House Rejects Net Neutrality

[im10ashus]

The First Amendment of the Internet – the governing principle of net neutrality, which prevents telecommunications corporations from rigging the web so it is easier to visit sites that pay for preferential treatment – took a blow from the House of Representatives Thursday.

Bowing to an intense lobbying campaign that spent tens of millions of dollars – and held out the promise of hefty campaign contributions for those members who did the bidding of interested firms – the House voted 321 to 101 for the disingenuously-named Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act (COPE). That bill, which does not include meaningful network-neutrality protections creates an opening that powerful telephone and cable companies hope to exploit by expanding their reach while doing away with requirements that they maintain a level playing field for access to Internet sites.

"Special interest advocates from telephone and cable companies have flooded the Congress with misinformation delivered by an army of lobbyists to undermine decades-long federal practice of prohibiting network owners from discriminating against competitors to shut out competition. Unless the Senate steps in, (Thursday's) vote marks the beginning of the end of the Internet as an engine of new competition, entrepreneurship and innovation." says Jeannine Kenney, a senior policy analyst for Consumers Union.

In case there was any question that Kenney's assessment was accurate, the House voted 269-152 against an amendment, offered by Massachusetts Democrat Ed Markey, which would have codified net neutrality regulations into federal law. The Markey amendment would have prevented broadband providers from rigging their services to create two-tier access to the Internet – with an "information superhighway" for sites that pay fees for preferential treatment and a dirt road for sites that cannot pay the toll.

After explicitly rejecting the Markey amendment's language, which would have barred telephone and cable companies from taking steps "to block, impair, degrade, discriminate against, or interfere with the ability of any person to use a broadband connection to access…services over the Internet," the House quickly took up the COPE legislation.

cont'd...

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=90090

[Lars39]

1. Good article. Thanks for posting this.

I agree with Mr.Nichols re 'New Democrats'.

[MadHound]

2. Yep, corporations and their government lapdogs can't stand the idea

That there is still one relatively uncontrolled media medium over which the truth can reach the masses. Thus, by doing away with net neutrality, corporate America will finally be able to control virtually all the media.

One more step towards fascism, and a mighty big one at that.

[im10ashus]

3. It's our last bastion of hope for information.

Let's hope they defend our net neutrality.

[INdemo]

6. Why did the Democrats sell out?I'd like to see the voting record

Our only hope is with the Senate where we might have a chance to stop this fascist movement.
What does this mean for the 19th century dial up users?

[MadHound]

14. Same reason the Dems have been selling out for years now

Two party/same corporate master system of government at work. In this day and age, corporate money counts more than votes, thus almost everybody on both sides of the aisle do their corporate masters' bidding.

[Auggie]

36. Try to imagine 10 year from now

No telling what advances are yet to come on the internet. Love it or hate it, a free market is how we got to where we are today. Corporate control will likely stifle it.

[NorCalDem]

41. You're correct in that corporate control will stifle the internet

but the "free market" did not create the internet. Tax payer money and DARPA created the internet.

[serryjw]

61. A Virgin!

May I be the first to welcome you to DU! May I offer you a drink?:toast:

[tjwash]

4. That's what fucking China does.

They regulate the internet,and throw people in jail if they get caught trying to access non-government approved sites.

Glad to see the republicans and big business lobbyists for telcos finally showing exactly who they are trying to emulate. Now if we could get a Democrat with some balls like Dean or Clark to hammer this point across, it might be a help.

[im10ashus]

5. That's the first thing that came to my mind.

We are turning into China when it comes to the information we can access. Just lovely, isn't it?

[pokercat999]

42. China doesn't have a second amendment to their

constitution, we do. The time is fast approaching; if the people (real democrats) don't take back the house and senate, the time will be upon us.

[gatorboy]

18. Microsoft writes the software that HELPS China regulate the internet.

Just imagine what they'd do here with the government's okay...

[IndyOp]

7. There is work to be done: Call Your Senators

And tell them to pass a 'net neutrality amendment' and/or vote against COPE.

All Hands on Deck - Net Neutrality

[Gemini Cat]

10. Calling today & kick nt

[Selteri]

52. Which Republican? Voinovich or goostepper?

[NotGivingUp]

8. we're totally screwed if we let them get away with this

[DarleenMB]

9. Instead of just bellyachin' about this

Who has contacted their members of Congress (I refuse to call them "representatives" anymore since they sure as hell don't represent ME)?

Weeks ago I wrote to Barbara Cubin (idiot bitch from Wyoming) and asked her to vote in favor of "net neutrality." I didn't do it via one of the many sites that make it easy to just click and send. I wrote to her from her webpage. I intend to write both Senators from Wyoming today and INSIST they vote this thing down.

I've been writing to my congress critters for years because (a) the squeaky wheel gets the grease and (b) it annoys them cause they're all hard line Repukes.

[NVMojo]

11. this happened while DUers were frothing over Ann Coulter yesterday

we get what we deserve.

[im10ashus]

12. I am writing Clinton and Schumer today.

Let's see what their response is.

[fearthem]

64. Please post their addresses.

[MadHound]

13. Hey, some of us bellyache AND contact their reps

In fact, given the high interest in politics around here, I'd be willing to bet that a large number of DUers, in not the majority, do indeed both bellyache and contact their reps.

No need for broadbrush attacks, thanks

Peace:hi:

[whathappened]

45. hey

i'm tied of writing these dam fools and getting the same canned responce out of them every time , we thank you for your interest in the above vote that is coming up and we are working hard to respone to the peoples voices , bull shit , all we are getting is a can with a big hole in it , these people are working for the money people , and until k street is run out of town on a rail we are wasteing our time even trying to get them to wake up and smell the roses , get rid of them all and start out with a fresh bunch of faces and try to keep them from being what the corp want them to be , one pissed off voter that go'es way back in time and has seen the same ole same ole for years

[Tigress DEM]

49. But when they get a wave coming in from the likes of DU...

you can see the shift within a few days. The House is worse than the Senate anyway in my opinion.

You got John Conyers standing up for DEMS in the House and if there are others maybe someone like Marty Sabo here in MN, but the Senate has DEMS who have gotten concessions out of rethugs as well as their own, mostly...

One other thing to keep in mind is that there is still the quid pro quo thing going on in Congress, where rethugs will throw stuff into bills that wreck things for another Rep or Senator's state - like rethugs who might have supported Kennedy in his attempt to get the studies going on red tide out East would only do that if he backed off on other things. Well, like that would happen, so I don't think he got anywhere with that... So it isn't just politics the DEMS are playing, it's their constitutient's issues that are getting slammed for no good reason too.

[fishwax]

15. I recommend writing paper letters as well

they are harder to ignore, and people respect something tangible (as opposed to digital).

And also, welcome to DU, DarleenMB :hi: I admire you for still contacting your congress critters at all, given their leanings. After years in Oklahoma, where I was represented by the likes of Jim Inhofe and JC Watts, my ability to invest time and energy in that process has been thoroughly sapped. (When you have a senator (as oklahoma now does) who advocates the death penalty for abortion doctors, is it really possible for a letter to make a difference?)

But I digress, and I commend you for hassling them just the same :toast:

Finally, it's good to see another Wyomingite here. I no longer live in the state, but I (mostly) grew up in Sheridan and I still have family and friends scattered around the state :toast: Whereabouts in Wyoming?

[femrap]

47. I'm convinced about the snail mail....it gets much more

attention and makes a more lasting impression. Senator's administrative staff can just delete the emails.

When you call your senator, ask for the Aide that is handling the Net Neutrality issue....and then make sure you tell that Aide of your concerns and that he/she is taking notes and has your name and address. I usually say I am a member of an organized professional group...this seems to get the Aide's attention.

