Tag Archives: regulations

Featured, Politics, Technology, US

FCC reclassifies the internet, approves net neutrality rules

6 Comments

The Federal Communications Commission has just approved their plan for net neutrality, which also reclassifies broadband Internet as a public utility.

Under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act, the reclassification of the internet as a public utility allows the FCC to place regulations on Internet service providers (ISPs) such as Comcast and Verizon. These regulations would mandate these service providers to transmit all Internet content at the same speed, regardless of what interests are involved, according to Newsweek.

According to engadget, the FCC chairman, Tom Wheeler, said, “It [the internet] is our printing press; it is our town square; it is our individual soap box and our shared platform for opportunity… That is why open internet policies matter. That is why I support network neutrality.”

Net neutrality, also known as open Internet, is an idea which says all Internet networks and content are equally available to all legal content generators, according to USA Today. Therefore, a practice called “paid prioritization” which results in ISPs showing preference towards companies who pay more for higher transmission speed of content, would be illegal.

The new reclassification also affects wireless data providers. The new plan places similar regulations on phone companies as those placed on other ISPs.

However, some people have spoken out against the new net neutrality plan.

Jim Cicconi, AT&T’s senior executive vice president-external and legislative affairs, said, “What doesn’t make sense, and has never made sense, is to take a regulatory framework developed for Ma Bell in the 1930s and make her great grandchildren, with technologies and options undreamed of eighty years ago, live under it.”

Republican Commissioner Ajit Pai said, according to FOX News, the plan represents a shift of power to allow the government to control the internet. Pai also warned the new plan would result in intended and unintended consequences, such as rate regulations. “The order explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes… Read my lips: More new taxes are coming. It’s just a matter of when.”

The FCC has said the new regulations will be posted online soon and will be published in the Federal Register. The new regulations will also go into affect 60 days after their publication.

Featured, Politics, US

15 Towns in New York’s Southern Tier Reportedly Considering Secession

Video 55 Comments

Economic desolation has consumed New York’s Southern Tier region, which traces the New York-Pennsylvania border, and some locals are blaming the New York state government for their woes. According to WBNG-TV, the Upstate New York Towns Association, which represents the interests of towns in the area, is researching whether it would be possible or prudent for fifteen towns located in the counties of Broome, Sullivan, Delaware, and Tioga to secede from New York and join Pennsylvania. The Upstate New York Towns Association has declined to name which towns have expressed interest in secession.

A statement released by the organization read, “On December 17, 2014, when it was announced that high volume hydraulic fracturing would be banned in New York State and there would be no casino license in the ‘true’ Southern Tier, a supervisor, whose town is a member of the Association, told a reporter from the Wall Street Journal that we should all secede… That supervisor discussed the idea of seceding to Pennsylvania with the Association. The Association began comparing taxes in New York with taxes in Pennsylvania and comparing the cost of doing business in New York with the cost of doing business in Pennsylvania. The Association also is studying whether or not decisions made in Albany are disproportionately benefiting Downstate.”

At issue are high taxes and bans on fracking and casinos, which some residents feel are crushing the local economy. Conklin, NY town supervisor Jim Finch (R) told WBNG-TV, “The Southern Tier is desolate. We have no jobs and no income. The richest resource we have is in the ground… We’re comparing the taxes in Pennsylvania compared to those in New York. There’s a great, great difference. Right now, we are being deprived of work, jobs and incomes.”

Bradford County, PA Commissioner Doug McLinko (R) said that he feels the pain of New Yorkers who want to jump ship and join up with Pennsylvania. Said McLinko in the above-embedded video coverage by Newswatch 16, “They look across the border and see our farms prospering, staying intact. They’re not being subdivided. They see our county cut taxes, eliminated debt.”

New York Senate Deputy Majority Coalition Leader Tom Libous (R) recently made news when he issued a pocketbook survey to his constituents asking them if they would support allowing some of the affected towns to secede from New York. Though the fifteen towns looking at secession have not yet identified themselves, Libous’ pocketbook survey specifically named Conklin and Kirkwood as two of the possible towns. The Upstate New York Towns Association says that the plan for fifteen towns to secede from New York and join Pennsylvania would have to be approved by the Pennsylvania and New York state legislatures, as well as the federal government. Conklin town supervisor Jim Finch called the possibility that the plan might work “far fetched” in comments to The Huffington Post. The Upstate New York Towns Association said it is conducting a study and will decide whether to go forward with secession after considering the merits and potential complications involved with the transition.

