The liberal left believes that freedom is maintained by big government control
FCC Net Neutrality Decision
The Net Neutrality argument is an old one that has been around much longer than the internet. Long before today's technology was even a nugget of thought in science fiction novels the concept of statism existed. In today's America, the Marxist idea of collectivism and utopia goes a little something like,
if the federal government doesn't maintain some kind of control over something the big bad corporations will take away our freedom regarding that something - whatever it may be.
Think about that, for a moment. The liberal left believes that freedom is maintained by big government control.
It sounds like an oxymoron because it is.
The federal government's intrusion into any industry does not create freedom within that industry as the liberal left wants you to believe
Those who support Net Neutrality, which is the policy that went into place during the Obama administration which basically establishes government control over the activities of internet providers because of the fear they may (in the name of profit) tier their services so that people have to pay more for certain access, do so because they believe that the corporations and the individual incentive for profit cannot be trusted. So, to control the untrustworthy corporations so that they "keep the internet free," government must block the free market from speeding up, slowing down or blocking any content, applications or websites you may want to use. The problem is, such control also prohibits them from innovating.
The federal government's intrusion into any industry does not create freedom within that industry as the liberal left wants you to believe. The incentive of profit, and the desire for the growth of one's industry or business, creates innovation. The federal government's intrusion through Net Neutrality is literally blocking the next great technology boom.
For over a hundred years the technology surrounding the telephone remained minimal. About the biggest leap we experienced was when they went from rotary dial to touch-tone. Then, the government withdrew many of its regulations, and what followed was a revolution that ultimately led to what we have today - smart phones.
Do these kinds of incredible innovations for the internet linger on the horizon, as well? Can we truly ask, when it comes to innovation in technology, "What's next for the internet?"
We will only find out if the unconstitutional regulation of Net Neutrality being lifted is allowed to truly exist despite vicious attacks regarding the decision by the liberal left.
The Federal Communications Commission decided to dismantle its net neutrality regulations, and the liberal left is determined to run to the courts (as they always do) to block the move.
The advocacy group Free Press plans to challenge the FCC’s decision. The most likely argument: that the commission’s decision violates federal laws barring agencies from crafting “arbitrary and capricious” regulations. After all, the FCC’s net neutrality rules were just passed in 2015, and they are convinced the move is totally guided by political partisanship.
Constitution has never been amended to grant the federal government authority over communications
Despite the argument of "capriciousness", in truth, from a federal legal standpoint, federal agencies are allowed to change their minds about previous regulations, so long as they adequately explain their reasoning.
From a constitutional point of view, since the Constitution has never been amended to grant the federal government authority over communications, the policy move regarding Net Neutrality, and even the existence of the FCC in the first place, are unconstitutional. It doesn't matter if the new FCC's decision regarding Net Neutrality was based on politics, what they think is best for the industry, that they believe it was unconstitutional in the first place, or because they realize it chokes the innovation possible in the industry, they have a duty to eliminate the Net Neutrality regulations because they took an oath to protect and preserve the U.S. Constitution.
The FCC's main argument for revoking the Net Neutrality rules established in 2015 is that the regulations hurt investment in broadband infrastructure. Advocates
supporting Net Neutrality argue that the FCC's argument doesn't hold water, because according to their research many broadband providers actually increased their investments, while those that cut back on spending told shareholders that the net neutrality rules didn't affect their plans.
Personally, I think the Net Neutrality argument that Internet service providers must treat all data on the Internet the same without varying costs per user, or regarding the content, website, platform, or application, was a straw man argument in the first place. Internet providers never stated they planned to block or throttle content, and have indicated since the issue came up that they don't plan to do such a thing in the future. That said, if the industry did do such a thing, it would actually create opportunity for innovation, not only because of the room it would give providers to offer various packages, but it would encourage smaller upstarts to increase their level of competition by offering plans that undermine what the big boys are trying to do.
In the long run, we could see the eventual death of data limits across the board, and changes in broadband limits (if not, also, an elimination of them). Streaming service could also continue to get better, and in the long run explode into a whole new way of viewing television. Fiber optics innovations, or something even better, may also emerge.
It does surprise me that the liberal left is so concerned about the threat of prioritizing in the industry, by the way. Here in California, the liberal left Democrats are all about prioritizing (though, they deny that is what they are up to). The new toll roads and toll lanes give those who can afford them priority on the freeways. The emissions controls placed on the trucking industry gives priority to the larger corporations who can afford compliance, while pushing smaller companies and owner/operators either out of business, or out of State. The new gas tax gives priority to the class of people able to afford to maintain a large amount of travel, while limiting those of a smaller income bracket to remain in their home's vicinity since the increase of fuel costs will make it harder for them to afford long trips. The increase in the gas tax also gives priority to citizens able to afford the increase of the cost of living in this State, since a higher cost of fuel will also influence the prices of all goods and services - those who are in underserved communities will have to reduce their living standard to accommodate the increase in cost. In short, the liberal left Democrats are all about prioritizing.
Leftism is always about increasing government intrusion into our lives
In the end, the advocates supporting Net Neutrality, if the courts don't give them what they want, will likely appeal to Congress, where by issuing legislation Congress can overturn the FCC's decision, or alter the path of how the FCC regulates the industry.
Again, as a strict orginalist regarding the United States Constitution, I cringe every time any part of the federal government comes up with the big idea of meddling with the free market, and especially with the internet. There is simply no expressly enumerated authority for such federal actions in the Constitution. All of this is illegal in the first place.
That all said, while the courts are 70% liberal left, the Supreme Court would likely sway in the direction of the current FCC's decision of doing away with Net Neutrality. If it went to Congress, overturning it with a piece of legislation would require approval by both Houses, and for President Trump to sign it. Currently, both the House and the Senate are under Republican control (albeit the Senate could easily change after the 2018 mid-term election if the Democrats are able to pull off what they did in
Alabama's recent special election in a number of other States).
Never mind the fact that President Trump would never sign such a resolution or bill.
That said, many of the establishment Republicans support the idea of Net Neutrality, so the battle is not as slam-dunk as we may hope.
And, we know how the liberal left Democrats operate. They don't let go, easily. They keep slamming their fists into issues over and over, until they either get their way, or they realize they will just have to wait to resurrect it at a later date.
Leftism is always about increasing government intrusion into our lives. Like a river current under a boat, they never pause, they never rest, and they never ever show mercy.
Net neutrality advocacy groups will not give up. Failure in the courts and failure through legislation will only be a temporary setback to them. They are not interested in compromise. They want full government control because they believe that corporations and individual interests cannot be trusted. Freedom, somehow, goes hand in hand with government imposed equity.
To be honest, if they would simply search history to find examples that match their demands, it would be a short trip that lands them on the doorstep of Karl Marx.
Stronger rules and regulations against the internet industry for the purpose of making sure everything remains equitable is just another piece of the socialist puzzle, where government hands out misery equally, and true innovation is choked out before it can get off the ground. In the end, it is not freedom as they claim, but bondage under government rule. Net Neutrality is just another piece in that overreaching socialist puzzle they are trying to put together.
Douglas V. Gibbs -- Bio and
Archives |
Comments
Douglas V. Gibbs of Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary, has been featured on “Hannity” and “Fox and Friends” on Fox News Channel, and other television shows and networks. Doug is a Radio Host on KMET 1490-AM on Saturdays with his Constitution Radio program, as well as a longtime podcaster, conservative political activist, writer and commentator. Doug can be reached at douglasvgibbs [at] yahoo.com or constitutionspeaker [at] yahoo.com.
