People are being hoodwinked into thinking that the government getting involved regulating the internet is a good thing. Who could be so gullible? People that read headlines instead of analyzing what the consequences will be once government gets involved; less access, more expense, and intrusion into the free market and best frontier for small businesses to compete. That’s right, the same people the advocates are pretending to protect (the small business and individual) is the same person that will be crushed by the FCC. The law of unintended consequences will rear its ugly head.

The reason people are concerned stems from concerns of bandwidth usage by content providers like Netflix. This type of content gobbles up bandwidth and impacts the performance of ISP’s, and has forced ISP’s to consider charging their customers more for this bandwidth service or not offering these services at all. Either choice for the ISP will be an issue for their business. But to have the federal government get involved is the wrong answer.

There is a red herring argument as well being used that large companies will dominate and control the information people seek on the internet. For example, large ISP’s could restrict other ISP’s services or access to them. Here’s the rub; they haven’t so far because they know if they do customers will flee to another provider. The market has worked and all of these people using the class warfare and evil corporation arguments are speculating and underestimating the power of the market to control itself. The same people that don’t think individuals can take care of themselves are the same people pushing net neutrality. All of the most liberal organizations are supporting this hand over of control from private companies to the FCC to our peril.

What if all the ISP’s and large players on the web got together and decided to block usage of one particular service? That is already protected under monopoly laws. We have seen a similar fight in the browser markets already. We have seen no evidence to date that we need the FCC getting involved. The free market will reward and punish the behavior it (the market/me and you) deem inappropriate.

People that are supporting the government’s intrusion say it is not “fair” for them to pay more for higher usage. And the providers of this content like Netflix say it is not “fair” that they will not have access to these ISP customers. It sounds like a perfect opportunity for another player in the market to compete. Asking the federal government to “solve” a market issue is dangerous, and is a great opportunity for the camel’s nose (FCC) to get under the tent.

The government at every level, local, state, and federal is trying to get its nose into the pockets of every aspect of the internet. The reason the internet has boomed is because there is little current regulation. The market has prevailed to keep entry costs low and competition fierce. That will change with net “neutrality”. Besides ISP’s either raising prices on everyone or getting out of the market, the regulation of content and taxation of individual websites and Blogs is high on the FCC’s priority list.

The federal government is also trying to introduce a version of the “Fairness Doctrine” on news outlets they don’t like; like everything conservative. Conservative news outlets and Blogs have exploded in popularity on the web because the market has chosen to subscribe, read, and listen to these outlets. The left hates the fact they can’t compete in the arena of ideas, and the only way to “compete” is to limit your access or shut down the outlets by forcing these outlets to provide an opposing view to their views. Huh! There are a billion opposing views on the internet and to force a conservative or liberal outlet to give their competitor a voice is already happening.

It is a guise to ruin the most popular networks like the “evil” Fox News, Drudge, and so many others that have outlets on the web… It made for really bad radio until Ronald Reagan ended it, and it will crush free speech on the web if the feds get their way with net “neutrality.”

There is nothing neutral about this really bad idea. Congress has defeated the bill but the FCC is going to move forward without authority. This is lawlessness by the FCC to move forward without the vote from congress. These unelected bureaucrats are changing rules against the will of the people. I can’t believe most thinking Americans can support this effort.

When people see the facts my guess is the will not…

The 10th Amendment

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”



Featured Articles

On the Constitution, history, the founders, and analysis of current events.

featured articles


Tenther Blog and News

Nullification news, quick takes, history, interviews, podcasts and much more.

tenther blog


State of the Nullification Movement

232 pages. History, constitutionality, and application today.

get the report


Path to Liberty

Our flagship podcast. Michael Boldin on the constitution, history, and strategy for liberty today

path to liberty


Maharrey Minute

The title says it all. Mike Maharrey with a 1 minute take on issues under a 10th Amendment lens. maharrey minute

Tenther Essentials

2-4 minute videos on key Constitutional issues - history, and application today


Join TAC, Support Liberty!

Nothing helps us get the job done more than the financial support of our members, from just $2/month!



The 10th Amendment

History, meaning, and purpose - the "Foundation of the Constitution."

10th Amendment



Get an overview of the principles, background, and application in history - and today.