Rep. Greg Walden Sets Feb. 16 Hearing With FCC

February 11, 2011 -

Addressing the Ripon Society earlier this week, Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) outlined his priorities as the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology this year. One of the biggest priorities for Walden is to take the FCC to task for its recent net neutrality rules. Many republicans see the new rules as an over-reach on the part of the FCC. Democrats think the rules are too weak.

"Look, whether you’re for it or against it," Walden said. "I don’t believe the FCC had the authority to do it."

Walden thinks that the FCC frequently oversteps its boundaries and needs some reform. That reform will come from congressional oversight. Walden said that Republicans plan to offer a "resolution of disapproval" and promised to hold hearings on "this issue and others" related to the FCC.

Other commissions will be considered, Walden added.

Watch the YouTube video to the left. All five FCC commissioners, including Chairman Julius Genachowski, will testify February 16 before Congress.

Source: Washington Post


Comments

Re: Rep. Greg Walden Sets Feb. 16 Hearing With FCC

I actually happen to agree with the point Walden's making; I DO believe the FCC overreached and this is a bad precedent.

However, I don't think he's making the point SINCERELY; I think he's just latched on to a convenient argument to scuttle net neutrality.

The hell of it is that this shouldn't be a partisan issue; the real parties involved here are corporate interests and consumer rights.  But as usual, the media have played up their owners' and advertisers' interests, the Republicans have taken the lobbyists' side while pretending to advocate for a free market that doesn't actually exist, and the Democrats have taken the lobbyists' side while pretending to advocate consumers' rights through the passage of ineffective, loophole-filled "regulation".

Re: Rep. Greg Walden Sets Feb. 16 Hearing With FCC

the situation here seems to look ever more grim by the day.  sadly the best answer is one that these people arent even concidering (which is to allow competition at the local level).

Re: Rep. Greg Walden Sets Feb. 16 Hearing With FCC

Indeed.  Anti-neutrality advocates love to talk about free-market solutions -- I would LOVE to see some free-market solutions, but first you need a free market.

My ISP is Cox.  My service is terrible.  I've averaged about a daily 10-minute disconnection since November.  (And that's an average -- some days I won't be disconnected at all, but others it'll be every hour.)

Last week I looked at switching to Qwest, the only other broadband provider available at my location.

The highest speed Qwest offers here is 1/12 what I'm getting with Cox.

Doesn't sound like any free market *I* ever heard of.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenSleaker - Who the heck are you reading that is claiming "all gamers are bad," we "need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers," that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem," or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"?09/20/2014 - 9:44pm
erthwjimhe swatted more than just krebs, I think he swatted 30 people http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/teen-arrested-for-30-swattings-bomb-threats/09/20/2014 - 9:31pm
Craig R.Btw, the guy who swatted security expert Brian Krebs? He got picked up recently. It can be done.09/20/2014 - 8:55pm
Craig R.Such things are not done in a vacuum... hence why the 4chan and other logs show what fools you've all been, tricked into doing the trolls' work09/20/2014 - 8:49pm
Sleaker@Technogeek - How do you call someone out that anonymously calls in a SWAT team, or sends threats to people?09/20/2014 - 7:04pm
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
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician