FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues
-
@travisdh1 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@scottalanmiller said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@travisdh1 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@black3dynamite said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@mlnews said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
How is that possible? Does FCC have that type of power to enforce individual states to comply?
Not in the least. Now do you think that actually matters to anyone?
Why do you say that? What do you mean not in the least? Everything the FCC does is federal and supercedes state laws.
Because I actually know the constitution and what the federal government is allowed.
So you know that interstate commerce is purely a federal concern then, so the states have no say in the matter.
-
@travisdh1 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
Like I said, nobody at any level actually pays any attention to it today, but it's never officially been changed to allow things like the FCC to exist.
Quite the opposite, they've paid very close attention and use the constituion. It's people making up fake states' rights that is the confusion. Telecommunications has been an interstate concern since day one and never fallen to the states. The FCC is able to exist, and needed, specifically because the constitution creates a need for federal oversite of interstate matters.
-
It's actually states, not the fed, that typically over step their bounds. The fed actually has nearly unlimited power in an age when almost all aspects of life are not bound to within the confines of a single state. Anything having to do with typical business, logistics, communications, or similar is clearly a federal concern.
-
-
Also worth noting that interstate commerce includes anything affecting other states, not just trade directly with them.
In United States v. Wrightwood Dairy Co. (1942) the Court upheld federal price regulation of intrastate milk commerce, stating:
The commerce power is not confined in its exercise to the regulation of commerce among the states. It extends to those activities intrastate which so affect interstate commerce, or the exertion of the power of Congress over it, as to make regulation of them appropriate means to the attainment of a legitimate end, the effective execution of the granted power to regulate interstate commerce. [ ...] The power of Congress over interstate commerce is plenary and complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in the Constitution. [ ... ] It follows that no form of state activity can constitutionally thwart the regulatory power granted by the commerce clause to Congress. Hence, the reach of that power extends to those intrastate activities which in a substantial way interfere with or obstruct the exercise of the granted power
-
@scottalanmiller said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
Also worth noting that interstate commerce includes anything affecting other states, not just trade directly with them.
In United States v. Wrightwood Dairy Co. (1942) the Court upheld federal price regulation of intrastate milk commerce, stating:
The commerce power is not confined in its exercise to the regulation of commerce among the states. It extends to those activities intrastate which so affect interstate commerce, or the exertion of the power of Congress over it, as to make regulation of them appropriate means to the attainment of a legitimate end, the effective execution of the granted power to regulate interstate commerce. [ ...] The power of Congress over interstate commerce is plenary and complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in the Constitution. [ ... ] It follows that no form of state activity can constitutionally thwart the regulatory power granted by the commerce clause to Congress. Hence, the reach of that power extends to those intrastate activities which in a substantial way interfere with or obstruct the exercise of the granted power
You've missed the entire issue. I'd argue the commerce clause is abused today, but it's a valid power of the congress.
-
@travisdh1 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@scottalanmiller said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
Also worth noting that interstate commerce includes anything affecting other states, not just trade directly with them.
In United States v. Wrightwood Dairy Co. (1942) the Court upheld federal price regulation of intrastate milk commerce, stating:
The commerce power is not confined in its exercise to the regulation of commerce among the states. It extends to those activities intrastate which so affect interstate commerce, or the exertion of the power of Congress over it, as to make regulation of them appropriate means to the attainment of a legitimate end, the effective execution of the granted power to regulate interstate commerce. [ ...] The power of Congress over interstate commerce is plenary and complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in the Constitution. [ ... ] It follows that no form of state activity can constitutionally thwart the regulatory power granted by the commerce clause to Congress. Hence, the reach of that power extends to those intrastate activities which in a substantial way interfere with or obstruct the exercise of the granted power
You've missed the entire issue. I'd argue the commerce clause is abused today, but it's a valid power of the congress.
But that's the point, that the commerce claus gives rise to the FCC and gives it the power over the states.
-
@scottalanmiller said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@travisdh1 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@scottalanmiller said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
Also worth noting that interstate commerce includes anything affecting other states, not just trade directly with them.
