Ref: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/9805/interbus.htm

In the last 18 months, I have purchased two Acuras, four Rolex watches, and well over an additional 35,000 dollars for Christmas gifts, flowers and other purchases. Without exception, I have been pleased. Perhaps plain lucky.

As a telecommunications enthusiast and former BBS sysop, I have grave concerns about the potential of a "Pandora's Box" being opened if government tries regulating the internet. For starters, to sufficiently "regulate", the FTC would have to "police" the net -- and in many circles, it is still refereed to as "wire-tapping". Regulations without enforcement are virtually useless.

Having stated this, what peril exists to American consumers that necessitates involvement by the FTC and/or any tier of government?

Constitutional attorneys tell me the Internet can not be regulated without trashing commerce provisions and restrictions. So, how would the FTC essentially "govern" ALL it wishes to accomplish without making it an international requirement?

And the cost -- what would a seemingly harmless regulation cost to enforce? How would violators be taken to court and prosecuted? What considerations are being given to consumers or just fun seeking net surfers insofar as PRIVACY is concerned?

What is the FTC proposing that the private sector isn't already offering on the Internet? Why should the FTC get involved if the private sector CAN solve internet-related problems -- such as encryption programs? The private sector is providing some very good encryption options for Internet users. I believe government trying to mock business eventually mocks itself.

If I missed something, I hope you, the FTC, will enlighten me.

Thank you.

State Rep. Burke Day
Georgia House of Representatives

xc: Congressman Jack Kingston (print copy)

CC: "Sen.Eric Johnson" <senej@aol.com>, Brian Joyce <b...