[CPF0000] RE: Subsidizing Internet access (was RE: A Modern Fairy Tale)

[qsrvbas@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Tom Liotta)]

cpf0000-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>   1. Re: Subsidizing Internet access (was RE: A Modern Fairy   Tale)
>      (Alan E.)
>
>| But the power is Congresses; and because Article I,
>Section 8, does grant a power, the Tenth Amendment
>technically restricts both the States and the People from
>it.
>
>==> Read it again. That clause restricts the U.S., not the
>states. In fact, it's easier to use it to make the case that
>subsidies for the arts, research, milk prices, tobacco
>prices, personal subsidies, etc., are prohibited to the US
>government. For example, the granting of patents and
>copyrights have nothing to do with subsidizing your
>research.


Wish I had more time but there isn't enough for topics in CPF0000 recently.  
But I am interested enough to take time for this item because I'll happily 
learn more about it if you have info.

Amendment X explicitly covers two categories of powers:

  a) "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution"
  b) and "nor [powers] prohibited by it to the states"

It then states that such rights are reserved (respectively):

  a) "to the states"
  b) "to the people"

The definition of "respectively" in context is easy since clearly powers 
'prohibited' to the states could never also be 'reserved' for the states.

Now, because the power to create a postal system *is* granted Congress, it 
cannot be a power categorized as (a) or (b). Hence, such power belongs only to 
Congress; it is for neither the states nor the people.

As for the idea of being obligated, well, there's no obligation to coin money 
nor to regulate the value thereof even though the power is granted. But that 
power is constitutionally restricted from the states and from the people in 
exactly the same manner as postal systems are. And while there may be no 
obligation to borrow money on the credit of the United States, the power to do 
so is _reserved_ to Congress; neither the states nor the people may do so (can 
I?). Obligation is irrelevant.

At least, that's insofar as a lawyer would argue in front of a court. And there 
is no other _practical_ definition of law except what courts are persuaded to 
rule as such. No?

Tom Liotta

-- 
Tom Liotta
The PowerTech Group, Inc.
19426 68th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Phone  253-872-7788 x313
Fax    253-872-7904
http://www.powertech.com



__________________________________________________________________
New! Unlimited Netscape Internet Service.
Only $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register
Act now to get a personalized email address!

Netscape. Just the Net You Need.