Feb 11
The parallels between what is happening in Egypt with Mubarak and how Americans feel about the despot-in-the making, Obama, are quite close. It is unfortunate that Obama "can't" be overthrown like the Middle East situation.
The extent of suppression and oppression legislated on Americans by the Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats has not reached the levels endemic in Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab world but our rights and freedoms are increasingly being abridged while greater and outrageous amounts of our earnings are being confiscated by an ever enlarging government with an insatiable appetite for spending.
Posted in Congress Democrat Egypt Freedom Government Control Obama Political Cartoon Regulations with No Comments
More:
Print This Post
Feb 6
The American electorate sent an unmistakable message to President Obama and the Democrats in power this past November – “STOP SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE!” The result was an historic reversal of majority party in the House and a six seat gain in the Senate for Republicans. A chastened Obama even admitted he took a "shellacking".
The article below lays out the Republican plan to cut spending to reduce the $1.5 trillion deficit for 2011 alone and begin to tackle the over $14 trillion national debt. But are the Republicans really serious about establishing a guideline for fiscal responsibility or are they just playing small ball? Will they stand their ground when they come under siege with vicious attacks and lies from Obama, Congressional Democrats and the far left news media?
Sure, they are proposing a return to the pre-2008 spending budget, which is a good start, but it is just a drop in the bucket compared to the massive entitlement bills that will come due in the years to come. Unless the current Republican leadership shows the courage and unwavering fortitude regarding the hard decisions on the largest expenditure areas that need to be reined in - Medicare and Social Security - rather than myopically focusing on the minutia in the federal budget, it may take another election cycle of Tea Party-type candidates to enforce the message in Washington.
"Get it done or get out" will be the theme of the 2012 election if things don't change in Washington. Let's just hope that the Congressional Republicans get it right this time around and are not just playing politics with our and our children's financial futures.
House Republicans move to slash domestic programs
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans controlling the House promised Thursday to slash domestic agencies' spending by almost 20 percent in their drive to bring it back to levels in place before President Barack Obama took office.
House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan announced the move as the first salvo in a battle with Obama as they seek to keep a campaign promise to cut $100 billion from domestic programs.
The cuts would bring huge changes to agencies used to budget boosts during Obama's first two years in office. The White House has vowed to fight Republicans, saying their plans could lead to widespread furloughs of federal employees and force vulnerable people off of subsidized housing, reduce services in national parks and slash aid to schools and local police and fire departments.
"Washington's spending spree is over," Ryan, R-Wis., said. "The spending limits will restore sanity to a broken budget process and return spending for domestic government agencies to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels."
Republicans made a campaign promise to cut $100 billion from Obama's request for domestic agencies like the Department of Education, for the budget year that began in October. But since the year is under way, they're so far falling short, just $58 billion under the plan released Thursday. They promise to try to fully impose the dramatic cuts during what is sure to be a contentious budget debate this year.
The GOP promise was to reduce spending for domestic agencies whose budgets are set by Congress each year back to levels in place under the last budget approved by former President George W. Bush.
Under the original pledge, the Pentagon could have been awarded Obama's proposed 4 percent, $23 billion increase. Instead, the military budget will grow by significantly less when the Appropriations Committee unveils its proposed budget cap later Thursday.
The $100 billion savings figure is measured against Obama's budget request, but the actual savings would be less since Obama's budget boosts were never approved and the government is operating at 2010 levels. Instead, the savings from domestic programs in making the switch from 2010 to 2008 would be about $86 billion, imposing cuts of 19 percent on average.
And the savings from domestic programs in the year ending Sept. 30 would be even less since Obama's budget boosts were never approved and the government is operating at 2010 levels. Republicans acknowledge they can achieve, at best, $32 billion in saving by the Sept. 30 end of the year once small increases for the security agencies — the Pentagon and the departments of Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs — are factored in.
A stopgap spending bill passed in December expires March 4. Enacting a full-year funding bill promises to be a difficult test of the new balance of power in Washington. Republicans control only the House, but Democrats acknowledge that — with the deficit on pace to hit $1.5 trillion this year — some spending cuts will have to be made.
"We're not burying our heads on the sand. We recognize that we have to do something," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Obama's most powerful ally on Capitol Hill.
Republicans say some agencies like the FBI, the Indian Health Service and NASA are unlikely to be cut all the way back to pre-Obama levels. But that means other agencies, like the Environmental Protection Agency, would have to bear even bigger cuts.
