General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe FCC Did a Lot More Than Just Approve Net Neutrality Today
Win/win!
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/02/fcc-did-lot-more-just-approve-net-neutrality-today
The FCC Did a Lot More Than Just Approve Net Neutrality Today
By Kevin Drum
| Thu Feb. 26, 2015 5:04 PM EST
The FCC voted today in favor of strong net neutrality rules, but this is something that's been expected for weeksand something I've written about before at length. So instead of commenting on that yet again, I want to highlight something else that might be nearly as important:
The commission granted petitions by Chattanooga, Tenn., and Wilson, N.C., to overturn laws that restricted the ability of communities in those states to offer broadband service. In all about 20 states have passed such laws. The vote was 3-2 and along party lines. The decisions dont affect the other states, but they do set a precedent for consideration of similar petitions in the future.
This is a step in the direction of creating more competition for broadband internet, which I think is at least as important as net neutrality regulations. So hooray for this ruling, which is a step in the right direction. And while we're on the subject, it's also worth noting that the FCC's net neutrality decision could end up stimulating more broadband competition too. Why? Because net neutrality depends on regulating broadband providers under Title II of the Telecommunications Act, and this means that companies like Google, which are trying to set up their own high-speed networks, will be able to do it more cheaply. This is from a couple of months ago:
Cable and telecom companies, like Comcast and AT&T have long had the right to access utility poles and other important infrastructure, such as ducts, conduits and rights of way, he noted. Google Fiber, which competes against these companies, has not had this right and the service has had trouble getting access to some poles as it builds out its fiber-optic network to homes.
....Hooking up homes using poles is about a tenth of the price of digging trenches across streets and sidewalks, according to Reed Hundt, who was FCC chairman in the 1990s. Pole access is fundamental and Google will never be able to make the case for Google Fiber without pole access, he said. If Title II gives Google pole access, then it might really rock the world with broadband access.
If Google gains pole access, and cities and towns are free to set up their own high-speed networks, then local cable companies will finally start getting real competition in the high-speed internet market. Net neutrality is a big win for consumers, but real competition might be an even bigger win. This is far from a done deal, but things are starting to head in the right direction.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Thanks to the millions that spoke out and got Mr. Wheeler to change his mind. Speaking out can make a difference.
babylonsister
(172,551 posts)BTW, I was going to post a rebuttal with links and all, but google 'Obama net neutrality'.
It's shocking to me how many people are angry about this. Right wing sites rule on google for some reason.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)you are aware that Mr. Wheeler's first proposal was against net neutrality. This was the reaction. Millions of Americans responded.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/05/08/1297841/-FCC-commissioner-asks-for-delay-net-neutrality-rules#
The day after around 150 Internet and tech companies asked FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler to remove discriminatory loopholes from his net neutrality proposal, another large coalition comprised of everything from consumer advocates to educators to Reddit to the Harry Potter Alliance has written to both Wheeler and President Obama, calling for the FCC to drop the controversial plan to allow Internet fast lanes.
http://consumerist.com/2014/05/08/a-second-large-coalition-calls-on-white-house-fcc-to-not-screw-up-net-neutrality/
And if I remember correctly, many supports of the President said after Mr. Wheeler's first disasterous proposal, that the President didn't have influence over Mr. Wheeler.
I am happy with what I've seen of the outcome.
babylonsister
(172,551 posts)How Obamas net neutrality comments undid weeks of FCC work
By Brian Fung November 14, 2014
When President Obama told his top telecom regulator Monday to apply "the strongest possible rules" on Internet service providers so that they couldn't speed up or slow down certain Web sites over others, he galvanized Democrats around a populist technology issue and set up a showdown with congressional Republicans.
But the White House's move also undermined weeks of work by the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission to develop an alternative policy, which he has said in private meetings could preserve a free and open Web while also addressing concerns by the Internet providers. Because of the unprecedented nature of the FCC's compromise proposal and its controversial nature -- critics fear it would not prevent Internet providers from slowing down content they don't like -- the agency held a flurry of meetings with a wide range of groups, including major tech companies, lobbyists, consumer advocates and the telecom industry to see if it could bring a broad coalition together around its plan, according to a half-dozen people familiar with the discussions.
In the days before the president's statement, the agency's efforts appeared to be working. Some tech companies, including at least one major firm, and several tech interest groups showed signs of warming to the outreach by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. They and Wheeler scheduled a series of critical meetings on Monday at the FCC to discuss their differences. Talk emerged of working out language in a letter that would clarify the sentiments of all involved and help build consensus for Wheeler's plan.
But all of that was thrown off-track as soon as Obama called for "bright-line rules" backed up by the FCC's most aggressive powers. Now a number of companies who were close to signing onto the "hybrid" plan proposed by Wheeler are in a holding pattern. Demand for a less-compromising stance has increased. And pressure is building on Wheeler and the FCC to decide what it should do.
"If the week had started not with the president's announcement, but with the tech community and lots of big names lining up in favor of the hybrid, we'd be having a very different conversation right now," said one tech industry official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the meetings were private.
more...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/14/how-obamas-net-neutrality-comments-undid-weeks-of-fcc-work/
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)he choose Wheeler in the first place. He choose an industry insider in lieu of a consumer advocate.
babylonsister
(172,551 posts)I knew a gripe was to come. It worked out okay, so relax!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)This was a huge accomplishment and I am happy about it. I don't like those that try to give the credit to those that tried to screw us.
babylonsister
(172,551 posts)Wrong thread, hon. This is the 'net neutrality' thread, not the 'starving children' thread.
Have one for me!
uhnope
(6,419 posts)calimary
(88,870 posts)But, unfortunately, the relentless critics of our President are here, too.
I try not to generalize. However, uhnope, you put it rather succinctly:
"Some people just don't want any credit to go to Obama for anything."
Just imagine if it had been President romney in the White House while this was going on. What kind of result could we expect in THAT case, 'eh?
Guys, dear treasured cherished DU brothers and sisters - I humbly suggest we ALL try on this filter when discussing lots of different issues, especially as we draw nearer and nearer to primary and general election season.
"WHAT KIND OF RESULT COULD WE EXPECT IF THERE WAS A CON IN THERE, INSTEAD OF (Democratic fill-in-the-blank-here)?"
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Well you can relax if you want. I see that there is a lot of work to be done.
nikto
(3,284 posts)It ain't like the war's over or anything.
This net neutrality issue seems like a victory, at this point.
But we don't even know what's in the whole bill yet, don't we?
And the issue of WHY Obama put Wheeler in in the 1st place is a legitimate point to ponder.
I have read the conversation between you and others here, and I'm with...YOU!!!!!
It's just smart to never stop asking questions.
IMO,
Complacency is dangerous.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)this mess. I am a baby boomer and I lay the fault squarely with us. Our grandparents and parents had it rough but fought to make our lives better. But even though our parents warned us, we really didn't know adversity and lived the good life. The greedy capitalists didn't relax and by 1970 those that lived through the First Great Republicon Depression were old or dead and we, the pampered Baby Boomers, were complacent. I personally feel that I owe younger generations a fight to return the greatness of the Great Middle Class.
I understand that some here are so desperate they will celebrate the smallest of victories. Yet millions of American children live in poverty. Fix that and I might celebrate.
nikto
(3,284 posts)And I too, place MUCH blame on our generation and its smug complacency.
Plus, voting for REAGAN (which I never did--I smelled trouble from the get-go with RR, as some others did) was a real departure point for our generation----The place where many boomers left the rails of political common-sense, and never returned.
The election of Reagan is one of the biggest and bitterest points of criticism for our generation, IMO.
So much damage was done to America, while boomers counted their meagre tax cuts and cheered like idiots.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)stonecutter357
(12,969 posts)nikto
(3,284 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)FSogol
(47,518 posts)but today you don't know if the President had any influence over him?
Whatever the outcome, it can't be, nice job Obama, right?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5798091
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025796271#post113
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=941643
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5797594
joshcryer
(62,534 posts)It's about bashing the president, nothing more.
FSogol
(47,518 posts)joshcryer
(62,534 posts)FSogol
(47,518 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)It makes it too difficult to pretend transparency!
merrily
(45,251 posts)something most people don't like, all Executive Branch agencies are utterly independent by law and the President has no influence over them.
Same with Congress, even one that is overwhelmingly Democratic.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)but some people just don't want Obama to have any positive light on him at all
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)posted.
As far as Obama's appointments, don't get me started.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)even if it means cutting off his nose despite his face....
joshcryer
(62,534 posts)Thanks to Wheeler for being a reasonable man.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Tom Wheeler, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission and a former top lobbyist for the cable and wireless industries, was mulling new rules to allow broadband companies to provide fast lanes for content providers who were willing to pay for it.
Yes, the guy who used to run the cable industrys lobbying arm is now running the agency tasked with regulating it, said John Oliver, host of HBO's "Last Week Tonight with John Oliver" in June. That is the equivalent of needing a babysitter and hiring a dingo.... Make sure theyre in bed by 8, theres 20 bucks on the table for kibbles, so please dont eat my baby. He then urged his viewers to contact the FCC.
Thousands of Americans contacted Wheeler as Oliver recommended telling them that Wheeler's proposal was unacceptable. Wheeler and Obama yielded to the public pressure.
joshcryer
(62,534 posts)You act as if he had already made up his mind. He was listening to both the corporations and people, the people won.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Not an ideal scenario for consumers.
joshcryer
(62,534 posts)So it's damn hard to find someone pure. This is not to say not to try, of course. But choosing only academics may not always work out.
So you go with the guy you think can get it done.
merrily
(45,251 posts)people who were vigorous advocates of net neutrality. Moreover, the choice is not between industry lobbyists or academics. That's an example of a logical fallacy, false dilemma. Nor are academics necessarily people who don't know an industry and/or are ineffectual.
joshcryer
(62,534 posts)Just one.
And let's see how easy it is to tear their name down and drag them through the mud.
I didn't say the choice was only "between industry lobbyists or academics." Nor did I say that "academics necessarily people who don't know an industry and/or are ineffectual."
I said that you select the best person you feel suited for the job, in that case Wheeler appears to have done a great job.
merrily
(45,251 posts)And, of course, many people could be named who are not telecom industry lobbyists who are capable of heading the FCC. Don't be so silly.
joshcryer
(62,534 posts)As it clearly had no negative effect on his actions today.
I consider substanceless posts like this a hit piece on a good man who did a good thing today. Then there's this bizarre hit piece where you fail to recognize how the public comment process works.
Wheeler said he was for net neutrality but you called it "Orwellian Double Speak."
Strange how easy it is to find these nasty screeds against good people in the government.
BTW, I love how lobbying has become such a scare quote to refer to anyone. Lobbying is a first amendment right. The problem isn't lobbying per se, the problem is allowing 1) lobbyists (or the companies they work for) to write legislation and 2) allowing congresspeople not to read the very legislation they vote on. Our congresspeople frankly need to be babysat to keep lobbyists from wowing them with BS.
merrily
(45,251 posts)criticize me for replying to it. So, feel free to carry the rest of this conversation on without me.
joshcryer
(62,534 posts)You called Wheeler's stance on net neutrality "Orwellian double speak."
rtw
(42 posts)joshcryer
(62,534 posts)Edge providers are protected. Google did not get what it wants. You can plug into Google's network without issue. This is a disaster for Google.
rtw
(42 posts)He refused to testify in front of Congress. So 3 unelected bureaucrats have made these sweeping changes without explaining themselves in front of those we elected.
joshcryer
(62,534 posts)I'm fucking done.
rtw
(42 posts)Cha
(316,461 posts)
http://theobamadiary.com/2015/02/26/a-tweet-or-two-and-ggails-birthday/
Thanks babylonsistah..and Thank you, President Obama..
Net Neutrality: President Obama's Plan for a Free and Open Internet
More than any other invention of our time, the Internet has unlocked possibilities we could just barely imagine a generation ago. And here's a big reason we've seen such incredible growth and innovation: Most Internet providers have treated Internet traffic equally. That's a principle known as "net neutrality" and it says that an entrepreneur's fledgling company should have the same chance to succeed as established corporations, and that access to a high school student's blog shouldn't be unfairly slowed down to make way for advertisers
http://www.whitehouse.gov/net-neutrality
See ya on the internet!
PBass
(1,537 posts)(Just trying to fit in at DU)
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)babylonsister
(172,551 posts)you are also right!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)outcome of course, but also that that many Americans cared enough to be active.
I think there is a movement going on. It is currently disjointed and not reported on by the Corp-Media, but sooner or later it will be a force to be reckoned with.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Not sure if you saw them.
