Re: Did the Republican House landslide kill net neutrality?

Oh, crap!

Sent from my Droid Incredible
On Nov 5, 2010 11:37 AM, "Bruce Geerdes" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/11/net-neutrality-any-hope-left.ars
>
> Did the Republican House landslide kill net neutrality?
> By Matthew Lasar
>
> The Federal Communications Commission has published the agenda for its
> November Open Meeting. It comes two days after the Democrats took
> their shellacking in the midterm Congressional elections. And once
> again, the FCC's Open Internet proposals are nowhere to be found on
> the list of action items.
>
> Why not? Here's one idea: Net neutrality foes point out that none of
> the nearly one hundred Democratic candidates who signed a pledge to
> support the policy won their race.
>
> "The FCC should take note that the main 'political' driver behind
> trying to make net neutrality into a national grass roots issue,
> FreePress/PCCC/Moveon.org, could not get the issue to register on the
> election radar screen," observed Scott Cleland on Wednesday, "and
> where ever they did attract a candidate endorsement of their position,
> they failed 100 percent [of] the time in having that candidate get
> elected."
>
> No doubt that the concept was buried under a pile of front-burner
> concerns—the economy, health care, and immigration the biggest among
> them. All the more reason to wonder whether this election can be
> construed as a national plebiscite on net neutrality. When do telecom
> issues ever get that far?
>
> It is certainly true, however, that the House is now packed with
> headline-hungry politicians ready to pounce on the double n-word at a
> moment's notice. They squelched Henry Waxman's (D-CA) modest
> compromise proposal in a matter of days. That's got to be giving the
> FCC's boss Julius Genachowski a jitter or two.
>
> Last week's theories
>
> We've heard all kinds of theories about why the Commission didn't
> pursue its open Internet proposals prior to Tuesday. The big one was
> that White House economist Larry Summers and Chief of Staff Rahm
> Emanuel put pressure on the agency to keep the issue on a low flame.
> But they've moved on, and can't be blamed for the delay any longer.
>
> Another popular thesis was that Genachowski just doesn't want to "man
> up" to the pushback he's been getting from the phone and cable
> industries on the question. We do telecom rather than testosterone
> analysis around here, so we'll pass on that observation.
>
> In any event, if the FCC's boss actually wants to do something about
> net neutrality, he still can. He's got three votes. The FCC could
> launch its proposal to partially reclassify ISPs as common carriers.
> Or it could propose something like the Google/Verizon plan—a far
> weaker enforcement scheme with its exemptions for wireless broadband.
> Or it could cook up something in between these scenarios.
>
> As for all the political fallout that will come with any action—here's
> an idea. Why not wait and see how hard the Republican House tries to
> defund the Obama administration's health care bill? If Washington,
> D.C. shuts down in the ensuing stalemate, and electricity around
> Capitol Hill goes out, who'll notice if the FCC issues a net
> neutrality order via candlelight and batteries?
>
> Just a thought. Never mind.
>
> --
> dadl-ot mailing list
> http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot