Slashdot Mirror
Republican Bill Aims To Thwart the FCC's Leaning Towards Title II
SpzToid writes U.S. congressional Republicans on Friday proposed legislation that would set "net neutrality" rules for broadband providers, aiming to head off tougher regulations backed by the Obama administration. Republican lawmakers hope to counter the Federal Communications Commission's vote on Feb. 26 for rules that are expected to follow the legal path endorsed by President Barack Obama, which Internet service providers (ISPs) and Republicans say would unnecessarily burden the industry with regulation. Net neutrality activists, now with Obama's backing, have advocated for regulation of ISPs under a section of communications law known as Title II, which would treat them more like public utilities. The White House on Thursday said legislation was not necessary to settle so-called "net neutrality" rules because the Federal Communications Commission had the authority to write them.
"which Internet service providers (ISPs) and Republicans say would unnecessarily burden the industry with regulation." - Except it IS NECESSARY, DUMMIES.
U.S. congressional Republicans on Friday proposed legislation that would set "net neutrality" rules for broadband providers, aiming to head off tougher regulations backed by the Obama administration.
That sentence should have read, U.S. congressional Republicans on Friday proposed legislation authored by industry lobbyists, that would set "net neutrality" rules for broadband providers, aiming to head off tougher regulations backed by the Obama administration. (additions mine).
Yeah.
The polarized politics in this country has gotten so out of hand that the electorate shoots themselves in the foot over ideology.
Last year's election was a complete joke in my state (GA). Every Republican ran with this platform: A vote for a Democrat is a vote for Obama's policies.
If you ask a typical Obama hater exactly what policies they don't like and why, you inevitably got the media talking points. The only time I saw a reasonable dislike for one of Obama's policies was actually here - the person actually had a unique and quite thought out reason that I even agreed with; and I voted for Obama.
But that was the only time. I have a very low opinion of the electorate. Everyone bases their opinions on what they see and hear in the media with absolutely no critical thinking or skepticism. A media that over simplifies things to fit complex issues into 2 minute segments while making it understandable to your typical 8th grader.
Does anyone think the sponsors of this legialation have serioulsly considered the issues of user access and cost? Of course not. As in so many areas of public life, Republicans have adopted the mantra of "free markets". Which is another way of saying on behalf of large corporations, "Let the Wookie win". Let the big strong arm-ripping behemoth have its way. This disregards the needs of the majority of the population and lets corporations take the profits resulting from public investment and tax dollars.
The internet has never been about "free markets". The internet was developed by the government and universities (with public funding). As far as the big ISPs are concerned, most of them, such as Comcast and Time Warner, make use of public right-of-way to carry thier signals to their customers. Most of this right-of-way was obtained either through imminent domain (for the public good) or for other purposes entirely (to carry power lines). This has resulted in a protected monopoly for these ISPs. They have no competition, the exact opposite of a free market.
Title II will treat the ISPs as utilities so that their rates will be controlled and their fiber optic cables will be available to all content providers under competitive conditions. This is really a free market in content, rather than the coroporate oligarchy envisioned by this Repucblican legislation.
"He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition
Because we have a House of Representatives and a Senate which comprise Congress. Both work independently of each other, and each can be ruled by either party. The clincher is that both the House and Senate need to agree to pass a bill. If a bill doesn't make it thru both sides it dies. The deadlock we've been seeing for the past few years has come from the Republicans ruling the House of Representatives and refusing to pass any Democrat-proposed bill coming from the Senate, even tho the Democrats ruled there, and vice-versa.
Now that both sides are Republican I don't expect anything to change really. Since they are comprised of at least 4 warring factions amongst themselves (the tea party, moderates, extreme right wing faux-christians, and libertarians) it's highly unlikely both sides of Congress will ever agree on anything, and even if they do Obama has the power of veto to block any legislation that might successfully come out of Congress. Yes, Congress can override a veto with a 2/3rd majority vote, but that's extremely unlikely to ever happen. So essentially we will have another 2 years where absolutely nothing gets done.