U should probably weigh in and defend your honor.
stonecutter357
(12,969 posts)babylonsister
(172,551 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)TexasProgresive
(12,660 posts)riqster
(13,986 posts)Private companies have given us fuck-all thus far.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)I just don't know how much more likely.
TexasProgresive
(12,660 posts)I worked in the telcom business for 37 years with some of that is outside plant engineering. The blunt truth is that the cost to extend fiber networks into rural areas whether aerial, direct buried or underground (in conduit) can never be recovered by user fees alone. The way rural people got landlines was a price subsidy plan mandated by the Federal and state governments that the most profitable subsidized the least profitable- So long distance subsidized local, business subsidized residential and all of the above subsidized rural. In addition REA brought phone lines to the farm.
The other thing is that the telecom companies were give a limited monopoly that was regulated to insure universal service. This means that service had to be extended to anyone who requested it. All this began to crumble with the deregulation of the industry. This is what they always wanted - to be unregulated and to do whatever they want.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)So are other broadband connections. Knocking down political barriers will make a big difference to some consumers, and eventually to all.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)myrna minx
(22,772 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)support net neutrality.
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)project_bluebook
(411 posts)and they will have HELL to pay!
spanone
(140,922 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)But I will remain sceptical because the devil is in the details as we all know.
But public opinion stopped us from going into Syria and maybe it stopped this too...we shall see.
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)This can't be good news, there has to be a downside to making ISPs transparent on their access amd giving local communities control on how they connect to the internet. Surely,
there is a downside to this. Can't wait to hear why this is bad news.
DescendantOfMany
(22 posts)is either a right-wing tool who still thinks the Internet is a series of tubes or they have a financial stake in Big Telecom.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)who can't give President Obama credit for anything positive even if their life depended on it.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)This is DU Prognostication Gone Poof Response #2 ... "Yeah, but we MADE him do it!"
tridim
(45,358 posts)blue neen
(12,465 posts)I'm so sick of Comcast and their monopoly here, with the resulting exorbitant rates and outsourced, hideously bad customer "service".
Any alternative, any competition would be better than those clowns.
Thank you, Obama Administration.
SunSeeker
(57,445 posts)Hutzpa
(11,461 posts)Great job all round.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Having lowest position is the cheapest. If you have to climb over other lines, you are responsible for any damage done to the lines you had to climb over.
My Dad's county had the funding about 5 years ago to fiber the entire county (which is only 15.7% smaller than Delaware), but the cable and phone companies have delayed it by arguing pole position. Free internet access will kill cable and phone and they will fight to maintain their monopolies.
phylny
(8,791 posts)I live in a rural area with satellite Internet, and my husband can't do his job from home (he's home based) because satellite isn't compatible with VPNs.
JustAnotherGen
(37,476 posts)You won't find it in the news - massive layoffs at one of the major telecoms and they are finally dumping their west coast landline (broadband falls under that) business. Last day for a lot of folks is today.
We are losing 900 people in our HQ building today. It's truly like - a black Friday around here - lots of empty cubes.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)that's the other side of just about any issue ... lot's of people losing their jobs.
Roland99
(53,345 posts)So, the FCC fixed a broken internet that wasn't broken and is now adding more regulation to what was already a free and open internet.
I swear...I've seen that reply, almost exactly to the word, from multiple right-wing opponents of Net Neutrality.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Roland99
(53,345 posts)they claim the free market straightened it out w/o a need for government involvement.
Yeah...Netflix paying a ransom is now a free market strategy
jwirr
(39,215 posts)becoming a service provider but could not at this time. I am hoping they go through with their plans now. Not everyone has a computer but enough of us do that that we will join and from many of the white families I have talked to out here so will they. We are tired of slow internet just because we live in the country.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)that way. I'll have to ask. I know! I think in the past not that many homes had computers but that is changing rapidly with the children. Which to me is good. Unfortunately gaming is the big draw for them. Too many children are sitting too long in front of the computer - like me.
madokie
(51,076 posts)standing between fascism and us
B Calm
(28,762 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)but I am just as thankful when he and his administration do something good.
This was a good thing, Mr. President. Thank you!
Mosaic
(1,451 posts)Who fought for net neutrality and put all my heart into our fundamental right to a free and open internet, I don't appreciate the devil horns from the OP. Sorry, that goes against my beliefs and efforts for us all.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Please tell me you're joking.