US Senate votes to preserve net neutrality, but effort faces overwhelming odds

Posted:
in General Discussion
U.S. Senate Democrats were handed a major victory on Wednesday when the body voted 52 to 47 in favor of undoing the Federal Communications Commission's "Restoring Internet Freedom" order, which ended Obama-era net neutrality protections.

fiberopticcables


The measure passed with a better margin than expected, with three Republicans and two independents helping to put Democrats over the top, Reuters observed. It must still survive the Republican-dominated House of Representatives however, and a likely veto by President Donald Trump. The White House has opposed any return to net neutrality.

Senate Democrats took advantage of the Congressional Review Act to force a vote on the matter. Without intervention, net neutrality is expected to vanish on June 11.

Supporters of net neutrality have worried that if internet providers are no longer subject to Title II rules, they will begin preferentially blocking or throttling traffic, favoring their own services or customers and partners that pay the best. Restoring Internet Freedom simply requires ISPs to inform the public of those tactics.

Among the corporate backers of neutrality is Apple. The company's business model is highly dependent on fast internet access, whether for services like Apple Music, iTunes, and FaceTime, or just general usability.

"An open internet ensures that hundreds of millions of consumers get the experience they want, over the broadband connections they choose, to use the devices they love, which have become an integral part of their lives," the company remarked in an August letter to the FCC intended to steer the agency's thinking.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 50
    jdgazjdgaz Posts: 249member
    hmm
  • Reply 2 of 50
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,182member
    Overwhelming bribery.
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 3 of 50
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 5,913member
    Net neutrality is one of those “let’s get all emotional and angry about” issues. It’s like the analysts saying the iPhone X was a miserable flop. It’s fodder for the techie Chicken Littles of this world to wring their hands over. And if Apple were a broadband provider they would be singing a different tune I guaran-damn-tee it. So the FTC is going to monitor the bandwidth providers instead of the FCC. Big frick’n deal. All this “might”, “could”, “may” happen bull excrement being spread around is pathetic. Net neutrality is nothing more than government intrusion into and regulation of private enterprise. The state of broadband access in this country has already ground to a halt and net neutrality would only cause AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc to be further disincentivized to deploy and expand their networks. Google’s fiber project was a cruel joke, just like their barge in the middle of San Francisco bay. Elon Musk’s idea of hundreds of satellites to provide Internet access world would crumble under the weight of government price regulation. Reclassifying broadband as a regulated utility will spawn dozens of fees and taxes like those you see on your landline and electric bills, if you still have a landline that is.  

    https://www.theringer.com/2017/7/21/16077992/google-fiber-struggles-7d2bb5399a12
    edited May 16 monstrosityboltsfan17redraider11sdw2001tallest skil
  • Reply 4 of 50
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,181member
    No matter which way this goes, the people lose.
  • Reply 5 of 50
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 5,913member
    cgWerks said:
    No matter which way this goes, the people lose.
    Nothing’s free in this world and you don’t get to dictate how much something you desire is going to cost, like the iPhone X. You can decide if something you want is worth the price being asked, that’s it. Like a fusion reactor power plant super fast, unlimited bandwidth will always be perpetually years down the road.
    edited May 16 monstrosity
  • Reply 6 of 50
    urashidurashid Posts: 37member
    lkrupp said:
    Net neutrality is one of those “let’s get all emotional and angry about” issues. It’s like the analysts saying the iPhone X was a miserable flop. It’s fodder for the techie Chicken Littles of this world to wring their hands over. And if Apple were a broadband provider they would be singing a different tune I guaran-damn-tee it. So the FTC is going to monitor the bandwidth providers instead of the FCC. Big frick’n deal. All this “might”, “could”, “may” happen bull excrement being spread around is pathetic. Net neutrality is nothing more than government intrusion into and regulation of private enterprise. The state of broadband access in this country has already ground to a halt and net neutrality would only cause AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc to be further disincentivized to deploy and expand their networks. Google’s fiber project was a cruel joke, just like their barge in the middle of San Francisco bay. Elon Musk’s idea of hundreds of satellites to provide Internet access world would crumble under the weight of government price regulation. Reclassifying broadband as a regulated utility will spawn dozens of fees and taxes like those you see on your landline and electric bills, if you still have a landline that is.  

    https://www.theringer.com/2017/7/21/16077992/google-fiber-struggles-7d2bb5399a12
    I prefer my electricity service as a regulated utility.  Last time we experimented with private electricity companies in California, everything went bonkers and rates went to the moon.  Don't want that to happen with my internet service.
    paxmangeorgie01lollivermuthuk_vanalingampropodwaltgbshanksphericchasm
  • Reply 7 of 50
    mknelsonmknelson Posts: 178member
    lkrupp said:
    Net neutrality is one of those “let’s get all emotional and angry about” issues. It’s like the analysts saying the iPhone X was a miserable flop. It’s fodder for the techie Chicken Littles of this world to wring their hands over. And if Apple were a broadband provider they would be singing a different tune I guaran-damn-tee it. So the FTC is going to monitor the bandwidth providers instead of the FCC. Big frick’n deal. All this “might”, “could”, “may” happen bull excrement being spread around is pathetic. Net neutrality is nothing more than government intrusion into and regulation of private enterprise. The state of broadband access in this country has already ground to a halt and net neutrality would only cause AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc to be further disincentivized to deploy and expand their networks. Google’s fiber project was a cruel joke, just like their barge in the middle of San Francisco bay. Elon Musk’s idea of hundreds of satellites to provide Internet access world would crumble under the weight of government price regulation. Reclassifying broadband as a regulated utility will spawn dozens of fees and taxes like those you see on your landline and electric bills, if you still have a landline that is.  

    https://www.theringer.com/2017/7/21/16077992/google-fiber-struggles-7d2bb5399a12
    A (mostly) sports site? :o 

    “might”, “could”, “may” ? Try "Has", "Did", "Probably will again" 
    https://consumerist.com/2014/02/23/netflix-agrees-to-pay-comcast-to-end-slowdown/

    There are plenty of expansions that Ajit Pai likes to point to as a victory for the end of Net Neutrality that were approved and funded under Obama.
    spheric
  • Reply 8 of 50
    boltsfan17boltsfan17 Posts: 1,875member
    urashid said:
    lkrupp said:
    Net neutrality is one of those “let’s get all emotional and angry about” issues. It’s like the analysts saying the iPhone X was a miserable flop. It’s fodder for the techie Chicken Littles of this world to wring their hands over. And if Apple were a broadband provider they would be singing a different tune I guaran-damn-tee it. So the FTC is going to monitor the bandwidth providers instead of the FCC. Big frick’n deal. All this “might”, “could”, “may” happen bull excrement being spread around is pathetic. Net neutrality is nothing more than government intrusion into and regulation of private enterprise. The state of broadband access in this country has already ground to a halt and net neutrality would only cause AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc to be further disincentivized to deploy and expand their networks. Google’s fiber project was a cruel joke, just like their barge in the middle of San Francisco bay. Elon Musk’s idea of hundreds of satellites to provide Internet access world would crumble under the weight of government price regulation. Reclassifying broadband as a regulated utility will spawn dozens of fees and taxes like those you see on your landline and electric bills, if you still have a landline that is.  

    https://www.theringer.com/2017/7/21/16077992/google-fiber-struggles-7d2bb5399a12
    I prefer my electricity service as a regulated utility.  Last time we experimented with private electricity companies in California, everything went bonkers and rates went to the moon.  Don't want that to happen with my internet service.
    The way it was done in California when we had the energy crisis here was a mess since the system was exploited. If you follow the model of other states, deregulation is beneficial. Natural gas is deregulated here and we have some of the cheapest rates in the country. 
    paxmanSpamSandwichsdw2001christophbredraider11
  • Reply 9 of 50
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 29,095member
    urashid said:
    lkrupp said:
    Net neutrality is one of those “let’s get all emotional and angry about” issues. It’s like the analysts saying the iPhone X was a miserable flop. It’s fodder for the techie Chicken Littles of this world to wring their hands over. And if Apple were a broadband provider they would be singing a different tune I guaran-damn-tee it. So the FTC is going to monitor the bandwidth providers instead of the FCC. Big frick’n deal. All this “might”, “could”, “may” happen bull excrement being spread around is pathetic. Net neutrality is nothing more than government intrusion into and regulation of private enterprise. The state of broadband access in this country has already ground to a halt and net neutrality would only cause AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc to be further disincentivized to deploy and expand their networks. Google’s fiber project was a cruel joke, just like their barge in the middle of San Francisco bay. Elon Musk’s idea of hundreds of satellites to provide Internet access world would crumble under the weight of government price regulation. Reclassifying broadband as a regulated utility will spawn dozens of fees and taxes like those you see on your landline and electric bills, if you still have a landline that is.  

