Congress Abandons Net Neutrality Bill
Friday 01 October 2010
by: Nadia Prupis, t r u t h o u t | Report
(Photo: Cian Ginty / Flickr)
House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-California) has given up for the year on an effort to create bipartisan legislation that would prevent broadband providers from interfering with traffic over their networks.
Waxman's net neutrality bill would have prohibited Internet, cable and phone companies from slowing or blocking traffic to legal web sites, protocols and services, which would otherwise allow them to play favorites with online content - and while Internet providers have claimed they would engage in neutral practice with or without a bill, cable company RCN was recently sued for "delaying or blocking" P2P protocols.
Click here to get Truthout stories like this one sent straight to your inbox, 365 days a year.
Although the bill would have benefited wireless companies, Waxman stated that his proposal couldn't garner enough support from House Republicans to advance any further in Congress. That gives the debate back over to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which has the ability to regulate wireless network providers by reclassifying them as Title II common carrier services - essentially equating them with cable and phone companies. That type of regulation would allow the FCC to impose traffic equality laws on all carriers, where under Waxman's proposal, wireless providers would have been exempt. Verizon, AT&T and wireless association CTIA have opposed the FCC's measures, while Google, Facebook and Skype, among various public interest groups, have strongly supported them.
"If our efforts to find bipartisan consensus fail, the FCC should move forward under Title II," said Waxman. "The bottom line is that we must protect the open Internet. If Congress can't act, the FCC must. This development is a loss for consumers."
During President Obama's election campaign, he promised to make net neutrality a top issue in his technology platform. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said in September 2009 that without net neutrality, "We could see the Internet's doors shut to entrepreneurs, the spirit of innovation stifled, a full and free flow of information compromised. If we wait too long to preserve a free and open Internet, it will be too late." Since Congress failed to pass the legislation Thursday, many public interest groups have begun to call on the FCC to make good on its promises.
Among the dissenting Republicans is Texas Rep. Joe Barton, the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Barton stated, "there is a widespread view that there is not sufficient time to ensure that Chairman Waxman's proposal will keep the Internet open without chilling innovation and job creation ... if the majority wants to work on a solution to continue a free and open Internet, let's consider the issue deliberately, rather than punting with a halfway measure two days before the end of Congress."
But Barton also emphasized his opposition to the potential FCC regulations, stating that the commission is "going down the wrong path ... it is not appropriate to give the FCC authority to regulate the Internet."
This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.
Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
That Waxman "has given up"
Fri, 10/01/2010 - 16:23 — Liced-christ (not verified)That Waxman "has given up" says it all. Isn't it "un"believable that with a President, Senate and House all in the rule of Democrats, this remains a non-confrontational, perhaps even politically pacifist, administration. And for one simple reason: Obama will not use the procedural maneuvers guaranteed to him in his position as executive chief. These democrats are so pathetic.
Terrible news. And Joe
Fri, 10/01/2010 - 18:14 — MG (not verified)Terrible news. And Joe Barton is an embarrassment to Texas. Who will regulate the internet, if not the FCC, Mr. Barton?
"Illegal Websites"??? That
Fri, 10/01/2010 - 19:36 — Bill O'Rights (not verified)"Illegal Websites"??? That this phrase is floating in this article without question is indicative of the mindless acceptance of government censorship and trampling of the First Amendment. The current administration is already associated with individuals who would use the power of law to censor it's critics (Cas Sunstein).
Are there 'illegal' newspapers in this country? What have we become?
Actually, the sad truth is
Fri, 10/01/2010 - 19:51 — Anonymous (not verified)Actually, the sad truth is that all it takes is 40 Republicans to block something like this. There is no magical "maneuver" Obama can make around that. More and more, it looks like a huge flaw in the System. Waxman has punted; I hope the FCC takes aggressive action on the matter.
Why is Barton still even on
Fri, 10/01/2010 - 21:24 — Power Struggle (not verified)Why is Barton still even on the House Energy and commerce committee? He should have been taken off the committee the minute he doubtlessly showed his true colors and apologized for BP, not to mention all his shares in oil which is a conflict of interest in itself.
