Slashdot Mirror


FCC Internet Grant Decision Riles Congress

museumpeace writes "The FCC, with no advance notice to congress, effectively made substantial cuts in the funding for the program that subsidizes provision of internet connection to libraries and poorer school systems. This was not small potatoes: 2.5 billion buys a lot of connection. [confess your real identity to them and the ] NYTimes will tell you all about the uproar. The ostensible cause according to FCC officials, who annoyed congressfolk by dodging the inquiry, was an attemp to control possible fraudulent spending in the program but FCC actions then went far beyond fiscal oversight. FCC deference to phone companies by way of reducing the amount they were required to contribute to the program has compounded its financial woes according to Technology Review which also covered the story. [and which will also require a "free" registration]"

52 of 214 comments (clear)

  1. E-Rate was a mess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The E-Rate Program was incredibly corrupt with lots of companies getting illegal kickbacks. They had to restrict it so they could at the very least clean it up. I don't see how allowing things to continue as they were was a good idea.

    1. Re:E-Rate was a mess by sgant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not that...it's that the FCC didn't tell anyone they were going to do this...like Congress.

      The FCC is again just acting like they have no one overseeing what they're doing...and they had to be reminded that they do indeed have people watching what they're doing.

      Funding for the FCC needs to be cut WAY back itself...they are tending to stick their noses where it just doesn't belong...at all. But that's another matter.

      --

      "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    2. Re:E-Rate was a mess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't see how allowing things to continue as they were was a good idea.

      You know the expression "throwing the baby out with the bathwater"? Arbitrarily shutting the program down without notification, under the intent of stopping abuse (at the expense of a majority of programs that are not part of the abuse) is a great way to get new FCC commissioners.

      I have E-Rate customers (mostly school districts). Last year, several had their paperwork rejected (clerical errors by the district staff rejected by E-Rate and the E-Rate administrators would not permit a "re-application" to correct the minor errors). We carried them at a loss of over $20K per district. We made sure to update our paperwork to prevent against having to carry the loss in the future - whether or not your mom and dad give you $10 to help buy lunch is not McDonald's responsibility.

      Guess what? Several districts are now faced with being shut off. No Internet. They don't have the budget to make up the E-Rate difference - heck, they already had to reduce several teaching positions in several districts. They looked at us to absorb it again, but after $80K missing from last year on a customer who at their current rate is 60% of what I make on the same business broadband (and they use every bit of bandwidth I give them). Per the corruption issues, a subsidy for broadband provided at less than my cost is far from an issue (though I am aware of some incumbant LECs that have abused it). Want to shut down a corrupt broadband program? RUS grants and low interest loans - mostly used as ILEC political reward money. Many of the grants in our region are given to totally inept, unqualified but politically influencial incumbant phone monopolies. Oh well, it's just your tax money being given back to keep your phone company in position to monopolize the network for another 50 years.

      So I would imagine the FCC's effect will be causing an Internet blackout for schools and libraries. Senators are already getting called by administrators, and Senators should have no problem removing a rather corrupt FCC (mind you, I'm of the same political party as the President, a licensed amateur radio operator, own commercial licenses and am highly disgusted with this cash & carry FCC).

    3. Re:E-Rate was a mess by Ho-Lee-Cow! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And the single best way I the FCC is to investigate the hell out of Michael Powell and his cronies to find out who is in their pockets.

      I think that the shady dealings of the FCC merit a special prosecutor, and have for some years.

      --
      In space, no one can hear you moo.
    4. Re:E-Rate was a mess by lynx_user_abroad · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Funding for the FCC needs to be cut WAY back itself...they are tending to stick their noses where it just doesn't belong...at all.

      If this ship is not heading where you want it to go, you won't correct that problem by dropping the sail. You have to adjust the rudder.

      Trying to correct an out-of-control FCC by just cutting it's funding is likely to get you an FCC which is still heading the wrong way, but perhaps in a less-effective fashion.

      --

      The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.

