Waxman pushes Bill to Kill Net Neutrality

[NorthCarolina]

After committing to ‘Net Neutrality’, Rep. Waxman pushes bill to kill it

Legislative text put forward by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) under the banner of mandating network neutrality would instead prevent the government from requiring broadband providers to treat all Internet traffic equally.

<---snip--->

Should the president sign a bill containing Waxman's language, it would effectively kill 'Net Neutrality' efforts and make key parts of a hotly contested proposal by Google and Verizon the law of the land.



Link: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/committing-net-neutrality-rep-waxman-pushes-bill-kill/

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Waxman?? :wtf: Whats next on the chopping block? Social Security? Medicare? Damn....no longer your fathers Democratic Party. Not even sure they are the Democratic Party at all anymore.

[RandomThoughts]

1. They don't own me.

And they know it and it pisses them off :)


For anyone that thinks corporate or political elements, own people. I successfully surprised many sectors. One of the reasons was to prove they do not own me, since if they did not see what was coming, then they weren't owners.

Although there are things behind people that can own many people, but only by peoples choices.

[msongs]

2. democrats perpetuating and enlarging the Bush police state nt

[ixion]

7. Yep, that is precisely what it is

Same sh*t, different admin.

[NorthCarolina]

10. Are you seeing "Change" you can believe in? eom

[ixion]

13. Not. Even. Close.

[avaistheone1]

14. I don't see it either.

[OKNancy]

3. Skeptical

Considering the source of this I always check things out.

http://communication-solutions.tmcnet.com/topics/broadband/articles/104785-california-rep-waxman-prepares-net-neutrality-bill.htm

The draft would prohibit the commission from imposing regulations on broadband Internet access service or any component of the service under Title II of the Communications Act, except when a broadband Internet access provider prefers to do so.
The rules would apply to all consumer broadband connections, wired and wireless.
The short draft, which of course always could be amended into something quite different, should it advance, basically codifies the existing "Internet freedoms" rules the commission has been using, without adding language that prohibits the application of quality-of-service features to consumer broadband access.

[ixion]

8. Your quote confirms the initial story... so I don't understand your skepticism

Just sayin'...

[OKNancy]

4. More from another source

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=197591&site=lr_cable&f_src=lightreading_gnews

[Blue Meany]

5. I think the answer to this to start up non-profits that offer

cheap (or perhaps free, if municipal governments do it)and content-neutral internet access. After all, the government owns the internet backbone that these companies are selling access to. It's like owning a freeway on-ramp for a public freeway. They don't own the internet and another means of access will work just as well.

[RKP5637]

6. Yep, no longer your father's Democratic Party. Not sure what it is, anymore. n/t

[Dr.Phool]

9. Waxman and Conyers talk a good game when they're in the minority.

Not so much action when they have some power.

I just got my absentee ballot in the mail yesterday. Hmmmm........

[Uncle Joe]

11. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, NorthCarolina.

[NorthCarolina]

12. ..

No problem :hi: