Ajit Pai Loses in Court -- Judges Overturn Gutting of Tribal Broadband Program (arstechnica.com)
A federal appeals court has overturned Ajit Pai's attempt to take broadband subsidies away from tribal residents. From a report: The Pai-led Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 in November 2017 to make it much harder for tribal residents to obtain a $25-per-month Lifeline subsidy that reduces the cost of Internet or phone service. The change didn't take effect because in August 2018, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit stayed the FCC decision pending appeal. The same court followed that up on Friday last week with a ruling that reversed the FCC decision and remanded the matter back to the commission for a new rule-making proceeding. [...] The Pai FCC's 2017 decision would have limited the $25 subsidy to "facilities-based" carriers -- those that build their own networks -- making it impossible for tribal residents to use the $25 subsidy to buy telecom service from resellers. The move would have dramatically limited tribal residents' options for purchasing subsidized service, but the FCC claimed it was necessary in order to encourage carriers to build their own networks.
This isn't about Republicans, but the Trump Administration seems to be filled with people who's default stance is about making rules that tries to be cruel to people.
I am unsure if it is because they are just so out of touch with reality and the "Rich Guy" solution of the problem seems so obvious, that they just don't understand how a lot of people just do not have the upfront money, or personal power to follow these solutions.
Or they just want to be actively cruel to anyone who just doesn't fully support and love them.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Slashdot headlines never read, "Barack Obama's pen-and-phone lost 9-0 in the Supreme Court (again!)"
Slashdot is now a partisan hack fake-news site?
There's a harmful $25 to keep them right where they are.
But it's OK to hand billion dollar subsidies directly to the crack-whore telecoms?
Have gnu, will travel.
It's designed to discourage competitors to the telecoms. Nothing is needed to encourage build-out, they've been given billions to build out and pocketed it. They were also given massive tax cuts which were to build out. Instead they've used the funds to re-organize and lay off workers.
Big Tech
Big Broadband
Big Telco
Big Media
Big Pharma
Big Oil
Big Tobacco
These industries are not our friends.
You are correct. You rarely see a fair representation of conservative positions or an honest one of liberal positions for that matter. Both are spun all to hell and very few people actually understand the underlying issues. But you'd do well to take BOTH with a heavy grain of salt, if you assume both are shady and self-serving with justifications to never be the real motive and both real pro's and con's for normal people (including the 1% but not the 0.01%) to be neutral side-effect everything makes more sense.
"Do you really think the reason for this action from Pai/FCC was to "be cruel to people"? Did you actually read their reasoning for why they did this?"
Well which do you want to talk about the reason they did it or the justification they used to support their actions?
The civil war is a great example. The reason for doing it was to centralize federal power particularly for the Presidency both direct and financial. The justification was freeing slaves.
In this case the reason for the action is that Pai is a puppet for major telecom/broadband interests and this move cuts out competition. Reduced competition isn't exactly a free market cornerstone. Their justification was an argument that more money to the telco would mean increasing build-out. It all falls down when you realize no company the size of a telco is one company or one division of a company. The division which builds out infrastructure charges the division that offers service on those lines. They are required to sell services to third parties as well, in a perfect world, at the same rates (though they play shenanigans on this part).
So either there are enough people wanting the service to make it good business for the infrastructure division to take on the cost of building out or not but their consideration includes all their clients whether internal or external since both are buying services from their division.
That has nothing to do with all the subsidy money going to their internal service, that just benefits mother telco in the form of slurping up all the government subsidy money. It doesn't go back into build-outs anymore than the massive tax cuts they've received has. The division of the telco that does infrastructure build-out won't see either one and they won't build out unless business needs dictate it no matter how much you give mother telco. More likely it will go to fund Pai as a paid consultant after his FCC term and to pay for speaking engagements for him and others like McConnell. Then it will go to bonuses and dividends because telcos still pay dividends.
"Ajit Pai, he strikes me as the kind of person who does evil or not based on his boss"
Agreed but his real boss isn't Trump. McConnell wouldn't be it either. His real boss is the Telcos he came from. After he leaves his position he'll get his reward in the form of paid speaking engagements and very lucrative consultant or lobbyist position from those same Telcos. And you can quite certain those same Telcos are the ones who pulled McConnell's strings to get his name put on Obama's desk for a recommendation. McConnell probably traded some favor to Obama or Obama's staff to get it done.
Like it or not that is how politics work in this country. Evil isn't the right word. By and large the people at the top aren't evil, they are neutral to the good or ill effects. Even if they didn't start that way I can spin just about anything as good or evil and make a solid argument. Washington is filled with spin masters to put me to shame. Imagine how easy it is to self-justify your actions when surrounded by people making solid and reasoned arguments for their benefits? Nothing is that simple, everything helps some groups and hurts others without any universal good answers that don't stomp on good people.
So whether they start there or not, all of these people effectively end as sociopaths and the corporations start that way. The people they hurt are collateral damage and the people they help are incidental good.
The civil war freed the slaves, incidental good. But the sociopath at the top was centralizing the power of the federal government, which he was practically a dictator of. If you think otherwise you are extremely naive. The only ones you'll find who genuinely fought for or against human freedom on the basis of morality are the common people and soldiers up to and including middle-to-upper ranks.
LOL
Fuck you, Ajit Pai, you crooked little scumbag. My only regret is that you won't be prosecuted for this and all your other sleazy crimes.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...