Net Neutrality, the War on Salt and Beach House Insurance
The Federal Communications Commission receives thousands of comments on its proposed “net neutrality” regulations.
New York City public health officials launch a campaign to reduce salt consumption.
Beach property owners in North Carolina fight a proposed change that could cause their insurance premiums to rise.
Listen to LibertyWeek, the CEI podcast, here.
1. TECHNOLOGY
The Federal Communications Commission receives thousands of comments on its proposed “net neutrality” regulations.
CEI Expert Available to Comment: Vice President for Policy Wayne Crews on why the FCC is going down the wrong path:
“Banning proprietary business models is just the opposite of true ‘openness.’ The FCC seems to be forgetting that not every network has been built yet, and tomorrow’s networks and business models need not resemble those that prevail today. The FCC is wrong to assume that today’s politicians and regulators know what’s best for companies not yet created, networks not yet deployed, and business plans not yet formulated.”
2. HEALTH
New York City public health officials launch a campaign to reduce salt consumption.
CEI Expert Available to Comment: Research Associate Daniel Compton on what’s really behind the new plan:
“…this campaign isn’t about public health – it’s about grandstanding on a pseudo-issue ginned up by activists, when science clearly shows that there’s neither a crisis nor a way for the government to actually alter our salt intake. All these initiatives do is win headlines for ambitious policymakers (New York’s last health commissioner parlayed his trans-fat activism into a promotion to FDA chief), while making food slightly more costly and leaving a bad taste in the mouths of consumers – literally.”
3. BUSINESS
Beach property owners in North Carolina fight a proposed change that could cause their insurance premiums to rise.
CEI Experts Available to Comment: Policy Analyst Michelle Minton on why the higher rates are justified.
“When insurers can’t charge rates that truly reflect the risk of the properties they insure they have to charge everyone more. So safer folks far away from the beach end up paying for the riskier decisions of beach homeowners. If the rates hadn’t been artificially suppressed by interventionist government policy for political reasons, the need for an increase might not be necessary. In fact, had the rates been higher to begin with some of the coastal residents now complaining that they can’t afford the increase might never have purchased homes on the beach in the first place.”
Listen to LibertyWeek, the CEI podcast, here.