Tomorrow at 2:30 pm, the Senate Commerce Committee will meet to discuss the administration’s National Broadband Plan. However, given the court ruling last week that the FCC can’t regulate the Internet under its current classification, the focus will be on net neutrality.
There are two ways to get net neutrality written into law – one easy and one hard. The hard way would be having Congress approve a net neutrality bill. That involves a majority in the House and 60 votes in the Senate. As we well know, it’s hard. The easy way would be to correct a Bush-era mistake, as explained by Josh Silver of Free Press:
Under intense pressure from phone and cable companies, the Bush FCC chose to reclassify broadband as an "information service" instead of a "communications service" that provides strong regulatory oversight of traditional telephone services. Problem is, the "information service" classification so lacks the required regulatory authority, that the court just decided the FCC can’t do anything. University of Michigan’s Susan Crawford explains it in detail here.
The good news is that there is a simple solution. FCC Chairman Genachowski must "reclassify" broadband as a "communications service." The formidable phone and cable companies will fight tooth and nail to keep that from happening, but the Comcast case has forced Chairman Genachowski’s hand: he must make the change. If not, the FCC has virtually no power to stop Comcast from blocking websites. The FCC has virtually no power to make policies to bring broadband to rural America, to promote competition, to protect consumer privacy or truth in billing. Bottom line: the agency has no power to enact the much-discussed National Broadband Plan, released just last month.
FCC Chairman Genachowski has been forced into a corner, and he will have to either stand up to the big companies and do the right thing, or watch his legacy at the FCC wash down the drain.
Tomorrow, Chairman Genachowski is testifying. It’s important that he hear from Senators that they are supportive of net neutrality and would support him if he chose to reclassify broadband so the FCC can regulate it.
Of course, the army of lobbyists the telecom companies have hired would like nothing more than to force net neutrality to go through Congress, where they could kill the bill outright or weaken it to the point of futility. They are right now working overtime to pressure Senators on the committee (and Senators in general) against reclassification.
But we have here a moment where public pressure can make a difference. Click here to send a message to your Members of Congress, asking them to support the FCC as it reclassifies broadband. And then give the members of the Committee a call.



24 Comments







There’s a few additional things callers should keep in mind when they call their representatives:
– broadband cable providers have been selling phone service;
– broadband cable providers’ service has been used for phone service provided by other VoIP firms, like Vonage and Skype;
– broadband cable providers also support Skype and other VoIP calls over handheld devices which cut to WiFi as if they were phones.
They have become communications services both by their own choice and their customers’ choice.
And if customers are using their own VoIP providers like Skype or Vonage over their cable company’s service, theoretically the cable co. could cut them out and insist they buy their cable co. VoIP service instead. We wouldn’t tolerate that from a traditional phone company any more.
I agree with most of what you say here, and already made all the relevant calls to Congress that I can make, and even sent a couple of faxes, and agitated upward by calling a couple of local pols with better connections to the Capitol than I have, and already did likewise with blogs and letters last year when Obama appointed the telecom tool Mignon Clyburn to the FCC.
But still…
Why does Genachowski need anybody’s “support” to do the right thing about reclassifying the internet as a medium of communication?
He serves five years as Chairman of the FCC unless the world burns down, and nobody in Washingtyon can touch him.
Because a lot of highly paid people are pressuring him not to do the right thing.
Ditto
While there’s nothing Congress can do to him, there’s plenty it can do to his agency. To think that congressmen wouldn’t do something out of personal spite is, I think, to overcomplicate the career of Sen. Jim Bunning, as just one example.
Also very true.
This is really an issue that crosses partisan boundaries; evangelicals who may not read ‘lefty blogistan’ do **a lot** of communicating with their church websites, from what I can tell. I’d give my molars to watch Orrin Hatch or Richard Shelby explain to the ministers of their state why they gave the Internet away to the telecoms.
Any group with unpopular views can be victimized, as can any business that is somehow in competition or in an adversarial relationship with ISPs. Comcast, for instance, is deep into both telecom and entertainment. How safe is Sony or any other entertainment business that doesn’t have its own large group of Internet users?
Of course, one doesn’t need to be either of those things to be overcharged by an ISP, which is another danger of this court decision.
Good post, JR. I’ll call my senators in the A.M.
Signed the letter when it first came out.
From the Commerce Committee’s website, here are the members listed:
* Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV West Virginia Visit Site
* Senator Daniel K. Inouye Hawaii Visit Site
* Senator John F. Kerry Massachusetts Visit Site
* Senator Byron L. Dorgan North Dakota Visit Site
* Senator Barbara Boxer California Visit Site
* Senator Bill Nelson Florida Visit Site
* Senator Maria Cantwell Washington Visit Site
* Senator Frank R. Lautenberg New Jersey Visit Site
* Senator Mark Pryor Arkansas Visit Site
* Senator Claire McCaskill Missouri Visit Site
* Senator Amy Klobuchar Minnesota Visit Site
* Senator Tom Udall New Mexico Visit Site
* Senator Mark Warner Virginia Visit Site
* Senator Mark Begich Alaska Visit Site
Minority Members
* Ranking Member Kay Bailey Hutchison Texas Visit Site
* Senator Olympia Snowe Maine Visit Site
* Senator John Ensign Nevada Visit Site
* Senator Jim DeMint South Carolina Visit Site
* Senator John Thune South Dakota Visit Site
* Senator Roger Wicker Mississippi Visit Site
* Senator George S. LeMieux Florida Visit Site
* Senator Johnny Isakson Georgia Visit Site
* Senator David Vitter Louisiana Visit Site
* Senator Sam Brownback Kansas Visit Site
* Senator Mike Johanns Nebraska Visit Site
If your Senator is on that list, it might be particularly important to contact him (or in my case, her).
