Slashdot Mirror
FCC Commissioner Leaves To Become Lobbyist
An anonymous reader writes "Meredith Attwell Baker, one of the FCC Commissioners, is leaving the FCC to become a lobbyist for Comcast-NBC, just four months after approving their merger deal. She refused to put any significant conditions on the merger, saying that the deal would 'bring exciting benefits to consumers that outweigh potential harms.' Comcast has released an official statement saying that, 'Meredith's executive branch and business experience along with her exceptional relationships in Washington bring Comcast and NBCUniversal the perfect combination of skills.'"
Maybe before she leaves she can put the stamp of approval on AT&T / T-Mobile as a fallback.
Revolving door. Enough said. Honestly, I'm tired of caring about it. Action will only happen when people begin to truly feel the effects. Logic is lost on the masses.
Corruption just seems to be getting more and more visible and obvious, and nobody with the power to stop it gives a damn.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
They either come from Corporations (which means they are biased in favor of their former boss) or they know that the job will eventually lead from government to a cushy corporate position, if they just brown nose enough (hand down the right decisions).
I still think the FCC's decision to allow Internet Devices to broadcast over top existing TV channels demonstrates they care more about pleasing their once-or-future bosses (Microsoft, Google, Apple, ATT, etc), even if it means blocking consumers ability to watch free TV.
FCC == corporate tool.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Odd for a lobbyist to say something like "bring exciting benefits to consumers that outweigh potential harms", which confirms they believe there is a potential for abuses. A statement like that practically begs for someone to ask what these benefits are exactly, that she was able to even make such a statement.
Ice Cream has no bones.
If by 'Meredith's executive branch and business experience along with her exceptional relationships in Washington bring Comcast and NBCUniversal the perfect combination of skills.' they mean that she accepts bribes, er, a job offer from the people she JUST granted a favor to, then, YES.
Translation: Meredith's dedication to serving us during her tenure as FCC Commissioner, and her willingness to betray every principle, ethical or moral, makes her a perfect fit for our corporate atmosphere, much as a piece of shit makes a perfect fit for a septic tank. We look forward to long years of benefiting from her betrayal of the American people.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
When my father retired from NASA, he had to wait two years before he could work for anyone who did any business with NASA.
Apparently this sort of thing doesn't apply to political appointees.
LBJ much?
It's a sad testimonial to the lopsided state of our nation's political system when we need non-compete clauses for elected and appointed officials to prevent them from leaping to the Dark Side immediately after their terms end.
The next sound you hear will be bunch of grandstanding Senators investigating her. Give it a week, 10 days tops.
This is plain and simple fraud.
"Meredith's executive branch and business experience along with her exceptional relationships in Washington bring Comcast and NBCUniversal the perfect combination of skills." - means we bought the bitch a long time ago, we just are now taking possession.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Progressives have nothing to answer for this. She failed to use federal government power to block a merger. She didn't use power that she should have.
Can we just accept the fact that they're all corrupt, and simply require that politicians publish their price, and who's pocket they're in so that the general public can try to buy a few?!
I don't think the Comcast/NBC merger is that big of a deal. A cable company acquired a 4th place network and a few channels with sinking ratings. I think it will have as little impact as when UPN/WB bankrupted themselves & created CW, or when Sirius XM merged. Little impact will be noticed.
I do however think Comcast needs to be sued under the Sherman Antitrust Act, forced into regulation, and price fixed just like the electricity and water monopolies. They are a utility and should be treated as such.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Why do progressive have to answer for a Republican FCC commissioner?
In 2009, Baker joined the FCC as one of two Republicans on the five-person commission.
Progressives have a lot to answer for.
As long as the citizenry believe that one party or the other are too blame then the citizens are just useful idiots. Conservatives like to consolidate power too, it's just you probably happen to agree with their reasons for doing it so it's ok. It's those lousy progressives. Also, in this particular instance it was the lack of using that consolidated power that is the problem.
Of this part: The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Sort of like the "right to privacy" that we are told by the right doesn't exist because the Constitution doesn't specifically mention it?
I thought there was a law against this.... Don't you have to wait two or so years before you can do this???
Congress refuses to pass a law. The Obama administration, on the other hand, issued an executive order the very first day banning lobbying by former members of the administration to executive branch employees. So because the legislative body is corrupt, she can lobby Congress. The executive is slightly less corrupt, so she theoretically can't talk to former co-workers or anyone in the executive branch (including the FCC) about law and policy changes without that member of the executive being fired. That's about as close to honest as we've been able to come in recent decades.
The funny thing is that this person is a conservative Republican with such choice quotes as:
“I’m afraid we are endangering a really important agenda. . . by pushing forward with a partisan, big-government regulatory issue [net neutrality] that has no immediate need for us to act,” Baker said.
Yep, that sounds very much like a progressive to me. Oh wait...
Because Republicans are progressives... all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt.
Yes, let's ignore the last 50 years of US politics and post such a lame comeback.
Progressivism is a political attitude favoring or advocating changes or reform through governmental action.
And a choice quote from Baker:
“I’m afraid we are endangering a really important agenda. . . by pushing forward with a partisan, big-government regulatory issue [net neutrality] that has no immediate need for us to act,” Baker said.
She is by no means a "progressive".
Shouldn't lobbying be Illegal ?
Don't you listen to Rush Limbaugh? This is all part of evil plan set in motion by Bill Clinton and carried out by his minions. The Republican former FCC commissioner was a progressive sleeper agent.
brandelf -t FreeBSD
BTW your comeback is about as lame as saying "Democrats are segregationists" which purposefully ignores decades of political shifting that went on within the political parties. Seriously, lame trolling is lame.
Let me ask you something: in the absence of the FCC, what would have been different? There would not even have been a review of the merger. Conservatives seem to forget the reasons why regulation exists in the first place. I think they should spend some time talking to thee grandparents working in coal mining towns, complete with script and company housing. Fun times.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
For Immediate release
Comcast-NBC announced today that Meredith Attwell Baker is joining the company as a lobbyist.
In our previous professional dealings, the company has found Attwell Baker to be wide open to hard and long discussions. Though faced with difficult positions, Attwell Baker was always flexible and willing to prod new and unexplored avenues. The drippings of our mutual efforts leave a permanent mark on the fabric of America and its citizens.
Comcast-NBC will introduce Attwell Baker Thursday morning. Just as soon as she cleans her chin.
How can you make lobbying illegal? Politicians need to be able to talk to people to do their job, so you can really ban lobbying. I think what you mean is lobbyists should be arrested because of all the shady, back room stuff they seem to do. I don't think the problem is that there aren't enough laws and regulations, so much as it is that the stakes are so high that no punitive measures are grave enough to discourage people from engaging in these kinds of activities. The only real solution is to not consolidate so much power and authority in one place. That would limit the scope of abuses, and it would reduce the rewards of engaging in this kind of behavior (which should reduce the number of people willing to participate in it).
"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things bought and sold are legislators."
What's really funny is that the people who want the government involved in everything are the same who act outraged when the inevitable corruption follows.
If we compare our government today, to what it was in 1900, it's clear that we've gone downhill.
You're right, if you look at the decade between 1900 and 1910. However, before that you had the Whiskey Ring and Tammany Hall, after that, you had the Newport Sex Scandal and Teapot Dome. The US government has never been completely free of corruption and harking back to some mythical "Golden Age" does no one any good. The only reason why things look worse now is that the dollar amounts have increased - but that's inflation for you...
That is all.
17/150 on the http://www.worldaudit.org/corruption.htm scale not that bad but not as good as Canada or Sweden (and both country are corrupt as hell but not as much as they were 50 years ago)
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
More details in the link.
Ryan T. Sammartino
"Ancora imparo"
Meredith Attwell Baker was nominated for a seat on the Federal Communications Commission by President Barack Obama on June 25, 2009.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_Attwell_Baker
QUIT VOTING REPUBLICRAT
If you are still under the delusion the United States has "two political parties" you're stupid. We have one political party in power with two sudo oppositional sides both of which are owned by different sets of corporations. It is obvious who owned this politician. If you think your politician isn't owned by a company or two and you vote Republicrat you're stupid.
More government regulation is the problem, not the solution, I don't really care where you're looking.
You want corporations to have less power? The only way to remove power from corporations is to remove it from the government, there really isn't much of a dividing line anymore. The corporations that are the most regulated are the ones that have the most government protection against new competition. Corporate power and government power are the same thing.
If you vote Democrat OR Republican you are part of the problem, not the solution.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
More details in the link.
Fascinating. Simply amazing. Selling the airwaves PERMANENTLY. No regulation other than "you own that much of the spectrum".
Nobody could buy up the bandwidth to prevent competition? One TRILLION dollars is the value, according to this nutcase. Sorry, he's wrong. Someone doesn't need to buy it all to have a monopoly. All they need to do is buy all the spectrum of the appropriate kind in the limited geographic area and they'd have a lock on that medium for that area. One TV station in LA buys all the TV channels, he owns them FOR LIFE. No give-backs. Leave all but one sitting idle/empty. No take-backs.
Somebody buys channel A in one area, someone else channel A in another area, and they interfere with each other. A sues B, B countersues, both own what they own, neither is "at fault". Both are using their property in the manner authorized by their purchase agreement.
A buys a TV channel in LA. B buys a TV channel in LA. B decides he likes a new technology for doing TV so he switches. Viewers in LA now need TWO different TVs to watch those two channels, because nobody is there to tell manufacturers they need to support both. Hell, there isn't even anyone who can define the STANDARDS that apply, so two isn't the upper limit on incompatible uses.
The TV I buy has spurious emissions that blanket the other channels. All my neighbors get interference. They have to HIRE someone to come find the source, and then they have to SUE me to get me to shut the TV off. Lawyers make out like bandits.
The local cops buy a channel for their use. I start using it, too. They have to HIRE someone to come find me, and then they have to SUE me to get me to stop. They can't arrest me, there are no regulations! (And yes, that link is explicit in saying that lawsuits are how the issues are resolved.)
A buys the channels for public safety in an area. B buys the channels for cellular. After a while, everyone figures out that the use of cellular at those specific frequencies is interfering with the public safety users. What to do? The owners own the spectrum. You can't rescind the "license" because there is no license. You can't force anyone to move, they own the spectrum. (And if you think this is far-fetched, google for "nextel" and "rebanding".)
No, I'm sorry. The FCC still has a purpose. It may not have a right or reason to do some of the things it does, but that doesn't mean the baby needs to go out with the bathwater.
By the way, who "sells" the bandwidth for frequencies and uses that are worldwide in nature? HF radio frequencies travel around the globe.
Because Republicans are progressives... all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt.
She wasn't a progressive but a statist. And yes, you can have Republican statist but getting rid of them is one of the reasons why we have the tea parties.
Yes, I suppose me having to sue my neighbour who decided to use a high-power transmitter on the frequency I was using for something like my wi-fi is not anarchy.
I'm sorry, did you BUY the frequencies you are using, or are you just using them anyway? Just how does one split up the WI-FI frequencies into geographically-relevant sized pieces so that people can buy the frequencies they use?
And what happens when you move? I'm sorry, your neighbor owns the WI-FI frequencies for this part of the block, you don't get to use any. Wait, you're on the fiftieth floor of an apartment building and he's on the second? Hmmm. Multiple sales of frequencies based on VERTICAL separation. What a cash cow for the government.
By the way, make sure you sell the next tenant the frequencies so he can use his WI-FI when he moves in.
Then you get to worry about someone using his frequencies in a way that is incompatible with your use. Only then.
By the way, what government agency is responsible for doing this splitting up by region and allocating bandwidths to chunks of spectrum? We'll have to create one. Maybe call it "Federal" because it is a federal agency. Then something about "communications" because it deals with communications. Not sure what other words might apply...
Privacy is a right. What do you think it means to be secure in your person, papers, and effects? If they're all public that's not very secure.
You are assuming that things like company towns and stores and oppressive corporate control in general is something that would happen by default without government regulation.
Why wouldn't they be? Unregulated monopolies are a great business model! (They just generally suck for everyone but the owners of the company) And why would it matter if "the public actually starts to care about specific abuses" if the government has no regulatory power to do anything about them?
viva-la -revolution
time for a change .
"I don't pitch OpenSUSE Linux to my friends, i let Microsoft do it for me
18 USC 207 puts restrictions on lobbying by past public officials. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say for sure whether it applies in this case, but it seems like it does.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission
The FCC is directed by five commissioners appointed by the U.S. president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate for five-year terms, except when filling an unexpired term. The president designates one of the commissioners to serve as chairperson. Only three commissioners may be members of the same political party. None of them may have a financial interest in any FCC-related business.
Depends how you define bribery.
"Do this and I'll give you money." - illegal. "Do this and you can expect a hefty donation to your political campaign" - legal.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You mean, representing huge, powerful businesses that operate in their states, against interests of everyone else living in their states?
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.