Automobile dealerships have been the beneficiaries of state laws that require maker-dealer contracts with restrictions blatantly favoring the profits of dealers over the welfare of consumers.
State governments have developed a despicable habit of ignoring what the voters and their representatives identify as the official purpose behind many grants and fee collections. In too many cases, state governments display the arrogance of skilled thieves, diverting funds from the intended destination. Instead the funds are used to plug self-inflicted budgetary holes.
Federal regulators are considering the imposition of onerous regulations on the U.S. rail industry, including competition-busting rules that would require competitors to share routes at subsidies rates – called reciprocal switching regulation. Before looking at the problem that regulations would create for consumers, it is helpful to review the long history of rail regulation and historical reforms – something that regulators need to understand.
For years, antitrust regulators in the European Union (EU) have behaved as if antitrust schemes lurk within each high-tech firm from the US. This paranoia fuels the imagined misdeeds that are the basis for high fines. If it were not for the windfall fines that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) harvests from US based defendants, Europeans might be more curious about the lack of evidence behind the adverse decisions against US high-tech firms.
The change in Administration brings fresh thinking to what had become an epicenter of 1934 regulatory thought – the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Under the prior Administration, the FCC was twice chastised by the courts for attempting to impose net neutrality on Internet Service Providers (ISPs). To avoid a third spanking by the courts, in 2015 the FCC chose to reclassify Internet service as a “telephone service” subject to the hideously complex public utility-style rules codified in 1934. That allowed the FCC to say that under net neutrality, ISPs are forbidden from offering Internet service at a priority speed, among other things.
Most consumers like meaningful, well-paying jobs and lower tax rates. Those end results are typical of what our political candidates promise, but those results are not the automatic result of an election victory. They depend on implementing the right policies. In the recent election, one piece of a tax proposal for businesses was a “border adjustment tax” or BAT. Just this morning, President-elect Trump tweeted that GM will be hit with BAT taxes, unless they manufacture the Chevy Cruze in the U.S., instead of Mexico, as proposed.
The EU fired its privacy blunderbuss against Yahoo, Facebook and What’s App, but that gun fires both ways. If and when the EU bothers to probe who actually is dropping the privacy balls, it will need a mirror and the full dossier on its own security agencies and success against hackers.
The latest bad news in consumer taxes is suitably framed against a backdrop of by terrorist and hacker disruptions and by disappointments from automobile recalls, excessive drug prices and the chronic bickering over how to increase income taxes.
The ongoing scuffle over launching competitive set top boxes has the FCC, the White House, and wannabe program packagers, like Google, lined up against the cable, satellite and telephone companies, also known as multichannel video programming distributors or MVPDs. The superficial version of the scuffle is whether consumers should have a competitive alternative to paying an average of $89 yearly to rent a set top box. Of course, all things being equal, they should have a competitive choice. But what the FCC wants is not that simple, and in its zeal to score populist points it ignores what makes the industry viable.
Willie Sutton said he goes after banks because that is where the money is. Hackers go after retail databases because that’s where the data is. Willie’s banks knew they’d been robbed when they heard bullets hitting the wall. Today’s retail outlets may get a firewall breach alarm but confirmation comes when banks start telling the retailers about consumer charge card anomalies.
When evidence is erased, everyone’s access to it is denied, but erasure creates an asymmetric advantage for the perpetrator. Loss of access to email evidence can shield the perpetrator from the orderly process of investigation and justice. Destruction of evidence conducted in pursuit of a politically partisan goal weakens the public’s perception of government integrity. The central goals in cases of evidence destruction must be to restore the public’s access to evidence and nullify the perpetrator’s illicitly obtained advantage. The court’s treatment depends on its assessment on whether the destruction was likely done in bad faith.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) declared that too many Americans have no access to broadband. This complaint arrives one year after the FCC raised the definition of “broadband” to 25 Megabits per second (Mbps ) up from 10 Megabits per second. That redefinition of what qualifies as broadband is the cause of the broadband shortage that the FCC complains about. It doesn’t require a law degree to know that unilaterally setting a higher standard will result in fewer homes meeting the standard.
In the United States, three pieces of legislation set the stage for government and national security agencies to access and use private information stored in electronic media. In the United Kingdom, a bill would make national security access easier. The European Union’s new privacy law is set to replace the 28-nation hodgepodge of privacy and security laws, and that new regime carries draconian fines. The three sets of laws have different emphasis and will make tripartite legal compliance often impossible for commercial vendors.
The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) has guided law enforcement’s collection of emails for three decades. In that time, the processing and location of emails has changed, many people have objected to the use of warrantless email searches, and some government entities were poorly served.
Between 2010 and 2014, the IRS budget was reduced, resulting in a hiring freeze and a net loss of 13,000 staffers. The demographic mix of IRS workers has tilted toward older workers and expected retirements will further deplete the IRS’s capabilities. The current staffing may be too thin and in some functions and it may be too inexperienced. The IRS Commissioner observed that “more than 6 out of every 10 people who call can’t reach a customer service representative,” a level of level of customer service he regards as “truly abysmal.” The IRS Commissioner claims it will focus its efforts on collections of taxes lawfully owed. To the contrary, IRS employees feel free to commit illegal actions in pursuit of partisan goals. This shows a failure of leadership.
The need for more radio spectrum devoted to consumer use is obvious from the increasing demands that consumers place on wireless carriers. U.S. wireless providers carried 3.23 trillion megabytes of data traffic in 2013, up 120 percent from 2012, and that was up 69.3 percent from 2011. Most carriers are able to quickly put into productive use the spectrum they buy from Federal Communications Commission (FCC) auctions. Finding spectrum that can be auctioned is the difficult and slow part.
The EPA claims that both science and economics support its global campaign to force U.S. states into halting carbon dioxide emissions. EPA’s Administrator Gina McCarthy says the EPA’s Clean Power Plan authority calls for an end to debate on climate change and emissions control: “people overwhelmingly consider climate change to be a problem — and they want action, not more debate or discussion.” Unfortunately, McCarthy’s policies are at odds with economics, law, and science. All that remains solid is the arrogance of the “my way or the highway” attitude shared with the White House.
Thinking of retiring in a few years? Beware of what is likely to come.
In the FCC’s recent incentive auction for spectrum, a total of $41 billion was bid. As expected, the winning bidders tended to be enormous, but this time, exceedingly small Northstar Wireless and SNR Wireless LicenseCo stood out. Both have affiliation with Dish Network, the satellite TV outfit with revenues of $14.6 billion and a market cap of $32 billion. Since Northstar and SNR’s were reportedly penniless and their bids were backed by Dish, the team’s bids were logically bids from a large bidder, Dish Network.
![James Comey Denies Being A Leaker [VIDEO]](http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/James_Comey-4-e1524706361747-279x120.jpeg "James Comey Denies Being A Leaker [VIDEO]")