Returning to 2008 levels would produce dramatic cuts for many agencies: a 41 percent cut for EPA clean water grants; an 8 percent cut to NASA, a 16 percent cut for the FBI and a 13 percent cut in the operating budget of the national parks.
The hard-charging GOP freshman class — especially newcomers from Minnesota, Wisconsin, New York and New Hampshire — may have some second thoughts when confronted with big cuts looming to the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, known as LIHEAP, which provides home heating subsidies to the poor.
Republicans in Texas, Florida and Alabama — where NASA facilities mean thousands of jobs — are sure to fight against cuts to the space agency. NASA could have to abandon the International Space Station because of the cuts, the White House warns.
Lawmakers in both parties from rural districts are likely to resist what could be an almost 20 percent cut to a program that subsidizes service by smaller airlines to isolated cities and towns like Scottsbluff, Neb., and Burlington, Iowa. Smaller subsidies or tighter rules would probably mean some communities would lose service.
As local school districts cope with budget squeezes, they won't be able to count on the same amount of help from the federal government. Special education grants to states could be cut by $1.4 billion, or 11 percent, forcing hometown school boards to cut services or make up the difference with local funds.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gkeDfYvhT6TACrThCe5077sBo-bQ?docId=050645469a634a44b715c2d3035f9ff6
Posted in Congress Democrat Government spending Media - Far Left Obama Republican US Debt with No Comments
More:
Print This Post
Jan 20
To satisfy Big Labor (the single largest source of campaign funding for the Democratic party), Democrats have been pushing hard since taking control of congress in 2006 to pass a law that would circumvent the secret ballot process to unionize private businesses. Even with large majorities in both Houses and a “president” Obama eager to please his cash cow, Democrats have been unable to wrangle up enough votes to pass such a measure.
What to do now? Just as the Obama Administration is using the EPA to regulate carbon emissions because of the inability to pass Cap and Trade in Congress, it is now using the National Labor Relations Board to also do an end run around the legislative branch and impose regulations that are quite unpopular with the public and would not garner enough support as legislation in Congress. This bypassing of the electoral system and the imposing of rights denying rules is characteristic of a cynical, arrogant, authoritarian styled politician who is not looking out for the welfare, rights and freedoms of the citizens of this country.
As it stands right now, private business owners are obligated by law to allow union officials access to their workforce. The union representatives hand out "cards" to each employee to fill out - including their name - to see if there is sufficient interest to move to the next phase of unionizing - a secret ballot. Big Labor and the Democrats want to eliminate the secret ballot part of the process - a time honored American institution to protect voters from the reprisal of adversaries. They, instead, prefer the "card check" part of the process which does not allow anonymity.
This allows the Union bosses to learn the identities of those who voted against considering unionizing which will subject these employees to the bare knuckle tactics for which unions are famous in controlling dissent – both before and after the vote. Without a secret ballot, the unions have the upper hand at the expense of the employees (and employers).
If we elected our public officials in the same manner that Big Labor and Democrats want to determine the establishment of a unionized workforce in a private business, we all be exposed to the type of intimidation that we saw in 2008 when members of the New Black Panther Party harassed white voters as they approached a polling site in Philadelphia.
This is the stuff of Third World countries. Then again, Obama’s incompetence, arrogance, imposition of failed policies and ruling essentially by fiat, would qualify him to become the leader of a Banana Republic (where we seem to be heading under his rule).
Feds threaten to sue states over union laws
Sam Hananel Associated Press Jan 14, 2011
WASHINGTON – The National Labor Relations Board on Friday threatened to sue Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah over constitutional amendments guaranteeing workers the right to a secret ballot in union elections.
The agency's acting general counsel, Lafe Solomon, said the amendments conflict with federal law, which gives employers the option of recognizing a union if a majority of workers sign cards that support unionizing.
The amendments, approved Nov. 2, have taken effect in South Dakota and Utah, and will do so soon in Arizona and South Carolina.
Business and anti-union groups sought the amendments, arguing that such secrecy is necessary to protect workers against union intimidation. They are concerned that Congress might enact legislation requiring employers to allow the "card check" process for forming unions instead of secret ballot elections.
In letters to the attorney general of each state, Solomon says the amendments are pre-empted by the supremacy clause of the Constitution because they conflict with employee rights laid out in the National Labor Relations Act. That clause says that when state and federal laws are at odds, federal law prevails.
Solomon is asking the attorneys general in South Dakota and Utah for official statements agreeing that their amendments are unconstitutional "to conserve state and federal resources."
