Situation: Congress votes to overturn rules created by the FCC requiring
that broadband providers receive permission before collecting data on a
user’s online activities.
Claim: I believe this is an unethical decision
Argument: I believe it is the role of government
to protect its citizens. I believe this
is demonstrated through our laws as well as through the establishment of governing
bodies that regulate specific industries for the protection of the people such
as OSHA, EPA, and FTC. The statement
that the FCC was overstepping its bounds by creating these rules is
ridiculous. The FCC’s job is to
establish regulations for communications over radio,
television, wire, satellite and cable. In my opinion, this decision
demonstrates that Lobbyists have more power and influence in Washington and are
lining the pockets of politicians, proving that capitalism is more important
than protecting the constituents that voted them into office. The statement
that the FCC's rules would put broadband providers "at a disadvantage
relative to internet companies like Google and Netflix" further
demonstrates that Congress believes that making money is more important than a
person's right to privacy.
Principle: The underlying principle of my
argument is that of beneficence. I
believe the government is supposed to protect
the public from harm and make concerted efforts to secure their
well-being. Maintaining the new FCC
rules would have given consumers the power to stop such companies from making
money off their private information but this decision puts people in harm’s way
by exposing their data to be sold to the highest bidder.
Contextualization:
Philosopher Steven Heyman, in his article The First Duty of Government: Protection, Liberty and the Fourteenth Amendment, argues that the founders of our government believed protection is the primary purpose of government (521). Heyman demonstrates that early Americans were influenced by British concepts of common law and Social Contract Theory. Social Contract theory is the belief that “society is formed to obtain the advantages of association by others” (517). Hence the idea that the role of government is to protect the people in their personal liberty, personal security, and rights of private property became an important concept in American Constitutionalism (521,544). As States developed their own constitutions, they declared that “government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people (VA Declaration of Rights)” (523). States even began to establish police forces to ensure the protection of the people against acts of violence. This concept of the government’s role in the protection of its citizens is at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment. Heyman effectively establishes that the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment believed the government’s primary purpose is to protect the people but that the States had failed to do so, therefore requiring its inclusion in the Federal Constitution (542). Heyman writes, “[u]nder the original Constitution, the responsibility for protecting life, liberty, and property was left largely to the states”, but that the “history of slavery and suppression in the South before the [Civil] War, together with the torrent of violence after…convinced the Thirty-Ninth Congress that states could not be relied upon to protect the rights of all persons” (571).
The government has interfered in commerce before to protect the people, for example by prohibiting monopolies and establishing Antitrust laws dating as far back as 1890. Most recently, AT&T monopolized the telephone industry establishing a rate structure which consumers had no choice but to pay as there was no competition. The company was broken up in 1984 by the Reagan Administration. This allowed the establishment of smaller regional carriers such as Nynex, Bell Atlantic, BellSouth, Ameritech, Southwestern Bell, U.S. West and Pacific Telesis. This created a market of competitive pricing, giving consumers more of a choice when it came to telephone service which still stands today. This effectively demonstrates that the government has and should get involved when an industry or company’s practices threaten the livelihood of the people. Government established Antitrust laws and regulatory agencies demonstrate that the government’s job is to protect the people; therefore, the idea that the FCC was overstepping their bounds by establishing rules for broadband companies is outrageous. The FCC was doing its job and Congress should be ashamed that they put Capitalism before the security of its citizens.
No comments:
Post a Comment