Lawmakers Urge FCC to Move Forward on Net Neutrality

August 17, 2010 -

Four lawmakers have written to the Federal Communications Commission this week urging it to act on the issue of net neutrality regulation - inspired by Google's and Verizon's proposal last week. All four are Democrats who serve on the House Energy and Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet. The group wrote to the FCC asking it to "take action to preserve the free, open nature of the Internet".

The letter goes on to point out that the Google-Verizon proposal might make "certain Internet content" "prioritized," which they say is a grave threat to the "principles of net neutrality." The group, lead by Ed Markey (D - MA), includes Anna Eshoo (D - CA), Mike Doyle (D - PA), and Jay Inslee (D - WA).

Full statements below:

Rep. Markey said: "No private interest should be permitted to carve up the Internet to suit its own purposes. The open Internet has been an innovation engine that has helped power our economy, and fiber-optic fast lanes or tiers that slow down certain content would dim the future of the Internet to the detriment of consumers, competition, job creation and the free-flow of ideas. In our letter, we express our strong support for Chariman Genachowski’s 'Third Way' proposal to bring the benefits of broadband to all Americans and encourage the FCC to move forward to preserve the free, open nature of the Internet."

Rep. Eshoo said: "In my Silicon Valley district there are people building the next generation of internet breakthroughs. We cannot undermine their success by 'cable-izing' the Internet. That’s why my colleagues and I remain steadfast in our commitment to net neutrality. The reactions to the legislative proposal from Google and Verizon demonstrate that it is not nearly strong enough to meet this standard. This letter is a clear statement of the principles that we believe are necessary to preserve openness on the Internet to allow the kind of innovation and growth that is the hallmark of today’s Internet. I remain optimistic that Chairman Genachowski will be able to find a path forward that honors these principles."

Rep. Inslee said: "Americans online experience shouldn't be dictated by corporate CEO's. Innovation and creativity online have given rise to millions of jobs and tremendous economic growth, in large part because individual consumers have been free to access what they want. The principles we have set forth in this letter coincide with that fact. Net neutrality is not about imposing a new set of rules, net neutrality is about preserving the open Internet and empowering consumers and small businesses to bring the next generation of entrepreneurial drive to the world wide web."

Rep. Doyle said: "The power of the Internet comes from the ability of everyone to find anything anywhere – or to put anything on it for the world to see. The internet’s value comes from the fact that it’s not like any other communications platform before it. I am concerned that the proposal put forward by Google and Verizon could have the effect of choking off much of the most important, creative, and valuable contributions the Internet can make to the idea-driven economy of the 21st century. At a time when research shows that low-income Americans are the fastest-growing users of the mobile web, it would be short-sighted to wall-off those users from the open internet and all of its benefits. My constituents know the benefit of an open Internet and they’ve urged me to press the FCC to address this issue quickly. That’s why I signed this letter to the Chairman Genachowski urging him to continue to work to preserve those essential qualities of the Internet."

Source: markey.house.gov


Comments

Re: Lawmakers Urge FCC to Move Forward on Net Neutrality

Well, gee...  Maybe next time Obama wants to do something, y'all shouldn't FIGHT HIM ON IT!!!  Seriously!  Everyone's whining that he doesn't do anything, but whenever he tries, everybody fights him on it!  What is the bloody problem with America?!  No wonder we're so messed up!

Re: Lawmakers Urge FCC to Move Forward on Net Neutrality

They want Obama to fail, hwoever then the GOP is in office they don't do shit.

Re: Lawmakers Urge FCC to Move Forward on Net Neutrality

Yes they do! They give big business and the wealthy tax breaks (to stimulate the economy - Regonomics - "Trickledown" - or, as Bush Sr. called it, "Voodoo Economics"). Oh, and invade other countries. Of course, that's just *my* opinion.

Democrats, on the other hand, they just waffle.

But when you get butt-hurt Republicans and waffling Democrats together? THEN you get a *real* doozy! One side doing everything they can to make the other side fail - even if it hurts the country - because, well...Democrats are in power and we can't have THEM seen as accomplishing anything good. And the other side? They get all weak-kneed and whiney about how the other side won't play with them. Instead of just realizing it's a lost cause and actually growing a pair. *sigh*

Re: Lawmakers Urge FCC to Move Forward on Net Neutrality

I DISAGREE!

Unless, you know, you don't like that, in which case I'm willing to reconsider.