In his letter to South Carolina's attorney general, Solomon asks the state to take measures that would prevent the Legislature from ratifying the amendment. Solomon requested that Arizona's governor decline to make the amendment official.
Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff said he believes the state is on solid ground. He plans to coordinate a response with the other three states.
"If they want to bring a lawsuit, then bring it," Shurtleff said. "We believe that a secret ballot is as fundamental a right as any American has had since the beginning of this country. We want to protect the constitutional rights of our citizens."
South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley also promised to "vigorously defend our South Dakota Constitution" against any federal lawsuit.
Unions long have pushed for the card-check legislation, but the effort hasn't won enough support in Congress. Union officials say companies often use aggressive tactics — borderline illegal, they contend — to discourage workers from organizing unions.
Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group that spent millions to back congressional Republicans in last year's elections, was among the groups that pushed for passage of the state amendments. Phil Kerpen, the group's vice president for policy, said the NLRB's action "shows how determined the board is to accomplish card check by backdoor means against the wishes of the American people and Congress."
Kimberly Freeman Brown, executive director of the pro-union group American Rights at Work, said the board was confirming that "these initiatives were intended to restrict workers' rights to determine how they choose a union, disingenuously cloaked in the language of worker protection."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110114/ap_on_re_us/us_unions_secret_ballots
Posted in Arrogance Congress Democrat Government Control Labor Unions Obama Regulations with No Comments
More:
Print This Post
Jan 11
The House of Representatives must change the "business as usual" approach which has included unfettered spending under the Democrats.
Posted in Congress Democrat Political Cartoon Republican with No Comments
More:
Print This Post
Jan 8
If the first few days in the House of Representatives under Republican control is any indication of what the next two years may be like, then freedom loving Americans have a lot to cheer about. For starters:
1. Opening with the reading of the U.S. Constitution
2. Submitting a bill for the expeditious repeal of Obamacare
3. Pursuing the negation of birthright citizenship – the anchor baby problem associated with illegal immigration
4. Introduction of a bill to reduce or eliminate Obama’s appointed, non-scrutinized, independent, and powerful czars
Finally, our representatives may truly be that – plenipotentiary agents that will serve and protect our interests, rights, freedoms and hard earned income.
Quite a difference from the last few years!
GOP Introduces Bill to Roll Back Executive Branch ‘Czars’
Meredith Jessup Jan 6, 2011
A group of nearly 30 Republican members of the House of Representatives has introduced a bill to rein in the various “czars” serving in the Obama administration.
Van Jones, former WH green jobs "czar"
The bill mirrors similar legislation introduced in the 111th Congress that was not allowed to advanced under Democrats’ majority control.
But with Republicans commanding the House majority in the 112th Congress, Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., and the 28 other Republican co-sponsors on the bill are hoping to do away with the informal, paid advisers President Obama has employed over the last two years.
The Hill reports:
The legislation, which was introduced in the last Congress but was not allowed to advance under Democratic control, would do away with the 39 czars Obama has employed during his administration.
The bill defines a czar as “a head of any task force, council, policy office within the Executive Office of the President, or similar office established by or at the direction of the President” who is appointed to a position that would otherwise require Senate confirmation.
Republicans had complained about the president’s use of czars to help advance his agenda in Congress. In particular, the GOP had harped about the personal history of Van Jones, the president’s czar for “green jobs,” over past comments Jones had made about Fox News came to light. Jones eventually resigned.
Another prominent czar over the past year was Carol Browner, the president’s energy and environmental adviser. She helped head up efforts in response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, and the ultimately unsuccessful effort for an energy and climate bill from Congress.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/gop-introduces-bill-to-roll-back-executive-branch-czars/
Posted in Congress Czar Obama Republican with No Comments
More:
Print This Post
Jan 6
For two years, "president" Obama and the Democrat controlled Dongress have blamed the Bush Administration for the "economic collapse". Their solution to bring us back from the precipice of bankruptcy: massive government spending. A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon we're talking big money.
All Obama and the Democrats did was delay the hard decisions to future Congresses and ultimately, to future generations.
Instead of reigning in spending, Obama and the Congressional Democrats passed the trillion dollar boondoggle stimulus (Porkulus) package that amounted to nothing more than a special interest giveaway and a means to prop up state and local governments that were unwilling to make the tough decisions to balance their budgets including reducing the costs of their state employee union contracts.
So, do the 65 newly elected fiscally conservative Republicans entering the 112th Congress in a few days have time to celebrate their historic victory on November 2nd?
No, they do not.
