From The Hill:
By Gautham Nagesh – 12/13/10 07:33 PM ET
Net-neutrality advocates come out against Genachowski’s plan
Opposition to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski’s open Internet proposal is building on both the left and the right ahead of a potential vote on the proposal at the Commission’s Dec. 21 open meeting.
A group of net-neutrality advocates declared their opposition to the plan during a meeting with Democratic FCC Commissioner Michael Copps on Thursday.
A number of prominent individuals and organizations including representatives from Consumers Union, Free Press, Netflix, Amazon.com and Dish Network were at the meeting, which was described in an ex parte filing released Monday. Genachowski needs Copps’s vote for the proposal to pass.
“At the outset of the meeting, the participants expressed their unanimous unwillingness to support the proposed open-Internet framework in its present form as they understand it,” according to the ex parte document.
Ed Morrissey has a reminder about the wholly dangerous, unconstitutional, Statist desires of Democrat Michael Copps. See if you like this.
Copps has been in the news lately for his increasingly strident demands for new authority to regulate broadcast content. He suggested in a speech that the FCC share authority on campaign-finance regulation with the FEC as well require network affiliates to have 25% locally-produced content in prime time. At other times, Copps has proposed that the FCC approve the content of news shows. As far as statists go, well, Copps pretty much goes all the way and then some.
Conservatives don’t like it because it goes well beyond constitutional grounds and is a major Statist power-grab. Liberals don’t like it because it doesn’t grab enough power fast enough. And the Democrat Copps probably doesn’t like the fact it still doesn’t let the government control what is reported in the news (since he already made it known he wants the government to be able to approve or disapprove news content).
There are two comments in Hot Air’s comment section that are worthy of note because they are rather accurate portraits.
If you’re Hugo Chavez, you directly nationalize the business. But if you’re in the Obama Administration, first you take away the industry’s current business model, through regulation, and then you (government) take over the industry when the new regulated business model fails. You just add an extra step.
RBMN on December 14, 2010 at 6:13 PM
It continues to amaze me that this lefty government is so controlling. All these years the left pretended they were the ones who wanted more freedom… I think it has always been a way to lure people into the Democratic Party for brainwashing. I think total control has been the goal all along.
Why did I ever bother trying to be tolerant of their positions? They never had any inclination toward tolerance of others. Like I said, I am amazed, it has taken me this long to get it.
The left wants to control every thought and action. They want to control everyone else’s money. They keep pretending they are “for the little guy” but they are really only about power for themselves.
petunia on December 14, 2010 at 11:13 PM
The FCC has no authority to do the FEC’s job, especially a job SCOTUS rightly deemed unconstitutional in Citizens United. But I believe the FCC is unconstitutional to begin with. Article I Section 1 states very clearly “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” And Article I Section 7 further clarifies the law-making process.
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.
Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.
The Constitution is very clear who is responsible for writing laws and how that law-making process is to be completed. There is no room in the Constitution for an unelected bureaucracy to write any laws or for the Legislature to shirk its responsibilities in law-making. Therefore, the FCC, created in 1934 under FDR, is in violation of the Constitution every time it writes a new regulation and every time it enforces a regulation it wrote. (Note: When SCOTUS was using the Constitution as written to strike down FDR’s unconstitutional big government power-grabs, FDR threatened to pack SCOTUS. That caused SCOTUS to acquiesce to the unconstitutional demands of FDR.)
It’s time for Congress to eliminate the funding for the FCC.