    https://www.theringer.com/2017/7/21/16077992/google-fiber-struggles-7d2bb5399a12
    I prefer my electricity service as a regulated utility.  Last time we experimented with private electricity companies in California, everything went bonkers and rates went to the moon.  Don't want that to happen with my internet service.
    I'm sorry, but I was around when this absurd "experiment" happened. It was a textbook example of the entrenched interests sabotaging the entire idea of competition. There was no real free market competition at work, the phony "electricity market" they cobbled together was built to fail. It remained highly regulated, highly centralized the entire time. That's not competition and it sure as hell has nothing to do with free markets.
    edited May 16 cgWerksredraider11boltsfan17chasm
  • Reply 10 of 50
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,181member
    lkrupp said:
    cgWerks said:
    No matter which way this goes, the people lose.
    Nothing’s free in this world and you don’t get to dictate how much something you desire is going to cost, like the iPhone X. You can decide if something you want is worth the price being asked, that’s it. Like a fusion reactor power plant super fast, unlimited bandwidth will always be perpetually years down the road.
    Hmm, I'm not sure I quite get this response. What I meant was that if Obama's Net Neutrality™ stays, we don't get real net neutrality (the principal) anyway, but we get the FCC oversight which has language in it which could be used to control free-speech and shut down anyone who doesn't comply. If it gets repealed, the big telcos and content producers will certainly collude, producing a more AOL-like internet at minimum, but could also venture into limiting free-speech and shutting down people who become the enemy of the gov't, the popular view, or content-competitors.

    urashid said:
    I prefer my electricity service as a regulated utility.  Last time we experimented with private electricity companies in California, everything went bonkers and rates went to the moon.  Don't want that to happen with my internet service.
    Aside from concerns above about the gov't putting restrictions on the communications, I'd prefer a utility model at this point as well. Private telcos have proven they are unable of competing and brining better services and innovations at lower prices. Since they are more or less monopolies (but I don't think reachable via the restrictions), the capitalistic model simply won't work. Or, they could be broken up, reset, etc. But, I just don't trust that to go well either.

    mknelson said:
    “might”, “could”, “may” ? Try "Has", "Did", "Probably will again" https://consumerist.com/2014/02/23/netflix-agrees-to-pay-comcast-to-end-slowdown/
    There are plenty of expansions that Ajit Pai likes to point to as a victory for the end of Net Neutrality that were approved and funded under Obama.
    You realize Netflix wouldn't even be able to operate under a pure net-neutrality model, right? It currently works well because Netflix places special 'caching' boxes at major ISP locations. That kind of pay-to-play would be against net neutrality, afaik. Heck, my own sites use CDN, which costs me more money to get my site to my users faster. Someone competing with my sites who doesn't have CDN is at a disadvantage.
  • Reply 11 of 50
    georgie01georgie01 Posts: 135member
    lkrupp said:
    Net neutrality is one of those “let’s get all emotional and angry about” issues. It’s like the analysts saying the iPhone X was a miserable flop. It’s fodder for the techie Chicken Littles of this world to wring their hands over. And if Apple were a broadband provider they would be singing a different tune I guaran-damn-tee it. So the FTC is going to monitor the bandwidth providers instead of the FCC. Big frick’n deal. All this “might”, “could”, “may” happen bull excrement being spread around is pathetic. Net neutrality is nothing more than government intrusion into and regulation of private enterprise. The state of broadband access in this country has already ground to a halt and net neutrality would only cause AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc to be further disincentivized to deploy and expand their networks. Google’s fiber project was a cruel joke, just like their barge in the middle of San Francisco bay. Elon Musk’s idea of hundreds of satellites to provide Internet access world would crumble under the weight of government price regulation. Reclassifying broadband as a regulated utility will spawn dozens of fees and taxes like those you see on your landline and electric bills, if you still have a landline that is.  

    https://www.theringer.com/2017/7/21/16077992/google-fiber-struggles-7d2bb5399a12
    This is such a troubling comment. I’m for small government but it’s naive to argue that government regulation is a bad thing. The anti-net neutrality crowd has been spewing this perspective and people have been lapping it up without even taking a moment to indulge in common sense. 

