Congress Prepares To Gut Net Neutrality With Bills Pretending To Save It

from the who-needs-a-healthy,-open-internet? dept

Wed, Feb 1st 2017 6:43am — Karl Bode

As we've noted a few times, the Trump administration and new FCC boss Ajit Pai have made it abundantly clear net neutrality protections will be going the way of the dodo under their watch. Given the threat of activist backlash and the logistical complications of rolling back the rules via the FCC, neutrality opponents' (like Pai) first step toward eliminating net neutrality will likely be to simply refuse to enforce them. From there, ISPs have been lobbying Congress to pass new laws that either hamstring regulatory authority, or pretend to protect net neutrality while actually doing the exact opposite.

For example, the House last week quickly passed a trio of new bills that would not only allow Congress to roll back Obama-era regulations (including net neutrality) en masse, but would give Congress effective veto power over future regulations from a number of regulatory agencies (including the FDA, EPA, and FCC). But there's also indications the GOP is cooking up a Communications Act rewrite with an eye toward weakening the FCC's authority over industry giants like Comcast, Verizon and AT&T even further.

Over at Vox, readers were recently informed that "A Republican bill could be our best chance to save net neutrality." According to author Timothy Lee, we need Congress to write a quality set of net neutrality protections to establish permanent protections, avoiding the partisan patty cake that occurs each time FCC oversight shifts:

"Donald Trump’s FCC looks poised to repeal the net neutrality regulations Obama’s FCC passed in 2015. If a Democrat is elected president in 2020, it’s a near certainty that the FCC will reinstate a version of Obama’s rules. Then if a Republican is elected in 2024 or 2028, the FCC is likely to tear those rules down.

Having the rules switch back and forth unpredictably is a disaster for both sides in the net neutrality debate. A legislative compromise can solve this problem. Because passing legislation is a lot harder than changing an FCC rule, a rule passed by Congress with buy-in from both parties would have a much better chance of being permanent."

And while it's true that a Congressional net neutrality law would certainly be the preferred and more permanent solution, some of you might have noticed that Congress is so campaign-cash compromised that achieving this end has proven to be virtually impossible over the last decade. Case in point is the "compromise" net neutrality legislation Senators Thune and Upton tabled last year as a last-ditch effort to deter the FCC from tougher rules. The proposal was so stuffed with loopholes as to be arguably useless, but was lauded by industry as a "sensible compromise" to the endless debate over net neutrality.

The problem is that passing ultra-weak rules just to stop the endless game of partisan fisticuffs isn't much of an actual solution to the problem. Thune and the GOP are preparing to table new legislation that would once again profess to put this issue to bed, but is very likely to fail to address the areas where the net neutrality fight is actually occurring right now, including interconnection, usage caps, and zero rating. Still, Lee tries repeatedly to insist that this sort of flimsy legislation would be better than no legislation at all:

"Still, if the alternative is four or even eight years of no network neutrality protections at all, some net neutrality fans might take a deal. More importantly, big telecommunications companies give generously on both sides of the aisle. So there may be some centrist Democrats who are willing to take a deal despite pressure from liberal activists to reject it."

But it's simply not clear that's really true. It might feel good to pass new net neutrality rules professing to put the issue to bed, but if the rules don't actually address any of the actual issues of the day, it's at best just theater, and -- depending on how it's written -- could actually act to make many of the more controversial net neutrality violations legal permanently. And if attempts to defund and defang the FCC are embedded in this or other bills in sync, actually enforcing consumer telecom protections (net neutrality, privacy, or otherwise) could prove harder than ever.

Of course there's another utterly crazy solution: for Congress to finally realize that net neutrality has broad, bipartisan support, and that a healthy and open internet is good for everyone. It's certainly a wild idea, but Congress could put the issue to bed and prove it actually cares about startups, innovators and consumers -- by leaving the existing rules alone, and moving on to other more pressing issues of the day.

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: congress, fcc, net neutrality

52 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ninja (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 5:46am

We all know where this is heading. Sure it may be prevented by broad activism and protesting and we shouldn't lay down arms or accept as inevitable. But truth is it's a very hard battle to the point a victory for the population is unlikely.

On the other hand, if this administration is bad enough that it causes real, visible damage in a massive scale then it might actually be a good thing. Sometimes we need to reach the bottom of the pit to actually turn around and start climbing up. I'm not sure if Trump and a Republican Congress that is populated mostly by the worst the Republicans can offer at the time are the bottom of the well but it seems so. In that case, brace yourselves, hope for utter chaos and for a swift rebirth from the ashes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 6:56am
  
  Re:
  "On the other hand, if this administration is bad enough that it causes real, visible damage in a massive scale then it might actually be a good thing."
  
  This is what is required to wake people from their apathy. The real questions are... 1. will the damage be enough? and 2. more importantly, will the solution be the correct one?
  
  I vote not likely on 1 and fat chance on 2. So sit back, it's going to sucks, might as well grab some popcorn and TRY to enjoy this fucked up ride!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 6:48am

Just think of all those folks who have set up auto pay via the internet ... how will they pay their bills after the internet is turned off? What will those companies do when their revenue tanks due to lose of net-pay fees?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 6:53am
  
  Re:
  We old timers do remember a time Before Internet...
  
  We used to use paper, with paper wrapped around it, and a token from the government-run shipping company affixed to the wrapper...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:20am
    
    Re: Re:
    Pffft. I'm old enough to remember when you had to lick the back of the token and the back of the paper wrapper, to get each to stick to the appropriate surfaces.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - GristleMissile (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 9:16am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I know self adhesive tokens have been around a while, but when did they start doing that with wrappers? All the (standard size no bubble wrap) ones I see still require a lickin.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Eldakka (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 3:46pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I still lick the wrapper before putting the load in.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - timmaguire42 (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 9:44am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      In 10 feet of snow.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - timmaguire42 (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 9:44am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      In 10 feet of snow.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - timmaguire42 (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 9:45am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Both licks.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        timmaguire42 (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 9:45am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        And we felt lucky!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        OGquaker, 1 Feb 2017 @ 11:09am
        
        Re: SouthCentral pays in cash
        PacBell closed all their walk-in payment centers ~1990, but when TheGasCo. tried to close their street offices my roommate put together protests and legal action that kept them open for a few more years. The utility monopoly bent their tariffs to allow 7-11 and such to accept cash, but not complaints.
        Utility & Landline tariffs were presented on paper at all public offices, now you will NEVER see the contract you WILL be the victim of.
        The city tows legally parked cars during parades and such to avoid a physical confrontation with an owner; lying to a persons face is a rare thing.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 8:12am
    
    Re: Re:
    And our search for knowledge was time consuming and/or expensive, as it involved libraries and bookshops. If you needed tutoring, then it was night school for suitable classes, if any were available that you could attend. I hope that those days do not return.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Derek Kerton (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 1:20pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Amen. I feel like my brain is bionic, enhanced by the Internet. Need to fix the torque sensor in my e-bike...youtube search...there's a video to teach me.
      
      What's that quote about "First they came for the..." Oh, yeah, Martin Niemoller's poem. Would I ever have that info at my fingertips in the old days?
      
      I have unbelievable access to shopping. Not just consumer crap (yeah, that too), but parts to repair my furnace, for example. Just search, download the manual, find the partslist in the PDF, match the broken part number, search for that part number, BAM, order. Two days later my furnace is fixed.
      
      This access to information and things is fucking amazing. I am a superman beyond what was thought possible when I was a kid. I am not interested in losing my bionic ability.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 4:35pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Yes - the internet is one of the greatest human accomplishments ever, and guess what the idiots in power want to do to it. Sorta reminds me of the story about a goose that laid golden eggs.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:12am
  
  Re:
  Its unlikely the internet will be turn off
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 8:52am
    
    Re: Re:
    It will become just another vehicle for the government approved cable channels.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 11:39am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Not if we fight to protect net neutrality and many already are and you should too
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 4:37pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Thanks for the vote of confidence and encouragement, hopefully it will not get me shot, arrested, or sent to gitmo.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 10:59am
    
    Re: Re:
    It looks like you are trying to reach the website "blah_blah_blah.com" would you like help with that?
    
