An instructive myth-versus-fact visual when it comes to public assumptions regarding corporate profits…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: Myth Versus Fact Regarding Corporate Profits

An instructive myth-versus-fact visual when it comes to public assumptions regarding corporate profits, courtesy of AEI:

. [caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="520" caption="Myth Versus Fact: Corporate Profits"][/caption]

.…[more]

January 17, 2018 • 01:08 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Home Press Room CFIF Comments on FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's Remarks on “The Future of Internet Regulation”
CFIF Comments on FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's Remarks on “The Future of Internet Regulation” Print
Wednesday, April 26 2017

Today, Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") Chairman Ajit Pai delivered a highly-anticipated speech entitled "The Future of Internet Regulation," setting forth his proposal to reverse radical internet regulations imposed by the Obama Administration FCC. 

In response, Center for Individual Freedom ("CFIF") Senior Vice President of Legal and Public Affairs Timothy Lee issued the following statement: 

"Since the 1990s, the internet has flourished and transformed our lives like no other innovation on record.  As Chairman Pai cogently stated in his remarks, 'The internet is the greatest free-market success story in history.'  And that occurred because administrations spanning two decades and both political parties, beginning with Clinton/Gore, wisely chose a 'light touch' regulatory approach to the internet.

"Unfortunately, two years ago the Obama Administration's FCC radically reversed two decades of bipartisan consensus by needlessly reclassifying internet service as a 'public utility' under 1930s laws enacted for copper-wire telephone service.  That reversal was not based upon evidence, law or logic.  The internet wasn't 'broken' or in need of a heavy-handed federal regulatory 'fix.'  Rather, it was a scheme to extend government control over yet another sector of our economy. 

"The negative consequences of the FCC's reclassification of internet service as some sort of Depression-era 'public utility' were immediate and profound.  As the Chairman noted, domestic broadband capital expenditures declined by 5.6%, or $3.6 billion, which marked the first time that such investment declined outside of a recession during the internet era.  That applied to both large and small internet service providers. 

"Proponents of heavy-handed internet regulation will now roll out their usual litany of scare tactics and hyperbole.  Don't believe them. Chairman Pai is simply restoring the bipartisan light-touch regulatory status quo that existed for more than two decades. 

“Simply put, the principle of a free and open internet is something on which all parties agree.  What American consumers didn't need was a hyper-partisan FCC suddenly regulating the internet as a 'public utility' under the pretense of 'protecting consumers.'  Accordingly, CFIF applauds Chairman Pai for moving to restore common sense to internet regulation and the FCC."

###

Related Articles :
Question of the Week   
Which one of the following U.S. Naval officers is famous for stating: ‘Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead’?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch knew well in advance of FBI Director James Comey's 2016 press conference that he would recommend against charging Hillary Clinton, according to information turned over to the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Friday.The revelation was included in 384 pages of text messages exchanged between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and it significantly diminishes…[more]
 
 
—Sharyl Attkisson, Emmy-Award Winning Investigative Journalist
— Sharyl Attkisson, Emmy-Award Winning Investigative Journalist
 
Liberty Poll   

Traditionally, the President's political party loses Congressional seats in midterm elections. Will the positive economic trends being generated by tax reform allow Republicans to retain enough seats in 2018 to maintain majorities in both houses?