Who are the folks who share
Fri, 10/01/2010 - 21:45 — Anonymous (not verified)Who are the folks who share Barton's "wide spread view" that keeping the internet free and unobstructed by corporate money grabbers will chill jobs creation and innovation? The chamber of commerce does not count.
Barton needs to explain how net neutrality can possibly stifle job creation and innovation. The only innovation might be in ways the giant corporations that he and the GOP serve is in their moneyed ability to eliminate the free flow of ideas and information between everyday citizens searching for information sources beyond the reach of corporate censorship.
I am grateful for Henry Waxman's efforts and would like to see him confront Barton and the GOP on these issues and force them to defend their stance in favor of ensuring the dominance of giant corporations in yet another important aspect of our lives. Rat them out into the open and force them to expose who, or rather what, they represent. Because it sure isn't the citizens of America.
@:51 The even sadder truth
Sat, 10/02/2010 - 10:14 — Liced-christ (not verified)@:51
The even sadder truth is that Obama has appointed REPUBLICANS over DEMOCRATS to key committee chairmanships, so please don't even try to let him off the hook. You've got a right wing Democrat in the Oval Office, a Republican wearing a Democrat's badge, moving this country ever more to the right.
Whatever goal you have in
Sat, 10/02/2010 - 11:26 — To the guy who calls himself "the even sadder truth" (not verified)Whatever goal you have in your head, no matter how much you go around stating weird crap like that it still won't get you anywhere people won't believe you. Whatever weird left wing extreme crap your trying to output is making you look like a weirdo, seriously. Mr Obama has a lot more to deal with now with republicans across the country being voted in and him trying to play Mr. Nice guy suddenly due to elections. We have a FAR LEFT wing LIBERAL in the office. Please try not to act out whatever alternate reality you have in your head. It's really annoying.
@16:26 You are completely
Sat, 10/02/2010 - 12:20 — Liced-christ (not verified)@16:26
You are completely out of touch with realty and a subscriber to Fox News. You must be a Tea Party (i.e. conservative right wing nutcase) supporter. No left wing liberal would have four neocon inspired wars going on, continue to torture Arab detainees, support the business community over public and worker affairs, appoint people like Summers, Geithner and Duncan to key administrative positions, appoint a conservative, right wing Republican to head a committee on Social Security, compromise womens 'reproductive rights in the health bill, continue to prosecute open gays in the military and so so many other things. Wake up
Anytime I read a post on the
Sat, 10/02/2010 - 13:48 — Anonymous (not verified)Anytime I read a post on the web and the writer starts with this Republicans/Democrats are the reason things are so screwed up, liberals/conservatives are to blame, left/right blah, blah, etc, I stop reading, figuring the writer is either an idiot or a Republican/Democrat/liberal/conservative shill. The people really running things are not Republican, Democrat, liberal or conservative. They're criminals. It's all an illusion to keep the peons fighting amongst themselves.
Excellent I love how I got
Sat, 10/02/2010 - 15:53 — Anonymous (not verified)Excellent I love how I got your attention. I hope the things I say just absolutely piss you off. I hope you can't stand me. Check this out Mr. 16:26.... Just because you think so doesn't mean others do. Just because the nasty source you get your news doesn't mean that's how it really is. No matter what you say to me or about me. Straight up. There's no way in hell I'm ever going to believe that one party is better than the other. I hope I make you really mad and upset. Hilarious left wing terd.
Hey, 17:20, why don't you
Sat, 10/02/2010 - 15:53 — Anonymous (not verified)Hey, 17:20, why don't you turn some of that venom on the Republicans for a change, huh?
You also, of course, ignore a long list of Obama's genuinely liberal achievements and appointments, from funding stem cell research to agitating for and signing the Hate Crimes Act to putting Elizabeth Warren in charge of consumer protections. You're about as "fair and balanced" as Faux News.
