4 ms·

They are legally empowered by elected officials, just like the police, the courts, the entire Justice Department, military, State Department, NIH, NSF, IEEE (fo

They are legally empowered by elected officials, just like the police, the courts, the entire Justice Department, military, State Department, NIH, NSF, IEEE (for some things), and many, many more. What alternative is there? Our elected officials can't possibly have the time or the expertise to perform all those tasks themselves.

thomasthomas 10y ago
the difference is the communication act of 1934 essentially lets the FCC create laws whereby the police etc don't have that power. the power to create laws should be held by elected officials imo. the 5 leaders of the FCC get to unilaterally make regulations (laws) that affect every single citizen in america. everything from tv broadcasts to net neutrality
- Frogolocalypse 10y ago
  No, it allows them to create regulations within the framework of the act of their constitution. They can't create laws that stop someone fishing for tuna, now can they? This is the same as road/highway authorities being able to set traffic speed zones, food authorities for setting health quality regulations, health bodies regulating medicines, or any other regulatory body. You don't like it? Get you politician to change/repeal the act. That's how democracy works.
  - thomasthomas 10y ago
    except speed limits are enforced by police. huge administrative authorities have executive, law making, and judicial power. The [Federal Trade] Commission promulgates substantive rules of conduct. The Commission then considers whether to authorize investigations into whether the Commission’s rules have been violated. If the Commission authorizes an investigation, the investigation is conducted by the Commission, which reports its findings to the Commission. If the Commission thinks that the Commission’s findings warrant an enforcement action, the Commission issues a complaint. The Commission’s complaint that a Commission rule has been violated is then prosecuted by the Commission and adjudicated by the Commission. This Commission adjudication can either take place before the full Commission or before a semi-autonomous Commission administrative law judge. If the Commission chooses to adjudicate before an administrative law judge rather than before the Commission and the decision is adverse to the Commission, the Commission can appeal to the Commission. If the Commission ultimately finds a violation, then, and only then, the affected private party can appeal to an Article III court. But the agency decision, even before the bona fide Article III tribunal, possesses a very strong presumption of correctness on matters both of fact and of law. http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/hlr107&div=63&id=&page= http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/h...
Spivak 10y ago
If Congress legally empowered an un-elected five person 'Super Congress' that wielded the power of Congress itself to make laws independently would you feel like your voice at the ballot box was being undermined? I'm not saying the US regulatory agencies are at that point, but I would feel better about them if their power was more directly checked by the Executive branch. Instead of "FCC voted today on a new ISP resulations..." it would be "Today President Obama approves new FCC recommendation...".
- meddlepal 10y ago
  That's great and all if you like the president. Enjoy when its president Palin, Trump, Cruz, or Bachmann for example.
- Frogolocalypse 10y ago
  > I would feel better about them if their power was more directly checked by the Executive branch. They can. The executive can always modify or repeal the act that defines their constitution and authority.
  - pdonis 10y ago
    > The executive can always modify or repeal the act that defines their constitution and authority. Um, what? Once it's signed into law (which the acts that empower agencies like the FCC are), the executive branch can't modify the law at all. Only Congress can. The only thing the executive can do is veto a bill when it comes, to prevent it from becoming law in the first place.
    - Frogolocalypse 10y ago
      > Only Congress can. Sorry, I should have said 'government'. There are three branches of the US government : the legislature, the judiciary, and the executive. You have a say in all of them though. Don't you vote in your congress-people and senators? So... They can. The government can always modify or repeal the act that defines their constitution and authority. They're your representative. If you don't like an act, get them to change it.

thomasthomas 10y ago

the difference is the communication act of 1934 essentially lets the FCC create laws whereby the police etc don't have that power. the power to create laws should be held by elected officials imo. the 5 leaders of the FCC get to unilaterally make regulations (laws) that affect every single citizen in america. everything from tv broadcasts to net neutrality

Frogolocalypse 10y ago
No, it allows them to create regulations within the framework of the act of their constitution. They can't create laws that stop someone fishing for tuna, now can they? This is the same as road/highway authorities being able to set traffic speed zones, food authorities for setting health quality regulations, health bodies regulating medicines, or any other regulatory body. You don't like it? Get you politician to change/repeal the act. That's how democracy works.
- thomasthomas 10y ago
  except speed limits are enforced by police. huge administrative authorities have executive, law making, and judicial power. The [Federal Trade] Commission promulgates substantive rules of conduct. The Commission then considers whether to authorize investigations into whether the Commission’s rules have been violated. If the Commission authorizes an investigation, the investigation is conducted by the Commission, which reports its findings to the Commission. If the Commission thinks that the Commission’s findings warrant an enforcement action, the Commission issues a complaint. The Commission’s complaint that a Commission rule has been violated is then prosecuted by the Commission and adjudicated by the Commission. This Commission adjudication can either take place before the full Commission or before a semi-autonomous Commission administrative law judge. If the Commission chooses to adjudicate before an administrative law judge rather than before the Commission and the decision is adverse to the Commission, the Commission can appeal to the Commission. If the Commission ultimately finds a violation, then, and only then, the affected private party can appeal to an Article III court. But the agency decision, even before the bona fide Article III tribunal, possesses a very strong presumption of correctness on matters both of fact and of law. http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/hlr107&div=63&id=&page= http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/h...

Spivak 10y ago

If Congress legally empowered an un-elected five person 'Super Congress' that wielded the power of Congress itself to make laws independently would you feel like your voice at the ballot box was being undermined? I'm not saying the US regulatory agencies are at that point, but I would feel better about them if their power was more directly checked by the Executive branch. Instead of "FCC voted today on a new ISP resulations..." it would be "Today President Obama approves new FCC recommendation...".

meddlepal 10y ago
That's great and all if you like the president. Enjoy when its president Palin, Trump, Cruz, or Bachmann for example.
Frogolocalypse 10y ago
> I would feel better about them if their power was more directly checked by the Executive branch. They can. The executive can always modify or repeal the act that defines their constitution and authority.
- pdonis 10y ago
  > The executive can always modify or repeal the act that defines their constitution and authority. Um, what? Once it's signed into law (which the acts that empower agencies like the FCC are), the executive branch can't modify the law at all. Only Congress can. The only thing the executive can do is veto a bill when it comes, to prevent it from becoming law in the first place.
  - Frogolocalypse 10y ago
    > Only Congress can. Sorry, I should have said 'government'. There are three branches of the US government : the legislature, the judiciary, and the executive. You have a say in all of them though. Don't you vote in your congress-people and senators? So... They can. The government can always modify or repeal the act that defines their constitution and authority. They're your representative. If you don't like an act, get them to change it.