They have the sober responsibility to do what the previous Congress did not have the courage to do and reverse some of the poor legislation that was passed: cut discretionary spending, repeal Obamacare and give hope to the millions of job creators that they are valued in a capitalist society for more than just a source of tax revenue. This Congress will need to oppose and neutralize Obama's liberal wealth re-distribution policies of the past two years and begin the difficult process of weening the American people from government dependency.
It is not time to celebrate yet but at least now we have some responsible adults to help run the country.
Posted in Congress Democrat Economy Incompetence Obama Political Cartoon Republican with No Comments
More:
Print This Post
Jan 2
The House Republican leadership has a novel and educational idea to open up the next session on Jan 6th, 2011: read the Constitution in its entirety from the floor of the chamber. It has been quite apparent that over the past two years, aided by Pelosi, Reid and Obama, the spirit of the Constitution has been wantonly violated as has specific strictures.
A little re-education regarding this most important document that serves to protect our rights and freedoms may be quite valuable vis-a-vis future proposed legislation.
Then again, the left has shown an utter disdain for the Constitution and would rather pervert it to such an extent so as to render it almost irrelevant. With such an attitude, reading it will accomplish little for those willing to destroy it the most.
Then again, maybe not – that is if it is read again and again as the president of the Roanoke Tea Party, Chip Tarbutton, suggested somewhat tongue in cheek. He stated that, "If it was up to me, they could spend the whole congressional session reading the Constitution and nothing else, and they wouldn't do as much damage as the last Congress did."
Just keep Congress from passing legislation and imposing more regulations and taxes…
A solution that we can all live with!
'We the people' to open next Congress
House to read Constitution
Stephen Dinan The Washington Times December 23, 2010
The Constitution frequently gets lip service in Congress, but House Republicans next year will make sure it gets a lot more than that - the new rules the incoming majority party proposed this week call for a full reading of the country's founding document on the floor of the House on Jan. 6.
The goal, backers said, is to underscore the limited-government rules the Founders imposed on Congress - and to try to bring some of those principles back into everyday legislating.
"It stems from the debate that we've had for the last two years about things like the exercise of authority in a whole host of different areas by the EPA, we've had this debate in relation to the health care bill, the cap-and-trade legislation," said Rep. Robert W. Goodlatte, Virginia Republican, who proposed the reading. "This Congress has been very aggressive in expanding the power of the federal government, and there's been a big backlash to that."
Setting aside time at the beginning of the congressional session for the reading is just one of the changes to House rules that Republicans say are designed to open up the legislative process. They say the new rules also will try to bring some restraints to lawmaking after decades in which both Republican and Democratic leaders whittled away opportunities for real legislative give-and-take.
The biggest changes would make it easier to cut spending and harder to create entitlement programs, while imposing restrictions that could keep leaders from jamming massive bills onto the House floor before lawmakers have had a chance to digest them.
"To begin to restore trust with the American people, Republicans have pledged to operate Congress differently: with real transparency, greater accountability and a renewed focus on the Constitution," said Rep. Greg Walden of Oregon, who led the GOP's transition team. "The sweeping reforms offered in this package make clear we intend to keep that promise."
The chief criticism from Democrats has been the GOP's decision to exempt some tax cuts from the pay-as-you-go rule, which requires new spending to be offset by corresponding budget cuts. Republicans want to exempt tax cuts of the George W. Bush era and alterations to the alternative minimum tax.
"Their proposal leads us down the same path of fiscal negligence that the GOP took the nation down when [Republicans] got rid of pay-go in 2002," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen, Maryland Democrat. "We know how that story ends: ballooning deficits and an economic crisis not seen since the Great Depression."
In the Senate, where Democrats will retain a majority by a much smaller margin, returning Democrats are pondering how to rein in repeated Republican filibusters. All returning Senate Democrats have signed a letter, first reported by National Journal, asking Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, to consider taking action to change the chamber's operating rules.
The letter sets the stage for another round of discussions on whether to curtail the practice, though it's unclear how much room there is for major changes, since Republicans are likely to be united against anything that would constrain their rights as the minority party.
Liberal legal scholars on Thursday praised the movement to curtail filibusters.
The House rules changes, meanwhile, have won praise from open-government advocates, who say lawmakers and the public now have better access to legislation and committee proceedings and give them a chance to weigh in on the drafting and voting on the bills.
One key change would require bill sponsors to add statements to the congressional record citing the specific constitutional authority for the actions they are proposing.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration is on the defensive over the new health care law. A federal district judge in Virginia ruled this month that the general welfare and commerce clauses do not give the federal government the authority to require individuals to purchase health coverage, under pain of a financial penalty.
