Republican's 'Net Neutrality' Proposal Called 'Bait and Switch' (techcrunch.com)

Remember that net neutrality legislation introduced by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)? TechCrunch is calling it "half-hearted" -- and suspect. It's not going to happen, it wouldn't help if it did and Blackburn isn't someone you want writing this kind of legislation. Among other things, she thinks it's the ISPs' job to police content, and voted to kill the Broadband Privacy Rule.
In fact, Blackburn's legislation would deal a "fatal blow" to net neutrality, argues Evan Greer, campaign director at the nonprofit Fight for the Future, writing in Newsweek: Already one of Big Cable's best friends in Congress, Marsha Blackburn, who has taken more than $600,000 from the industry, is pushing for legislation that would permanently undermine the FCC's ability to enforce open internet protections. This bait and switch has been in the works for months. The telecom lobby's end game is to use the crisis they've created to ram through legislation that's branded as a compromise but amounts to a fatal blow to net neutrality... We don't need legislation that's been watered down with kool-aid.
A better solution, he suggests, is pushing Congress to overrule the FCC with a Congressional Resolution of Disapproval.

Comments

News flash, that's how it works

[bkmoore]

Already one of Big Cable's best friends in Congress, Marsha Blackburn, who has taken more than $600,000 from the industry, is pushing for legislation....

That's how our political system works. You need bribes, -cough- I mean campaign contributions, to get elected. Once elected, you have to do what your donors want you to do, even if it's at odds with the best interest of your constituents or the well being of the country. Conversely, if you're a special interest group and want to enact your agenda, you need to bribe, I mean make enough campaign contributions, to get your agenda passed into law. Who's bribing politicians on the behalf of net- neutrality???

Both parties are doing this, so this isn't a Republican or Democratic thing.

Re:News flash, that's how it works

[Anonymous Coward]

Both parties are doing this, so this isn't a Republican or Democratic thing.

Funny that only one party seems to be trying to kill NN. And healthcare. And a host of other issues that affect people's lives in dramatic ways. But they're both the same, surely.

Re:News flash, that's how it works

[Anonymous Coward]

Bad acts are always a both party thing unless it's a Democratic thing. But I have still yet to figure out why most of the things happening now are mainly being done by the ruling Republican party and it is still the fault of Democrats.

Not that I care mind you, but I just love to see how people convince themselves their politics are correct.

Re:News flash, that's how it works

[Anonymous Coward]

Bad acts are always a both party thing unless it's a Democratic thing. But I have still yet to figure out why most of the things happening now are mainly being done by the ruling Republican party and it is still the fault of Democrats.

Not that I care mind you, but I just love to see how people convince themselves their politics are correct.

It's easy. Republicans screamed about Obama's birth certificate for 8 years, but it's Hillary's fault. Republicans chose an unrepentant birther whose tendency towards hysterical tirades and corruption is well known, but it's Hillary's fault. Republicans vote dozens of times to repeal the ACA, but it's Hillary's fault. Trump buddies up to Russia, and denies their perfidy, but it's Hillary's fault.

Transparent as glass, everything is always and ever will be Hillary's fault. Even the American Civil War. Hillary's fault.

Re:News flash, that's how it works

[liquid_schwartz]

Both parties are working to aid their people. Democrats are promoting NN (for the poor people) and Republicans are promoting No Limits Capitalism (for the rich people).

Meanwhile the middle class continues to fade away. Neither party helps the middle class, both parties see the middle class as something to be milked and woo'd.

Re:News flash, that's how it works

[MillionthMonkey]

This behavior is required by law. A long time ago the Supreme Court altered corporate behavior forever with a ruling that corporations have a duty to their stockholders only, and aside from taxes, absolutely no responsibility to the community at large. They also recently decided that politicians have a duty to represent their supporters, not their constituents. Then they established that a corporate person has a Constitutional right to free speech, with a decision that redefined political bribery out of existence- at this point corruption can't be prosecuted unless someone can find a legal document where both parties agree to a quid pro quo.

This is what happens when you use a few narrow issues like abortion and guns as litmus tests for judgeships. Since judges have lifetime appointments, Trump has wisely chosen to nominate Hitler Youth who apparently haven't even seen a single episode of Law and Order, and he is rapidly filling all the seats that Congress left empty during the Obama administration.

Re:News flash, that's how it works

[drinkypoo]

This behavior is required by law. A long time ago the Supreme Court altered corporate behavior forever with a ruling that corporations have a duty to their stockholders only, and aside from taxes, absolutely no responsibility to the community at large.

One thing, however, does not lead to the other. Corporations have a duty to follow their charter. If the charter includes a commitment to community service, then the investors know what they're getting into when they put their money into the company, and the corporation can do all the good deeds it likes. Corporations are generally designed first and foremost to maximize shareholder value, however, and this is reflected in their charters.