    > yes
    
    Ok then, you will need to contact your local representative and update your package selections. There are several options that could offer significant savings if you bundle websites. You could chose the News! package which is on sale thru the end of the month, we suggest bundling this with our FamilyFirst package. You'll love it at only 99.99 /month
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 11:38am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Most dont want a package internet and a fighting to make sure that never happens
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 4:40pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Fighting an uphill battle, maybe when congress gets the boot things will turn around. In the meantime the assholes are introducing bills that would "outlaw" protesting. This goes 100% against the first amendment .... the first fucking one!
        God these people are assholes!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 6:55am

Sometimes you have to destroy the village to save it.
So they say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:00am
  
  Re: Sometimes you have to destroy the village to save it.
  Funny you should say that...
  
  http://imgur.com/lo9IK
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:08am
    
    Re: Re: Sometimes you have to destroy the village to save it.
    Nukes: The solution to "under-performing" cities?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:26am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Sometimes you have to destroy the village to save it.
      The imagery speaks for itself!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 4:44pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Sometimes you have to destroy the village to save it.
      That would fall under their planned effort to privatize cities across the country. Any city that does not meet their standard (a moving target) will be closed. Residents will be allowed to submit an application for attendance at an alternate (private) city if they are accepting applications and you meet their stringent requirements.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - BAPACop (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 11:50am
    
    If anyone is curious about the accuracy of the provided image:
    
    Top-left: Hiroshima in 1945.
    http://www.usatoday.com/picture-gallery/news/2015/08/05/looking-at-atomic-bombing-of-hiroshima/ 31165729/
    
    Bottom-left: NOT Hiroshima. That's Yokohama.
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/59026000@N04/6834814157
    
    Top-right: Detroit in 1945.
    http://www.hourdetroit.com/core/pagetools.php?pageid=7045&url=/Hour-Detroit/September-2012/ Book-The-Glory-Years-of-the-Detroit-Tigers-1920-1950/&mode=print
    
    Bottom-right-left: Michigan Central Station in Detroit. Closed since 1988. Those broken windows were replaced in 2015.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/detroit-s-michigan-central-station-getting-new-windows-1. 2969221
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_Central_Station#/media/File:A445,_Michigan_Central_Sta tion,_Detroit,_Michigan,_USA,_2016.jpg
    
    Bottom-right-right: NOT Detroit. Warsaw, Poland c.~2009.
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wings3.jpg
    http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-the-ruins -of-an-old-house-and-a-modern-block-of-flats-warsaw-poland-58591559.html
    
    FINAL SCORE: 2 correct, 1 misleading, 2 blatantly false.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:34am
  
  Re: Sometimes you have to destroy the village to save it.
  That is only ever said by those who would destroy all opposition to their rule.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:09am

This will require nothing short of a SOPA style uprising.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:19am
  
  Re:
  True and its already beginning. Many support net neutrality and dont want it repealing.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - PaulT (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 8:10am
    
    Re: Re:
    I hope it's enough. There's been a lot of misinformation spread about net neutrality, and some people seem to think that the term refers to new FCC rules. They don't realise that it refers to the open internet that the rules were put in place to protect. Some of these people support removing net neutrality rules, thinking they're preserving instead of killing it.
    
    Like many things recently, we seem to be faced with a populace who have been lied into supporting the destruction of things they were wanting to protect.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 11:08am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      It's not at all enough. The current Congress is riding a wave of conservative populism and right now, their constituency that put them there is euphoric that they've stuck it to the liberal left and want everything from the past 8 years reversed regardless of whether the law or regulation is positive or negative. To them, anything from the Obama years is automatically negative and needlessly restrictive.
      
      Tech companies putting up road blocks are going to be seen by that same constituency as more liberal obstructionism and sour grapes (as most of them supported Hillary) and hostile to their agenda of a "Return to the Way Things Were" and "Limited Government". So no. Google et al throwing hissy fits and blacking out their services for a day is going to be met with anger at THEM, not at the government by the voters that put the Republicans in office.
      
      We're looking at a management, financial, real estate sector "friendly", and labor, environment, consumer "hostile" government for at least the next 2 - 4 years, if not 8 (it's difficult to unseat a sitting President). And like every administration before it, privacy and rights hostile (regardless of party in power).
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 11:43am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Not really most people spsupport net neutrality and are fighting to keep it so we will see a SOPA backlash
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 2 Feb 2017 @ 6:17am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Looks to be more of a ripple than a wave.
        
        Whilst some in politics focus on the ripple they created, becoming enthralled by and proclaiming its wondrous beauty ... there is tsunami building behind them and it is gathering strength. Wonder what these fools will do when they see the water receding just prior to its arrival. They might proclaim it proof that climate change is a hoax because the water is not rising.
        
        - hilarity ensues (even though it is gallows humor)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:44am
  
  Re:
  What are the odds that Trump will tell the security services and police to solve the problem of such a revolt.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:17am

if you want to help protect Net Neutrality you should support groups like ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Free Press who are fighting to keep Net Neutrality.

https://www.aclu.org/

https://www.eff.org/

https://www.freepress.net/

also you can set them as your charity on https://smile.amazon.com/

also write to your House Representative and senators

http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information /senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state

and the FCC

https://www.fcc.gov/about/contact
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:51am

Nobody fucking cares. Close this shitty website down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 8:06am
  
  Re:
  Yet, apparently, not only did you come here willingly, you made the effort to read the article, click through to comments and write...
  
  Apparently, you care very much.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 8:21am
  
  Re:
  Aw there there, I'm sorry the big words scare you. Hold on and Mr Trump will be right along to tuck you into your safe space.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 8:55am
  
  Re:
  That's not how you say it ...
  
  this site is bad, very bad.
  filled with losers, sad very sad.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 10:18am
  
  Re:
  Nobody fucking cares.
  
  You cared enough to comment. Although it's ironic because no on really cares that you don't care (although it seems that you do care...a little).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - That One Guy (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 5:46pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Maybe they're a nobody and they were posting to declare that they at least care?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 7:55am

With you until that last sentence

It's certainly a wild idea, but Congress could put the issue to bed and prove it actually cares about startups, innovators and consumers -- by leaving the existing rules alone, and moving on to other more pressing issues of the day.

Doing nothing would be better than reverting the FCC's rule changes, but if Congress really wanted to prove it cares about the people harmed by a non-neutral Internet, it would pass a bill that is better than the FCC's rules, rather than stand idly by and pretend that the FCC rules are good enough as-is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 8:07am

I wonder if it would allow websites that are like 1-900 numbers. $2.99 for the first Megabit and only $.99 for each additional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
orbitalinsertion (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 8:19am

_"...fans..."_

Idiot.

Actually, Timothy's article is entirely full of crap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- GristleMissile (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 9:23am
  
  Re:
  Pretty sure that Sir Timothy "Fucking Invented the Web" Berners Lee might know a wee bit more about the issues than you.
  
  If you'd like to change that opinion, try posting something substansive.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - That One Guy (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 9:21pm
    
    It's easier to get a stationary car to move the direction you want it to than one already moving the wrong way
    'Smart in general', or even 'Smart on a given subject' does not make one immune from making bad decisions or arguments, and bad rules would be worse than no rules at all, because the latter at least would be easier to fix once there was enough pressure to do so, whereas the former would enshrine bad ideas into law which would have to be removed first, and you can be sure that the ones benefiting from those bad laws would fight tooth and nail to keep them in place('removing the current laws would upset the market, causing significant confusion and harm to customers!') followed by fighting against the new laws.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
timmaguire42 (profile), 1 Feb 2017 @ 9:50am

A few years ago when net neutrality first started getting talked about, Mike penned a solid argument (this was before techdirt became a political rant site) that charging service providers for faster service constituted double dipping and was in violation of high speed contracts customers were signing and paying for.

That strikes me as the best avenue to go down--the legislature is fine, but that sounds like a long-term solution. Instead have the courts decide the issue under contract law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 11:03am

There is a difference between a rant and a well thought out commentary on the present day issues. But you knew that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Feb 2017 @ 2:47pm

Time to dust off the dialup modem
I wonder if it still works?

Next problem: does the modem at the other end still work?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Feb 2017 @ 8:55am
  
  Re: Time to dust off the dialup modem
  And the problem after that, is can you live with a pure text world, and days to exchange emails? Even the fastest modems would struggle with still images, and be hopelessly slow for audio, never mind video.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]