As least as a discussion point, the Constitution has proved to be the "comeback kid" of the past two years.
For example, the word "unconstitutional" was used 408 times in congressional debates during the 111th Congress, according to a search of the Congressional Record. That was up from 283 in the 110th Congress and is the most since the immediate aftermath of the 1994 Republican takeover of Congress.
Even before that, the presidential campaign of Rep. Ron Paul, Texas Republican, seemed to tap a nerve with voters looking for more discussion about the founding document, the core of the blossoming "tea party" movements.
"If it was up to me, they could spend the whole congressional session reading the Constitution and nothing else, and they wouldn't do as much damage as the last Congress did," said Chip Tarbutton, president of the Roanoke Tea Party in Roanoke, Va., which is in Mr. Goodlatte's district.
He said the key test for lawmakers such as Mr. Goodlatte is whether they treat the constitutional reading as "window dressing" or whether it sparks the kinds of discussions that could lead to a major re-evaluation of the role of the federal government.
"If they follow through on it, it'll create some very difficult conversations, because what they'll end up doing is finding a lot of things already in place are unconstitutional," Mr. Tarbutton said.
Mr. Goodlatte credited Virginia Attorney General Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, a Republican, with coming up with the idea of a public reading of the Constitution. Mr. Cuccinelli brought suit against the federal health care law and won the judge's ruling that part of the law is unconstitutional.
Mr. Goodlatte said it's too early to tell exactly how the reading will go, though he expects many members to take part.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/23/we-the-people-to-open-next-congress/
Posted in Congress Constitution Democrat Ideology Liberal Republican with No Comments
More:
Print This Post
Jan 1
The following creative factitious letter to “president” Obama from Mephistopheles (the devil or other evil person’s name associated with this letter) sardonically lauds him for his brilliance in implementing his policies in whatever illegal, shady or unconstitutional way possible and doing so by circumventing the electorate and Congress.
For us to successfully reclaim our country we must neutralize, exorcise and remove the “devil” (Obama) from power ... as well as his cronies.
New Year's Advice From Your Sponsor
From the desk of D. Mephistopheles, Attorney-at-Law:
Dear President Obama,
I must say, I am quite impressed. Following the unfortunate turn of events in your country's mid-term elections, many of the lower downs to whom I answer in this Great Firm were fully convinced that we had "bet on the weak horse", so to speak. There was a growing sense that you were out of time and out of ideas. But lo and behold, you had aces up both sleeves! Your mastery at mustering your forces through the "lame duck" session of Congress was simply brilliant to behold. Truly, our side was amazed, having not seen such tactical brilliance since our man from Austria launched his lightning campaign seven decades ago. In just a few short weeks you gained enormous swaths of territory from our common enemy, simultaneously weakening the resolve of your country's fighting forces and legitimizing the previously stigmatized wretches who dare not speak their love's name. Likewise, your ability to convince your own domestic opposition to lie down before the threat of a renewed menace from Comrade Putin was simply brilliant.
What has struck me as even more brilliant, however, is your determination to accomplish our mutual goals without regard to the outcomes of these ever-so-annoying elections. We saw the Republicans manage to block net neutrality, cap and trade, and death panels being enacted into law. Yet you brilliantly retorted "so what" and simply instituted all of these policies through executive direct action, proving once again that you are just the man we've been looking for. Even Bill Clinton didn't have the chutzpah to pull that kind of thing off! Truly, to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat as quickly and deftly as you have these last few weeks is breathtaking.
That being said, I think there are some lessons to be learned here. First of all, don't put too much stock in the outcomes of elections. Let's face it, our people lost the vote big time in November. Yet you simply stood your ground and took it to the enemy! And what did you learn? That you don't need to pay any attention to election outcomes or Congressional votes. You don't have to worry about the petty legalists who want to see policies enacted into law before you put them in place. All you need to do is take direct regulatory action and leave Congress out of it altogether. You did it, and what price have you paid? None at all, that's what. So why not keep it up?
Just think of it. You know the old saying "the devil is in the details"? Well I can tell you for a fact that is absolutely true. And who knows more about details than your vast army of Washington bureaucrats? What you need to do is simply enact every piece of our agenda that you can think of immediately through executive directives and agency regulation. After all, even if the Republicans try to block you, how many hearings can they hold at one time? You have thousands upon thousands of bureaucrats at your command for every Republican Congressman. They may try to take out a few of our initiatives, but there is no way they can even begin to address all of them. Truly our name is Legion!
