House Passes Amendment to Defund FCC Net Neutrality Rules

February 18, 2011 -

The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday passed an amendment that essentially halts the use of any funding by the Federal Communications Commission to implement the Net Neutrality rules order it approved in December of 2010.

The amendment was approved by a 244-181 vote. The amendment was sponsored by Energy and Commerce Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore), and tacked on to legislation to fund government agencies for the rest of fiscal year 2011.

"If left unchallenged, this claim of authority would allow the FCC to regulate any matter it discussed in the national broadband plan," Walden said.

If this amendment fails, Republicans in the House and the Senate will push a "resolution of disapproval" under the Congressional Review Act. This gives lawmakers a limited amount of time to try to block the FCC's net-neutrality rules.

President Obama has threatened to veto the spending measure if it cuts too deeply into government programs, and supports the net neutrality order.

Source: National Journal


Comments

Re: House Passes Amendment to Defund FCC Net Neutrality ...

"The amendment was approved by a 244-181 vote."

Let's call this what it is: Republicans simply voting to undo anything that Obama and the Democrats have done over the last couple of years.

They may claim it's under the guise of 'less regulation, less government', but it's simply because they didn't approve of it themselves.

Re: House Passes Amendment to Defund FCC Net Neutrality ...

The one time FCC does something decent for the public and they get crap for it. 

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: House Passes Amendment to Defund FCC Net Neutrality ...

i'm still curious how an organization like the FCC even exists to a degree.

in a country that preaches free speach and no censorship (and how such things are illegal), it sure is LOADED to the rim with. though unlike in other countries that wear their censorships on their shoulders, its all hidden under a table cloth so the people don't know they've been had.

then again, thats what happens when a buncha people are given power to "translate" old texts rather than just follow them.... double meaning there if ya hadn't cought it :)

 

Re: House Passes Amendment to Defund FCC Net Neutrality ...

The FCC is primarily a regulatory agency, not a censorship bureau. They have rules about "indecency" on the mediums they oversee, but that has long been backed but the general populace.

An "organization like the FCC" is necessary in a world where the means of communication are limited (whether by spectrum or infrastructure). Otherwise, companies would be climbing over each other trying to stake out as much wireless spectrum as they could get to first, and there would be nothing to ensure the public good was maintained. It is the same for landline communications. Cities are not going to let any company that wants a piece of the market put up their own set of lines to every house. Without regulatory oversight to force things like common carrier status, whoever put the lines up first wins, forever.

This is the problem that everyone talking about "free market" preventing broadband abuses completely ignores. There is not, and can not, be a true free market in broadband, because a truly free market requires barriers to entry that are low enough for new firms to enter the market when existing firms begin pushing prices higher than the market will bear. Broadband has a nearly insurmountable barrier to entry, because spectrum is finite, infrastructure that municipalities will allow is finite, and these finite resources are largely used by the existing firms.

That is the purpose of "organization[s] like the FCC". Whether they are effectively serving their purpose is another question altogether.

Re: House Passes Amendment to Defund FCC Net Neutrality ...

i understand that, but they "regulate" based on the highest bidder, as well as tell ME what i can/can't watch/see/say.

public good should be a public issue, not a government funded organization guaranteed to sellout at the first sign someONE was offended by something mundane and everyday (such as basic cuss words like "crap")

i don't mind them dealing with the companies and regulating their stuff, but the censorship end, which is the more prominantly seen, is what irks me to the bone. that and they aid in pushing this "political correctness" bull.

Re: House Passes Amendment to Defund FCC Net Neutrality ...

Net Neutrality has absolutely nothing to do with censoring, and anybody who tells you it does is a liar or misinformed.

What Net Neutrality is meant to do is keep the people who own the lines from giving preferential treatment to different content providers.

Re: House Passes Amendment to Defund FCC Net Neutrality ...

Well, there are those who feel that once they have that amount of oversight on the network, they'll try to impose the same regulatory censorship they have on traditional broadcast media, on the internet. I don't believe it myself as it would be an impossible undertaking, but some do.

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: House Passes Amendment to Defund FCC Net Neutrality ...

Wow, petty much?

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenIn my head I'm swapping out Aykroyd with McCarthy and I'm not feeling outraged at all.06/30/2015 - 3:34pm
Andrew EisenOkay. Why?06/30/2015 - 3:30pm
Goth_SkunkI predict there would be outrage from feminists.06/30/2015 - 3:29pm
Andrew EisenThen I imagine the reaction would be what I imagined it would be a few minutes ago.06/30/2015 - 3:28pm
Goth_SkunkFor the sake of argument, assume the tone, context, and content mirror the same scene from the 1984 film, just with a gender role reversal. For context, here's the scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43wE6j_0Bc806/30/2015 - 3:26pm
Andrew EisenOf course, it all depends on the scene itself, the preceding scenes and the subsequent scenes.06/30/2015 - 3:23pm
Andrew EisenI imagine the reaction ("well, that's an odd scene that maybe feels a bit out of place") would be the same along with a heavier helping of "Oh, come on! Do we REALLY need to repeat scenes from the original film? Do something new!"06/30/2015 - 3:23pm
Goth_SkunkI propose: If, out of respect to the original film, something similar happens in the all-female version (male ghost), would the reaction be the same as it was in 1984?06/30/2015 - 3:19pm
Goth_SkunkI just had a thought: Fans of the original Ghostbusters film should recall a short scene in the film where it is heavily implied that Ray Stantz has sexual intercourse with a female ghost during a montage. In fact, it's technically rape.06/30/2015 - 3:18pm
Andrew EisenYou're assumption would be correct. The costumes are indeed for the film in production and not the one that the Sony emails showed was being considered and we have since heard nothing about.06/30/2015 - 3:16pm
Goth_SkunkOn the basis on chronology, I assume the aforementioned costumes and prop designs are for the female-led team.06/30/2015 - 3:14pm
Goth_SkunkJust asking out of curiosity, because while the all-female ghostbusters film will be out within a year, there is actually a male one being considered, too: http://ow.ly/P0AR706/30/2015 - 3:13pm
Andrew Eisen(There's only one Ghostbusters movie in production right now.)06/30/2015 - 3:07pm
Andrew EisenI'd say the fact that you can't tell is a positive sign!06/30/2015 - 3:06pm
Andrew EisenDoes it matter?06/30/2015 - 3:04pm
Goth_SkunkAnd now, to get back on target, these uniform and proton pack designs, are they for the female ghostbusters? Or the male ones?06/30/2015 - 3:02pm
Goth_Skunkabout GG is to be either shouted down, mischaracterized, or mocked. But, as James so eloquently put it, I am a GP member first, and a GG supporter second.06/30/2015 - 2:59pm
Goth_Skunkan anti-GG echo chamber with the majority of its users firmly entrenched in their belief that GG has no place in the culture, period. With that firm a mindset, there's little point to registering on the site when the likely response to speaking positively06/30/2015 - 2:59pm
Goth_Skunk@Manta: No, Gamergate is not rife with bigots and misogynists. Additionally, nothing excuses the behaviour by members of games press towards people they don't like, either. There is a lack of GG presence here because this site is still considered to be06/30/2015 - 2:57pm
Goth_SkunkWell I din't really have anywhere else to post it! Lord knows GP would not have posted a story about the Breitbart article. I'm genuinely sorry that I filled up so much space in the shoutbox, but I honestly had no other relevant place to put it.06/30/2015 - 2:53pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician