“Senate Republicans moved Monday afternoon to prevent the FCC’s proposed rules on net neutrality with an amendment to the Interior Appropriations bill that would tie up funding at the agency for new regulatory mandates. Observers said, however, that the move was unlikely to be approved in the Democrat-majority Congress,” Cecilia Kang reports for The Washington Post.
Kang reports, “Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), ranking member of Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, said in a release: ‘We must tread lightly when it comes to new regulations. Where there have been a handful of questionable actions in the past on the part of a few companies, the Commission and the marketplace have responded swiftly. The case has simply not been made for what amounts to a significant regulatory intervention into a vibrant marketplace. These new regulatory mandates and restrictions could stifle investment incentives,’ she said.”
“Senators John Ensign (R-Nev.), Sam Brownback (R-Kansas), David Vitter (R-La.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and John Thune (R-S.D. co-sponsored the amendment,” Kang reports. “The two Republican commissioners at the five-member FCC issued a joint statement in response to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s announcement, expressed concern that conclusions have been prematurely drawn about how consumers and businesses are being affected by Web policies. ‘We are concerned that both factual and legal conclusions may have been drawn before the process has begun,’ said Commissioners Robert McDowell and Merideth Baker. ‘We do not believe that the Commission should adopt regulations based merely on anecdotes, or in an effort to alleviate the political pressures of the day, if the facts do not clearly demonstrate that a problem needs to be remedied.'”
Kang reports, “Some wireless providers have balked at the proposal, with AT&T saying it does not agree that the rules should apply to its giant national wireless network because of capacity constraints. Genachowski said in his speech that the rules would apply to all platforms – which would include wireless – but that such questions would be part of a process that will begin late October to come up with new rules. If approved, final rules could be drawn next spring.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: As we said back in August 2006: “We don’t presume to know the best way to get there, but we support the concept of “Net Neutrality” especially as it pertains to preventing the idea of ISP’s blocking or otherwise impeding sites that don’t pay the ISP to ensure equal access. That said, we usually prefer the government to be hands-off wherever possible, Laissez-faire, except in cases where the free market obviously cannot adequately self-regulate (antitrust, for example). Regulations are static and the marketplace is fluid, so such regulation can often have unintended, unforeseen results down the road. We sincerely hope that there are enough forces in place and/or that the balances adjust in such a manner as to keep the ‘Net as neutral as it is today.”
That we have the same Take over three years later should be telling. Government regulations are not a panacea, neither are the lack thereof. It’s all about striking a proper balance where innovation can thrive while abuses are prevented.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “iWill” for the heads up.]
John,
It’s because of fools like you that we have a half-term freshman senator / “community organizer” in the White House and in way, way over his head.
– Ohioan praying for a real Conservative candidate in 2012.
Rethugnicans acting as corporate shills? This is news?
If a Rethugnican was acting on behalf of the public or opposing the expansion of corporate power it would be news.
Before the ‘free market’ zombies attack hear me out.
The telcos run their lines across your property WITHOUT your permission, WITHOUT compensation to you under the eminent domain power granted them by the government and then oppose any effort to in any way regulate them. If they want a truly free market, start paying me for the right to run your damn cables on my land. The permission to run lines without your consent or compensation amounts to a subsidy worth tens of billions of dollars.
I do not oppose a free market- I oppose crony capitalism. That is largely what we have in the US.
@John: That wasn’t laissez-faire, though. The sub-prime crisis, and over-leveraged lenders were the opposite of laissez-faire. They were the result of focused government intervention and bad policy.
@gzero: “As to the issue of net neutrality: I’m all for some form of government regs, as long as it doesn’t interfere with the flow of commerce or stifles competition.”
And that’s what gets us into trouble, starting with the notion that governmen regulation is itself a good thing. Your first post reveals your ignorance of the true American heritage. Go back and read how we got where we were in the 18th century. This country was founded on a mistrust of government power. Forget politicians; the Founders and the public know that individuals, even well-intended ones, cannot be trusted. So, they created a framework of institutions intended to hobble the over-aggregation of government power itself. The mistrust of government power, not merely individual politicians, is in the American DNA. Thank goodness.
The opposition party is at it again.
American got where it was by killing the natives and anyone else who got in its way. And above all by using oil. When the oil eventually runs out so will the USA unless it does something intellingent besides brute force, money talks, soon.
@John: You said: “Superior being: “originate” does noe equal “cause”. Debts go bad all the time. It was what the banks did to hid risk and basically lie that caused the system to collapse.
Left to their own devices they stole our money.”
And thus the limp mind of the liberal is exposed. Seriously? Are you kidding? Actually, “originate” means precisely that. it is why smart people seek out “root causes” for problems.
@John: You wrote: “American got where it was by killing the natives and anyone else who got in its way. And above all by using oil. When the oil eventually runs out so will the USA unless it does something intellingent besides brute force, money talks, soon.”
And thus your patheticism is truly revealed. You are an America-hater. Fine.
The previous administration expanded the federal deficit to historical levels, sidestepped the constitution with detention without trial and created an entirely new arm of the govt the singular job of which is to spy on US citizens.
That Republican supporters still pretend that the Republican party is the party of smaller government is unabashed stupidity and hypocrisy that boggles the mind.
Superior Being’s link is from the Professor of Economics Emeritus, Clemson University and Distinguished Adjunct Professor of Economics, Mercatus Center at George Mason University.
John’s link is from a DVD peddler whose site looks like it was made on a Gateway PC in 1996.
Republicans serving their masters, Big *insert description of industrial branch here*?
In other news, sun rises again this morning, Windows sucks, and Ballmer sweats like a pig while sticking his tongue out and jumping around screaming “developers developers developers developers!”
His Shadow,
We haven’t had a real conservative in the Oval Office since Reagan.
None of the nominees were real conservatives, either.
And, Obama has already far outspent Bush.
We booted Bush in part because he spent too much. So, the solution is to spend 50 times as much?
Nope. 2010 is when we start getting back to fiscal sanity.
Voter, let’s hope so! As a conservative, I am appalled by some of the actions of the R party, but I am terrified by Obamination. We need leaders who stand for fiscal and governmental conservatism.
@Julia: Thanks for calling that out. John is clearly a small-minded disciple of the Michael Moore School of Uncritical Thinking.
MDN should stick to what they do best: making snarky, childish, statements about anyone who dares to compete with Apple.
As to an intelligent argument against deregulation: the credit default swap market was at the core of the financial crisis, and it was totally unregulated. Global demand for securities based on subprime bonds created the housing bubble because: 1) These bonds were highly rated by unregulated, free-market, ratings agencies, and 2) People were able to cheaply purchase credit default swaps that were supposed to be insurance policies if these securities defaulted. The trouble is the unit of AIG that was writing tens of billions of these things had less than 3 million dollars in their account to pay out should one of them actually default.
Voter: by voting in the same Republicans who had no trouble with Bush’s spending? I hope you choose third party instead, then.
@cogitoergomac
Disagreement for or observation of acts committed by our government does not by any means make John “an American-hater.” Dissent is a right we have as Americans. I’ve lived in several countries that dissent would land you in jail regardless of the truth in your statements. Consider the possibility that those of us who don’t turn a blind eye to outrageous actions by any sitting president actually love our country and dislike their actions.
A related aside – how exactly did all the no bid contracts handed to Halliburton and it’s subsidiaries prove love of our country? What about the mishandling and disappearance of untold billions of dollars in Iraq?
And they wonder why they lost there votes and a Democratic President is now in office.
Net Neutrality is the right thing to do before the internet turns useless because of greed and abuse. Comcast is one of the biggest violators of this! They’re supposed to be internet providers, instead they’re internet dictators, turning on and off your connection at there whim for whatever reason!
I just love how the right complains about spending, but totally ignores the financial mess inherited from the previous administration. Things are beginning to turn around since the current administration followed the advice of the majority of economists. I cannot imagine where we would be if the ‘do nothing’ GOP was running the show.
Regarding Republican against Net Neutrality…. Nothing new, the GOP usually sides with big business.
Let’s not forget that the reason Obama has spent so much money, is because the blatant mismanagement of the country, at home and abroad, at the hands of the conservative republicans drove our country into financial chaos… You people have such short term memory it does indeed boggle the mind.
@ Hannah,
“Ohioan praying for a real Conservative candidate in 2012.”
Well, maybe God will hear your pleas and arrange for someone more inline with your thinking to become a Presidential candidate. How about that awesome hunk of conservatism Joe Wilson from South Carolina?
“In 2003, Wilson voted for the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act, including its Section 1011 authorizing $250,000 annually of taxpayer money to reimburse hospitals for treatment of illegal immigrants. In 2009, Wilson changed to his current position opposing public funds for healthcare of illegal immigrants.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Wilson_(U.S._politician)
Of course, he’s no G.W. Bush, but who could even come close to that man’s performance. And just think, if elected, he might start flying the Confederate flag over the White House.
Doesn’t the thought make you feel all warm and conservatee inside? Yeehaaaaw!
@Superior Being
“Liberalism used to mean a much different thing. When did Libs come to love gov’t so much?”
My theory for at least part of this change (because you are right) is that members of both the old Socialist and Communist Parties in America finally grasped that they couldn’t win elections as 3rd party candidates. They moved into the Democratic Party and have since tilted it radically left. I used to be a Dem, and I say that I didn’t leave the Party, it left me.
“Conservatives” continually prove themselves to be anything but conservative… “Liberals” have proven themselves to not think liberally…
People who are bind themselves to ideology will find themselves just that… bound.
Intelligent governance is flexible and meets the needs of the people.
Stop arguing from positions of stupidity. No one wins.
without net neutrality, huge investments in internet infrastructure could be blocked overnight. The open marketplace could go. ebay could be turned off or everyone you sell on ebay could be taxed by your local cable company. Is $140 a month not enough for time warner to bribe these rebpublican Sh*T F**ks. do they really need more of my damned money. let’s roll these greedy on the take criminals out of office and into the obscurity.
“We booted Bush in part because he spent too much.”
Uh, no, he left because of the 2-term limit in the Constitution. He couldn’t run again, legally.
@spark,
You are really dillusional. The political spectrum has moved right, not left. Reagan’s conservatism is today’s liberalism. Go back and look at the programs Reagan supported 25 to 30 years ago. Take his name out and insert President A. The GOP today would label him a flaming liberal today.
@Marko
Marko is correct, and I will now follow your posts with blind admiration.