    The basic and true premise that people are usually self-interested is ignored in favour of letting go of government regulation. People will screw others to get what they want. This is the norm not the exception. The exception is the company who has genuine interest in serving their customers first. Additionally, the customers who supposedly have the ‘power’ are just as self interested and will happily bend over if it means they don’t have to put the effort into fighting something.

    The ‘market’ only works if people treat others well. The internet is not going to fall into the hands of well-meaning entrepreneurs who want to serve others, it will fall into the hands of selfish and greedy people who will happily screw others to make a buck. I don’t like big government but I’d rather have that than the alternative. 

    edited May 16 gatorguyroundaboutnowmuthuk_vanalingamsingularityspheric
  • Reply 12 of 50
    The government sucks at everything. At best you get mediocrity with them. Anyone who thinks otherwise just doesn’t know history. 

    The socialists in Seattle think the lack of affordable housing is because Starbucks and Amazon aren’t paying their “fair share.” All a sane person has to do is look at all of the laws, regulations, and hoops builders have to jump through to build anything and it’s no wonder there’s a shortage of affordable housing. 

    Keep the the government out and let business’ do their thing and compete. 
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 13 of 50
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 16,878member

    Supporters of net neutrality have worried that if internet providers are no longer subject to Title II rules, they will begin preferentially blocking or throttling traffic, favoring their own services or customers and partners that pay the best. Restoring Internet Freedom simply requires ISPs to inform the public of those tactics.
    ———

    This is a deceptive paragraph.  So-called “neutrality” under Title II is not the norm.  It is a NEW government intrusion into the free market. 
    tallest skilchristophbSpamSandwich
  • Reply 14 of 50
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 42,990member
    The government sucks at everything. At best you get mediocrity with them. Anyone who thinks otherwise just doesn’t know history.
    Where does this delusion originate? I’m asking everyone. “Government is incompetent” isn’t an explanation for anything. It’s not even a justification for anything. It’s laziness, cowardice, and stupidity. On the part of the speaker. The speaker refuses to do a damn thing to better himself. He refuses to do research on the objective truth of [insert topic here]. He refuses to learn who is in government, how they got there, who funds them, and what their interests are. He refuses to accept that the individuals in government have interests. And, most importantly, he refuses to accept and acknowledge 1. the nature of their interests and 2. the origin of their interests.

    Because, in general, he has been literally brainwashed to believe that they don’t exist. And so, since he can’t even DEFINE the problems in the world (because it makes him physically uncomfortable to think about people and their differences), he can’t solve the problems. And if he continues to refuse to define the problems, a solution remains impossible. So it’s just easier to ignore the problems. It’s easier to say, “The problems can’t ever go away.” Easier. Safer. More comfortable.

    And we let them get away with it. Every time.
    cgWerksmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 15 of 50
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,181member
    georgie01 said:
    The ‘market’ only works if people treat others well. The internet is not going to fall into the hands of well-meaning entrepreneurs who want to serve others, it will fall into the hands of selfish and greedy people who will happily screw others to make a buck. I don’t like big government but I’d rather have that than the alternative. 
    Amen. I'm guessing most of the people fighting on both sides haven't had a (real) economics course. Economics is a social science, not a science. If you get human nature wrong (as much of modern economics does), you get economics wrong. And, as you say, people, corporations, governments, etc. will all try to screw one-another if they can. And, this will only get worse the way society is going (we're losing several centuries of hard-won civility).

    The government sucks at everything. At best you get mediocrity with them. Anyone who thinks otherwise just doesn’t know history. 

    The socialists in Seattle think the lack of affordable housing is because Starbucks and Amazon aren’t paying their “fair share.” All a sane person has to do is look at all of the laws, regulations, and hoops builders have to jump through to build anything and it’s no wonder there’s a shortage of affordable housing. 

