Reinstate The National Do Not Call List

RJL | September 24, 2003 | RJL

[RJL]

The best and fastest way to reinstate the National Do Not Call List, or an equal substitute, is to call your US Representative and two US Senators and tell them you want action right now!

Stress the fact that 50,000,000 people signed up for the National Do Not Call List and as a politician having 50,000,000 people happy with you is a lot better than having 50,000,000 against them.

Stress to them that action is needed right now! They can find a way to stop tele-marketers with 50,000,000 voters behind them.

[RJL]

Please call, we can force action.

[Rebelbase]

Nope.

[dirtboy]

So, if 50 million people want it, Congress should just up and pass it, whether or not it passes Constitutional muster? I think this is what Franklin was warning us about.

[meyer]

I've a better idea - where in the constitution does it say that we cannot charge businesses for the use of our time? Put a meter on the phone and send them a bill.

[isthisnickcool]

States rights issue. The feds have no business in this area.

[Grim]

It takes me less than a second to hang up the phone if I get an unwanted call. Personally, I don't need no stinkin government program to protect me.

[RJL]

Nope.

OK, Rebel you don't have to, but everyone else, get on the phones.

[MineralMan]

"States rights issue. The feds have no business in this area."

Actually, not. Telemarketing is a interstate commerce issue...no question about it.

[Wonder Warthog]

"States rights issue. The feds have no business in this area."

So, if a phone bank in Texas calles me here in Washington, how is that a "states rights" issue. Sounds like interstate commerce to me.

[Williams]

I missed something. A court struck down the "do not call" list? Damn.

[Orangedog]

Stick around...the last 3 threads on this issue were entertaining when people started fighting for the "right" of telemarketers to harass people at home.

[mewzilla]

Well, to my mind, it's like sticking a sign on your telephonic doorway that says No Soliciting. If you can do that on your home, why not your phone?

[wideawake]

Interstate commerce is one of the few things which isn't a states' rights issue.

I doubt there is a single telemarketer who confines all his calls to only one state.

[maxwellp]

I'm in New York State and a few years ago I signed something and returned it and all telemarketing calls stopped. I never bothered with the national program because I didn't need it. However, I do feel that 50 million Americans who are experiencing these very annoying calls need help - federally or state-wise. I wonder how much money this Judge received to reverse what 50 million Americans want. And I also wonder if he was elected or appointed.

[Chiliarch]

Um...forgive me guys but I'm missing something here...

Are you opposed to something the majority of our nation want? I mean, I'm not understanding what the basic issue is that would make this objectionable.

Truly, I mean no disrespect - I just don't understand what the oposition is?
Enlighten me, please...

[Willie Green]

States rights issue. The feds have no business in this area.

Wrong. The Constitutional justification for federal jurisdiction is quite clear.

Article I, Section 8. The Congress shall have power...
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

[M. Peach]

Last night I got a telemarketer on the line, and I was going to hang up. Since I didn't have anything to do, I pretended to be senile and hard of hearing.

The conversation lasted for about 15 minutes and was quite hilarious - and to tell you the truth it was more gratifying than what was on TV at the time.

She finally hung up in total frustration.

Try it sometime....

[dirtboy]

Are you opposed to something the majority of our nation want? I mean, I'm not understanding what the basic issue is that would make this objectionable.

I am in favor of limited, Constitutional republican government. If the majority wants the feds to do something that is not enumerated in the Constitution, they should follow the process of amending the Constitution. This helps prevent nonsense such as a Social Security system where a surplus can be collected and spent while still being counted as an asset, or having Congress mandate that our toilets only use 1.7 gallons per flush, along with the other 2/3rds of federal laws that are not based on Constitutional concepts.

In this sitution, there is definitely interstate commerce involved, so there is at least a basic premise for federal involvement - but what the feds are doing with a no-call list is not regulating the commerce in question, but eliminating it - so IMO it oversteps the boundaries of federal power. There are plenty of ways to avoid telemarketers - if I get a call from unknown, I don't answer it, and if it was someone I know they'll just leave a message and I'll call them back. We don't need a governmental solution here.

[dirtboy]

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

That says regulate, not eliminate, so IMO the feds are overstepping their enumerated powers - a do not call list eliminates commerce, does not allow it to happen at all, rather than setting reasonable guidelines regarding the veracity of what telemarketers are claiming and selling. But, as it turns out, the judge did not overturn the no-call list on Constitutional grounds, but jurisdictional ones.