« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Tech at Night: Sometimes I wonder if we should just abolish the FCC

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  March 10th, 2012 at 01:45 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Tech at Night

I know, I know. The way that broadcasts travel across state lines, it’s important that some sort of national control step in, because the states can’t do it. But the way the Obama FCC operates, sometimes I wonder if it’s worth all the trouble.

Instead of working to ensure we have the spectrum we need allocated to the purposes we want, The Obama FCC constantly works as a roadblock, earlier against AT&T, and now against Verizon.

This same FCC is also, with apparently no objection from the President, actively and openly stonewalling Chuck Grassley and the Senate in attempts at applying reasonable oversight to the committee.

The FCC has too many secrets and tries to make too many decisions over the private sector. We have to fix this.

Even under new ownership, the Pirate Bay is in trouble. And apparently the site is allying itself with Wikileaks. You see where the lines are drawn. Anti-copyright, Pirate Party, and all of that are parts of the greater anarchist movement. These are not our friends.

So when in the US, MPAA comes after another infringer haven, Hotfile,, I’m not complaining.

Of course government is a double edged sword. Book copyright holders are at risk of government action for colluding to harm Amazon and its customers for the gain of themselves and of Apple.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • buzzbrown

    What does the FCC do for the public anyway? It seems to me it is just another Gov’t regulating agency trying to justify it’s existence by adding even another layer of regulation to overburdened taxpayers and businesses.

  • synergist777

    I have a general rule about conspiracies, based on Occam’s Razor: Don’t blame on a conspiracy that which can be explained by a group of individuals, each acting in their own self-interest. Bureaucrats, in general, act first to keep their jobs, second to get promoted, and third to expand their sphere of power.

    The FCC is no different. The idea of an FCC is important; there are limited airwaves, and it is somewhat ridiculous to decide that anybody can own part of the spectrum. However, if anarchy prevailed, they would quickly become totally useless, so there needs to be some sort of gatekeeper to work out the best way to deal with them. Unfortunately, the individuals that make up the FCC will almost always work in their own personal interests first, and only in the public interest when it serves their own. Hence the expansion of FCC power into areas where there really isn’t competition for use of the spectrum (such as the Internet), and other areas where the FTC is the more logical choice of regulator (note that a certain degree of regulation is necessary; it is when the regulations start serving the interests of the regulators and their friends rather than the public that it becomes abusive).

    The biggest of several problems I see in the article quoted is a lack of accountability. The FCC has rules which it is not required to and will not reveal, but feels free to use its muscle on those who break them. This, in turn, means that the bureaucrats can pretty much make them up on their own whims, which is as bad as anarchy.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    It’s also the political appointees at the top.

  • WmCraig

    I have been convinced of the accuracy of President Reagan’s statement that “Washington is the problem”. I don’t understand why there is any question in your mind that the FCC should be abolished. No agency of this federal government has the interests of the American people at heart. What we have today in Washington is not what the founders envisioned, and not the government of liberty that we embrace.

    There is definitely a place for federal referee to insure continued access to resources and to mediate any disputes that arise from various implementations of technology, but so much power concentrated in so few hands is dangerous to liberty. The FCC is no exception. Whether we are talking about the power of the bureaucracy to self promote, or the ability of a few ideologues to to infiltrate, influence and even control the power of the FCC from within, or ability of the ruling elite to wield that power against liberty doesn’t matter. The fact that it is so powerful, and can so easily be manipulated by a few as a tool against liberty makes it unacceptable to continue in it’s current form.

    Tell me again why John Boehner’s Republican party refuses to shut down the government, reduce spending to sustainable levels, and return the power over Washington to the citizens of this country?

    I will counter any financial explanation with the simple statement, that the next batter up wants to control, not reduce federal spending, and will need the power of this agency to intimidate. I no longer trust Republican ruling elite including John Boehner to defend liberty and expect the next Republican administration to use the FCC as a bludgeon to defend their power with no less zeal than the Obama administration.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I’m a conservative. I reject anarchy.

  • synergist777

    Unaccountable political appointees who make unappealable decisions are only one step removed from a tyranny. (see: Obamacare)

  • crazyjoan

    With top Republican leaders like John Boehner in charge one has to expect discord and dysfunction.