I hate corporations. A lot.

[nolabels]

16. The post title is somewhat misleading

Shouldn't it be congress sells out again for the 345,054,080,354 effing time. The only thing that is new as of late, is that jargon, or talking points they use, has added a few more ambiguous words to the lexicon. Call spade a spade and a bunch of crooks a bunch of crooks.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/11/03.html

[Jack Rabbit]

17. 106 Democrats voted AYE

Who were they? Where's the roll of dishonor?

[im10ashus]

19. Voila!

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll241.xml

[Jack Rabbit]

20. Thank you

My congressman, Mike Thompson of California 1, voted NAY.

[im10ashus]

21. You are welcome.

My rep, Jerrold Nadler of NY's 8th. voted NAY.

[mvd]

23. Why did people like Jackson-Lee, Rangel, and..

Schwartz vote for this? Do they think this could help Democrats gain more of a voice? I disagree - with the Repuke media giant, you know they'll be trying to manipulate things first.

I think this sets a dangerous precedent.

[stepnw1f]

24. No Kidding...Are They That STupid?

Or are they too in the pockets of the GOP and/or Telcos. This is disgusting.

[mvd]

27. I have lots of respect for Jackson-Lee

It's very disappointing.

[im10ashus]

26. Very dangerous indeed.

We need to call our Senator's and find out where THEY stand.

[agio]

38. the article got it right

"Bowing to an intense lobbying campaign that spent tens of millions of dollars – and held out the promise of hefty campaign contributions for those members who did the bidding of interested firms"

This is how our Congress works. Pork fat and greasy palms.

[im10ashus]

39. Welcome to DU.

:hi:

[mhatrw]

22. Why doesn't this surprise me?

What was the DLC on this issue?

Where is EVERYONE on this issue?

In the pockets of our corporate communications oligopolists and totalitarians, of course.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

25. Kicked and Recommended

[Julius Civitatus]

28. Goodbye to the FREE INTERNET, hello to CENSORSHIP and FEES

Another kickback to scumbag mega-corporations. From today and on, they OWN the INTERNET. Without Net Neutrality, the Bush admin. lets mega-corps like AT&T to set virtual toll-booths in the information superhighway.

I wonder if this is a reward to AT&T for that "nice work" they did on letting NSA access client's records.

:puke:

[rman]

29. So we lost

I think i'm going to cry now.

[Rosco T.]

33. Still has to get thru the Senate... not over yet.

[Swamp Rat]

30. Politicians in DC are gonna push the American People to the brink

:nuke:

[Downtown Hound]

32. I'm already there

I'm so fed up with this government. I want the backlash to cometh. I can't wait for the day when it does.

[mccoyn]

31. Does the bill actually allow this?

As I understand it, the telecommunications bill doesn't enable provides to charge in such a two step way. It was legal before and it will still be legal. So, the claims that the internet dies today are a little melodramic.

"That bill, which does not include meaningful network-neutrality protections creates an opening that powerful telephone and cable companies hope to exploit by expanding their reach while doing away with requirements that they maintain a level playing field for access to Internet sites. "

I don't see how the bill does "away with the requirements that they maintain a level palying field." Anyone want to find it for me? My skimming didn't turn anything up. http://saveaccess.org/sites/saveaccess.org/files/HR5252-COPE2006.pdf

I'm worried that we are all getting worked up over something that has been legal forever without any problems.

[Eric J in MN]

55. The point is that the heads of AT&T and Verizon recently

announced a plan to extort popular websites by charging them a fee to maintain service.

[ninkasi]

34. It's too much to hope for

that members of Congress actually pass laws that are for the good of the individual, rather than the corporation. It's absolutely disgusting, to see things that affect us sold to the highest corporate bidder.

[Rex]

35. Congress just LOVES working for corporations!

Fucking traitorous scum.

[porphyrian]

37. Well, I reject the majority of the House, so we're even. - n/t

[mom cat]

40. Let them know how we plan to deal with them in November.

[althecat]

43. This is apalling news... but all too typical

Why are any democrats voting for this crap

[creeksneakers2]

44. Every Congressperson who voted against

net neutrality should never receive any financial or other support from the net again. It would be a good idea if Senators were warned of the same.

[Nikki Stone 1]

46. YES! Let's get a list

I'd like to know myself

[Hestia]

48. Here is a list of the sell outs

Here are the sellout "Democrats", the ones that need to be replaced with real Democrats.

John Barrow, Shelley Berkley, Sanford Bishop, Dan Boren, Leonard Boswell, Rick Boucher, Allen Boyd, G.K. Butterfield, Dennis Cardoza, Russ Carnahan, Ben Chandler, William Clay, James Clyburn, Jim Costa, Bud Cramer, Joseph Crowley, Henry Cuellar, Artur Davis, Lincoln Davis, Norman Dicks, Harold Ford, Bart Gordon, Gene Green, Luis Gutiérrez, Brian Higgins, William Jefferson, Eddie Johnson, Jim Marshall, Kendrick Meek, Gregory Meeks, Charles Melancon, Michael Michaud, Dennis Moore, Ed Pastor, Nick Rahall, Mike Ross, Dutch Ruppersberger, Bobby Rush, David Scott, John Spratt, John Tanner, Tom Udall, Robert Wexler, Al Wynn

http://lowdownsplace.blogspot.com/2006/06/44-democrats-sell-us-out-good-bye-tom.html

[freefall]

50. Thanks for posting this list, Hestia. I held my breath looking for my

Congressman's name. Yeah!!! He is not on the list. I didn't think he would be because he is a good guy, but I was still holding my breath just in case. And I totally agree that every name on this list should be got rid of in November but only if we can replace them with a Democrat. We must keep our eyes on the ultimate goal in November -- making John Conyers Chair of the Judiciary Committee.

Whatcha wanna bet many of the same names are on the list of turncoats who voted for the bankruptcy bill. Another corporate written law guaranteed to screw the average person. One of my big fears is that some of these purchased politicians won't support impeachment when the possibility presents itself.

Peace,

freefall

[Selteri]

51. I'm not surprised at all, I wrote my rep but I already knew

it was lost because the corporations have more power with their millions of dollars than I do with my single voice. Even our voices together are drowned out by corporate moneies. The onyl way we will ever take back our country is to take the power from these corporations and rturn the power to the voter.

[im10ashus]

53. How did your rep vote?

Thankfully, mine voted Nay! Thankfully.

[Eric J in MN]

54. Disgusting corporate whores occupy the US House of Representatives.

nt

[cornermouse]

56. When was the last time the House of Representatives did something

ethical; because it was the right thing to do? This is from the family values crowd, mind you...

[im10ashus]

57. It's been a very long time.

Ethics would be anathema to them.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

58. Gosh. What a surprise. Wealthy lobbyists "persuaded" politicians.

Gotta keep those bribes..uh..campaign contributions coming in.

[The Wizard]

59. Totalitarians by any other name

They hate us for our freedoms.

[Cetacea]

60. kicked and Recommended

They don't like the 'internets'.

[Dagaz]

62. Good. I agree with the AFL-CIO on this

http://files.cwa-union.org/National/CommunicationsPolicy/Other/060524_House.pdf

[fearthem]

63. WHERE ARE THE LAWYERS? ARE WE GOING TO LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN?

I feel like it's widely known but people who are able to effect change seem to be paralyzed. Of all things, this needs action to protect democracy -- what will it take to get rid of Diabold and others who are posed to cheat us again??!! If our Democratic leaders do not get on top of this and direct monies needed to investigate, use the rule of law, they do not deserve to be elected! We discuss this all the time on blogs but is it being challenged in court, getting the press it must have? I think we must stop talking among ourselves and start calling, writing our representatives, demanding change.