In United States v. Wrightwood Dairy Co. (1942) the Court upheld federal price regulation of intrastate milk commerce, stating:
The commerce power is not confined in its exercise to the regulation of commerce among the states. It extends to those activities intrastate which so affect interstate commerce, or the exertion of the power of Congress over it, as to make regulation of them appropriate means to the attainment of a legitimate end, the effective execution of the granted power to regulate interstate commerce. [ ...] The power of Congress over interstate commerce is plenary and complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in the Constitution. [ ... ] It follows that no form of state activity can constitutionally thwart the regulatory power granted by the commerce clause to Congress. Hence, the reach of that power extends to those intrastate activities which in a substantial way interfere with or obstruct the exercise of the granted power
You've missed the entire issue. I'd argue the commerce clause is abused today, but it's a valid power of the congress.
But that's the point, that the commerce claus gives rise to the FCC and gives it the power over the states.
Trust me, there is no more right to privacy or free speech at least. I've witnessed this myself, no amount of arguing about technicalities will disprove what they've actually done.
-
@travisdh1 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@scottalanmiller said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@travisdh1 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@scottalanmiller said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
Also worth noting that interstate commerce includes anything affecting other states, not just trade directly with them.
In United States v. Wrightwood Dairy Co. (1942) the Court upheld federal price regulation of intrastate milk commerce, stating:
The commerce power is not confined in its exercise to the regulation of commerce among the states. It extends to those activities intrastate which so affect interstate commerce, or the exertion of the power of Congress over it, as to make regulation of them appropriate means to the attainment of a legitimate end, the effective execution of the granted power to regulate interstate commerce. [ ...] The power of Congress over interstate commerce is plenary and complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in the Constitution. [ ... ] It follows that no form of state activity can constitutionally thwart the regulatory power granted by the commerce clause to Congress. Hence, the reach of that power extends to those intrastate activities which in a substantial way interfere with or obstruct the exercise of the granted power
You've missed the entire issue. I'd argue the commerce clause is abused today, but it's a valid power of the congress.
But that's the point, that the commerce claus gives rise to the FCC and gives it the power over the states.
Trust me, there is no more right to privacy or free speech at least. I've witnessed this myself, no amount of arguing about technicalities will disprove what they've actually done.
What the heck are you talking about? You specifically said that the FCC could not oversee the states. Now you are talking about something unrelated. This has nothing to do with the conversation.
-
Right to privacy is not a right in the US - you are confusing the US with the EU. Freedom of Speech is a federal right, and nothing to do with interstate commerce.
-
@black3dynamite said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@mlnews said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
How is that possible? Does FCC have that type of power to enforce individual states to comply?
Yes.
-
@scottalanmiller said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
Right to privacy is not a right in the US - you are confusing the US with the EU. Freedom of Speech is a federal right, and nothing to do with interstate commerce.
It's odd actually the only state with an actual privacy is California.
-
With regards to Muni internet Spectrum (aka time Warner) has been losing market share here in Rochester for the past 2 years. Not Muni service, just private competition with a fiber provider.
-
Might be incredibly naive of me, but is there a world in which they pass this nonsense and nuke net neutrality, then an ISP is started that doesn't follow in step with these terribly unethical practices and a lot of providers see a huge loss of business as a consequence of their own actions?
-
@r3dpand4 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
Might be incredibly naive of me, but is there a world in which they pass this nonsense and nuke net neutrality, then an ISP is started that doesn't follow in step with these terribly unethical practices and a lot of providers see a huge loss of business as a consequence of their own actions?
Hahahah... Sure and Kim Jong Un will see the error of his ways and go full Democratic
-
@r3dpand4 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
Might be incredibly naive of me, but is there a world in which they pass this nonsense and nuke net neutrality, then an ISP is started that doesn't follow in step with these terribly unethical practices and a lot of providers see a huge loss of business as a consequence of their own actions?
Could be. But in this world that competitive service would be sued into oblivion by the incumbant ISPs.
-
@dustinb3403 Not sure how that remotely is related...
-
@r3dpand4 those 2 things are far more likely to happen than big ISPs allowing competition.
-
@r3dpand4 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@dustinb3403 Not sure how that remotely is related...
You're expecting buisinesses who've been getting away with everything just do an about face and start playing fair because someone else started off playing fair.
It's unrealistic
-
@coliver I mean I suppose that's possible, but you could say the same thing about anything that's going to upset large scale service providers in any industry. When cable/dish subscriptions started losing out to a la carte packaging from other sources they just had to adapt for instance.
