Google is the Evil Empire.  The Internet Search behemoth has long been using its monstrous power not for good, but for ill.

To give but a few examples:

Google was knowingly running illegal ads for Canadian pharmaceuticals – since 2003.  And they just had to pay a $500 million fine for so doing.

Google has been – for their Google Books – scanning in their entirety tens of thousands of tomes – without the legal approval to do so.  Myriad publishers are currently suing.

—–

Their serial illegal business practices are a natural extension of their Leftist ideology.

They are incessant violators of antitrust, privacy and private property law – it is a business ethos borne of a political one.

To give but one example, Google was long the Daddy Warbucks behind the push to Network Neutrality.  Which mandates that Google have free, unlimited access to the Inter-networks that others spend hundreds of billions of dollars building and maintaining.

Google has been very busy, and very thorough.

Google has repeatedly been accused of violating privacy laws, facilitating copyright infringement and aiding online piracy. 

Why?

Google and its political allies want to turn the Internet into an “information commons.” To that end, they seek to weaken copyright, trademark and patent protections.

Why?

This “what’s yours is mine” philosophy is used by Google to monetize others’ information and content without paying for it. 

Behold the Socialist undermining of property rights.  They want to illegally make money off of your stuff – at the expense of you legally making money off of your stuff.  Hence their aforementioned Google Books massive private property heist.

However.

Ask them for access to their mystical Search algorithm – how they arrive at the Search results they do – and they go ballistic.  Screaming “Proprietary!” – and steadfastly refusing to acquiesce to any degree.

For Google, it’s “what’s yours is mine” – and “what’s mine is mine.”

Access to information should be unfettered: Google aims to replace user privacy and data security with radical transparency and openness.

Translation: Google doesn’t give a rats rear end about your privacy – or, again, your property rights.

There’s very much more to be mined, but you get the idea.

—–

Google has been for some time under antitrust investigation by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).  But as the above demonstrates, there is oh so much more to be investigated.

Meanwhile, there have also been multiple Capitol Hill hearings looking into Google’s myriad bad practices.

The Senate’s Antitrust Subcommittee had one on September 21.  During which, example after example of Google manipulating Search results were presented.

What was gleaned therefrom led to a letter to FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz from Utah Republican Mike Lee, the Subcommittee’s ranking member.

What was gleaned therefrom was so disturbing, it led to that letter also being from uber-Leftist Wisconsin Democrat Subcommittee Chairman Herb Kohl.

If the long-Leftist Google has drawn the ire of uber-Leftist Senator Kohl – how far from the path have they strayed?

The letter lays out some of Google’s many, many abuses – including consistently favoring Google products in Search results at the expense of all others.

Note: Google is a big Yes for Net Neutrality – but a vociferous No on Search Neutrality.  “What’s yours is mine” – and “what’s mine is mine.”

The letter concludes by asking Chairman Leibowitz to – given all the evidence uncovered at the hearing – pursue with all vigorousness the FTC’s antitrust investigation.

—–

As conservatives, we want Less Government and maximum freedom – but within the confines of the rule of law and order.

Google makes a multi-billion dollar living well outside said confines – abusing the economic rights of others for fun and profit.

All hail Senators Lee and Kohl for insisting upon the rule of law.  For the lawless, illegally self-serving Google.

$787 billion.  Plus interest.  At downgrade – and thusly increased – rates.

Behold the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 – the “Stimulus.”  Brought to you by President Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and their Congressional Democrat cohorts.

Passed in the panicked wake of the 2008 Community Reinvestment Act-Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac-government-induced global economic collapse.  Because “you never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

Passed, we were told, to create “or save” jobs.  In places like non-existent Congressional districts.

Passed, we were told, to keep unemployment below 8%.  How’d that work?

