Can anyone tell me what gives govt right to sell airwave for $6 billion.

http://www.cio.com/article/177151/_MHz_Spectrum_Auction_Bids_Top_B ^

[ideablitz]

Computerworld — After the third day of the auction, bidding reached a total of $6.1 billion for 1,099 licenses in the Federal Communications Commission auction of 700-MHz wireless spectrum.

[Deo et Patria]

Take a look at the U.S. Constitution. In particular, the commerce clause. Then think about how chaotic it would be if the federal government didn’t have the authority to regulate matters pertaining to interstate commerce. The Founders got it right, that’s for sure.

[El Gato]

The government's right to regulate the radio spectrum was established in laws like the Radio Act of 1927, the Communications Act of 1934, etc.

First Congress has no rights, only powers. Second, they cannot give themselves any power just passing a law. See the 10th amendment. They only have the powers granted to them in the Constitution. No more. Regulating something, even in the original sense of "make to work properly, is not the same as being able to buy and sell it.

[bill1952]

Congress isn’t engaging in anything.
The commerce clause gave them the authority to regulate the airwaves and they set up the FCC, in part, to do just that.

And the FCC can engage in commerce.
The entire thing is set up in this manner to be perfectly legal. And it is.

[El Gato]

It is, whether congress has a right to regulate that, which is not committed to it, under a power, which is committed to it, simply because there is, or may be an intimate connexion between the powers. If this were admitted, the enumeration of the powers of congress would be wholly unnecessary and nugatory. Agriculture, colonies, capital, machinery, the wages of labour, the profits of stock, the rents of land, the punctual performance of contracts, and the diffusion of knowledge would all be within the scope of the power; for all of them bear an intimate relation to commerce. The result would be, that the powers of congress would embrace the widest extent of legislative functions, to the utter demolition of all constitutional boundaries between the state and national governments. "

A thinker of his time, that Story guy. I wonder if he ever thought Congress would manage to make his nightmare come true, without a Constitutional amendment? He certainly would have known they would try, but probably expected the people sheep to rise up and swat them if they did.

[Deo et Patria]

They are bidding on licenses to use the applicable spectrum. If the granting of a license isn’t part of what it means to “regulate commerce”, then I don’t know what is.

I don’t see any issue on this one.

[montag813]

What gives govt right to sell airwave spectrum. Why does it cost $6 billion and who gets the $6 billion?

It goes to the government so Bush can throw yet another $30 billion to big pharma for AIDS in Africa (translation: down the drain of African kleptocracies)

[HAL9000]

First Congress has no rights, only powers.

That's true, but I hope most people will get past my semantic error to understand the gist of the information.

[tacticalogic]

Everybody seems to say they want SC justices that subscribe to an “original intent” interpretation of the Constitution, but nobody seems to want politicians that practice it.

[Sender]

Once we thought about building a pool on our 1/2-acre lot. You'd think there would be plenty of room for a pool. Not so.

It can't be less than 50 feet from the curb (utility easement), and it can't be too close to the septic lines, and it can't be within so many feet of school property.

Essentially there is a very narrow stripe across our lawn where a very narrow pool could be. Thank you, gub'mint.

[org.whodat]

Are you in school somewhere?? It is called representative government!

[swain_forkbeard]

By that reasoning, the internet ought to be regulated and addresses sold.

[RockinRight]

There’s a world wide web standard...protocols and all that, but that’s industry, not government. But there are many key differences and you’re using false logic.

[swain_forkbeard]

“There’s a world wide web standard...protocols and all that, but that’s industry, not government.”

That was MY point, wasn’t it?

There are technical differences between the two cases, of course. But I’m not so sure of the difference in principles.

[untrained skeptic]

The use of the radio spectrum has to be regulated. If it isn't it becomes mostly useless because of interference.

It might be a stretch of what was intended by the commerce clause, so I can understand arguing against the federal government's constitutional authority to regulate it. However, if the federal government lacks the authority, I would argue that the constitution should be amended to grant them that authority because the spectrum does need to be regulated.

As for why it is worth $6 billion dollars, it's worth that much because companies are willing to bid that much for it. The government isn't setting the price, they are allowing the market to set the price, which is as it should be.

Our government sets aside some frequencies for public use such as amateur radio. However, the amount of frequencies are limited, and the demand for them far surpasses the supply.

So how would you have our government allocate those frequencies? Should the government stem in and have a bunch of politicians that pander to special interests allocate them? Or should they place limited restrictions on their use and then auction off the frequencies and let the market determine how they would best be used?

Our government does a bit of both. Some frequencies are allocated by the government. A larger portion are auctioned off after some restrictions are placed on their use.

[cowtowney]

http://www.forbes.com/2008/01/30/spectrum-auction-google-tech-wire-cx_ew_0130auction.html?partner=technology_newsletter

[Publius6961]

Can anyone tell me what gives govt right to sell airwave for $6 billion.

I can.
Because they can.

Same reason they stopped taxing us simply for the essential roles of a central government; Ten or a hundred times the rational amount doesn't seem to bother the average sheeple.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

I guess what I’m trying to say is that one needs to drill down a little further on what creates the assessment, rather than allude that the tax is created by an assessment. is it small potatoes? probably unless you want to fight the assessment, which if most people did, they would be paying less, especially if prices in their area was deflated.

[El Gato]

The commerce clause gave them the authority to regulate the airwaves and they set up the FCC, in part, to do just that.

And the FCC can engage in commerce.

So you're saying the FCC is not part of the government? If Congress can't do it, then no other part of the government can do it either, unless specifically authorized by the Constitution. Regulate, yes, in the sense of making it work properly, deconfliction if you will. You might as well say Congress or one its creations could sell the Mississippi River because deconfliction of it's use is required, and it is used to facilitate interstate commerce. Or confiscate and sell your property because that would facilitate commerce as well.

[El Gato]

They are bidding on licenses to use the applicable spectrum.

Are these licenses in perpetuity, or a fixed period? Can they in turn sell them? If permanent and they can sell them, then they are selling the airways, and that's not regulating, it's selling. OTOH, if they are for fixed periods and they can't sell them, but must return them to the government if they don't use them, then they are regulating.

[El Gato]

So how would you have our government allocate those frequencies?

In similar circumstances, homesteading, dear tags, etc, they use a lottery. They have in the past used a lottery for spectrum/frequency allocations. . I admit I don't know if those were permanent or for fixed periods.

According to the link above, they've only been auctioning the spectrum for the last 5 years, before that they used lotteries, and before that they actually attempted to figure out what would be in public interest.

I guess I wouldn't mind them auctioning licenses for fixed periods. But I would like them to keep more spectrum for their own use, specifically for military use. The military would/will have to lease those frequencies from whoever buys them, or (more likely in the current budget climate) do without. In fact I know of military applications for which are having buy new equipment, because they can no longer use the spectrum the older equipment can operate in. It's geographic problem, as in some places they can use the frequencies, they just can't use them in other places they need to do so.