Why is the white house writing legislation concerning the internet??? not congress
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Why is the white house writing legislation concerning the internet??? not congress

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Florida Panhandle
    Posts
    3,098

    Exclamation Why is the white house writing legislation concerning the internet??? not congress

    Under a White House plan, the Homeland Security Department will have far-reaching oversight over all civilian agency computer networks.

    The proposal would codify much of the administration's memo from July 2010 expanding DHS's cyber responsibilities for civilian networks.

    The White House, however, is taking those responsibilities further, according to a source familiar with the document. The administration drafted a legislative proposal to give DHS many, if not all, of the same authorities for the .gov networks that the Defense Department has for the .mil networks.

    Federal News Radio recently viewed a draft copy of the legislative proposal.

    "I have to question why the Executive branch is writing legislation," said the source, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to talk about it. "This is not a proposal or white paper like the White House usually sends to Capitol Hill. This is the actual legislation."

    The source said the 100-page document is going through interagency review. DHS sent the document around to agencies late last Friday and asked for comments by Monday. The source said few agencies had time to take a hard look at the document, especially in light of the possible government shutdown.

    read the rest here Federal News Radio 1500 AM: White House draft bill expands DHS cyber responsibilities
    FESTUS
    IN OMNIA PARATUS

  2.   
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Creswell, Oregon
    Posts
    3,865
    Well we have a president, though he took an oath to protect and uphold the constitution, could care less about it. No one will hold him accountable. But he is a democrat, so words mean nothing.
    "You can get a lot accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit" - Ronald Reagan

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington
    Posts
    475
    Because when the US sheep/Citizens wake up and revolt they want to be able to shut it down before they get overthrown.

  5. #4
    handgonnetoter Guest
    They want this so that sites like this could not exist.

  6. #5
    Given that the internet can (and should) be considered an instrument of "interstate commerce", long ajudicated to be under the realm of Government "area of concern" (if not control)..... existing Government Agencies do have the authority to regulate and write rules concerning the use and extent of the internet. That the Government has (I feel) overstepped it's authority under the Constitution in it's "interpretation" of the interstate commerce clause, is beside the point. It is done and the SC has ruled, repeatedly, that it IS legal and Constitutional. (A whole 'nother topic.)

    The President, or his pet "Agencies" then, can certainly write rules and conditions of internet use. It's a "policy" thing and does not require the Congress to pass judgement on it.

    Rather, complaints will likely be taken up under the guise of "1st Ammendment" concerns. (That's my best guess.)

    Given that modern day communications systems and means tend to demonstrate to various Governments that they no longer have "control" over what information gets out to the general public, Wikileaks being a prime example, and, given the recent communications driven upheavals in the Middle East...... you can bet that virtually EVERY Government is "looking into" ways by which they can, if not control, at least "massage" internet traffic and communications to their situational advantgage.

    Witness the recent "internet kill switch" that the Government was alluded to be looking into.

    Given an unbiased Supreme Court, efforts at Government control over the internet could be successfully challanged under 1st Ammendment concerns. Unfortunately, the SC HAS become just another "political tool", the "findings" thereof often waxes and wanes depending on the "agenda" of the most recent appointees of the President. (Another whole topic of long discussion.)

    Just another item that the general citizenry MUST keep a wary eye on. The US has spent years in blissful tranquility, trusting the Government to do what is right for the Nation. As it turns out, the Government has spent the bulk of it's time (and OUR money) placating and oiling the most squeeky wheel(s) of our society... fine, except when it affects, negatively, the prosperity of the entire Nation.

    Exactly why we find ourselves in the financial mess we are in right now. We let it happen, inch by inch, year by year. Only when a crisis looms does the "Average American" get riled up enough to join a "Tea Party" to try to do something about it. It may already be too late.

