Ajit Pai Gives Carriers Free Pass on Privacy Violations During FCC Shutdown (arstechnica.com)

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai refused to brief a Congressional committee Monday about mobile carriers' ability to share their subscribers' location data with third parties. From a report: House Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.) asked Pai for an "emergency briefing" to explain why the FCC "has yet to end wireless carriers' unauthorized disclosure of consumers' real-time location data," and for an update on "what actions the FCC has taken to address this issue to date." Pai's FCC could take action, despite the 2017 repeal of the commission's broadband privacy rules. Phone carriers are legally required to protect "Customer Proprietary Network Information [CPNI]," and the FCC's definition of CPNI includes location data.

[...] Pai did not agree with Pallone, it turns out. "Today, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai refused to brief Energy and Commerce Committee staff on the real-time tracking of cell phone location[s]," Pallone said in a statement yesterday. "In a phone conversation today, his staff asserted that these egregious actions are not a threat to the safety of human life or property that the FCC will address during the Trump shutdown."

Comments

How is this false?

[SuperKendall]

What the carriers are doing is horrible, no doubt. They should be stopped from selling location data to anyone, full stop.

But it's also not wrong to say - this is not threat to life. It's something that should be addressed when the government is re-opened.

If you are really really keen on this moving forward, add to the support to fund the wall already authorized by previous government bills, and move on.

Re:How is this false?

[Anonymous Coward]

But it's also not wrong to say - this is not threat to life. It's something that should be addressed when the government is re-opened.

It very well could be a threat to life. A cost of $300 is small change for a stalker or killer to track someone.

Re:How is this false?

[EndlessNameless]

If you are really really keen on this moving forward, add to the support to fund the wall already authorized by previous government bills, and move on.

Screw that. Pass a bill to restart the government, then debate the wall like adults. Holding the government hostage is not acceptable.

Plus... why wasn't this $5b funded when Republicans held both houses? Presumably, they could have worked with Trump earlier. They funded the DoD and a few other agencies through Oct 1 (start of the government's next fiscal year).

Stupid manufactured crisis.

Re:How is this false?

[Anonymous Coward]

trump rejected the *REPUBLICAN* budget bills late last year (ya know, when he had the fucking majority in both houses), ones that did include *some* 'wall' funding.

now he and mcconnell (who is doing trump's dirty work, not even letting a bill get a fucking vote to pass; which would force trump to veto.. which would cause a shitstorm, even among his sheeple), and their russian puppetmaster, are holding the entire country hostage for the 'full' amount (and it's not even the 'full' amount, but rather what some estimate would be barely five percent of the final cost after it's all built.. and most of which would end up in republican "donor" pockets). never mind the fact the fucking wall should be debated and funded independently of any other appropriations and legislation, which is what the sane members of congress want.

we do not negotiate with terrorists. trump is owned by russia. he is an enemy asset. HE IS A FUCKING TERRORIST. his allies in the senate are co-conspirators. DO NOT GIVE IN. EVER.

Re:How is this false?

[slack_justyb]

But it's also not wrong to say - this is not threat to life. It's something that should be addressed when the government is re-opened.

No arguments here. This totally can wait till the government is reopened.

If you are really really keen on this moving forward, add to the support to fund the wall already

No. That just sets a new standard that if the President refuses to sign a CR then eventually they will get their way. If we were literally talking about any other piece of legislation outside of a CR, maybe. But refusing to sign a CR (or in the Congressional sense vote for a CR) makes a person(s) look like an asshat. That applies to anyone and everyone regardless of political party.

authorized by previous government bills

Which if you might remember Trump was going to veto. First President I've known of who had exactly what they wanted and then threaten to veto it. Nah, he got his chance in March when the first pieces of his wall were addressed in the 2018 Omnibus spending. He shot it down, at this point he can kick rocks. The President wanted his cake and to eat it as well. I'll continue sending care packages to the local TSA agents and helping out friends who are furloughed till the 2020 election if need be. The President blew his one chance, he ought not get another. If you get three inches in anything government, you take that small bit and roll with it. The President looked at that small concession, wasn't happy it wasn't a "BIG WIN", and decided he'd pass and wait for something better. Doing that in anything government is call being a greedy fool.

Re:How is this false?

[Darinbob]

If Congress has the will, they could end this.

And don't forget that if the president has the will, he could end this too. When there is an impasse the fault never lies solely with one side.

America is dead

[Anonymous Coward]

It was a nice run but it's time to admit the experiment our founders put in motion all those years ago has failed. Undone by ignorance, complacency, and unfettered capitalism.

It was nice while it lasted. It's all over but the shouting now.

This is BAU for Pai

[rsilvergun]

he sides with the corporation over consumers almost every single time (he did some stuff for rural communities that you can chalk up to his party needing that voting block).

We all know this by now. The question I keep asking is, is this going to change how anybody votes in 2020? So far I haven't got a single answer of "yes". As such, I would expect him to continue this behavior since it seems to be working out just fine for him.

Re:Dereliction of duty in a treason adminitration

[sdinfoserv]

Bullshit. 2 months ago the GOP had the House , Senate and Oval Office - yet couldn't get a budget done. The GOP refused to give Lord Trumpkin his silly wall. He was ready to sign a budget deal without the wall till FoxNews made fun of him and he threw a tantrum... You like having a Commander if Chief taking marching orders from a propaganda organization? It doesn't bother you he idols are Putin and Kim Jong-un
And, BTW, this shutdown is the longest in history, so there's comparison with Obama or anyone else.
Trump is a spoiled brat petulant child in the White House.
People are sick and tired of politicians owned by corporations raiding the Treasury for corporate benefit... In 2018 the GOP increased the deficit by $1.06T dollars in massive corporate tax cut under the guise of "it would spur the economy"... Corporations took their new found windfall and used it on record setting stock buy backs... a $1T dollars worth (seen that number before?)
We have the GOP who continually scream about the deficit when there's a Democrat in charge, instantly toll armloads of payola on corporate oligarchy as soon as they get the chance.

Re:Dereliction of duty in a treason adminitration

[penandpaper]

Budgets in the senate require 60 votes. They needed democrat support then just as they need it now.

Re:Because Republicans are Bad!!!

[CohibaVancouver]

Note, though, that budget bills originate in the House, and Pelosi has not allowed a vote on a FY2019 budget. This is Pelosi's shutdown, not Trumps. He blusters, he threatens, whatever. Pelosi has the first move and she's stonewalling.

Incorrect, Anonymous Coward.

The House has passed numerous budgets. The Speaker of the Senate, Mitch McConnell, refuses to take any of them to the floor of the senate.

McConnell has the next move and he's stonewalling.