Better Alternatives to Net Neutrality

Net neutrality was the wrong solution.  It just added more government regulations to solve a problem caused by government regulations.  The solution should be to remove the regulations that grant ISP's monopolies free from competition.

ISP's monopoly power comes from control of the "last mile" that connects to your house.  Local governments, like the village I live in, grant exclusive rights to a single ISP.  Nobody else can string coax or fiber in the local government's area.  Congress can outlaw this practice because it's local governments interfering with interstate commerce.

There's also a lot of reserved TV spectrum that could be used for super wifi.  Local TV spectrum is reserved for TV whether it's used or not.  In smaller markets, with only a few TV stations, there is a whole lot of idle spectrum that could be reallocated to provide broadband Internet over the air.  The spectrum could be auctioned off to raise revenue for the Feds.  In low density rural areas, this might be the only way to provide high speed internet.

What's It Worth To Teach Trump to Respect Women?

It's worth whatever it takes to make sure that potty mouth Trump is taught to respect women. Hillary Clinton respects women (except for women who accuse her husband of rape) and she is going to show the world how well socialism works! Power to the (politically connected) people, right on! Hillary Clinton has a track record of working hard for people (who have donated to the Clinton Foundation). As the first woman president, Hillary Clinton can complete the (disastrous) domestic and foreign policy changes started by Barack Obama, the first black president. Clinton will convert our outstanding (unsustainable) Obamacare into single payer VA Care. The government will pay for all healthcare without any problems (for liberals who vote correctly). The government will make sure that coal is no longer used to generate electricity (no matter how many blackouts this causes). The government will regulate the US internet to preserve net neutrality (and large campaign contributions from internet providers), but give the international internet arrangements to the UN (to make sure that all internet screens condemn Israel, but allow local dictators to censor other content). College will be completely free to students (but not to taxpayers). Ultimately, socialism will deliver equality for all (by impoverishing everyone who doesn't work for the government).

Internet Neutrality: Regulate Like It's 1887

The latest atrocity in the ever expanding regulation of everything by the Obama Administration is regulating the internet as a common carrier justified by enforcing internet neutrality.  The putative purpose of the regulation is to make sure that all internet traffic is treated equally.  No company should be able to buy a fast track for its traffic.  The problem is especially acute in “the last mile,” where local municipalities have sold monopoly positions to cable and telephone companies which have jacked up prices.  If the problem is geographical monopolies on the last mile, then the solution is a federal law that outlaws them because they are an illegal local burden on interstate commerce. This would be a use of the Commerce Clause as it was actually intended.

The solution is not to allow the Feds to regulate the internet based on a law passed in 1934 for regulating telephone companies as common carriers, which itself was based on common carrier railroad regulation which was originally passed into law in 1887. The Interstate Commerce Commission powers to regulate railroads bankrupted a lot of them. Railroads were deregulated in 1980 and the ICC was abolished in 1995. Jimmy Carter signed the bill in 1980 and Bill Clinton signed the 1995 bill. The ICC was such bad news two Democrats signed bills to dismantle and kill it. Why would we want to resurrect this mess for the internet?

As a side comment, a nice Constitutional Amendment would be to make all laws expire in 50 years. If Congress doesn't see fit to reenact them, they should be gone. We could avoid 80 year old laws being used as excuses to regulate us. Why 50 years, you might ask?  Because we might need Democratic votes to get the 2/3 majority of votes in both Houses of Congress  needed to propose the amendment.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/413854/obamacare-you-will-love-obamanet-deroy-murdock