The unemployment rate when Obama took office was 7.6%. The stimulus was passed in February 2009. According to Obama, it was never supposed to go above 8% — well, it was already at 8.1% when the stimulus became a law. And it never got any better. According to the Bureau of Labor & Statistics, the unemployment rate remained high. There were some predictions that it would stay above 9% until 2012 (and this was from the White House no less). The CBO also predicts that the unemployment rate would be 8.2% come November 2012 which is higher than when he took office.

It worked swimmingly.  Drowning-ly, actually.

As we said way back in February:

Government attempting to “assist” the private sector is the D.C. version of the elementary school game Red Light-Green Light.

If the government has given itself the Green Light – and is lumbering and lurching around the free market, blindly and ignorantly throwing around laws, regulations and money – the private sector freezes in place, afraid to move in any direction for fear of the next federal anvil to fall.  The overactive government has thusly emplaced a Red Light in front of the private sector.

Rarely if ever has the federal government been more active than they have been these past two plus years.  And as a result the private sector has been exceedingly timid – which explains why our “recovery” has been so pathetic – if not non-existent.

—–

Which brings us to the government “helping” the Internet.

No, we’re not talking about the illegal, job-and-investment debilitating “solution” to a non-existent problem that is Network Neutrality.  We’re talking Internet “stimulus.”

Tucked into the fatty, flabby folds of the 2009 “Stimulus” law was $7.2 billion for broadband Internet projects.  And that coin was just as fabulously successful as the rest of the “Stimulus.”

It was supposed to “connect the unconnected” to the Internet.  98% of Americans are already connected – by the government’s own assessment – so why the Leviathan insisted on wading in I will leave to you and yours to decide.

(Hint: They don’t want a private sector Internet.)

What ended up happening, of course, did not go according to announced central-plan.  The feds instead established government-subsidized competitors to existing private sector broadband providers.

Allegedly creating jobs – by unquestionably destroying them.  And (with but a few, isolated, individual exceptions) not connecting anyone new.

Again, 98% of Americans are already connected – via private sector broadband Internet providers.  And they got us there in about fifteen years.

So why insert the government – which had a seventy-plus year mandate to connect the unconnected to landline telephones, and only managed to reach about 93% before the (private sector) cell phone revolution began the inexorable decline?

(Hint: They don’t want a private sector Internet.)

—–

And we now have yet another update demonstrating the utter failure of government “stimulus” – on $4.7 billion of said government Internet coin.

As of the third quarter of 2011, only two projects from the federal government’s Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) — a technology stimulus program funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) — have been completed, according to data from Recovery.gov.

Fabulous completion rate – think Tim Tebow in quarters 1-3.  But don’t expect a Tebow-esque fourth quarter rally – because the game is already long over.

The grants were awarded through 2010 and the final BTOP funds were awarded by Sept. 30, 2010, according to NTIA‘s own description of the program.

The money’s long been out the door.  Whatever was “shovel-ready” – has been shoveled.  The entirety of the feeble bang for our billions of Internet bucks – has already banged.

Perhaps, again, because 98% of Americans were already connected.  Meaning – there was pretty much nothing to shovel.  No bang to be had.

Yet we dumped nearly $5 billion in government money – with $2+ billion more still to come  – down a pointless, fruitless rat hole.  Pre-identified by the government as a pointless, fruitless rat hole.

Yet another excellent outlay of our government money.  Revel in the ongoing “Stimulus” success.

Lost, sadly, is the discussion of whether or not we should be so doing.

This is in fact not a “tax cut” at all – not in the income tax sense of the word.  It is a reduction in the payments made to the Social Security program (SSI).

A reduction which – definitively – does nothing to create jobs or “stimulate” the economy.

Because no one in the private sector makes any permanent decision based upon temporary government policy.

If they can’t afford to permanently hire you, a temporary tax cut doesn’t make it any more feasible.  A part of why our egregious unemployment problem has persisted under the current, temporarily lower payroll tax rates.

This lack of policy permanence – which has been rampant throughout the Olympic-ly overactive Obama Administration – is a large contributor to the uncertainty that has plagued us and our economy lo these last nearly three years.

