4 ms·

What are the checks and balances here? He's not an elected official (so he can't be voted out), and he knows his time is up as soon as the executive branch tur

What are the checks and balances here? He's not an elected official (so he can't be voted out), and he knows his time is up as soon as the executive branch turns blue again. So of course he will do his best to please the ISPs in whose coddling arms he will find refuge after his tenure. Best I can think of is Congress passing a law to enforce net neutrality.

notalawyer 9y ago
So the federal regulatory agencies actually have fairly unchecked power; it's one of their flaws. Lawyer boyfriend has remarked that they are actually rather unconstitutional in the sense that they have broad powers to make what are effectively laws, and constitutionally, only Congress can do that. That being said, Congress has rightly delegated the ability to manage things like radio transmissions, the environment, food and drugs, etc. to bodies that have more time and domain knowledge, and under a decent president and Congress, we wouldn't have to worry about bad actors making their way to the tops of these organizations. And frankly, do you really have faith that Americans would do any better having to elect tens or hundreds of people to various positions in regulatory bodies?
matt4077 9y ago
It's the same as for any government employee. First, obviously, the law. It's not actually within his power to just write something down and sign it to make it the law of the land. There's a process that has to be followed, of which the comment period is but one step. Regulatory decisions are also required to, in general terms, make sense and be fair. The new EPA head is currently coming to the realisation that there are limits to his power, especially when he's trying to change rules which had just recently been created: quickly flip-flopping on regulatory issues is an open invitation to be sued by, for example, companies that have based decisions on the assumption of regulatory stability. It's also really hard to argue convincingly to abolish a rule, when the almost unchanged group of people has just made the convincing case for that rule a year ago. But beyond those squabbles, he is accountable to the people who hire and fire people in his position: the President and Congress. The assumption being that people realise it is the Republican Party who deserves the blame for this disaster of an idea.
jethro_tell 9y ago
I think that FCC can make some net neutrality rules, but I think the real win is if congress sets the ISP's status to title II common carrier. We already have the laws for that, they've just never been able to get it through so instead we are at the whim of the guy in office at the FCC

notalawyer 9y ago

So the federal regulatory agencies actually have fairly unchecked power; it's one of their flaws. Lawyer boyfriend has remarked that they are actually rather unconstitutional in the sense that they have broad powers to make what are effectively laws, and constitutionally, only Congress can do that. That being said, Congress has rightly delegated the ability to manage things like radio transmissions, the environment, food and drugs, etc. to bodies that have more time and domain knowledge, and under a decent president and Congress, we wouldn't have to worry about bad actors making their way to the tops of these organizations. And frankly, do you really have faith that Americans would do any better having to elect tens or hundreds of people to various positions in regulatory bodies?

matt4077 9y ago

It's the same as for any government employee. First, obviously, the law. It's not actually within his power to just write something down and sign it to make it the law of the land. There's a process that has to be followed, of which the comment period is but one step. Regulatory decisions are also required to, in general terms, make sense and be fair. The new EPA head is currently coming to the realisation that there are limits to his power, especially when he's trying to change rules which had just recently been created: quickly flip-flopping on regulatory issues is an open invitation to be sued by, for example, companies that have based decisions on the assumption of regulatory stability. It's also really hard to argue convincingly to abolish a rule, when the almost unchanged group of people has just made the convincing case for that rule a year ago. But beyond those squabbles, he is accountable to the people who hire and fire people in his position: the President and Congress. The assumption being that people realise it is the Republican Party who deserves the blame for this disaster of an idea.

jethro_tell 9y ago

I think that FCC can make some net neutrality rules, but I think the real win is if congress sets the ISP's status to title II common carrier. We already have the laws for that, they've just never been able to get it through so instead we are at the whim of the guy in office at the FCC