    5. Re:E-Rate was a mess by ortcutt · · Score: 3, Informative
      True. That wasn't in dispute, and no one was suggesting that things should continue as they are. The question is whether the steps the FCC have taken are necessary and effective to deal with the fraud. The NY Times article made this quite clear.
      At Tuesday's hearing, lawmakers and an executive of Universal Service said that many of the most significant changes would not make it easier to perform audits or root out fraud and waste. That acknowledgment prompted concern from the lawmakers.

      "It's really difficult to understand why these changes were made,'' said Senator Olympia J. Snowe, a Maine Republican who helped draft the legislation that created the E-Rate program in 1996.

      Senator Conrad Burns, Republican of Montana, also criticized the tighter regulations, which have led to a cash squeeze at the program, and the recent quick sale of the program's investments.

      "I fail to see how these series of events have led to a more efficient management of the funds,'' he said.

    6. Re:E-Rate was a mess by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree.. why should the FCC have such powers? They're not elected or representative of the people. Isn't that how democracy is supposed to work?

    7. Re:E-Rate was a mess by ortcutt · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually you better ask for Cheney. Otherwise, Bush is going to mess up the big words when he has to relay the message to him.

    8. Re:E-Rate was a mess by AoT · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey!

      It's hard work, you know.

      It's hard work.

    9. Re:E-Rate was a mess by keyshawn632 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well they are [representatives of the people], just not directly.

      They five FCC comissioners, (which, no more than 3 of them can be from the same political party), are appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. They serve Five year terms.

      The Head, Michael Powell [Colin's son] was put on by Clinton in 96, and Bush promoted Powell to head commissioner Jan. 2001.

      Want them to change ? Vote for your electoral college candidates' choices on Nov. 2nd.

      [Or just start a revolution :p] /just finished an outline on the FCC for AP Govt

    10. Re:E-Rate was a mess by jmorris42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > Better yet, let's close down everything that is not explicitly covered
      > by the Constitution.

      Preach it brother! Can we get an Amen on that?

      And I'll add in a great big Hell Yea for good measure.

      Especially in the case of the SLC. The FCC had no business ever getting into that business in the first place and it has only caused problems since its inception. We wouldn't be fighting off the CIPA & COPA censors if it were not for those "federal monies" (read cash ripped screaming from end users by way of the telcos) introduced into the state and local schools and public libraries.

      And you are exactly on target with where to attack this problem, and that is at the root. Doesn't matter whether the program is effective, whether you think it is a good idea or what. It isn't constituitional, like most of the current Federal government.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
  2. *cough* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Internet Grants Cut, and F.C.C. Scolded
    By STEPHEN LABATON

    Published: October 6, 2004

    ASHINGTON, Oct. 5 - The Federal Communications Commission came under sharp criticism in Congress on Tuesday over a series of decisions that have led to the suspension of a $2.25 billion program that pays for telephone and Internet services at public schools and libraries.

    Advertisement

    The suspension, which began without notice two months ago, has caused hardships in many school districts and communities, which have had to postpone paying bills or take money from other projects. By one estimate, as much as $1 billion in expected grants could be suspended by the end of the year.

    The company that administers the program issued a suspension on new grants as it wrestled with new accounting standards and tighter spending limits imposed on it by the F.C.C.

    A hearing Tuesday before the Senate Commerce Committee had originally been called to examine waste at the so-called E-Rate program, which administers telephone and Internet services for schools and libraries. But three of the four senators present focused instead on the F.C.C.'s decision to impose tighter spending restrictions.

    The fourth senator, John McCain of Arizona, the Republican chairman of the committee, pressed the witnesses about what steps were being undertaken to monitor the program in light of a series of fraud cases involving telephone companies and equipment makers over the last few years. He expressed irritation that Congress had not been notified about the suspension of the program.

    Frank Gumper, the chairman of the Universal Service Administrative Company, the nonprofit organization that oversees the E-Rate program, told lawmakers that the F.C.C.'s decision last week to order a quick sale of more than $3 billion of the program's investments had resulted in a loss of almost $5 million.