Meanwhile, the per person Social Security payment reduction is tiny – about $20 a week.

Keynesian dreams aside, government spending doesn’t “stimulate” the economy.  2009’s $787 billion – plus inordinate interest – didn’t.  Twenty bucks a week per employee certainly won’t.

Yet in the aggregate the one-year Social Security heist-extension adds about $185 billion to the federal debt – a not insignificant sum.

As is always the case with government programs – minuscule individual benefit, gi-normous accumulated cost.

—–

And speaking of permanent, President Barack Obama and his Democrats want to pay for this one-year temporary SSI holiday with a permanent tax on one million-plus earners.

You know, the top 1% – who earn 19% of the income but pay 37% of the income taxes.  So they clearly deserve another, bigger hit.

(In actuality, if the “rich” are to pay their “fair share,” they’re due for a hay-yuge tax cut.)

And it will take ten years of this permanent tax increase to pay for the one-year temporary SSI payment reduction.

How’s all that math working for you?  Here’s some more.

The federal budget has skyrocketed – by 34% – in just the last five years.

This titanic increase, and all we’ve thusly seen, leads to but one inexorable conclusion: Our federal problem is not one of revenue, but of spending.

So here’s a thought: Stop spending – and start cutting.  Rather than looking to bleed us for more money.

—–

And as already noted: Unlike income taxes, Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) payroll payments are supposed to go to a specific, delineated program – Social Security.  Which is already broke – and hurtling towards tens of trillions of dollars worth of insolvency.

Well, they’re supposed to go to SSI.  And they did – for a while.  Until President Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ) – Democrat – started stealing the Social Security trust fund to incept and “pay for” his inordinately lame and now broke Great Society.

From which President Obama stole – $500+ billion from Medicare – to incept and “pay for” his inordinately lame and already broke ObamaCare.

Since the LBJ Great FICA Robbery, we’ve been writing IOUs – from us to us.  Which I would think makes them IOIs.

President Obama and his Democrats are now simply looking to further ramp up their IOI penmanship – and/or pummel even more brutally the already overtaxed.

—–

This is yet another temporary policy allegedly trying to engender permanent recovery.

Allegedly – because this is small-bore, small ball stuff.  Devised not to enact true reform, but crass political advantage and punishment.

The whole “tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires” – translation: employers – nonsense.

From a President who is trying to fundamentally transform America – when what we need to do is fundamentally transform Washington.

We must totally revamp the way the federal government does – well, everything.

The Big Three – Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid – all of which are careening towards insolvency.

Things like the Post Office and Amtrak – all of which are broke.

Things like the myriad other unConstitutional federal expenditures – the Solyndras, the Fiskers, the Departments of Education, Energy, Agriculture, and on, and on, and….

All of which and more are colossally wasteful – and counter-productive and indeed destructive to their intended missions.  They need to be not “reformed” – for that never actually happens in D.C. – but privatized/eliminated.

To paraphrase Jesse Jackson – end them, don’t mend them.

Apply the Yellow Pages rule – if you can find it in the Yellow Pages, the federal government shouldn’t be doing it.

—–

And then there’s the tax code.  Which is a special interest carve-out, 3.4 million word nightmare.  It needs to be dramatically streamlined and simplified – and the rates flattened and reduced.

It is in this mind-numbing flurry of words, laws and regulations that the power to over-tax – and thusly over-govern by economic concussion – lies.

President Obama and his Democrats are fundamentally unserious about these true, necessary structural reforms.  They in fact stand in opposition to them.

They choose instead to pick inconsequential fights over temporary non-solutions.

To distract, glean political advantage, buy pre-election time – and kick the can further down the road.

Pseudo-Leadership: Thy name is Obama, thy Party Democrat.

We last week passed the $15 trillion national debt mark.  It continues hurtling upward, almost completely unabated.

We the People did our job and then some in the historic 2010 election, delivering more than 70 new Republicans to the Congress – on their promises to rein in out-of-control Washington spending.

We sent these folks to D.C. in large part to prohibit President Barack Obama and his Democrats from continuing to explode the budget – and the deficits and debt along with it – the way they had when exclusively in the Majority in 2009 and 2010.

So when President Obama campaigns asking for reelection and more D.C. Democrats – to undo this “do nothing” Congress – remember that stopping Obama and his Party colleagues was what We the People elected these “do-nothings” to do.

Serving as an impediment (modest though it may be) to the Democrat fiscal train wreck is, in fact, doing something.

(House Republicans have in fact done a great deal –  on the budget, jobs and otherwise – only to see it all repeatedly, serially die of Democrat Majority-Senate malicious inattention.)

We the People last year clearly demonstrated that we do not want Republicans – in the name of “bipartisanship” and/or “compromise” – rolling over and allowing the Democrats to again continue spending us into oblivion.

—–

And we are certainly hurtling into fiscal oblivion.

The federal budget has increased meteorically – by 29% in just the last four years.

That span encompasses the 2006 Democrat takeover of Congress, the 2008 Obama ascension – giving the Donkeys total budget control – and the 2010 Republican return (to the slightest of fiscal sanity).

The federal budgets each year:

2007: $2.73 trillion

2008: $2.90 trillion

– The Age of Obama begins –

2009: $3.11 trillion

2010: $3.55 trillion

2011: $3.82 trillion

And our per annum deficits have detonated right along with the budgets.

2007: $0.16 trillion ($161 billion)

2008: $0.45 trillion ($454.8 billion)

– The Age of Obama begins –

2009: $1.40 trillion

2010: $1.17 trillion

2011: $1.65 trillion (estimated)

Meanwhile, the Congress has (yet again) this year increased spending by an additionally absurd 5%.

You’d never know it, given the Democrat gnashing of teeth and rending of garments about the alleged Republican-imposed austerity.  If only.

Wonder why the Senate – still in Democrat Majority hands – has steadfastly and illegally refused to pass a budget lo these last 900+ days?  So that they can budget instead by Continuing Resolution (CR).  Which locks in place spending at the preceding suicidal clip – with an inevitable additional bump.

Our long national budgetary nightmare, thusly, is not a revenue problem – it is a spending problem.

Which brings us to the longest current running Inside-the-Beltway joke – the Super Committee.

—–

Super Committee Republicans should have begun the process by unwaveringly demanding a return to 2007 spending levels.  (I’d prefer 1907, but first the small steps).

(A still obscene) $2.73 trillion.  Which would have been nearly impossible for Democrats to argue against – as the 2010 election was a fundamental repudiation of their 2007-2010 Keynesian Bacchanalia.

And never, never, never should “revenue increases” – or whatever euphemism the pro-tax Democrats choose to use – have been a part of the Republican portion of the discussion.

It’s like the old joke:

A guy’s looking around on the ground under a streetlight.  Another guy walks up and asks what he’s doing.

“Looking for my keys.”

“Is this where you lost them?”

“No, I lost them way over there – but the light’s better over here.”

We’ve reached this crisis point by spending way, way, way too much.

To look anywhere but to spending cuts so as to extricate ourselves is disingenuous (for those ideologically addicted to raising taxes).

And dangerous – if the results are the pseudo-mandated equally-proportioned Defense Department cuts.

There are – by the federal government’s own definition – 800,000 “non-essential personnel” currently on the Leviathan payroll.

An Army Sergeant or a Marine is not on any level the equivalent of a randomly selected government bureaucrat.  Certainly not the “non-essential” ones.  And certainly not for one-to-one budget cutting consideration.

—–

Predicting the Super Committee would fail to reach an agreement – and shocker, they failed to reach an agreement – was not exactly a supernatural feat of extra-sensory perception.

The Committee is but a distilled representation of the broader Congress.  That could not this summer get within a thousand miles of an agreement – hence the punt to the Committee.

The same ideological variances that afflicted the body as a whole then – afflict the Committee now.  The differences have not changed.  Thusly, neither have the results.

But here’s the dirty little secret.  Were the Committee to in fact reach it’s goal – $1.2 trillion in cuts over ten years – it would still be an abysmal failure.

Because that number – in relation to the problem we face – is a really bad joke.

Let’s do some math, shall we?

$1.2 trillion cut over ten years = $120 billion cut per year.

Which is less than the $161 billion deficit we faced in the relatively reasonable days of 2007.

It is a pathetic pittance of the $1.65 trillion (estimated) deficit we face this year.

$120 billion is just 7.27% of this year’s $1,650 billion ($1.65 trillion) deficit.

The only thing more pathetic is that the Committee couldn’t agree on the requisite cuts.

When $120 billion represents a paltry 3.14% of this year’s (estimated) $3,820 billion budget.

Which, remember, is about 2% less than the 5% budget increase we’ve this year endured.  We wouldn’t be cutting – we’d merely be slowing the rocketing rate of growth.

So even if the Committee were to by its own definition “succeed” – the federal debt would still increase this year by $306 billion – plus interest (at the credit-rating downgraded higher interest rate).

$306 billion is what the Justice Department spends per annum on the muffin/coffee breakfast combo – and you guys couldn’t get it done?

—–

We’ve oft heard of the pathetic and descending Congressional approval numbers.

Big Government advocates point to them as putative evidence that the American people don’t like the Republicans’ allegedly Draconian assault on the federal budget.

We the People aren’t that stupid.  We can do the math.

We see titanic, soaring budgets, deficits and debt – and Congress failing to address the problem and punting to a “Super Committee.”

Then setting the Super Committee “solution” bar microscopically high – and then failing to clear it.

We the People want a real solution.  We don’t want “compromise,” we don’t want “bipartisanship” – unless they are part of a real solution.

Increasing taxes isn’t a real solution – because a lack of taxes isn’t a part of the problem.

Aiming at ridiculously low 3% cuts – and then missing – is not a real solution.

It is more of the exact same problem that got us here.  That We the People voted to end in 2010.

We will just have to do more of the electoral same in 2012.

That’s our real solution.

Less Government President and StopNetRegulation.org Editor in Chief Seton Motley issued the following statement in response to today’s failed vote to undo the Barack Obama Administration’s illegal Network Neutrality Internet power grab:

“Today 52 lawmakers decided to give up on making law – and instead allow unelected, unaccountable Obama Administration bureaucrats to illegally do their jobs for them.

“These 52 Senators stood down and allowed regulators – who are only supposed to enforce law that these Senators write and pass – to illegally make up law themselves.  This isn’t how a representative Constitutional Republic does things – this is dictatorial authoritarianism.  These 52 Senators had an opportunity to stop it – and they refused to do so.

“The Federal Communications Commission has already been once told that their unilateral Net Neutrality imposition is illegal.  For these 52 Senators, that – and the fact that they still have never voted on anything having to do with Net Neutrality – apparently wasn’t enough of a visual aide.

“If these 52 Senators don’t want to do their jobs, why did they ask their constituents to give them the honor and opportunity?  These egregious mis-representations are easily correctable.  And We the People will begin doing so – starting next November.”

The vote on Senate Joint Resolution (S.J. Res) 6 – the Resolution of Disapproval to undo the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)’s illegal, unilateral Network Neutrality Internet power grab – is a watershed moment for the members of the Senior Circuit.

The FCC – in fact no federal Agency, Department or Commission – can do anything unless and until Congress writes a law that says “Yo – do this.”

As a unanimous D.C. Circuit Court pointed out in April of 2010, Congress has never done this for the FCC with regard to the Internet and Net Neutrality.

The Commission clearly, simply doesn’t have the juice to do what they again did last December.  It is an egregious overreach, and it must be undone.

Senators – not agencies like the FCC – write laws.  That’s their gig.  Each and every Senator that votes against S.J. Res 6 is giving up on what they asked their constituents to send them to Washington to do.