BTW, don’t assume that all Republicans are against Net Neutrality, or all Democrats for it. In the past, at least, the politics have not been that simple.
Very true.
I shall definitely be calling my senator, good ol Jay Rock
The original Telecomm Act was created in the 1930s.
It had about 5 Titles within the Telecomm Act.
One of the titles regulated “communication services”.
The telecomms and cables laid the groundwork for a number of yeras to get ‘communication services’ reclassified into ‘information services’ via two means: (a) a court case called Brand X, and (2) lobbying Congress.
They got their reclassification in 2005, which meant that ‘information services’ don’t fall within the Title that requires FCC protection.
So it was their workaround method to ensure that they’d cream off all the profits from the Internet. They wail and moan about how much they’ve paid to install fiber optic, etc, etc, etc.
I’d point out that every school district, city government with a cop, state agency with a website, church with a website, and Rotary Club has also ‘invested’ in the Internet.
Basically, the telecomms are acting as if the only part of the Internet that matters is the physical infrastructure. That’s total bullshit, and they’re a pack of whining babies.
The thing that makes the Internet ‘sing’ is software.
The telecomms do **not** make software, but of course they want to buy it all up.
The old Communist Politburo couldn’t do a better job of grasping onto resources than our current telecomms and their minions in D.C.
I swear that in June 2006 when I was calling several Congressional offices to explain why Net Neutrality was essential to the US economic future, not a single one of the people that I spoke with had the slightest clue that there are ‘layers’ to the Internet; they were legislating about the Internet without any technical background.
Pure stupidity.
The telecoms are about money, and their arguments are totally ‘bottom line’. They are not thinking seriously about the social, educational, economic, or scientific impacts (as corporate officers, their fiduciary responsibility is to their company profits).
As I said in 2006, just wait till all those Senators start hearing from the grandmas who are pissed because their telecomm bills are rising. There won’t be a federal elected left in office if they don’t wake up to how pissed people will be.
You can mess with a lot of things in this world, but never, ever, ever get between a grandparent and photos of their grandkids. That’s moronic stupidity.
IMHO Comcast can do whatever it likes in areas that have internet provider choice. However, in areas where Comcast has a virtual monopoly on high speed internet, like mine in Indiana,they need to provide “neutrality” or lose their monopoly status. In our community, we are considering wireless broadband provided by the county as a property tax benefit…lots of opposition, probably from deluded wingnuts, who actually believe that the private sector can do it better, and people in Comcast’s pocket. Should Comcast start playing a “big brother” role in deciding what we can and can’t see via the internet, my guess would be that even the Teabaggers would be for the county provided wireless, as Teabag sites would certainly be amongst the first sites to be blocked and another “freedom” would be “taken away!!”
If you have a choice, you’re lucky.
For most of us the choice is either phone company or cable company, both of which are monopolies. (I’m lumping DSL with phone company here, because it’s dependent on them.)
hychka, if you have a connection that enables you to watch video, you may find the Bill Moyers special on “Net at Risk” quite useful. It does a really good overview of the issues. You may want to pass it along to your local councilmembers if they are not familiar with it — it does a good job of showing that Net Neutrality is pretty ‘non-partisan’ as an issue.
Eli is upstairs!
Another Day, Another Scapegoat
I agree that NO ONE but the internet providers and the politicians they bribe gain should the nation allow any policy other than “net nuetrality.” But, it sure would be great to harness all that Teabag energy against “the taking of internet freedom!” Hell, even I’d get out a Paul Revere outfit and borrow a “front loader” for that one!!
Internet freedom is toast. This is what the Corporatist have wanted all along. This is the last place they need to stomp down resistance to their total rule and it’s going to happen.
I wrote to Sen. Cantwell. I suggest anyone else whose Senator is on that list do the same.
Why is the only freedom the useful idiots fight for the freedom of the rich to rob us blind?
Countdown to Obama disappointing everyone starts…NOW!
He’ll be a moderate and give 3/4ths of his soul to the telecomms, because Obama represents change that I cannot ****ing believe.
Should we call both houses? I mean, are the House committees also going to hold hearings or just the senate? (I have a senator on the list, but will also have a house member if they also hold a hearing).
Worth it, sure, though the House isn’t as pressing
As a former CTC Americore volunteer, I can tell you, this is an important matter for the Little Guy. Always watch what they do to the low income because believe me, YOU ARE NEXT IF THEY GET AWAY WITH IT. Most low income families are forced out of the market because it is unaffordable. Many communities have “monopolies” where their city or county government “contracted” with the company for this service. Many of these governemnt entities who makes these contracts “forget” to include the clause for low income and non-profit access in order for this compnay to even BE a monoloply.
Also never forget that the Telecommunications Act provided huge governemnt subsidies to companies like Comcast to huild the infrastructure. Now they whine that since they built it it should be all theirs. No, we helped build it and we should have a piece of the action and say.
My 2 cents,
Cat in Seattle