    Keep the the government out and let business’ do their thing and compete. 
    Except... the government is the only entity that can legitimately enforce the needed rules and regulations that make capitalism work. The problem isn't so much government regulation, as it is a government without the designed-in checks and balance. Many people under poorly designed governments or corrupt governments don't have this luxury. But, in the USA (and some other countries), we get the government we deserve. The mechanisms are there to fix it, if we have the will. We (collectively) don't.
    muthuk_vanalingamspheric
  • Reply 16 of 50
    christophbchristophb Posts: 1,411member
    This again.  535 people in DC to solve your alleged or potential local issue.  
    redraider11SpamSandwich
  • Reply 17 of 50
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 29,095member
    georgie01 said:
    lkrupp said:
    Net neutrality is one of those “let’s get all emotional and angry about” issues. It’s like the analysts saying the iPhone X was a miserable flop. It’s fodder for the techie Chicken Littles of this world to wring their hands over. And if Apple were a broadband provider they would be singing a different tune I guaran-damn-tee it. So the FTC is going to monitor the bandwidth providers instead of the FCC. Big frick’n deal. All this “might”, “could”, “may” happen bull excrement being spread around is pathetic. Net neutrality is nothing more than government intrusion into and regulation of private enterprise. The state of broadband access in this country has already ground to a halt and net neutrality would only cause AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc to be further disincentivized to deploy and expand their networks. Google’s fiber project was a cruel joke, just like their barge in the middle of San Francisco bay. Elon Musk’s idea of hundreds of satellites to provide Internet access world would crumble under the weight of government price regulation. Reclassifying broadband as a regulated utility will spawn dozens of fees and taxes like those you see on your landline and electric bills, if you still have a landline that is.  

    https://www.theringer.com/2017/7/21/16077992/google-fiber-struggles-7d2bb5399a12
    This is such a troubling comment. I’m for small government but it’s naive to argue that government regulation is a bad thing. The anti-net neutrality crowd has been spewing this perspective and people have been lapping it up without even taking a moment to indulge in common sense. 

    The basic and true premise that people are usually self-interested is ignored in favour of letting go of government regulation. People will screw others to get what they want. This is the norm not the exception. The exception is the company who has genuine interest in serving their customers first. Additionally, the customers who supposedly have the ‘power’ are just as self interested and will happily bend over if it means they don’t have to put the effort into fighting something.

    The ‘market’ only works if people treat others well. The internet is not going to fall into the hands of well-meaning entrepreneurs who want to serve others, it will fall into the hands of selfish and greedy people who will happily screw others to make a buck. I don’t like big government but I’d rather have that than the alternative. 

    LOL!

    “The basic and true premise that people are usually self-interested is ignored in favour of letting go of government regulation. People will screw others to get what they want. This is the norm not the exception.”


    Look at what you wrote and think about it. All people are self-interested, true. Here’s the rub: Government is also made of self-interested people, but they don’t have the leavening forces of competition keeping them in check.
    cgWerksredraider11
  • Reply 18 of 50
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,536member
    Everyone wants net neutrality. Don't let the media tell you otherwise.

    We currently have a means to regulate the any violations before net neutrality became policy. 
  • Reply 19 of 50
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 29,095member
    jungmark said:
    Everyone wants net neutrality. Don't let the media tell you otherwise.

    We currently have a means to regulate the any violations before net neutrality became policy. 

    I sure as hell don’t want it and it’s not the function of the Federal government to intervene in functioning markets. People are not guaranteed to get everything they want. If the market cannot provide everything and anything customers want, maybe sometimes that means what customers want is unrealistic.
    redraider11
  • Reply 20 of 50
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,181member
    jungmark said:
    Everyone wants net neutrality. Don't let the media tell you otherwise. 
    Yes, most people do want the principals of net neutrality (if they have a clue what it's all about).
    However, some fear certain wording in the Net Neutrality™ legislation proposed during the Obama administration, which wasn't really net neutrality anyway.
    And, then there is the telco industry baloney about how if they don't get their way, it will slow innovation. They've been making record profits for decades and we've seen little innovation and ever-increasing costs... why would they start now?

    This whole thing is a political football between government control/potential censorship and corporate interests.
    gatorguyspheric
Sign In or Register to comment.