Re: Lawmakers Urge FCC to Move Forward on Net Neutrality

Wait a sec.

First we have lawmakers whining because the FCC wants to do something, and that it should be up to lawmakers instead.

Then we have lawmakers demanding the FCC do something rather than, gasp, legislate.

Four more idiots that need to be voted out of office for not bothering to do their jobs.

Re: Lawmakers Urge FCC to Move Forward on Net Neutrality

They've been trying to legislate net neutrality for years -- remember the "series of tubes" speech?  Yeah, the guy who made that has been out of office for 2 years and died last week; that's how long this has been deadlocked.

I favor a legislative solution, too -- and, for that matter, a Democratic Party that can actually GET SHIT DONE -- but it's a little more complicated than "Why don't they just make a law?"

Re: Lawmakers Urge FCC to Move Forward on Net Neutrality

They can't get anything done with all the people saying no no no no.

Re: Lawmakers Urge FCC to Move Forward on Net Neutrality

Well, my Ted Stevens reference notwithstanding, this article isn't about the Senate, it's about the House, where there's no filibuster.  If the Democrats can't pass net neutrality in the House, it's because other Democrats are voting against it. 

But since you mention the Republican obstructionism in the Senate?  The GOP never had a 58-seat majority during the Bush Administration; that didn't seem to stop THEM from getting THEIR agenda passed.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Did Microsoft pay too much ($2.5 billion) for Minecraft developer Mojang?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Technogeek"It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so." I'd say you're certainly obligated to call them out when you see it happening.09/20/2014 - 5:17pm
SleakerNow if you disagree with anything in my last 2 posts then we obviously have a difference in world view, and wont come to any sort of agreement. I'm fine with that, maybe some people aren't?09/20/2014 - 5:09pm
SleakerIt also doesn't mean that just because a news outlet says that Gamers are the problem and you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem. It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so.09/20/2014 - 4:59pm
SleakerJust to re-iterate: People getting harassed is wrong. Just because someone is harassed by so called 'gamers' doesn't mean that all gamers are bad. nor does it mean that you need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers.09/20/2014 - 4:56pm
SleakerAnd furthermore just because someone doesn't 'crusade against the evil' that doesn't make them the problem. You can have discussion with those around you. There's a thing called sphere of influence.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
Sleaker@Conster - one person getting harassed is a 'problem' only so far as the harassee's are doing it. Just because a select few people choose to act like this doesn't make it widespread. Nor does it immediately make everyone responsible to put an end to it.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
james_fudgeno worries09/20/2014 - 4:15pm
TechnogeekI misread james' comment as "we can't have a debate without threatening" there at first. Actually wound up posting a shout about death threats and "kill yourself" not technically being the same thing before I realized.09/20/2014 - 3:59pm
james_fudgeDon't hit me *cowers behind Andrew*09/20/2014 - 3:20pm
ConsterYou take that back right now, james, or else. *shakes fist menacingly*09/20/2014 - 3:00pm
james_fudgeOur community is awesome. We can have a debate without threatening to kill each other.09/20/2014 - 2:50pm
Andrew EisenNo one's crossed a line but I just want to remind you all to keep discussions civil.09/20/2014 - 1:54pm
Craig R.tldr: I'm a gamer, and imo those who support GamerGate should feel free to take a flying leap off a cliff.09/20/2014 - 1:27pm
Craig R.Not only that, I'm pretty sure that if actual studies were done, you'd still deny them, Sleaker. After all, it's not what you'd want to hear to support your rose-colored view of GamerGate.09/20/2014 - 1:18pm
Craig R.There IS an issue. Nor do we need a study to show that if you deny it then you're part of the problem.09/20/2014 - 1:17pm
Sleakersimply oust people that do harass others.09/20/2014 - 11:34am
Sleaker@Conster - I can say the same thing if you think there's been more than a handful. Until there's an actual study on rates no one can claim to know how widespread the incidence of harassment is. Thus the best we can do is 'there might be an issue' and...09/20/2014 - 11:33am
ConsterSleaker: if you think there's only been "a handful of" incidents, you have your head stuck *somewhere* - I'm assuming it's sand.09/20/2014 - 5:38am
prh99Most of it's agitprop clickbait anyway.09/20/2014 - 5:27am
prh99A good reason to stop reading reguardless of view pointhttp://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/apr/12/news-is-bad-rolf-dobelli.09/20/2014 - 5:22am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician