Rep. Blackburn Introduces Bill To Thwart Vile FCC Attempt To Do....Little To Nothing Of Substance On Net Neutrality
from the protectin'-freedom dept
As I recently noted, all the net neutrality opponents freaking out about the FCC's new neutrality promises really shouldn't be.The announcement effectively boiled down to the agency saying "we might think about some stuff after a very long conversation that will potentially go nowhere." Yes, there are a few promises in there about pushing for greater competition and transparency, but the FCC has spent a decade making similar promises they've failed to follow through on. Still, that didn't stop Rep. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee from declaring that the FCC's ambiguous non-announcement was the very worst sort of attack on Internet freedom -- a "socialistic" proposal that will have Americans re-living the "horrors" recently experienced during visits to Healthcare.gov.
Blackburn appears to have followed up her failure to understand how little the FCC will actually be doing (right alongside much of the press, apparently) with a bill aimed at thwarting the FCC's entirely non-existent assault on Internet freedom. H.R. 4070, or the "Internet Freedom Act," would protect us all from the FCC goin' crazy and regulatin' the hell outta them there Internets. From a statement on her new bill:
"Net Neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine of the Internet. Once the FCC has a foothold into managing how internet service providers run their networks they will essentially be deciding which content goes first, second, third, or not at all. It’s time for Congress to slam the FCC’s regulatory back-door shut, lock it, and return the keys to the free market. My legislation will put the brakes on net neutrality and protect our innovators from these job-killing regulations."Blackburn is simply throwing some chum in the partisan water to excite her base. Pretending the horribly ill-conceived Fairness Doctrine is making its menacing return (it died in 1987) is one that gets trotted out every few months or so for just that purpose. The amusing part is that Blackburn doesn't appear to have noticed that her campaign contributors AT&T and Comcast actually really like the FCC's new proposal. Why? Because they know the very most it's going to result in is a list of voluntary, non-binding measures "prohibiting" ISPs from doing things they never wanted to (like stone-cold outright blocking of entirely legal websites or services for no sane reason) while not prohibiting them from "creative" pricing (usage caps).
The FCC has spent much of the last 20 years deregulating the broadband cable, and phone industries and doing everything in their power to support things like usage caps and limited competition through total inaction. The broadband industry in turn has spent much of that time working endlessly to weaken the FCC's authority to regulate, just in case the agency wakes up one day and decides to do its job. This entirely-hallucinated idea that the agency is suddenly going to go mad, unshackle its trademark apathy on consumer issues, abuse non-existent authority, and start creating tough new regulations is all part of one elaborate stage play. The FCC's moves are theater, the political response is theater, and the quality of all the players is abysmal.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: broadband, fcc, internet freedom act, marsha blackburn, net neutrality, regulation
Companies: at&t, comcast
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
What a clod. She really doesn't get what Net Neutrality is does she? Either that or she is blatantly being misleading. I suspect the latter. She can't actually believe that Net Neutrality, a concept that means that ALL traffic is treated equally on a network, could be used to do the exact opposite. That's like trying to argue that the 13th amendment to the Constitution would enslave people. She really needs to put the crack pipe down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Welcome to 'Murica.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I pretty much always auto-translate bills to mean the exact opposite of their titles. If some politician came down with a sudden case of honesty and proposed a bill that did what it was titled, I think it would break my think muscle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111027/15411816543/rep-blackburn-co-sponsor-e-parasit e-explains-why-regulating-internet-is-terrible.shtml
Make no mistake, she's PAID to say what she says and tell people that a few liberal (this is what she means by socialist) issues of internet fairness need to be all about private markets for her donors.
This is why money in politics and no public say on the matter are par for the course. Let the big guys duke it out and the fall out hits the regular plebs they care nothing about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Net Neutrality doesn't mean all traffic is treated equally...
The Fairness Doctrine did mean equal time for opposing views.
Net Neutrality means that the network doesn't care about the gist of the content that it carries. It just blindly forwards traffic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Net Neutrality doesn't mean all traffic is treated equally...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Net Neutrality doesn't mean all traffic is treated equally...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
net neutrality
Since both the network operators and some of those in government is trying to team up against us we are screwed.
Between this and data caps the internet is done, which is what they want. Everyday I see reasons not to live in the US
anymore....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: net neutrality
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: net neutrality
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
B-movie time!
In other words, it's just like a Syfy Saturday Special, only minus special effects, even abysmally bad ones.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Internet Must Go
[ link to this | view in chronology ]