To vote No is to give up on being an elected representative of We the People.

To vote No is to cede further illegal authority to a Barack Obama Administration that is every day grabbing as much unConstitutional power as they possibly can.

It’s a silent Yes to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) illegally (over-)regulating the energy sector.

It’s a silent Yes to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the Department of Labor illegally (over-)regulating businesses.

It’s a silent Yes to the Obama Administration’s over-arching, ceaseless “regulatory tsunami.”

(T)he Obama administration has “imposed 75 new major regulations costing more than $380 billion over ten years.”  In addition, the report says there are 219 more “economically significant regulations” in the works which will cost businesses $100 million or more each year — for a minimum cost of $21 billion over ten years.  The number of pages in the Federal Register, in which such rules are recorded, is increasing rapidly, the report says, and “pages devoted to final rules rose by 20 percent between 2009 and 2010, and proposed rules have increased from 2,044 in 2009 to 2,439 in 2010.”

S.J. Res 6 is in fact not about Net Neutrality.  It is about the illegal way Net Neutrality was jammed through – without the People’s Congress having a say.  It’s not the product, it’s the process.

As brilliantly demonstrated by Maine Republican Senator Olympia Snowe.  Who was a co-sponsor of the 2007 Net Neutrality bill – and is a co-sponsor of S.J. Res 6.  In a very recent letter to her Senate colleagues, Senator Snowe wrote:

My interest in protecting the fundamental rights of Internet users and businesses does not diminish my understanding of the importance of establishing proper policy that protects and encourages innovation to occur in all segments of the Internet supply chain, which is essential to the Internet’s continued health and growth.  Without question, it is more important that we get this right rather than done hastily, and in order to do that the only appropriate action, given the current landscape, is for Congress to act first.

Senator Snowe is merely acknowledging the proper Constitutional process – for which we are most grateful.

We may disagree over the need for Net Neutrality (if the Internet ain’t broke – and it ain’t – by all means don’t bring in the government to “fix” it).  But we wholeheartedly agree with and hail Senator Snowe’s principled stand for the rule of law.

Her fellow Senators should make note – and take heed.  Many of them are, after all, up for reelection just next year.

Where they will again ask their constituents to reelect them – as lawmakers.  Not as rubber stamp capitulators to illegal government power grabs.

They vote now, you vote later – and you’ll remember then what they do now.

Net Neutrality is the Dorian Gray Act – it freezes forever in amber THIS Internet – robbing us of the incredible innovations to come.

Revel in Senator Rubio’s excellence on the issue.

Specifically, on Senate Joint Resolution (S.J.Res. 6) – the vote to overturn the Obama Administration Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Net Neutrality Internet power grab.

If you live in Massachusetts – please call/email/fax the Senator and let him know he’d be very wrong to do so.

And that he next year needs Conservatives and Republicans – from Massachusetts and around the nation – if he has any hope to keep his seat.

• Scott Brown – Massachusetts
  • Phone: (202) 224-4543
  • Fax: (202) 228-2646
  • Email: Here

From most appearances, the Senate will this week vote on Senate Joint Resolution (S.J.Res) 6 – the Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval of the Obama Administration Federal Communications Commission (FCC)’s illegal Internet Net Neutrality power grab.

Only 51 votes are required for passage – which means only 4 Democrats are needed.  There are 23 Democrat Senate seats up for reelection next year.  A few of these folks aren’t running.  The rest are – many in center or center-right states.  Additionally, there are a few other Senators that should also be subject to Constitutional reason, and thusly contacted.

Behold a list below the fold of some of these Senators and their contact information.  Reach out and tell them to vote Yes on S.J.Res 6.  Also tweet it all out using the hashtag #freethenet.