    Guidelines for making those investments had been approved in July by top officials in the office of Michael K. Powell, chairman of the F.C.C. But the investments had to be liquidated after the commission later concluded that they impinged on the company's ability to make payouts to schools and libraries.

    Commission officials, who declined a request by the senators to appear at the hearing, have said that spending changes were necessary to audit and monitor the program more effectively. The officials have said they imposed the new restrictions in consultation with the White House budget office. But late last week, administration officials began distancing themselves from the changes, noting that the budget office has never issued a formal opinion on the matter.

    At Tuesday's hearing, lawmakers and an executive of Universal Service said that many of the most significant changes would not make it easier to perform audits or root out fraud and waste.

    That acknowledgment prompted concern from the lawmakers.

    "It's really difficult to understand why these changes were made,'' said Senator Olympia J. Snowe, a Maine Republican who helped draft the legislation that created the E-Rate program in 1996.

    Senator Conrad Burns, Republican of Montana, also criticized the tighter regulations, which have led to a cash squeeze at the program, and the recent quick sale of the program's investments.

    "I fail to see how these series of events have led to a more efficient management of the funds,'' he said.

    Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, a West Virginia Democrat, criticized the F.C.C.'s decision to reduce the contribution level by telephone companies and their customers by $550 million this year, only to find that the E-Rate program, under the new rules, is likely to suffer from a cash squeeze and may need to increase tariffs later to pay schools and libraries.

    He and Ms. Snowe also criticized the commission's decision not to send any officials to the committee who could explain the decision to tighten the spending rules.

    "I'm very disappointed that the F.C.C. declined to

    1. Re:*cough* by ortcutt · · Score: 2, Informative

      Respect fair use by being fair to the copyright holder. Reprinting the whole article isn't.

  3. Tit for Tat by grunt107 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Since the FCC is worried about government overspending, they should be rewarded with an equal amount of reduction in funding for them.

    The reduction can be used to then pay for the libraries (and underprivileged) to get internet access.

    1. Re:Tit for Tat by Sqwubbsy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course, we could find another corrupt organization to control distribution or, even more radical, let the localities KEEP their money and spend it on the things they need instead of keep bureaucrats employed. Oh wait, this is /. and not the WSJ discussion forum.

    2. Re:Tit for Tat by patches · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Although I think that Internet access in schools, and libraries are a good thing, why is it that it has to be the Federal Government's job to give them internet access.

      If you as a constituant think that your local schools and libraries need internet access then you lobby your State or Local governments and let them fund it. I don't see anywhere in the Constitution where the Federal Governement is required to fund Internet connections, and I do see where anything not specifically listed in the Constitution is reserved for the States. So I see this as really a non-issue. I don't feel that the FCC should be funding this anyway. Let the States or even Local governments handle this.

      I will also give you my reasoning for why the Federal Government should stick to only doing what the Constitution says it should do and let the States do all the other things. The government, like anyone else, cannot do things for free. Everything that a government does requires money. The problem is that the Federal Government has accountability to EVERY American. So your voice of how you think your tax money should be spent is of less significance because you are in a sea of many millions of Americans. Now in the States level, the field of constituants is dramatically cut down, as only residents of that Stateare included. Going one step further to the Local level and the number is a lot less. So you can have more control over how your elected representatives handle your tax money, the further down the chain you go. That is why I feel that the Federal Government should stick to only A) Settling Inter-State disputes, B) Providing for the National Defense of the United States, and C) Handling diplomatic responsibilities for the States. I think the Federal Government should stop doing all the other things they have their sticky little fingers in like Health Care, Education, Social Security, Welfare, etc... The list is rather long...

      --
      The worst part of being athiest.... You don't have anyone to talk to during orgasm!
    3. Re:Tit for Tat by lynx_user_abroad · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If you as a constituant think that your local schools and libraries need internet access then you lobby your State or Local governments and let them fund it.

      The reason the Federal government is involved here is because the Federal Government benefits when the population of the entire country is better educated.

      If we poshed this responsibility down to the local level, we'd wind up with (even more of) a two-tiered system where anyone living in big cities, where broadband is readily available, would pay next-to-nothing for great access and people living in rural communities, where broadband is still non-existant, would be paying thousands each to fund access for their school.

      FCC policy we have today is leading us to an Information Superhighway of privately owned toll roads. There are still many people in the US who have only dial-up access to the Internet, only one telecommunications provider to choose from, and no "market opportunity" to effect a change. If we had followed these same policies in deploying the telephone, most of the country would still be relying on the post office for their "telecommunication" needs.

      In my mind, this policy action on behalf of the FCC is just another in a long string of policies designer to ensure that a publically owned internet infrastructure is not allowed to come into existance, in favor of saving that infrastructure for divving-up amount the incumbent, politically powerful, telecommunications carriers and media companies.

      Here's an interesting question to homeowners? Would you be interested in fiber-to-the-curb provided and administered by your local government (city or county government) if the per-month cost for that service was on par with what you currently pay for city/county water? (For those who don't regularly write the check, it's about $15-$30 a month) If a local entity can keep the gallons flowing for this amount, why can't they keep a few routers running for the same money?

      That is why I feel that the Federal Government should stick to only A) Settling Inter-State disputes, B) Providing for the National Defense of the United States, and C) Handling diplomatic responsibilities for the States.

      Is the postal service a legitimate function of the Federal Government?

      --

      The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.

    4. Re:Tit for Tat by ortcutt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Michael Powell was on NPR yesterday and he was asked about the fact that FCC only censors broadcast media and not cable and satellite radio. He basically said that this was outdated and suggested that cable and broadcast should be treated similarly. If Bush wins in November, say goodbye to the Sopranos. The thought police have decided that we need protected from the bad words.

  4. Kicking kickbacks by goneutt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I remember hearing about how this program was providing funds to school districts that really didn't know what things cost. I think it was the El Paso school district that wound up being sold a few $million worth of Cisco gear that was never installed because it wasn't part of the IS architecture plans, drawn by the same people that sold the gear.

    All in all, this is a program that should have started really big to make initial investments in hardware, but cut back a little to just maintain.

    --
    Bacardi + slashdot = negative karma.
    1. Re:Kicking kickbacks by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You have put your finger on it precisely. Schools DON'T know how to spend the money, so they are getting ripped off left and right. Add corruption to the mix, and the biggest shame is that the program wasn't frozen sooner.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    2. Re:Kicking kickbacks by scott9676 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not just El Paso. In Atlanta they had some school classrooms with enough networking equipment to run a small company, and it was just sitting in closets because nobody had a clue how to install it. I don't think these funds pay for network administrators. And even if they did, how much connectivity does a grade school or middle school need? If they wanted to do it cheaply, they could just set up WIFI stations for every couple of classrooms, and have those wired through the ceiling to a decent switch, uplinked through a filtering router (for spam and inappropriate materials), and connected to a T1 (depending on the size of the school, maybe something a bit more). The problem at this point becomes maintenance. The user base is a combination of kids that don't have a clue, those that do have a clue, and teachers watching them that in a lot of cases don't WANT to have a clue. The teachers are interested in teaching sentence diagramming, not tweaking IP settings.

    3. Re:Kicking kickbacks by ortcutt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Explain to me the reasoning that says, "there's something wrong here, so we should do away with the whole program" because I can't understand it. They should be fixing the problem, not shutting down the program.

  5. repeat after me... by night_flyer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    schools do not NEED interent connections or computers, with a large % of people coming out of school illiterate, I would think that schools need to concentrate on the basics first!

    --


    Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
    Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
    1. Re:repeat after me... by jmays · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What about the schools that are doing their jobs? Are you going to deny them technology too?

      Besides, internet connections and computers aren't rewards ... they are aids. And when used in complement with a working 'basics' system they will provide a superior learning environment. I can't believe you got modded insightful for that generalized shit comment.

