your part will change the fact that government does not have all the solutions to free market problems.
Besides, net neutrality is just a solution in search of a problem. It's progressivism in one of its most insidious guises.
While I don't want the government censoring my internet service I don't ISP's doing it either. ISP's must treat all internet traffic the same.
The REAL world internet that the rest of us live in doesn't work that way – and NEVER will. But letting the Government have a say is exactly the wrong thing to do.
Trouble is, under monopoly conditions with Comcast, I have no choice. There is simply no other BB provider where I live, so all the free-market solutions are a dead letter, exactly as Adam Smith himself said. I cannot "Fire Comcast" if I want BB services. "Firing" my local township council is no help either, as: 1. it'd be dog-slow as a way to resolve my direct problem, 2. SPs aren't exactly lining up to provide service here. And I'm not alone, as there are hundreds of places/areas in the US with only one BB service provider (and I assume you're opposed to the gov't creating incentives for other companies to compete with Comcast, as that'd be that evil pinky, which I guess in no time flat would be controlling my fingers as they approach the keyboard.)
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, re: the role of gov't. The US has one of the lightest-handed gov'ts in the industrialized world and I don't see my "freedom" particularly endangered. What restrictions the gov't has imposed on my "freedoms" seem pretty much reasonable–I can't shoot those ppl I dislike, I can't run red lights, I can't dump poisons wherever I feel like it. It's a trade-off, to an extent. Having lived in Europe off and on for a number of years, I'd frankly prefer better public and social services than we have in the US, and I'd be willing to pay for them, but I can see that others might disagree. In any case, if given a choice b/w big gov't and big business–given that big business has essentially zero competition these days–I'd opt for the messy and often incompetent govt monopoly over the profit-driven, aggressive monopolies in the private sector. Too bad we don't have that choice: we can vote out politicians, but we have zero power over the corporations.
This is no doubt off-topic, but I'm new to the flavor of politics that I see on this site, so forgive me. But I'd like to raise a question: based admittedly on the minimal information we have, do you think Russians are better or worse off than they were under that ossified Communism they once had?
So, lemme get this straight… the Regressive solution is an only-game-in-town, National Socialist Democrat Workers Party monopoly that nationalizes the Internet, just like it's already done to the banks, auto companies, student lenders and the health-care industry?
BTW: Even if Comcast, AT&T and TWC are the only (wired) players, that's called an oligopoly, not a monopoly. Pinhead.
God, you Regressives are a bunch of jackasses.
Lame Straw Man again – can you just stop posting (Even under ANOTHER sign on?? did you get banned?? or forget which one you were using before?? Yeah – your BUSTED (and reported too)) You keep bringing up idiotic STUPID local problems. You have a local problem – solve it LOCALLY.
And it's clear where you get your socialistic ideas. Go back to Europe. We AIN'T Europe here and we don't want to BECOME Europe. Don't you GET that yet???
The Bible was a "living document," too, when statesmen quoted Scripture extensively to justify the South's way of life. The result was more than two centuries' worth of slavery for millions of involuntary African "immigrants."
NOW do you see why libertarians and conservatives take issue with this "living document" crap?
There's an alternative to gov't takeover in the event of monopoly control (or at least here once was, back in the day when we had an economy that not only grew, but actually improved the incomes of the lower 70% of the population), and it's called anti-trust. There's also the regulated-monopoly framework. The former has always been a bit clunky and hard to implement, but the latter can be an effective approach. The best example of that is in our wired-phone and electrical-power systems. Both are natural monopolies–that is, it would make no sense to built duplicative phone or power infrastructures (as we stupidly did with mobile phones, giving us some of the worst quality of service and highest rates in the industrial world). We thus admit that in some instances monopoly is a GOOD thing, then try to protect consumers and facilitate system development under a regulatory framework. Yes, it's messy and the devil is in the details, but given that deregulation often screws customers and Americans are averse to nationalization, it's a decent (or least-bad) alternative.
As for "taking over" the tissue industry, there's no need. Paper tissue is not a necessity and there are alternatives. Indeed, if Kimberly-Clark et al get too greedy, Americans might just move toward cloth napkins and hankies–and maybe save a few trees in the process!
On package delivery, you have to note that when USPS spun off package delivery to UPS, FedEx, etc, the private companies didn't have to deal with the dead weight, losing end of the postal business, letter and junk-ail delivery. FedEx and UPS got the cream, USPS was left with the loser activities.
As for Microsoft, I ironically like the setup as is. Here we have a verging-on-brain-dead monopoly firm charging outrageously high prices to business users, then taking a large chunk of that income and using it to help out poor Africans. I'd never have imagined it, but it's a good model for taking money from rich American businesses and sending it to Africa! Gotta love it.
Exactly WHY? You keep repeating the same point, but aside from the "creeping communism" allegation, why would it be a bad thing to have the gov't guarantee that local monopolies don't operate the last mile in ways that might be hugely profitable for them but a screw for the public? Again, wouldn't you support some sort of mechanism that would allow us to keep our $20/mo VoIP service and not be forced onto the SPs $40 service? And no, we can't fire comcast or the town council in any credible plan of action.
You'd have to have read up on some pretty odd subjects to know the ins and outs of the Comunity Chest, how they were founded and how they ended. Oh, and they were the original "income tax".
Monopolies are very difficult to create or maintain without either the gov't creating the conditions that allow the monopoly, or the monopolists acting as "police" to crush the competition.
The "acting as police" can range from the machine guns at the Appalachian coal mines to the way Micro Soft punishes the computer companies for offering Linux installations.
You must be logged in to post a comment.