"In
questions of power, then,
let no more be said of
confidence in man, but
bind him down from
mischief by the chains of
the Constitution."
- Thomas Jefferson
The
Federal Communications Commission
was created by Congress with
passage of the Communications Act
of 1934. The Commission
continues to operate under the
act, as amended. In Section
1, under the heading Purposes
of Act, is written, "For the purpose of
regulating interstate and foreign
commerce in communication by wire
and radio ...".
The
wording of the phrase insures
that it will conform with the
Constitution for the United
States, Article I, Section 8,
Clause 3. The Act makes no
reference to the regulation of
either intrastate commerce in
communications or private
communications. The
Constitution does not authorize
the Federal government to
regulate such activity within
individual states of the Union.
The
geographical territory claimed by
the FCC was plainly
constitutional until 1982.
With passage of the
Communications Act of 1982, the
1934 Act was amended such that
the territory now claimed may no
longer be constitutional.
This occurred when the FCC
suddenly demanded the right,
after 48 years, to require
licensing of communications that
are confined entirely within one
"state".
But
the federal government has never
possessed authority to regulate
intrastate activity. Is it
possible, even likely, that the
definition of "state,"
as used in the original Act, did
not refer to the 50 Union
states? If so, the
Communications Act of 1982 is not
unconstitutional on its
face. Rather, through the
cunning of high-level lawmakers
and the ignorance of low-level
bureaucrats, the Act is
misapplied.
The United
States Code
The
United States Code is commonly
used as authority when the FCC or
its courts seek to exercise
power. Specifically, Title
47 of the US Code,
"Telegraphs, Telephones, and
Radiotelegraphs," is cited.
Within
Chapter 5, "Wire or Radio
Communication," we find the
licensing statute, 47 USC Sec. 301.
As with any statute, Section 301
has limited
applicability. We
need not be concerned with FCC
licensing if Section 301 does not
apply to our particular activity.
We
can determine the limited
geographical area of
applicability of Chapter 5 by
referring to Subchapter I Section
152, which
says, "The provisions of
this chapter shall apply to all
interstate and foreign
communication...".
Next,
we must determine the definition
of the word "state," as
used in Chapter 5. We may
do this by referring to
Subchapter I, Sec. 153(40) where it
says,"The term 'State' includes
the District of Columbia and the
Territories and
possessions". The
identical wording is used for the
definition of "state"
in the Communications Act of
1934. It would be a
mistake to expand what is being
said by mentally adding the 50
states of the Union.
Common Law
Maxim:
The
inclusion of one is the
exclusion of another.
The certain designation of
one person is an absolute
exclusion of all
others. 11 Coke, 58b.
Consistency
- a fundamental principle of law
When
a Title within the United States
Code applies to the 50 states
such intent is unambiguous.
For example, in the Internal
Revenue Code, we find the
following:
26 USC Sec. 6103(b)(5)
- State:
The term
"State" means - (A)
any of the 50 States, the
District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,
the Virgin Islands, the Canal
Zone, Guam, American Samoa,
and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands
26 USC Sec. 4612(a)(4)(A)
In general:
The term
''United States'' means the
50 States, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, any possession
of the United States, the
Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, and the
Trust Territory of the
Pacific Islands.
Skeptics
can be further satisfied by
bringing to their attention the
definition of the word
"include," as used in
the above mentioned Sec. 153(40).
From Black's
Law Dictionary:
Include.
(Lat. inclaudere, to shut in,
to keep within.) To confine
within, hold as in an
enclosure, take in, attain,
shut up, contain, inclose,
comprise, comprehend,
embrace, involve. Term
may, according to context,
express an enlargement and
have the meaning of and
or in addition to,
or merely specify a
particular thing already
included within general words
theretofore used.
"Including" within
statute is interpreted as a
word of enlargement or of
illustrative application as
well as a word of limitation.
With
respect to Subchapter I, Sec.
153(40), the legal definition of
"state" expresses no
contextual language that suggests
an enlargement is contemplated.
Conclusion:
By using comparative analysis
between Titles within the Code
while considering the legal
definition of "state,"
it becomes clear that the
licensing statute applies only to
the District of Columbia and the
Territories and possessions,
which is exquisitely
constitutional. For those
not situated in a federal area,
this is strong legal grounds for
license-free broadcasting.
Private
broadcasting - an additional
remedy
The
courts take silent judicial
notice that all radio
communication is commercial in
nature. The radio operator
has the burden of proof to show
otherwise. When our
precious metal backed Dollars ($) were
replaced with the commercial debt
backed Federal Reserve Notes ($)
it meant all activity
conducted by means of FRNs, even
private activity, became
classified as commercial in
nature, under color of law.
The
FCC's jurisdictional statement
makes no claim of regulating
private communications. The
solution is to purchase all radio
equipment with gold or silver
coin, while securing proper
receipts. The power company
will likely not accept
constitutional money. It
will be necessary to generate
your own electrical power.
Any profit from the station must
be paid in gold or silver
coin. Those actions remove
you from the commercial venue.
Punishment
for radio broadcasting lacks
constitutionality
Another
area where federal power is
exercised without traceable
authority is punishment.
The Constitution is most clear on
the subject of punishment
available to the Federal
government. It is limited
to only three types:
counterfeiting, treason, and
offenses against the laws of
nations. The FCC is
constitutionally authorized to
regulate interstate and foreign
commerce in communications but
not to punish someone for simply
carrying out unauthorized
communications.
Conclusion
All
authority must be traceable to
the Constitution for the United
States of America. There is
a huge difference between the
meaning and exercise of power
and the meaning and exercise of authority.
For
almost a half-century the FCC's
licensing provisions plainly did
not apply to radio communications
confined to a single state.
Suddenly, in 1982, the U.S.
Congress apparently gave
the FCC power to license and
regulate radio transmissions that
are confined entirely within the
legal boundaries of a single
state. But did Congress
ever originally intend to include
the Union states within the
meaning of "state"?
In
both the original communications
act and the codified version of
the law, the 50 Union states are
not included in the definition of
"state," which is
constitutionally correct.
Successful prosecution for
non-licensed broadcasting within
one of the 50 states is a result
of ignorance and/or contempt for
the law.
It
is a constitutionally correct
strategy to avoid the FCC's
jurisdiction altogether by
avoiding the use of commercial
debt paper (Federal Reserve
Notes). The FCC has
jurisdiction over "...commerce in
communication..." only.
Another
area in which the FCC
successfully exercises power
without any authority is
punishment. The
Constitution authorizes the
Federal government to punish for
counterfeiting, treason, and
offenses against the laws of
nations, only.
CAUTION
There
exists a criminal element at the
highest levels of government in
the United States. Adhering
to constitutionally correct
principles will not insure the
full force of government won't be
used in an attempt to destroy
you. Criminals in
government generally use the
courts to carry out their
vendettas against free-thinking
individuals. Government
courts will boldly evade the
simplest constitutional principle
if failure to do so would
endanger a successful
prosecution. Although they
can tell you the latest ball
scores, most Americans sitting on
a jury do not recognize
constitutionally correct
principles. They will side
with the government. It is
advisable to take whatever steps
necessary to stay out of the
courts.
______________
Most of the greatest
evils that man has inflicted
upon man have come through
people feeling quite certain
about something which, in
fact, was false.
- Bertrand Russell, British
philosopher and
mathematician, 1872-1970
|