    GG
    Fanatics of any sort are dangerous! -GG-
    Which part of "... shall NOT be infringed..." confuses you?
    Well now, aren't WE a pair, Raggedy Man? (Thunderdome)

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Grognard Gunny View Post
    Given that the internet can (and should) be considered an instrument of "interstate commerce", long ajudicated to be under the realm of Government "area of concern" (if not control)..... existing Government Agencies do have the authority to regulate and write rules concerning the use and extent of the internet. That the Government has (I feel) overstepped it's authority under the Constitution in it's "interpretation" of the interstate commerce clause, is beside the point. It is done and the SC has ruled, repeatedly, that it IS legal and Constitutional. (A whole 'nother topic.)

    The President, or his pet "Agencies" then, can certainly write rules and conditions of internet use. It's a "policy" thing and does not require the Congress to pass judgement on it.

    Rather, complaints will likely be taken up under the guise of "1st Ammendment" concerns. (That's my best guess.)

    Given that modern day communications systems and means tend to demonstrate to various Governments that they no longer have "control" over what information gets out to the general public, Wikileaks being a prime example, and, given the recent communications driven upheavals in the Middle East...... you can bet that virtually EVERY Government is "looking into" ways by which they can, if not control, at least "massage" internet traffic and communications to their situational advantgage.

    Witness the recent "internet kill switch" that the Government was alluded to be looking into.

    Given an unbiased Supreme Court, efforts at Government control over the internet could be successfully challanged under 1st Ammendment concerns. Unfortunately, the SC HAS become just another "political tool", the "findings" thereof often waxes and wanes depending on the "agenda" of the most recent appointees of the President. (Another whole topic of long discussion.)

    Just another item that the general citizenry MUST keep a wary eye on. The US has spent years in blissful tranquility, trusting the Government to do what is right for the Nation. As it turns out, the Government has spent the bulk of it's time (and OUR money) placating and oiling the most squeeky wheel(s) of our society... fine, except when it affects, negatively, the prosperity of the entire Nation.

    Exactly why we find ourselves in the financial mess we are in right now. We let it happen, inch by inch, year by year. Only when a crisis looms does the "Average American" get riled up enough to join a "Tea Party" to try to do something about it. It may already be too late.

    GG
    Overall, I agree with GG. Just a couple of points though. The internet in not american. It is world wide with servers in every developed country. The Gov't can only regulate what happen to the internet in THIS country.

    And I feel that it is not too late. It is never too late to effect change in the government. The possibility exists that we could lose our right for a time, but I don't see it happening. There are too many people who would rise up and fight the gov't. And many, many more who, when faced with the reality of it happening, would also rise, or at least give support. There is something in the DNA of Americans that will not allow us to be beaten down for long.

  8. #7
    The answer to the question: Why is the white house writing legislation concerning the internet??? not congress

    Because we elect presidents to be strong leaders. It's what we expect.
    I cannot think of a president in my lifetime that did NOT submit legislation(usually many pieces of legislation.)

    In a quick search, I found an example dating back to March, 1966 when President Johnson submitted legislation to create the federal Department of Transportation. In a way, it's a very apt corollary to the regulation of the Internet. Clearly our roads and vehicles are involved in interstate commerce every day, much like the Internet. We expect to be able to travel anywhere we please, free to move about the country. Yet, that movement is still regulated, the cars are regulated, even the fuel is regulated and taxed. Much of that regulation comes from the very department that the president of the time submitted the legislation to create.

    That doesn't mean that the legislation in either respect is right or wrong. It's just that it's not some shocking departure from what we've come to expect from our presidents.

    I would consider the effort on the debate best spent on the content of the legislation. After all, that's what actually affects us all.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe Area, New Mexico
    Posts
    3,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Lakeland Man View Post
    Overall, I agree with GG. Just a couple of points though. The internet in not american. It is world wide with servers in every developed country. The Gov't can only regulate what happen to the internet in THIS country.

    And I feel that it is not too late. It is never too late to effect change in the government. The possibility exists that we could lose our right for a time, but I don't see it happening. There are too many people who would rise up and fight the gov't. And many, many more who, when faced with the reality of it happening, would also rise, or at least give support. There is something in the DNA of Americans that will not allow us to be beaten down for long.


    I disagree with your statement. While it's a nice , warm, comfortingly thought, 56% of the American People either support the current administration and or are receiving monetary compensation through some Federal program. The TRUE Producers have been beaten down for years and it's getting worse. People, money and Corporations have fled the US due to this confiscation of wealth. We have past the point of no return. The Takers in this great Country have now outnumbered the Producers. Millions of people have gathered together to rob their neighbors using the Gov't as their henchmen. You can no longer keep what you've reaped but are coerced through the threat of incarceration to COMPLY with the surrendering of your assets that YOU and ONLY YOU have earned. Redistribution of your wealth is what "Those People" have organized and had passed into Law in the name of "The Needs of Society".
    Don't know about you and or your friends, but mine are being beaten down daily by this socialist (formally Communist) crap. NEVER in my life have I felt more threaten. I have talked to a lot of different people with different back rounds and many are contemplating repatriating to other Countries. This is not a light decision, this is the reality of what is to come. The taking of your wealth by any entity against your will is theft plain and simple. I fully support and have served this Great Country, but the socialist have over thrown our Constitution without a shot being fired, and most just don't give a rip to their to stupid to understand. That's the saddest part of all this.

    Who is John Galt?
    "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." --author and philosopher Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

  10. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by mappow View Post
    [/B]

    I disagree with your statement. While it's a nice , warm, comfortingly thought, 56% of the American People either support the current administration and or are receiving monetary compensation through some Federal program. The TRUE Producers have been beaten down for years and it's getting worse. People, money and Corporations have fled the US due to this confiscation of wealth. We have past the point of no return. The Takers in this great Country have now outnumbered the Producers. Millions of people have gathered together to rob their neighbors using the Gov't as their henchmen. You can no longer keep what you've reaped but are coerced through the threat of incarceration to COMPLY with the surrendering of your assets that YOU and ONLY YOU have earned. Redistribution of your wealth is what "Those People" have organized and had passed into Law in the name of "The Needs of Society".
    Don't know about you and or your friends, but mine are being beaten down daily by this socialist (formally Communist) crap. NEVER in my life have I felt more threaten. I have talked to a lot of different people with different back rounds and many are contemplating repatriating to other Countries. This is not a light decision, this is the reality of what is to come. The taking of your wealth by any entity against your will is theft plain and simple. I fully support and have served this Great Country, but the socialist have over thrown our Constitution without a shot being fired, and most just don't give a rip to their to stupid to understand. That's the saddest part of all this.

    Who is John Galt?
    First, I don't know, nor do I care who John Galt is. I could ask you "Who is Reba Thomas".

    I guess I have a more positive view of this country and of its people. I believe that Obama and his socialist crowd are bad for the country. But people are waking up. The latest poll numbers I heard have the big O-hole's approval rating in the low 40's and dropping. People will and are waking up.

    I remain vigilant and politically active. I haven't written us off yet. If you have, there are airports all over the country that will facilitate your departure for a "better country". If you don't want to leave, then by all means stay. But I would hope that you would do something constructive to help get the country back on the right path.
    Last edited by Lakeland Man; 04-18-2011 at 09:24 AM. Reason: spelling

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe Area, New Mexico
    Posts
    3,487
    I'm in the middle of the GOP in our county, belong to a 9-12 Group as well as being active in Tea Party events. Show up and voice my opinion at County Council meetings as well. This ALL after a full days work. Would get more involved BUT just have plain run out of time during the week.
    I've always swam up stream, this is no different. Conservatives, TRUE Conservatives are the minority. The masses have figure out, with the help of BOTH parties, how to rob from the productive and give to those in need. And need is quantified as not willing to work for it. Karl Marx, I know another person to find out WHO they are, has summed it up years ago. His manifesto has come pretty dam close to full actuation.
    I still believe in the American Dream, but this is becoming a recurring nightmare. Getting worse and worse as days go by. Conservative Americans need to wake the heck up and stop this. But alas, I've not seen any surge of energy by most. Might as well be back in the share cropper days. (I'm usually the eternal Optimist)
    "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." --author and philosopher Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast