Tax Reform ATR believes that all consumed income should be taxed one time, at one low and flat rate. Link
GET INVOLVED
ATR ON TWITTER
FOLLOW US-
"I can't believe #Obamacare led to higher health care costs," said no economist ever: http://t.co/J6dfnKqFYZ
May 14, 2013 12:01 PM
taxreformer -
#Obamacare's 10% tanning tax hits salon owners and customers, most of which are women: http://t.co/dJuaGAT9LE
May 14, 2013 11:01 AM
taxreformer -
Groups who advocated for the IRS to prepare tax returns sure look foolish these days: http://t.co/oKvpIofu7Y
May 13, 2013 06:30 PM
taxreformer -
"We don't need the federal government mandating additional taxes..." -@MarshaBlackburn on MFA: http://t.co/lAuLJtr5t3 #NoNetTax
May 13, 2013 06:00 PM
taxreformer -
Health insurers and businesses are already feeling the iron-clad grip of regulations in #Obamacare: http://t.co/J6dfnKqFYZ
May 13, 2013 05:30 PM
taxreformer -
Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell Signs Largest Tax Hike in Virginia History into Law http://t.co/Qd6KOFfaPv
May 13, 2013 03:46 PM
taxreformer -
Under #Obamacare, mothers have had a tougher time purchasing non-prescription, over-the-counter medicine: http://t.co/dJuaGAT9LE
May 13, 2013 02:01 PM
taxreformer -
9 out of 20 #Obamacare tax hikes have not even been implemented yet: http://t.co/opFkyf1guJ
May 13, 2013 01:30 PM
taxreformer -
.@GroverNorquist on MFA: "[The Senate] didn't ask all of the questions that needed to be asked": http://t.co/wXfkIR2Ca9 #NoNetTax
May 13, 2013 01:01 PM
taxreformer -
"When architects of #Obamacare are worried about it creating a trainwreck, you know something's gone terribly wrong": http://t.co/J6dfnKqFYZ
May 13, 2013 12:30 PM
taxreformer
Email
PrintDoes “Net Neutrality” Violate The First Amendment?
Nick Dranias, Director of The Goldwater Institute's Centre For Constitutional Government, poses the question of whether so-called “net-neutrality” (AKA government internet takeover) regulations, as proposed by FCC Chairman Genachowski, violate the First Amendment.
Mr. Dranias notes that:
“In Comcast Cablevision v. Broward County, Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks struck down a county ordinance that forced a cable company to give its competitors equal access to its communication infrastructure. Much like advocates of net neutrality argue today, the county government argued that its “open access” ordinance did not offend the First Amendment because it ensured the transmission of more, rather than less, information by more companies. Judge Middlebrooks rejected that argument, ruling that the First Amendment prohibits government from forcing owners of communication infrastructure to transmit information against their will. He also held that government has no power to force the distribution—or “circulation”—of information because “[l]iberty of circulating is not confined to newspapers and periodicals, pamphlets and leaflets, but also to delivery of information by means of fiber optics, microprocessors and cable.”
He concludes by comparing net neutrality to “forcing a printer to publish books, newspapers, periodicals, pamphlets and leaflets on the government’s terms. And when it comes to government seizing command and control over freedom of the press, the First Amendment is anything but neutral.”
Yet another reason that net neutrality is a very, very bad idea.