      --
      KARMA TAG! You're it.
    2. Re:repeat after me... by Ho-Lee-Cow! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's pathetically amusing about this is that the vast majority of people who do this are themselves public school graduates; they're effectively calling themselves uneducated morons.

      What is sad about this comment is that it ignores the fact that the quality of education has fallen off so badly in the US in the last 25 years that we have to now require post-secondary education in order to be assured to get the basic language and math skills needed to do jobs that pay even a living wage. Of course, I'd actually be in agreement with you if the supposed college prep program I was forced into in high school had actually prepared me for college...it didn't and was a waste of two years that I could have spent learning something useful in the real world.

      The fact is that hard-working teachers in this country do their best to educate tens of millions of kids, day in and day out, and by and large they succeed. Is the system perfect? Hell no; it's a long way from perfect, and we should do everything we can to improve it.

      This is simply a strawman. An attack on the failings of the school system is not the same thing as blaming the teachers who are just as much screwed over by it as the kids are. When teachers are free to teach and students are free to learn, we get the best results and bang for the buck. When we have to spend tons of money on unfunded federal mandates and bean counting BS to maintain them--and force qualified and hardworking teachers to go to great expense to become certified in all the subjects they teach--it's easy to see why I think schools should stop taking federal largesse and get back to the business of teaching kids. No Child Left Behind means that all children get left behind--while all those concerned adults can pat themselves on the back because they slapped the fsck out of the 'bad guys'.

      But I know of no other educational system in history that has -- with a mandate to take every kid, regardless of intelligence or willingness to work -- successfully educated the number of people that the American public school system has.

      One of the accomplishments of the Soviets was mostly eradicating illiteracy in less than 30 years. Not that I think that the Soviet system is all that fabulous, but I note that their basic literacy rates were historically higher than ours. Breadth of literacy, though, we always had them hands down.

      --
      In space, no one can hear you moo.
    3. Re:repeat after me... by antiMStroll · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hi Grampa! Still walking uphill to and from school?

    4. Re:repeat after me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just an observation:

      Kid's don't like going to school.

      There are alot of reasons. The two most common are probably:

      Boredom.

      Fear.

      Society has changed alot in the last 25 years. As it changed our school systems have not fully adapted. The styles/methods used do not fit the current breed of children.

      Kid's walking through medal detectors, School shootings/beatings/stabbings etc have become common place. I personally would not like to attend the majority of Highschools in america now adays.

      The worst thing that happened when I was in school was the very rare fist fight and the ocasional kid who got a "Swirley"

      This whole heap of problems all stims from one thing: Parents.

      Parents need to do their job and do it right. The majority of early education is suppose to come from the parents. Children learn the fastest in their first few years. Negligent parents = uneducated children.

      One of my largest pet peeves currently is a large chunk of the African American culture. They expect to be treated equally when they have no excuse for not being able to speak with at least semi correct "English" grammar. I have an easier time speaking and understanding english with people from all over the world whom "English" is a second or third language.

      And I blame this completely on the parent's of these children. The CEO of the company I work for is a Black man. Highly educated and well spoken. The above is not a racial comment it indicating a viewpoint collaberated from a large sum of experiance with a group of individuals.

    5. Re:repeat after me... by rpillala · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes you're right it's a lot more efficient for teachers to create instructional materials by hand or on an old school typewriter and not be able to communicate with parents via email. Any teacher can just pick up the telephone here on our desk and talk to parents that way or maybe just go over to kids' houses.

      We don't need photocopiers either.

      Ravi
      --
      When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
  6. phone companies contribute? by way2trivial · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm sorry, don't they collect every penny of the "Universal connectivity charge" back from their customers (us) thereby making it a backhanded tax?

    So, the FCC has stopped paying out- Yet it's still on my cell bill, where are the funds piling up? the FCC coffers? or the telco?

    fwiw, I have no problem subsidizing a telephone to a city of 200 in W VA that can't run at a profit.

