In our latest Liberty Update, we highlight the benefits of the Trump Administration's deregulation effort…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly Agree with Trump's Pandemic Deregulation Initiative

In our latest Liberty Update, we highlight the benefits of the Trump Administration's deregulation effort, both pre-pandemic and going forward, and how a budding effort among Congressional leftists to impose a moratorium on business mergers would severely undermine that effort.  Rasmussen Reports brings excellent news in that regard, as large majorities of Americans agree with Trump rather than hyper-regulatory leftists:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey shows that 58% of likely U.S. voters approve of Trump's decision to temporarily limit government regulation of small businesses to help them bounce back.  Just 26% are opposed, while 17% are undecided."

Sadly but perhaps predictably, those on the left stubbornly disagree:

The president's action has triggered…[more]

May 26, 2020 • 12:43 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.
CFIF Praises Court of Appeals Ruling Upholding FCC’s Restoring Internet Freedom Order Print
By CFIF Staff
Tuesday, October 01 2019

ALEXANDRIA, VA – Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit broadly vindicated the 2017 Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) rulemaking that repealed the Obama Administration’s 2015 Title II internet rules that had suffocated the internet with public utility-style regulation.  In response, Center for Individual Freedom President Jeffrey Mazzella released the following statement praising the D.C. Circuit’s decision.

"Today’s decision by the D.C. Circuit is a huge win for consumers and internet freedom. 

"In 2015, the Obama Administration FCC radically reversed two decades of bipartisan consensus by reclassifying internet service as a 'public utility' under laws enacted in 1934 to regulate old-fashioned copper-wire telephone service.  Since the 1990s, the internet had flourished and transformed our world like no innovation in history for a simple reason:  Administrations of both political parties over two decades, beginning with Clinton/Gore, wisely chose a 'light touch' regulatory approach to the internet.  There was no justification for that sudden reversal, and it was not based upon evidence, law or logic.  The internet obviously wasn't 'broken' or in need of heavy-handed federal regulatory 'fix.'  It was merely a scheme to extend government control over yet another sector of our economy.

"The negative consequences were immediate.  Private broadband investment declined for the first time ever outside of an economic recession. 

"On that basis, the FCC under new Chairman Ajit Pai restored the bipartisan, light-touch regulatory consensus that existed for more than two decades. 

"Despite the Chicken Little predictions by proponents of heavy-handed government regulation, the internet has once again flourished since the FCC reversed the Obama-era Title II rules.  Private sector investment in networks and average broadband speeds have both increased dramatically since the FCC’s 2017 order.

"CFIF applauds the Court of Appeals for unanimously recognizing the merits of the FCC’s 2017 correction, which benefits American consumers, our economy, private investment, innovation and employment."

###

Related Articles :
Question of the Week   
The largest-ever helicopter evacuation took place during which of the following conflicts?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"Everyone is so afraid now. I grew up idolizing Evel Knievel. Kids now idolize Greta Thunberg."…[more]
 
 
—Tweet by Adam Carolla, Host of The Adam Carolla Show on Podcast One and Three Times New York Times Best Selling Author
— Tweet by Adam Carolla, Host of The Adam Carolla Show on Podcast One and Three Times New York Times Best Selling Author
 
Liberty Poll   

Until this week, the U.S. House has required Members to be physically present to vote. Due to coronavirus, "proxy voting," allowing Members to cast votes for absent colleagues, is now being used. Should "proxy voting" be allowed to continue?