Excellent, excellent, must-read and heed article. Gov. Gary Johnson (Nov. 30) -- A couple of decades ago, who would have imagined that much of America's hope for an economy-boosting holiday shopping season would hinge on something called "Cyber Monday"? If ever we needed an example of what can happen when innovation, entrepreneurship and a marketplace are left unfettered, it is the phenomenal and transformational growth of the Internet and the commerce it's engendered. No central planner or government could possibly have anticipated or steered such an innovation in the many life-changing directions it has taken. And no "encouragement" or stimulus from the government could have possibly matched the vast economic benefits the Internet has produced -- not just here, but in virtually every corner of the world. It is no coincidence that this one element of our modern economy that has been uniquely left free of government interference has created equally unique growth and transformation. Yet, in the face of this obvious correlation between freedom and prosperity, there are those who want the government to step in, regulate and pick winners and losers in the management and control of the Web. Oh, they will claim they support Internet freedom but will try to convince us that continued growth of service and commerce requires a traffic cop to regulate and prioritize access to limited bandwidth and cable capacity. Some of the heavy-hitters in the technology industry will threaten that the growth of wireless services will be hampered unless part of that capacity is somehow protected or segregated from the rest of the "free" data highways. Even our beloved cable movie channels will be endangered if the government doesn't protect us, they will say. Likewise, with proposals like the "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" (COICA), there are those who seem determined -- often under a cloak of good understandable intentions -- to put the government in the business of picking winners and losers in the content marketplace. While copyright infringement and harmful content are genuine concerns, the idea that the government should somehow be granted a "kill switch" for websites and domains creates entirely too much potential for censorship. Fortunately, COICA was shelved during the current session of Congress, but it will be back. I would strongly suggest that if the market demands Internet services, speed and access, the market will provide them without any help from the government. And for those of us who believe in free speech, it defies all logic and history to believe that a government with its foot in the door will not inevitably end up attempting to regulate and referee content and speech, not to mention commerce. Of course, just as the government loves to regulate, it also loves to tax. One of the few things Congress has gotten right in the past several years is the enactment and extension of a moratorium on taxation of Internet access and service. But again, there are those who continue to try to find ways to get their hands on yet another source of revenue -- and the leverage those taxes would offer. Just this year, in its National Broadband Plan, the Federal Communications Commission recommended that, "The federal government should investigate establishing a national framework for digital goods and services taxation." If you want to see what such a '"framework" would look like, take a look at your phone bill, a substantial portion of which is taxes -- both obvious and hidden. We have learned, in dramatic fashion, that the marketplace will drive the cost of information down if allowed to do so. The last thing we need is for government to drive the cost up with burdensome taxes. Beyond our own government, the United Nations' World Health Organization is seriously considered a proposal to impose a global Internet tax to fund drug and other health-related research. Fortunately, that plan did not survive -- for now. An Internet free of regulation and taxation has produced innovation and enhancements to quality of life almost unparalleled in human history. The only thing government can do to "help" is keep its hands and its taxes off this last bastion of freedom. Gary Johnson is the honorary chairman of the OUR America Initiative, a 501(c)(4) advocacy committee. He is also the former Republican governor of New Mexico (1994-2002) and has been a consistent and outspoken advocate for efficient government and lowering taxes. http://www.aolnews.com/opinion/arti...remain-free-of-government-regulation/19737988
Government should keep its hands off. Like-wise, commercial providers should as well. Open internet is what I should be paying for, not with some things throttled or charged extra for.
Wow. The number of factual errors in the article are enormous. The internet was created by private enterprise? Free of regulation? What internet is the author referring to? As for sales tax, why does it make sense that certain businesses have to pay while others don't? That is the very definition of government picking winners and losers.
Except that government created the Internet and is to a large degree maintaining, improving and expanding the infrastructure for it.
To the OP. Where do you stand on Net Neutrality? Should private companies be able to control access on the Internet?
While I agree with the sentiment of the article, the writer lost me here. The internet wouldn't exist as it does today if not for heavy US government involvement in R&D in the early days.
By now, internet should be an inalienable right in my opinion. Open internet. It would be lovely if it was just free to everyone. It will be eventually. Who will pay for it? I don't know. I obviously live in a world of rainbows and ponies.