Though attempts at secession from New York have been tried many times before, most have failed, and the last successful effort took place in the 1790s when Vermont seceded from the state.

Health, US

New EPA rules could be ‘most expensive’ set of regulations

7 Comments

President Obama has unveiled a series of new regulations for the EPA aimed at cutting levels of smog, especially the types of pollution which have been linked to inducing lung damage, asthma, and other health problems in humans.

The new regulations would mostly affect the power plants and factories in the Midwest which contribute large amounts of air pollution.

Currently, the EPA allows up to 75 parts per billion of air pollution to be emitted, a standard set by former President George Bush in 2008.  The EPA’s scientists have said, according to the Press Telegram, they would prefer a lower standard of air pollution of 60 parts per billion.  New regulations are thought to put the pollution emitted between 65 and 70 parts per billion however.

The new rules, which would not go into affect until after 2020, are estimated to cost the EPA about $3.9 billion to meet the 70 parts per billion level, but the cost is estimated to jump to $15 billion in order for companies to meet the lower level of 65 parts per billion.

The administration says the cost is worth the health benefits which would include, according to Politico, fewer deaths and hospitalizations as well as fewer missed days of school and work because of issues related to asthma and bronchitis.

Paul Billings, a senior vice president of the American Lung Association said, according to the New York Times, “Ozone is the most pervasive and widespread pollutant in the country… Ozone is not killing people, but causing tens of millions of people to get sick every day.

While environmentalists and health advocates have lauded these new regulations, some Republicans, as well as fossil fuel industry promoters, have criticized this plan, calling it another instance of government overreach.

The director of regulatory affairs for the American Petroleum Institute, Howard Feldman, said, “Air quality has improved dramatically over the past decades, and air quality will continue to improve under the existing standards.”  It is important to note though the American Petroleum Institute is an oil industry lobby group which spent $78 million to support the oil industry.

Harold Wimmer, the president of the American Lung Association said 60 parts per billion would be the most beneficial to the health of citizens, and he called these new regulations “long overdue.”

The proposed regulations can be found here.

US

South Carolina Losing jobs to states that embrace free markets and lower taxes

7 Comments

 

 

When Stone Brewing Co., the nation’s 10th-largest craft beer producer,  announced its list of potential new locations, South Carolina wasn’t on it due largely to the fact of its high taxes.

The San Diego, Calif.-based company narrowed its list to Columbus, Ohio; Richmond, Va.; and Norfolk, Va.

According to GreenvilleOnline, Greenville, S.C. was on the list almost to the end.

Brook Bristow, who is general counsel for the S.C. Brewers Association and assisted in recruitment efforts said that those other cities were chosen because they are not just centrally located — they also offer a better tax climate.

Both Ohio and Virginia have vastly lower excise taxes on beer — 18 cents per gallon in Ohio, 26 cents per gallon in Virginia, compared to 77 cent per gallon in South Carolina, he told Greenville Online.

“We can’t do anything about where we are, but we can make where we are more attractive for business,” Bristow said. “The brewers association’s next priority is cutting that tax. Currently, South Carolina has one of the 10 highest excise taxes in the country. That has to change to seriously compete with other states.”

South Carolina did make some changes to try and pretty itself for Stone Brewing.

Governor Nikki Haley signed “Stone Law,” which loosened restrictions on beer production and consumption in an effort to make the state more attractive for Stone’s $31 million project.

The bill, which was pushed through this spring after it became clear that brewery was interested in the state, changed the law to allow producing large amounts of beer while also operating a restaurant.

Unfortunately the bill wasn’t enough to woo Stone Brewery. Though it was a step in the right direction, Stone was turned off by South Carolina’s high taxes and regulations. Hopefully South Carolina, a so-called “Red State,” will start changing its laws to embracing free market principles.

Politics

Virginia DMV to Uber, Lyft: ‘Cease and Desist’

20 Comments

With gas prices on the rise and a jobs crisis choking the economy, the popular, new, and innovative rideshare companies Uber and Lyft have been battling back against these economic issues by rapidly expanding to new markets, offering jobs with flexible scheduling to out-of-work folks with reliable cars, and introducing more transportation options for individuals in need of a ride. Since consumers can easily match up with local drivers through these services using a convenient smartphone app, rideshare companies also increase the number of sober rides available to people out drinking at bars, helping to reduce drunk driving fatalities.

However, Uber and Lyft have completely new business models that rely on technology that didn’t exist when most livery regulations were developed. As a result, the companies have had to battle onerous and antiquated regulations on a state-by-state and city-by-city level. In most jurisdictions, the companies have prevailed, but recent battles with Virginia’s state government have escalated and taken a turn for the worse. The Virginian-Pilot is reporting that, on Thursday, the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles sent cease-and-desist letters to Uber and Lyft, asserting that the companies’ business models are out-of-step with state regulations. According to regulators, all drivers offering rides to the public must attain authorization from the state, except for in the case of rideshares. However, state law disallows rideshares from turning a profit in exchange for their activities.

Last April, the Virginia DMV issued a $9,000 penalty to Lyft and a $26,000 penalty to Uber for profiting on rideshares in violation of state law. The companies chose to appeal the fines and continue operating in the state. However, this new cease-and-desist order comes with a heavy-handed new threat: the DMV will expand its fines from targeting the companies in question to additionally targeting their largely cash-strapped drivers, who have been relying on income from the service to cover bills and feed their families.

Virginia’s Secretary of Transportation Aubrey Lane said of Uber and Lyft, “I actually like their business model in terms of giving more flexibility to the public, but there are some issues they need to work on and some laws that we need to change,” pointing out the need for policy changes to get state laws in line with rapidly changing trends in technology. However, these companies are already doing business in the state. Many Virginians are currently gainfully employed through them. Also, Uber and Lyft customers in the state have expressed concerns that too few taxis are available to deal with the community’s transportation needs.

According to NBC Washington, Uber representative Natalia Montalvo said of the order, “This decision is not in the best interest of Uber partners, who have been using the technology to make a living, create new jobs and contribute to the economy – or residents who rely on Uber for access to affordable, reliable transportation alternatives. We look forward to continuing to work with the Virginia DMV to find a permanent home for ride-sharing in the Commonwealth.” Lyft representative Chelsea Wilson noted, “Many of the current regulations surrounding taxis and limos were created before anything like Lyft’s peer-to-peer model was ever imagined.”

According to The Washington Post, both Uber and Lyft will continue operating in the state in defiance of the order. Virginia’s state government is conducting a study on web-based rideshare services and plans to publish a report sometime next year. However, this does little good for the companies’ current drivers, who already rely on rideshare income for survival.

Watch the below video for NBC Washington‘s video coverage on the issue.

US

Feds Propose First E-Cigarette Regulation

26 Comments

 

 

The e-cigarettes and the e-cigarette business are booming, so now the federal governments is looking to impose regulations.

The proposed regulations including requiring approval for new products and health warning labels. The federal government also wants to ban the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors nationwide. Currently cities and states prohibit the sale of tobacco products to minors.

According to The Blaze, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration said the proposal sets a foundation for regulating the products but the rules don’t immediately ban the wide array of flavors of e-cigarettes, curb marketing on places like TV or set product standards.

Any further rules “will have to be grounded in our growing body of knowledge and understanding about the use of e-cigarettes and their potential health risks or public health benefits,” Commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg said.

Once finalized, the agency could propose more restrictions on e-cigarettes.

An e-cigarette can look very similar to a traditional cigarette. It heats a liquid nicotine solution instead of burning tobacco. The device creates vapor that a user inhales and then exhales the water vapor.

Smokers like e-cigarettes because the nicotine-infused vapor looks like smoke but doesn’t contain the thousands of chemicals, tar or odor of regular cigarettes. Some smokers use e-cigarettes as a way to quit smoking tobacco or to cut down. But, there’s not much scientific evidence showing e-cigarettes help smokers quit or smoke less, and it’s unclear how safe they are.

Members of Congress and public health groups have raised concerns over e-cigarettes and questioned their marketing tactics as well at their safety.

“When finalized [the proposal] would result in significant public health benefits, including through reducing sales to youth, helping to correct consumer misconceptions, preventing misleading health claims and preventing new products from entering the market without scientific review by FDA,” said Mitch Zeller, the director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products.

Your thoughts: Is this another example of how government stifles creative innovation? Is this another attempt by Big Tobacco to use the government to eliminate competition? Is the government doing the right thing by regulating this new product?

Please comment below.

 

US

South Dakota’s New Raw Milk Regulations May Harm Smaller Farms

6 Comments

Proposed South Dakota raw milk regulations will make it difficult for smaller operations to continue selling the substance in the state.  Department of Agriculture officials finished a third public hearing on the issue on Wednesday, saying the rules are necessary to ensure safety.  A legislative committee last August had rejected the rules until it had more information on their financial impact for farmers.