• Joe Manchin – West Virginia
  • Phone: 202-224-3954
  • Fax: 202-228-0002
  • Email: Here

• Mark Pryor – Arkansas
  • Phone: 202-224-2353
  • Fax: 202-228-0908
  • Email: Here

• Tim Johnson – South Dakota
  • Phone: 202-224-5842
  • Fax: 202-228-5765
  • Email: Here

• Bill Nelson – Florida
  • Phone: 202-224-5274
  • Fax: 202-228-2183
  • Email: Here

• Ben Nelson – Nebraska
  • Phone: 202-224-6551
  • Fax: 202-228-0012
  • Email: Here

• Debbie Stabenow – Michigan
  • Phone: 202-224-4822
  • Fax:
  • Email: Here

• Jim Webb – Virginia
  • Phone: 202- 224-4024
  • Fax:
  • Email: Here

• Mark Warner – Virginia
  • Phone: 202-224-2023
  • Fax: 202-224-6295
  • Email: Here

• Jon Tester – Montana
  • Phone: 202-224-2644
  • Fax: 202-224-8594
  • Email: Here

• Joe Liebermann – Connecticut
  • Phone: 202-224-4041
  • Fax: 202-224-9750
  • Email: Here

• Claire McCaskill – Missouri
  • Phone: 202-224-6154
  • Fax: 202-228-6326
  • Email: Here

• Bob Casey – Pennsylvania
  • Phone: 202-224-6324
  • Fax: 202-228-0604
  • Email: Here

• Kay Hagan – North Carolina
  • Phone: 202-224-6342
  • Fax: 202-228-2563
  • Email: Here

The Senate will on Thursday vote on Senate Joint Resolution (S.J. Res.) 6 – the Congressional Review Act Resolution of Disapproval of the Obama Administration Federal Communications Commission (FCC)’s illegal Internet Net Neutrality power grab.

Only 51 votes are required for passage – which means only 4 Democrats are needed. There are 23 Democrat Senate seats up for reelection next year. A few of these folks aren’t running. The rest are – many in Center or Center-Right states. Additionally, there are a few other Senators that should also be subject to Constitutional reason, and thusly contacted.

But we may in fact need 5 – we have received word that Massachusetts Republican Senator Scott Brown is at the very least waffling on the issue.

Behold a list of some of these Senators – and their contact information. Reach out and tell them to vote Yes on S.J. Res 6. And Tweet it all out – with the hashtag #freethenet.

• REPUBLICAN Scott Brown – Massachusetts
  • Phone: 202-224-4543o
  • Fax: 202-228-2646o
  • Email:
• Joe Manchin – West Virginia
  • Phone: 202-224-3954
  • Fax: 202-228-0002
  • Email: Here

• Mark Pryor – Arkansas
  • Phone: 202-224-2353
  • Fax: 202-228-0908
  • Email: Here

• Tim Johnson – South Dakota
  • Phone: 202-224-5842
  • Fax: 202-228-5765
  • Email: Here

• Bill Nelson – Florida
  • Phone: 202-224-5274
  • Fax: 202-228-2183
  • Email: Here

• Ben Nelson – Nebraska
  • Phone: 202-224-6551
  • Fax: 202-228-0012
  • Email: Here

• Debbie Stabenow – Michigan
  • Phone: 202-224-4822
  • Fax:
  • Email: Here

• Jim Webb – Virginia
  • Phone: 202- 224-4024
  • Fax:
  • Email: Here

• Mark Warner – Virginia
  • Phone: 202-224-2023
  • Fax: 202-224-6295
  • Email: Here

• Jon Tester – Montana
  • Phone: 202-224-2644
  • Fax: 202-224-8594
  • Email: Here

• Joe Liebermann – Connecticut
  • Phone: 202-224-4041
  • Fax: 202-224-9750
  • Email: Here

• Claire McCaskill – Missouri
  • Phone: 202-224-6154
  • Fax: 202-228-6326
  • Email: Here

• Bob Casey – Pennsylvania
  • Phone: 202-224-6324
  • Fax: 202-228-0604
  • Email: Here

• Kay Hagan – North Carolina
  • Phone: 202-224-6342
  • Fax: 202-228-2563
  • Email: Here