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:phone companies contribute? by Dracolytch · · Score: 3, Interesting

      From what I can tell from the articles, your money is going to pay off debt that the FCC has generated because of corrupt business practices.

      Cheers.

      ~D

      --
      This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
  7. Bad but not so... by mirko · · Score: 3, Interesting

    IIIRC, a few months ago, Microsoft got to pay their fine in computer and software equipment for the above mentioned educational structures, now, if these get their technological fundings cut, then it means that Microsoft might have to pay in cash.

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
  8. uproar? by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So it's okay for the FCC to create a new tax without congressional oversight, but if they ever decide to get rid of that same tax, there's an uproar?

    I actually worked on an E-rate project in a large urban area. Graft and corruption do not begin to describe the money sucking machine that was E-rate. So I speak with some authority on the subject when I say that we are all better off without it.

    1. Re:uproar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      FCC didn't create it. Senator Olympia J. Snowe, who is mentioned in the New York Times article, was among the drafters of the legislation that created the E-Rate program.

  9. Taxpayer subsidized Internet is a boondogle by Gothmolly · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've read of massive hardware installations and billing done at small schools, all by unscrupulous companies and oblivious administrators, at the public expense. Any time you have this kind of blank check, and any time its 'for the children', you're going to get this kind of graft. The only solution is to stop taxing long distance bills (read your phone bill some time), and make local communities fork over the cash - they will buy what they can afford or what they need, no more, no less. It will spark creative ways of managing networks, combining services with adjacent communities, community involvement, and basically return the $$ spent back to the local vendors (with the exception of the hardware cost). Inject Gubmint monopoly money, and of course the costs will explode - look at the medical industry in the US for an example.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:Taxpayer subsidized Internet is a boondogle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem with the blank cheque approach is that the value of what you get is pretty much defined as what you spent on it. "A ten million dollar computer system" sounds just as impressive whatever it actually is.

      What you need is someone on the receiving end who actually knows what they're paying for and what it's worth, and is able to negotiate with the provider. That way you stand a fighting chance of getting the $10m to be the value, not just the cost.

    2. Re:Taxpayer subsidized Internet is a boondogle by killbill! · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The only solution is to stop taxing long distance bills (read your phone bill some time), and make local communities fork over the cash - they will buy what they can afford or what they need, no more, no less.

      I bet you didn't go to a public inner city school. By going this way, you make sure poor communities keep a substandard education because they won't be able to afford it.

      While it is generally true that federal intervention brings unaccountability and graft, federal funding also reduces funding inequality.
  10. Slush fund by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Now 3.5 billion is a nice slush fund.

    For 3.5 billion you could give 29 million students dialup for a year and they don't have to share.

    Or 1.1 million schools could have a dedicated high speed cable connection with static IPs and no bandwidth cap year round.

    If either of the above was actually done with the money it was well spent. But I don't think it was.

  11. Re:registration by mzs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Probably because if they did, and then everyone reading were to login with the bugmenot username and password, then not too many more people would be able to read the article. Don't you think that many news sites that require registration keep track of whether there are say more than a hundred people using the same username at about the same time from different IP addresses no less? More often than not, once someone mentions bugmenot in a slashdot story like you just did, the username stop works very soon afterwards.

  12. Ummm this is a legitimate executive branch power by ShatteredDream · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The executive agencies have a responsibility to cut off public funds when they have a very good reason to believe they are being subject to fraud, waste and abuse. GSA, the General Services Administration, does this sort of thing all the time when it does internal criminal audits of how Congressionally-allocated funds are being used. One of their jobs is to bust up slush funds and take down those who were using them. Do you honestly think they let someone just spend all of those tax dollars all the way through the investigation?

    The Congress desparately needs to have its spending and law-making powers curtailed by a few good constitutional amendments. The President needs the power of line-item veto, the Congress needs to have every bill address only one subject with all riders to the contrary automatically ruled unenforceable and deficit spending when the Congress has not issued a formal declaration of war should be unconstitutional.