The State of South Dakota currently allows the sale of raw milk, though not from retail stores.  Farms are allowed to sell the popular substance directly to consumers. Raw milk must also be clearly labeled as raw, but no other regulations currently exist.  The new regulations would regulate the production, testing and labeling of raw milk in the state.

farmer4.jpg

One of the new regulations would require the labels to have written, “This product has not been pasteurized and may contain harmful bacteria.  Pregnant women, infants, children, the elderly and persons with lower resistance to disease have the highest risk of harm from this product.”  This would require farms, both large and small, to redesign their labels and in some cases print more expensive ones.

The other regulations are more severe.  They would require a bottling date, as well as requiring regular testing and setting standards for bacteria and other contaminants.  Some have argued that the regulations – such as those designating maximum numbers of beneficial bacteria – are unreasonably low, and will be next to impossible to achieve.

Many who drink raw milk drink it specifically for these beneficial bacteria.  Individuals have cited raw milk as beneficial for health problems, from arthritis to irritable bowel syndrome.  The idea that the state would regulate the production of raw milk to minimize the very aspects of the product that people find beneficial and appealing simply reiterates the idea that the state feels it knows best.

Another effect of the new regulations would be the favor of larger operations over small farms.  Since 2010, raw milk producers have been required to have a license or permit, and only five dairies in the state are currently licensed to sell raw milk.  The new regulations would push more dairies out of business by imposing testing and labeling requirements which put extra financial burden on the operations.

Citizens believe this law would violate personal freedoms and give unfair advantages to larger farms over smaller competitors. Bigger corporations frequently use lawmakers to create regulations to push smaller operations out of businesses in order to strengthen their market share by reducing competition. Clearly this is a concern in S.D.

Those who oppose this law want the freedom to enter into private, contractual agreements without government interference.

Raw milk connoisseurs want to consume a living product that is fresher, full of nutrients and tastier, not a sterile, pasteurized product. Raw milk proponents say pasteurization – the process of heating milk to kill disease-causing bacteria – kills the good stuff, and they claim the bacteria is beneficial to human health.

raw-milk

There continues to be a high demand for raw milk despite the debate on its health benefits. North Carolina has banned raw milk sales, but residents are buying the products through the black market. According to reports, there is such a high demand that distributors have created “drop sites” in N.C. and will only sell to people they know. For many states “raw milk” has become the “new pot” and purchasing this popular substance will continue to be funneled through the black market despite government regulations.

 

 

Opinion, Politics, US

DC Bureaucrats’ Latest Assault On Freedom: Mandatory 24-Hour “Waiting Period” For Tattoos

107 Comments

The United States is nearly 17 trillion dollars in debt, the national unemployment rate is more than 7%, and one in seven Americans is on food stamps. But fixing those problems is just so darn hard! So several politicians in Washington DC have decided to spend their time creating tattoo regulations.

DC’s Health Department is aggressively pushing to instate a mandatory 24-hour waiting period for all individuals looking to get a tattoo in the District. The waiting period would mandate that “no tattoo artist applies any tattoo to a customer until after twenty-four hours have passed since the customer first requested the tattoo.”

Officials from the Department say the regulation would prevent “serious health risks.”

A spokeswoman for the Department of Health, Najma Roberts, thinks that the new rules would prevent individuals from making stupid decisions while they are intoxicated.

She said, “They can’t be responsible for themselves, as well as the person doing the work on them. We’re making sure when that decision is made that you’re in the right frame of mind, and you don’t wake up in the morning . . . saying, ‘Oh my God, what happened?’”

Tattoo shop owners, however, say the proposed regulations unfairly target their industry and would hurt business.

Paul Roe, a tattoo parlor owner in DC, said “Why not 24 hours’ waiting time before shaving your head?” The new rules are “honestly ridiculous” he claimed.

Gilda Acosta, a tattoo artist, said, “It would definitely be a direct hit to my income if I couldn’t tattoo people who come in and want work done on the same day.”

Good grief.

America is supposed to be the Land of the Free. If people want to make poor choices regarding their own bodies, they should be allowed to. In a free country, government cannot dictate lifestyle choices, nor can it become the overprotective mommy and daddy of its citizens. Freedom means having the right to make bad choices and then deal with the consequences ourselves.