Now about this "election" business. Here's a thought: You lost the election, but you still enacted your agenda. So why bother with this ridiculous election business to begin with? You know Chavez, Castro, the Royal House of Saud and so many other heroes of yours don't worry about this sort of thing. Are you less of a man than any of them? Certainly not! So why worry about the outcome in 2012? Just take command and cancel the whole thing. I know our mutual friend Bill Ayers has already spoken with you about this. The New York Times is ready to support you on this, along with the rest of your traditional media giants. The people need a Leader, someone who isn't afraid to do what has to be done, regardless of who stands in his way! You can be this Leader! All you have to do is take the full reigns of power. They are yours for the taking, just do it!
Okay, that's enough for now. Tell Michelle I said hi, and give my best to the kids. By the way, I'd really like to talk to you later about a book deal. Something about your goals and how you'll get there, maybe "My Struggle" or something like that. I'll have my people get with your people.
Your friend and admirer,
D. Mephistopheles, Attorney-at-Law
http://beautifulletters-bls.blogspot.com/2010/12/new-years-advice-from-your-sponsor.html
Posted in Anti-American Congress Constitution Corruption Far Left Freedom Ideology Legal rights Obama with No Comments
More:
Print This Post
Dec 30
The FCC is a supererogatory federal agency that is a constant threat to our rights including as a dangerous political weapon of the left, an impediment to a free market place and innovations, and a waste of taxpayer money. It wantonly issues regulations such as the recently approved net neutrality law even though it doesn’t truly have the legal authority, a problem made worse by the fact that the commissioners are political appointees and not elected officials. In fact, the “president” has used this agency as a way to bypass Congress and attempt to implement ideologically radical policies.
We can protect our rights, save billions of dollars, reduce the size of the government and its debt by terminating this agency run amok.
Kill Off The FCC
Investor’s Business Daily 12/23/2010
Regulatory State: Two days after the FCC voted to take over the Internet, it stands in the way of an agreement between private companies. This is an agency that should be targeted for elimination.
On Tuesday, the Federal Communications Commission approved net neutrality, a regulatory framework that has been sold as a means of keeping the Web fair and open. In truth, the rules give government the authority to tell Internet service providers how to organize the traffic that flows over their infrastructure.
That's enough meddling in private affairs for one week for any federal agency. But the FCC wasn't finished.
Chairman Julius Genachowski, who pushed net neutrality despite a court ruling and bipartisan opposition in Congress, set conditions Thursday on Comcast's acquisition of NBC Universal. He wants Comcast to distribute content in a way that he approves of and lets competitors access Comcast's platform.
It's almost amusing that these conditions are being applied in the name of the "public interest."
Genachowski's proposal isn't binding. He still has to present his ideas to the other four commissioners and a vote must be taken. But neither one man nor one group should have the power to marshal private companies' business operations.
Private media companies are not government-owned utilities.
Regulators such as Genachowski say they are merely trying to keep competition healthy and protect consumers.
But their efforts inhibit competition and obstruct innovation.
Cell phones, for instance, were delayed by the FCC for a decade. The cost of this hang-up to the economy, according to the National Economic Research Associates, was $85 billion.
Like generals fighting the last war, regulators make rules based on the way businesses operated yesterday. As they try to keep up with market dynamics, they inflict uncertainty into business decisions and put a boot on the neck of progress. When not held back by regulators, though, companies freely create new technologies and business models that increase competition.
What role, then, is there for regulators, especially those at the FCC, which oversees one of the most dynamic industries in the world? With the intense competition in telecommunications that has benefited consumers and led to wide commercial successes, there's no need for a government referee in this sector.
There's nothing the FCC does that can't be eliminated, streamlined or handed over to another agency or department that has a legitimate function. (Ed Morrissey of hotair.com suggests broadcast licenses "could be handled by the Commerce Department, or by a greatly reduced FCC with binding limitations on jurisdiction." The point is, the FCC as now constituted doesn't have to do it.)
The FCC has been around for a while — it was established by the Communications Act of 1934. So it won't be abolished overnight. But its elimination is a worthy goal.
Republicans, who at one time had a shutdown agenda, will control the House beginning in January. They should make the call and get the process started.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/557805/201012231855/Kill-Off-The-FCC.aspx
Posted in Congress FCC Government Control Legal rights Liberal Republican with No Comments
More:
Print This Post
Subscribe to Our RSS Feed
Follow Us on Twitter
Comments