    I applaud the FCC, it's about damn time that an executive agency told Congress to take responsibility for where it spends tax dollars. The Congress spends our money, which it confiscates by threat of prison time, like a bunch of rich old white businessmen at a Vegas strip club. As long as the FCC just keeps the funds tied up, it shouldn't have any legal trouble. Since it is saying that it is merely tying up the funds to prevent them from going to what evidence shows is most likely an illegal use, it doesn't have to ask the Congress for permission. The Constitution doesn't say that the executive agencies have to actually spend money for purposes known to be illegal under federal law....

  13. Silver Lining by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The plus side to this mess is that the FCC is going to so thoroughly piss off Congress that it could mean good things in terms of the Broadcast Flag and the EFF's argument that the FCC is overstepping its Congressionally-granted bounds in that matter. This certainly isn't the first case where Michael Powell found himself at odds with Congress.

  14. E-Rate is GOOD by Omeganon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When there is proper oversight. For the last 5 years I have been directly involved in wonderful education projects that would not be possible without E-Rate funding. Many, many schools in the state where I live would not even have Internet access were it not for E-Rate funds and most would be stuck at ISDN speeds for hundreds of students per school. I have seen first hand the power of distance learning in cooperation with Universities, use of web resources for students such as Atomic Learning and NetTrekker, online teacher recertification training to be compliant with NCLB, and the ability for districts and states to modernize a significant portion of their daily administrative tasks such as attendance reporting, Free and Reduced Lunch tracking and centralized student information systems by bringing them all online. The savings in administration overhead are significant by themselves. All of this is possible because of E-Rate.

    What people don't seem to realize is that most school districts are poor. They have very restricted budgets with little lee-way. E-Rate allows them to bring modern technology into the hands of students who most likely don't get to utilize it at home and educational resources that they most certainly wouldn't be able to use or even access at home.

    A properly managed E-Rate fund with proper accounting and oversight is essential to the education of our future. The sensationalist examples of waste given in response to this article are exceptions and not the general rule. NASA had the same types of problems years ago. NASA wasn't abolished or suspended. Instead, they were forced to get their act together and perform proper accounting and oversight. That's the right way and what needs to happen here.

    --
    Omeganon
    1. Re:E-Rate is GOOD by Edward+Faulkner · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The idea that most public schools are poor is FUD. They only *seem* poor because so much money is wasted. For example, the NY state school system employs more administrators than teachers.

      There are numerous examples of private schools that spend *FAR LESS* per child than your average failing inner city school, yet they achieve vastly better results, even with children who were referred to them as "problem cases" who couldn't succeed in public school.

      Read the facts in The Underground History of Education, full text online.

      --
      "The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern." - Lord Acton
  15. Another unbiased /. story! [nt] by Dwonis · · Score: 2, Funny
    ;-)

    Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment ... like the body or the subject!)

  16. Re:registration by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe because the editors want to honour the other sites requirements? Besides, it isnt the editors that write the italic blurb, its the article submitter that does that, editors comments are usually in plain face after the submitters blurb.

    Seriously, Slashdot editors have no place at all of suggesting methods of circumventing other sites login requirements. If they did, how long until NYtimes blocks referers from slashdot? How would slashdot feel if there was a bugmenot type site for slashdot itself? To view the article you need to log in, thats the casual agreement and cost of viewing the article, the same as having a unique ID on this site. Just because its on the Internet does not mean you have a Carte Blanche right to view it on your terms.

  17. Re:Ummm this is a legitimate executive branch powe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If the FCC were so principled:

    1) They would appear before congress to defend their actions.

    2) They would appear in *some* open forum to defend their actions.

    3) They would publish a public document to defend their actions.

    But they did not.

    Instead they acted in a manner consistent with Michael Powell's long history as a corporate puppet -- they slipped the knife in under cover of night.

    A vote for Kerry is a vote against Powell.

    Randy

  18. Yeah, how dare they... by mwood · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...decide not to spend money until they have it. This *is* government, after all.

  19. Another Way That Bush Screws American Children by ortcutt · · Score: 3, Insightful
    So, there's no reason to believe that these changes will prevent fraud in the program, but it is certain that these changes will prevent schools from getting money for legitimate and vitally necessary uses. Then, they make the change and fail to tell anybody about it, including umm, Congress. Yeah, remember them ... in that big building on that hill. Yep. This has all of the hallmarks of the present administration.

    Doesn't fix the problem. Check.

    Arrogant and secretive. Check.

    Hurts American children. Check.

  20. Looking out for who? by xombo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What ever happened to the FCC and government in general looking out for us?
    FCC Chairman Michael Powell has said on several occasions that he doesn't know what the public wants and votes however his lobbyists want. The same thing happened with de-regulation (which allows bigger media monopolies than we have today).
    The FCC is archaic and corrupt and something needs to be done.

  21. Problem Beyond Funding by Qboid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a former Director of Technology for a school district in Missouri, I had to deal very closely with the e-rate system. In concept, e-rate/universal service fund was supposed to level the playing field for poor districts whose tax base could not support the kind of technology enhancements that would allow students in those districts to compete with those in districts with a higher tax base that could afford the services if they wanted it.
    The problem as I see it is the Administrators don't know when they are being taken for a ride by the "consulting companies" that they bring in to do the work. I was one of the few administrators who was a technology professional to begin with. Most districts I had contact with just add the technology planning and administration to the duties of a Math, Science, or Business teacher. They don't traditionally have the information technology background to form a plan of attack for the district to follow, and instead just let the "consultants" tell them what to do. That gives the consultants the needed loophole to overcharge and under-deliver.

  22. Re:Hmm. I might be unpopular on this one. by Migraineman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You went to the library seeking information. That's what a library is all about. It's irrelevant as to how the information is packaged - magazine, newspaper, hardcover book ... that's just the transport mechanism. You went seeking information. Internet access is a logical extension of the library's charter, so it makes a ton of sense. If you don't want to read some grungy old book that's been thumbed through by countless "unfortunate souls," that's your prerogative; you can purchase a shiny new one at a bookstore. Same goes for your internet access.

    All countries run "social programs." Roads are built with tax money or under charter from the gub'ment. Same goes for providing potable water, electricity, sewer ... In order to truely prosper, you (we) need to provide infrastructure to all areas, not just the ones that are economically feasible. And yes, you (we) get to foot the bill.

  23. And in Related News by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 2, Funny

    New York, NY
    The Grand Musicians Union (GMU) which represents live performers has sued 14,000 recording industry executives for "copying" their intellectual property and thereby undermining their right to work.

    "These microphone devices are simple theft of our labor, and by suing the recording industry, we aim to put the world on notice that borrowed copies of the sounds we make will not be tolerated" Said GMU president George Brush.

    "Microphones" he went on, "Are intended to reproduce copyrighted material, and are therefore misunllegal, along with kites, under the Digital Mullenelum Copyright Act."

    The Recording Industry could not be reached for comment, but a recording on their answering machine in what appeared to be the voice of Ronald Reagan seems to be saying.

    "We will develop this technology, and then we will share this technology with the Soviets"

    AP

  24. Re:Hmm. I might be unpopular on this one. by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 2

    Parent is correct. Access to information is the key point here.

    Don't forget that a lot of government agencies, courts, and civic authorities are abandoning hard-copy and moving vast amounts of public information online. Banks, insurance companies, utilities, and cable/dish companies are increasingly expecting their customers to handle all of their business online.

    Without some form of access, you willfully exclude a significant portion of the population from participation in the American ideal; in essence, telling them they don't matter enough to merit your attention or concern.

    I'm so tired of hearing the traditional Republican line of, "Why should I pay taxes for this kind of thing?". Goddammit people, why shouldn't you?. Which would you rather have: a nation of informed citizens, capable of making a positive contribution to society - both physically, and financiall,; or, would you rather have a collection of poorly educated, militantly anti-government, suspicious reactionaries?

    --

    I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.