Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Lawmakers Propose New Net Neutrality Bill

Posted by Soulskill on from the round-infinity-fight dept.

An anonymous reader brings news that Net Neutrality legislation is making another comeback. A new bill, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), would make ISPs who fail to provide service in a non-discriminatory manner subject to anti-trust violations. From the NYTimes: "'The bill squarely addresses the issue of the enormous market power of the telephone and cable companies as the providers of 98 percent of the broadband service in the country,' said Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge. But broadband providers and some congressional Republicans have argued that net neutrality legislation isn't necessary. The broadband market is becoming more competitive and net neutrality regulations could hamper investment in broadband networks, some Republicans said during a hearing this week."

3 of 173 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Parse these lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    If lying day after day is tiresome for the republicans, I bet it's debilitating for Hillary. It's a miracle she can still stand.

    Let's not forget that Billary got NAFTA passed for their corporate masters so they could move all the jobs out of the country to India.

    Stop being the pot calling the kettle black.

    The GOP and democratic party are one and the same. It's like the AL and NL they are both out to win the world series, but all do the same thing and that's play baseball with the only difference being that pitchers in the NL bat as well as pitch.

    That about sums it up.

    -AC

  2. Re:Not necessary? by aldousd666 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I have no religion. Not even Ayn Rand. I just liked the book, and I can relate to a bunch of it. But if my liking of a book somehow excuses your thoughtfulness, then well I'm happy to have helped you out.

    --
    Speak for yourself.
  3. Re:Parse these lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    The rich depend on public-school-educated police officers to keep them safe at home.

    Because we have no choice, especially in jurisdictions with stringent gun-control "laws".

    The rich depend on public-school-educated employees to make them money.

    Because we have no choice.

    The rich depend on public-school-educated workers to build the products they buy with their money.

    Because we have no choice.

    The rich depend on public-school-educated professionals to fill their prescriptions.

    Universities in the U.S. receive most of their funding through student tuition.

    The rich depend on public-financed road networks to move their products. The rich depend on public-financed communication networks (like the subsidized phone system and the government-funded internet) to enable their businesses.

    Bullshit. The telephone network was built by a private company, and the overwhelming majority of Internet infrastructure in the U.S. was built privately.

    The rich depend on public-financed military to protect their business interests overseas.

    Because we have no choice.

    The rich depend on public-financed military to protect their country from invasion.

    Because we have no choice, especially since scum who "think" much like you do have "banned" automatic weapons from civilian possession.

    The rich depend on public-financed social, medical, and economic safety nets to prevent the type of discontent among the poor that create revolution.

    Total bullshit. Let's take a look at nations such as France that provide even more generous welfare benefits than the U.S., yet are often teetering on the verge of social upheaval.