[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GEN Proposed Legislation



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

I just pulled out my 1999 edition of the Vienna phone book and guess what, 
there is no:

 Richard Stepp, Berger,
 Stepp and Gorman Attorneys at Law 216 Concorde Street, Vienna, V

There is also no Concorde Street in Vienna.  

In a message dated 7/7/99 1:49:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, animal@xxxxxxxxx 
writes:

<< Subj:	 GEN Proposed Legislation
 Date:	7/7/99 1:49:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time
 From:	animal@xxxxxxxxx (Animal)
 Sender:	owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Reply-to:	metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 To:	realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Realtraders), metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
(Metastock User Group)
 
 Please read the following carefully if you intend to stay on-line and 
continue using email:
  
 The last few months have revealed an alarming trend in the Government of the 
United States attempting to quietly push through legislation that will affect 
your use of the Internet. Under proposed legislation the U.S. Postal Service 
will be
 attempting to bilk email users out of "alternate postage fees". Bill 602P 
will permit the Federal Govt to charge a 5 cent surcharge on every email 
delivered, by billing Internet Service Providers at source. The consumer 
would then be billed in
 turn by the ISP. Washington D.C. lawyer Richard Stepp is working without pay 
to prevent this legislation from becoming law. The U.S. Postal Service is 
claiming that lost revenue due to the proliferation of email is costing 
nearly $230,000,000 in revenue per year. You may have noticed their recent ad 
campaign "There is nothing like a letter". Since the average citizen received 
about 10 pieces of email per day in 1998, the cost to the typical individual 
would be an additional 50 cents per day, or over $180 dollars per year, above 
and beyond their regular Internet costs. Note that this would be money paid 
directly to the U.S. Postal Service for a service they do not even provide. 
The whole point of the Internet is democracy and non-interference. If the 
federal government is permitted to tamper with our liberties by adding a 
surcharge to email, who knows where it will end. You are already paying an 
exorbitant price for snail mail because of bureaucratic efficiency. It 
currently takes up to 6 days for a letter to be delivered from New York to 
Buffalo.
 
 If the U.S. Postal Service is allowed to tinker with email, it will mark the 
end of the "free" Internet in the United States. One congressman, Tony 
Schnell (r) has even suggested a "twenty to forty dollar per month surcharge 
on all Internet service" above and beyond the government's proposed email 
charges. Note that most of the major newspapers have ignored the story, the 
only exception being the Washingtonian which called the idea of email 
surcharge "a useful concept who's time has come" (March 6th 1999 Editorial. 
Don't sit by and watch your freedoms erode away!
 
 Send this e-mail to EVERYONE on your list, and tell all your friends and 
relatives to write to their congressman and say "No!" to Bill 602P. It will 
only take a few moments of your time, and could very well be instrumental in 
killing a bill we don't want. 
 
 Kate Turner Assistant to Richard Stepp, Berger,
 Stepp and Gorman Attorneys at Law 216 Concorde Street, Vienna, V
 
  
 
 --------------------
 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
 <HEAD>
 <META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
 <META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR>
 <STYLE></STYLE>
 </HEAD>
 
 <DIV>
 <DIV>Please read the following carefully if you intend 
 to stay on-line and continue using email:</DIV>
 <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
 <DIV>The last few months have revealed an alarming trend 
 in the Government of the United States attempting to quietly push through 
 legislation that will affect your use of the Internet. Under proposed 
 legislation the U.S. Postal Service will be
 attempting to bilk email users out of "alternate postage fees". Bill 602P 
will permit the Federal Govt to charge a 5 cent surcharge on every email 
delivered, by billing Internet Service Providers at source. The consumer 
would then be billed in
 turn by the ISP. Washington D.C. lawyer Richard Stepp is working without pay 
to prevent this legislation from becoming law. The U.S. Postal Service is 
claiming that lost revenue due to the proliferation of email is costing 
nearly $230,000,000 in revenue per year. You may have noticed their recent ad 
campaign "There is nothing like a letter". Since the average citizen received 
about 10 pieces of email per day in 1998, the cost to the typical individual 
would be an additional 50 cents per day, or over $180 dollars per year, above 
and beyond their regular Internet costs. Note that this would be money paid 
directly to the U.S. Postal Service for a service they do not even provide. 
The whole point of the Internet is democracy and non-interference. If the 
federal government is permitted to tamper with our liberties by adding a 
surcharge to email, who knows where it will end. You are already paying an 
exorbitant price for snail mail because of bureaucratic efficiency. It 
currently takes up to 6 days for a letter to be delivered from New York to 
Buffalo.
 
 If the U.S. Postal Service is allowed to tinker with email, it will mark the 
end of the "free" Internet in the United States. One congressman, Tony 
Schnell (r) has even suggested a "twenty to forty dollar per month surcharge 
on all Internet service" above and beyond the government's proposed email 
charges. Note that most of the major newspapers have ignored the story, the 
only exception being the Washingtonian which called the idea of email 
surcharge "a useful concept who's time has come" (March 6th 1999 Editorial. 
Don't sit by and watch your freedoms erode away!
 
 Send this e-mail to EVERYONE on your list, and tell all your friends and 
relatives to write to their congressman and say "No!" to Bill 602P. It will 
only take a few moments of your time, and could very well be instrumental in 
killing a bill we don't want. </DIV><DIV>
 Kate Turner Assistant to Richard Stepp, Berger,
 Stepp and Gorman Attorneys at Law 216 Concorde Street, Vienna, V</DIV><DIV>
 &nbsp;</DIV></DIV>
 
 
 ----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
 Return-Path: <majordom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 Received: from  rly-yb05.mx.aol.com (rly-yb05.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.5]) 
by air-yb05.mail.aol.com (v59.55) with SMTP; Wed, 07 Jul 1999 13:49:30 -0400
 Received: from  listserv.equis.com (listserv.equis.com [204.246.137.2]) by 
rly-yb05.mx.aol.com (vx) with SMTP; Wed, 07 Jul 1999 13:49:22 -0400
 Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
 	by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA07125
 	for metastock-outgoing; Wed, 7 Jul 1999 11:47:54 -0600
 X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to 
owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
 Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
 	by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07122
 	for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 7 Jul 1999 11:47:51 -0600
 Received: from smtp2.ncal.verio.com (smtp2.ncal.verio.com [207.20.246.162])
 	by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA19020
 	for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 7 Jul 1999 11:55:49 -0600 (MDT)
 Received: from corkie (h204-247-101-66.ncal.verio.com [204.247.101.66])
 	by smtp2.ncal.verio.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA05441;
 	Wed, 7 Jul 1999 10:42:54 -0700 (PDT)
 Message-ID: <006b01bec8a0$2a7c8a00$4265f7cc@xxxxxx>
 From: "Animal" <animal@xxxxxxxxx>
 To: "Realtraders" <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
         "Metastock User Group" <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 Subject: GEN Proposed Legislation
 Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 10:43:02 -0700
 MIME-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0068_01BEC865.7CF9CB70"
 X-Priority: 3
 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
 Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Precedence: bulk
 Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
  >>