As has been noted by many Conspirators, the rationale often offered by politicians to support their continued control of the airwaves is that the radio spectrum is a "limited resource". Of course, being limited does not mean it ought to be owned by the government. In fact, it means just the opposite. A "scarce" resource ought to be husbanded through the drives of the consumers in the market, not politically driven special interests and Congressmen. One could argue that TREES are, at any given time, a limited resource, because we could, potentially use them all up without enough to replace them. But, even if this were the case, it would not convince anyone that the federal government should regulate the content of books, newspapers and magazines.

The latest wrinkle in this fist of statist coercion is the federal government's push to oversee, or possibly block, the merger of Sirrius and XM satellite radio. In the case of satellite radio, even the spurious "scarcity doctrine" doesn't apply, yet the politicians in Washington use an open-ended interpretation of the interstate commerce clause of the US Constitution to improperly try to control the actions of these private businesses.

Tim Carney, author of the book "The Big Ripoff", and a frequent guest on "Against the Grain", has an excellent article for your reference. Check it out, and drop Tim a line!

http://www.examiner.com/a-608858~Timothy_P__Carney__Broadcasters_use_ant...