You are here
Regulatory Dissonance: FreePress' Tim Wu at FTC & Administration: No Burdensome Regulations
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2011-02-08 17:56
If ever there was a prime example of "regulatory dissonance" it would be:
When asked by the Wall Street Journal what he would be working on at the FTC, Mr. Wu ominously bragged: "I would be satisfied with getting together rules for the Internet platform."
- Professor Wu gets an A+ for hubris, given that bringing his FreePress agenda to regulate the Internet for the first time -- is in direct conflict with the law of the land (which is to preserve the competitive free market Internet "unfettered by Federal or State regulation") and with President Obama's Executive Order that promised the "least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends."
In sum, most in D.C. fully understand the old adage that "people are policy."
- The FTC would have been hard-pressed to find a more anti-business, pro-government-regulation-of-the-Internet person to advise the FTC "on rules for the Internet platform."
- If Mr. Wu's hubristic announcement of his intentions and his regulatory past are any indication, he will have the FTC chasing after new imagined problems (that require immediate and interventionist government economic regulation) in no time.
FTC advisor Tim Wu + President Obama's pledge of no burdensome regulation = regulatory dissonance.
Does the right hand know what the left hand is doing?