Slashdot Mirror
Net Neutrality Repeal Will Get a Senate Vote In the Spring, Democrats Say (arstechnica.com)
Congressional Democrats today introduced legislation that would prevent the repeal of net neutrality rules, but they still need more support from Republicans in order to pass the measure. According to Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), they will force a vote on the Senate version of the resolution sometime this spring. Ars Technica reports: Democrats have been promising to introduce a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution ever since the Federal Communications Commission voted to repeal its net neutrality rules in December. But lawmakers had to wait for the FCC's repeal order to be published in the Federal Register, which only happened last week. The CRA resolution would nullify the FCC's repeal order, allowing net neutrality rules that were passed in 2015 to remain in place. The resolution has public support from 50 out of 100 senators (all Democrats, all Independents, and one Republican), putting it one vote shy of passage in the Senate.
"The grassroots movement to reinstate net neutrality is growing by the day, and we will get that one more vote needed to pass my CRA resolution," Markey said. "I urge my Republican colleagues to join the overwhelming majority of Americans who support a free and open Internet. The Internet is for all -- the students, teachers, innovators, hard-working families, small businesses, and activists, not just Verizon, Charter, AT&T, and Comcast and corporate interests."
"The grassroots movement to reinstate net neutrality is growing by the day, and we will get that one more vote needed to pass my CRA resolution," Markey said. "I urge my Republican colleagues to join the overwhelming majority of Americans who support a free and open Internet. The Internet is for all -- the students, teachers, innovators, hard-working families, small businesses, and activists, not just Verizon, Charter, AT&T, and Comcast and corporate interests."
... is that anything done through it can be undone through it.
I have a phone and a pen? Remember?
Well, that has limitations and the first of those is that the next guy that comes along with a phone and a pen can reverse it.
No substitute for going through the proper legislative process.
Here people will say "its slow"... its faster than the alternatives because the alternatives won't work. The way that takes a long time but works when compared against the way that is fast and fails... Do it the right way.
Get the votes and pass your law.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
This should be more evidence that there are real and substantial differences between the Democratic and Republican parties. When people say that the two major parties are just the same, this sort of thing shows that isn't the case. There are real differences between the major political parties. This isn't the only example: on both having minimal amounts of gun control, and on climate change, there are real and substantial differences between the parties as they currently stand. And who one votes for and supports can make a real difference.
Happy to help - unlike what you've been told, large mega-corporations generally support Democrats these days (see donations to Hillary, Obama, etc.). So the network neutrality rules were written pretty much by some of the larger ISP's to block pesky competitors from getting too far.
So the Republicans and Democrats both know that the regulations really do not mean much on their own, but represent a symbolic stand.
What that means in practice is that Republicans then will generally be OK with repeal, because it doesn't affect major Republican donors, and it kind of goes along with the popular message of reducing regulation.
Meanwhile the Democrats detest Trump, and as noted are backed by large corporations which is why they are fighting tooth and nail to keep every regulation possible, including especially the network neutrality legislation...
Under no circumstance should you take this as any party trying to do anything that would benefit you, it's all just a large game where we are not even the pawns, we are crumbs in the box the game came in to be emptied into the bin if we do anything to make our betters notice us.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The CRA doesn't need the approval of the House of Representatives.
Ummm... Yes, it does.
A CRA is basically a joint resolution of both houses of congress so it does have to pass both the House and Senate within 60 days of the regulation change it seeks to reverse. It must also be signed by the president or a veto overridden by a 2/3rds vote.
See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
However, It makes me wonder if the CRA law would actually apply here. The CRA law was obviously not written with the intent to stop a regulation from being withdrawn although I don't see that use being specifically excepted by the text. I'm guessing that should this CRA actually be enacted (a snowballs chance I know) it would be challenged in court to test this.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
NN will not solve the real issue. The REAL issue is that the GOP continues to grant Monopolies to companies like Comcast and continue to support them.
Citation please? When and where did "{Republicans} grant Monopolies to {snip} Comcast"?
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Cliffs notes version:
The FCC originally tried to regulate network neutrality by declaring high speed internet to be under the same regulatory regime as cable television. This didn't work out for a variety of reasons. So the FCC switched to classify high speed internet as a phone service. This suited large ISPs well, but small ISPs find it difficult to comply with the more arcane regulations that come with, and there are some other less visible side effects as well.
So there are actually have three camps:
1. Those who don't want the government to regulate high speed internet at all
2. Those who want the government to enforce network neutrality, but don't think that classifying it as a phone service is the right way to do it
3. Those who want to regulate network neutrality as a phone service.
I find it interesting, and somewhat telling, that the Democrats are passing a law to re-instate the Title II network neutrality regulation, instead of a crafting a bill that would allow the FCC to regulate *only* high speed internet as a distinct service from telephone.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
Yes net neutrality is very important but the repeal, along with the erosion of rights and the rising inequality are symptoms of a much larger problem - unlimited and often secret money in politics. Our representives don't represent anyone but thier large donors, that is why thinks like universal background checks have 97% approval rating (republican and democrat and even gun owners agree) but we get nowhere. It's why companies are allowed monopolies, like ISPs, and in the case where there are two in a city they collude to create monopolies anyway and aren't held accountable. It's why the USA pays nearly double the healthcare costs of any other nation and yet our lifespan is 31st in the world, 5 spots lower than Slovenia. It's why corporations are people with more rights than actual humans. It's why people say democrats and republicans are the same (because in this respect they now are).
We are well and truly fucked if we don't get the money out. If you take corporate dough, you gotta go.