Unfortunate that these
Sat, 10/02/2010 - 16:40 — Anonymous (not verified)Unfortunate that these comments go around in circles and nothing gets done. Same old crap. I guess because the current president gets in front of the a camera and starts blaming Faux News I guess anyone with opposition must automatically be a Tea Partier or a Faux News spew box. I like how 17:20 assumes so much about me. I can only imagine what that individual believes is true. *sigh* I could go over all the BAD the president has done. So what. Look people... I don't know what you guys get out of saying this stuff but I myself am definitely sick of the politics on both sides and I become concerned when I see comments like I see here and some of the responses towards me. I don't know how anyone can think any of these party's or politicians are healthy for the American people in anyway. I'd rather see real comments being made instead of each other calling the other names and claiming the source they get informed is bogus and what they hear from their source is best. But when I see blatant bull crap being stated I have to wonder what that individual thinks they will get out of it. You guys calling me names and assuming I am completely right leaning and stuff is the arrogance that is not healthy. It's not cool. And yet people continue to stick up for bad behavior of politicians. How unfortunate for us all. I wish you all luck in this life. Be careful out there Watch out for them politicians!!! :p
I think this is a
Sun, 10/03/2010 - 04:06 — Anonymous (not verified)I think this is a constitutional issue. It violates freedom of assembly. -jack
@20:53 You are obviously
Sun, 10/03/2010 - 15:31 — Liced-christs (not verified)@20:53
You are obviously oblivious to the destruction this man [Obama] is creating with his 4 neoconservative wars.
And to answer your question: I do attack the Republicans, fool. But it's the fu@king Democrats who are in power now and acting like a bunch of "bipartisan" ass@holes with the Republicans, who'd hang them in the town square if they could. Please explain to me why Obama put a Republican, a conservative, right wing Republican to head the committee for cutting Social Security. Could Obama be a Democrat Neoliberal who shares the same world view as the Republican neo-liberals in want to cut SS to pay for his f^cking wars? You bet your ass he is. You're a real sucker for finding acceptable an extremely right wing Democrat president. Obama is neoliberal garbage in the tradition of Larry Summers. Wake up and stop adjusting to Obama's blatant and pathetic mediocrity.
Thanks Nadia.
Sun, 10/03/2010 - 18:22 — Anonymous (not verified)Thanks Nadia.
It wouldn't surprise me if
Sun, 10/03/2010 - 20:33 — Anonymous (not verified)It wouldn't surprise me if 20:31 is a Republican. Same belligerent, uncivil, trash-talkin' attitude, on a par with the Limbaughs, etc.
@1:33 Notice the complete
Sun, 10/03/2010 - 20:53 — Liced-christs (not verified)@1:33
Notice the complete lack of thought and substantive content in 1:33's attack of 20:31. That's because 1:33 knows everything Liced-christ is saying is TRUE & cannot be refuted. These centrist Democrats, half assed supporters of a half assed president, settle for the status quo without remorse.
Anyone interested in Obama's
Sun, 10/03/2010 - 20:58 — Giles Winterbourne (not verified)Anyone interested in Obama's huge number of liberal accomplishments should study the following pages:
politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/rulings/promise-kept/?page=5
www.obamarecord.blogspot.com/
@1:58 I went to the
Sun, 10/03/2010 - 21:39 — Liced-christs (not verified)@1:58
I went to the politifact URL you gave and laughed my head off at Obama's "liberal" accomplishments -- the first several accomplishments discussed the space program! -- just what we need when people are homeless and starving on our streets.
Now that's a true liberal, creating longer space programs for and at NASA. You've got to be joking that these are the accomplishments of a liberal. Obama is a failure at even approximating a liberal agenda; to say nothing of his four Bush inspired wars.
We were assured by Obama a week ago that Bush had our interests in mind when he invaded Iraq. That's right, Bush had the interests of Americans at heart, according to your liberal president. As Obama comes out of the closet for you to see that he's a Bush-like Republican, you look the other way -- or do you?
Even that website page put quotation marks around "universal" in the phrase "universal health care" plan-- another "liberal" Obama accomplishment.
Obama is a corporate, war-making, business supporting, neoliberal, right wing democrat. There is not enough of a difference between him and the Republicans to make me want to vote. I'm sitting this one out! I do hope Obama gets in though, but that's only to keep a slightly bigger jerk out.