Don't make excuses for corporate evil. The decision to write a charter which places shareholder value first is just that, a decision. It is a willful choice which we must not excuse.

Re:News flash, that's how it works

[Solandri]

Historically, contributions by the communications industry has favored Democrats (every year since 1990, except '98 when they were equal). 3/4 of the top recipients are Democrats. That's even more incredible when you consider that the party in power usually gets more lobbying contributions. The Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, and the Democrats are still receiving more lobbying money from the communications industry. (You can drill down to the cable or telecom subsets if you want. The general trend is still the same - Democrats receive more lobbying dollars from these industries. Telephone utilities are one of the few subsets whose lobbying contributions consistently favor Republicans.)

The notion that Republicans are in the pockets of corporations in these industries while Democrats are not doesn't correlate to the lobbying money trail, suggesting that it's a narrative that's been manufactured by the media (i.e. fake news). The same thing happened with science funding during Bush 2's term. The media so badly misportrayed his science policies (excessively focusing on killing the Superconducting Super Collider and his ban on fetal stem cell research) that most of the public still think his administration was anti-science. Ask yourself - based on what you heard on the news, do you think Bush was pro- or anti-science funding? In fact his administration enacted the biggest increase in Federal science R&D funding since Bush 1 and the 1960s space race.

You can even see when this started to happen. Up until 2000, contributions by the print, publishing, and newspaper industries only slightly favored Democrats. But from 2000 onwards, it's skewed to wildly favor Democrats, by about a 5:1 margin today. Around 2000, the media stopped trying to remain unbiased, and skewed unabashedly towards the left. (My guess would be the appearance of Fox News favoring the Right meant the rest of the media felt they no longer had to try to restrain their bias favoring the Left.)

Health care is more of a mixed bag.

Don't believe everything the media spoon-feeds you just because it confirms your pre-existing biases. Do your own research to see where the money is flowing (to and from). The Open Secrets website is a great tool that's organized to be very easy to use.

Re:News flash, that's how it works

[quantaman]

Both parties are doing this, so this isn't a Republican or Democratic thing.

Both do it, but both don't do it to remotely equal extents.

Democrats are generally a bit more supportive than their base of strong IP laws, that's probably because of donors in Hollywood.

But Democrats also support financial regulations that their base likes but their donors hate.

Meanwhile the GOP just enacted a massive tax reform that is almost purely a handout to their donors. And a lot of the Trump department appointees are simply industry representatives being asked to regulate themselves.

Basically the Democratic legislators represent their voters and are nudged by their donors, the GOP represents their donors and is nudged by their voters.

Re:News flash, that's how it works

[pots]

Historically, contributions by the communications industry [opensecrets.org] has favored Democrats

Did you look at your link? They're grouping communications and electronics together. If you pick out just the communications companies - AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, Cox - all favor Republicans. Be careful about how you use the term "fake news," it doesn't mean what you think it means.

Most criticism of Bush 2's science record was climate change, the stem cell business, etc. He also supported that "teach the controversy" BS, in schools. These are things for which his record is demonstrably poor. Spending more money in other areas does make up for suppressing research.

What your link tells me about print industry lobbying, is that the print industry doesn't spend money on lobbying. Compare to your link for communications lobbying - there's an order of magnitude difference there. (I was going to offer an alternative theory to your one about Fox News, but it doesn't seem necessary...)

Given that the person you were replying to was only claiming that the two parties are not the same, this seems to be born out by your links.

Paid prioritization.

[Monster_user]

So the new rules are "paid prioritization". https://arstechnica.com/tech-p...

And the concern is how to protect websites from being "down voted" out of existence, in respect to QoS priority, etc.

My concern is what is this going to do to VoIP providers. Aside from VoIP/SIP providers, I don't know what is latency sensitive. I actually don't give a rooty toot toot if a Facebook page takes a few seconds longer to load, or a video stream has to buffer a little longer before playing (as long as it doesn't buffer during the stream). VoIP prioritization, and video game lag are about the only things that concern me.

Re:Paid prioritization.

[currently_awake]

If you use your ISP provided VOIP and Video streeming service then you get priortized. Competing services will be slowed. Obviously they will charge extra for these premium services, no free U-Tube here.

Something Stinks about this Article

[SmaryJerry]

Either a new bill is fair and includes Net Neutrality or it isn't. That doesn't mean all bills on the subject will be horrible. I don't get the give up mentality by this writer. The point is to make a law about Net Neutrality so we don't have votes made of 5 people making important decisions, but congress. Hell you could make it an amendment to the constitution, it might be that important.