Constiutionally, the government has no place restricting or regulating spam or telemarketers. And frankly, I'm weary of ANY law that restricts freedoms.
Again, we have the fallacy that the "freedom of speech" is absolute whenever people want it to be to fit the current situation under discussion. However, that is simply not true -- the right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater is a perfect example. Further, the right of BUSINESS ENTERPRISES to free speech is certainly not absolute by any stretch of the imagination. Businesses have restrictions placed on their "speech" to a much greater extent than individuals. It stands to reason since the Constition is intended to guarantee individual rights and not those of corporate entities (which also do not have the right to vote).
Should a corporation have the right to claim that their herbal remedy has the possibility of curing cancer?
In other words, the government can have no powers not granted to it in the Constitution.
If you think that the phrases in the Constitution cannot be turned to justify nearly anything the federal government wishes (within some limits, of course), then I suggest you read the line of cases involving the interstate commerce clause. I've just recently tossed my law school books, or I would pull some case references for you to peruse.
The feds have no constitutional power to regulate this.
I repeat: Read about the interstate commerce clause. Any guesses as to what the role of the Federal Trade Commission is?
(I was waiting for someone to bring up the interstate commerce clause of Article 1 section 8)
Which is good, because it invalidates what you are arguing. The Supreme Court asserted that the federal government could regulate how an Alabama restaurant discriminated against blacks because theoretically the proximity of that restaurant to a federal highway involved interstate commerce (through actual commerce [truck drivers] or through the receipt of goods received from out of state [restaurant supplies and food]).
I am in the real world. You see, I'm not sitting here bitching and moaning about something I can easily prevent with a little foresight.
Well, I'm in the US military and therefore my name and particulars are retrievable from my local base through a FOIA request, barring national security implications in listing sensitive job information (classified positions -- even the presence of certain people in certain locations is a security breach). Therefore, my name and number are not protected no matter what I do.
But the slippery slope such a law is riding on WILL affect all of us sooner or later.
The slippery slope is a silly argument because the loss of intrusive commercial advertising over the telecommunications system is hardly a loss of political expression as guaranteed by the Constitution. We're not talking about silencing a political party.
All right, enough -- need to go to bed.
Facebook
Twitter