November‚??s election was an¬†overwhelming, historic rebuke¬†of what President Barack Obama and his Democrats are doing – and how they‚??re doing it.
But if you think the newly-minted major Republican majorities should serve as a roadblock to the Democrat agenda – well, that‚??s yet another thing you don‚??t have in common with the Democrat Party.
President Obama has been unilaterally rewriting law in Executive-Order-fiat-fashion since about¬†fifty-seven¬†seconds into his Administration.¬† Last November‚??s election¬†launched him into power grab overdrive.
Are Congressional Democrats protecting their purview?¬† And asking – nay demanding – President Obama leave the law writing to the lawmakers?¬† Of course not.
Why would Democrats do their jobs – where they‚??ll have to deal with all those pesky Republicans the American people keep electing in ever-greater numbers?
Better to help President Obama render Congress ever more irrelevant.¬† Democrats get the undiluted-by-compromise Huge Government they want – and invited to all the President‚??s fancy Fiat Signing Ceremonies.
President Obama has¬†nearly unlimited flexibility¬†now that there are no more elections between him and the end of his regime.¬† But the clock is ticking – so he is really moving.
Just after the election he basically demanded that the¬†allegedly independent¬†Federal Communications Commission (FCC):
The President wants his FCC to pretend to be Congress.¬† To yank the Internet out of 1996 law – and shove it into¬†1934 law.¬† He wants the omni-dynamic World Wide Web to be over-regulated like a Depression-era land line telephone.
Meanwhile, Republicans still cling to the quaint Constitutional notion that¬†elected legislators should be the ones legislating.
Republicans in Congress appear likely to introduce legislation next month aimed at preventing Internet providers from speeding up some Web sites over others.‚?¶
But those new powers would come with a trade-off‚?¶¬†(T)he FCC would refrain from regulating net neutrality using Title II of the Communications Act‚?¶.
‚??The FCC can and should take strong action‚?¶¬†We would forcefully oppose any (Congressional) reforms that would undermine the FCC‚??s authority‚?¶.‚?Ě
Get that? Democrats say Congress shouldn‚??t do Congress‚??¬†job – because that would prohibit the FCC from illegally doing Congress‚??¬†job.
Remember – the FCC doesn‚??t have any authority over anything unless and until Congress first writes law giving it to them.¬† (I‚??m reminding Democrats – not you, Gentle Readers.)
In 2010, many Democrats were singing a very different tune.¬† (Brace yourselves – else you might get whiplash.):
The lawmakers signed (Rep. Gene Green of Texas‚??) letter‚?¶expressing their opposition to the FCC‚??s‚?¶plan to reclassify broadband from a Type I information service to a Type II telecom service‚?¶.
“The significant regulatory impact of reclassifying broadband services is not something that should be taken lightly and should not be done without additional direction from Congress.‚?Ě‚?¶
Green said¬†‚??This letter clearly shows it is not a partisan issue.‚?¶.‚?Ě
Congressman Gene Green and 19 other Democratic Members of Congress sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission (FCC)‚?¶in response to recent reports that the FCC will consider regulating broadband Internet as a Title II, common carrier service under the Communications Act of 1934‚?¶.
‚??A strict, utility-type regulation under Title II-created to regulate telephone services in the 1930‚??s-simply won‚??t work for this new, innovative, ever-evolving technology.‚?Ě
74 dwindles to 20.¬† Profiles in Discouraging.¬† What happened to the rest?¬† Some lost intervening elections.¬† Some returned to the Democrat Huge Government fold.
Back in 2010, Michigan Rep. Gary Peters was one of 73 House Democrats who signed fellow Rep. Gene Green‚??s letter urging the FCC not to adopt strong Net Neutrality rules‚?¶.
This week Peters, who‚??s running for Senate, wrote a letter pushing the agency to protect the open Internet in the best way possible: by reclassifying Internet service providers as common carriers.
He‚??s now Senator Peters.¬† He was running for a promotion as a lawmaker – in part on refusing to make law. And was apparently unhindered by his newfound preference for unilateral government power grabs and his own irrelevancy.
Because this is the Democrat Party.¬† As much government as possible – by any means necessary.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter