Bravo! ANOTHER Fighting Dem?? Sen. Wyden even hints at... gasp! FILIBUSTER?!
BRAVO!
ABOUT TIME!
Sweet Lord above!
A Dem. in the Senate actually offering to STAND UP AND FIGHT.. against the Telecom giants?
BRAVO!
This is also the first time that C-dems.blgspt.com has ever linked to a dailyKos article.
But we certainly welcome the good news that Senator RON WYDEN is set to OPPOSE Big Telecom legislation trying to RIG the internet as a TIERED system, with one set or rates for big-biz customers (i.e. TAX CUTS, er, Big-Biz REBATES to friends and cronies), while setting higher rates (ENRON EXTORTION RATES) for everyone else.
We here at C-dems.blgspt.com do not believe that "free enterprise" is the Alpha and Omega for the telecom industry. They have set their priority as PROFITS, which means that lots of companies scramble around trying to CONTROL market share, often with competing and overlapping services. By contrast, in Europe the GOVERNMENT decides on which is the best, most efficient system available, and COORDINATES the construction of that system. You know, the way the US GOVERNMENT created the INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM, handing out plenty of "private enterprise contracts" to allow local contractors to become rich, but using the government's powers of taxation, planning, supervision, and oversight to develop an efficient, standardized system.
Or, to make it brief, we believe that EVERYONE in America should be ENTITLED to ACCESS to the information highway - AT FULL SPEED. This should be a CIVIL RIGHT for everyone in America in the 21st century, even if we have to knock a few telecom dodos over to attain that GOAL. (And Repugs say Democrats "HAVE NO BIG GOALS"!) (It is ironic that net telecom execs can become DODOS merely 10 years after 56k dialup was the "hot thing"! But Lyndon Johnson had to fight the same status-quo when he took on POWER EXECUTIVES in rural Texas and throughout America. Running power transmission lines is an expensive process in labor and materials, and private energy companies DID NOT want to run costly power lines long distances to small numbers of rural end users. But Johnson, a product of hardscrabble West Texas, INSISTED that the monopoly of private power execs be broken, doing much to take rural Texas out of the 19th century into the 20th.
Senator Wyden stands SQUARELY in that Democratic/Progressive/LEADERSHIP tradition, and for once it would be nice to see Democrats band together and GET THE UPPER HAND of POPULAR APPROVAL vs the telecom giant bullies.
Wyden Blocks Telecom Legislation over Net Neutrality
by mcjoan
Wed Jun 28, 2006 at 05:03:37 PM PDT
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/6/28/20337/0262
Ron Wyden announced this afternoon that he has placed a "hold" on the telecommunciations legislation just passed by the Commerce Committee until clear language is included in the legislation that prevents discrimination in Internet access.
From his floor statement (in an e-mail to me):
Mr. President, the major telecommunications legislation reported today by the Senate Commerce Committee is badly flawed. The bill makes a number of major changes in the country's telecommunications law but there is one provision that is nothing more than a license to discriminate. Without a clear policy preserving the neutrality of the Internet and without tough sanctions against those who would discriminate, the Internet will be forever changed for the worse.
This one provision threatens to divide the Internet into technology "haves" and "have nots." This one provision concentrates even more power in the hands of the special interests that own the pipelines to the Internet. This one provision codifies discrimination on the Internet by a handful of large telecommunications and cable providers. This one provision will allow large, special interests to saddle consumers and small businesses alike with new and discriminatory fees over and above what they already pay for Internet access. This one small provision is akin to hurling a giant wrecking ball at the Internet.
The inclusion of this provision compels me to state that I would object to a unanimous consent request to the Senate proceeding with this legislation until a provision that provides true Internet neutrality is included. . . .
The large interests have made it clear that if this bill moves forward, they will begin to discriminate. A Verizon Communications executive has called for an "end to Google's `free lunch.'" A Bell South executive has said that he wants the Internet to be turned into a "pay-for-performance marketplace." What they and other cable and phone company executives are proposing is that instead of providing equal access for everyone to the same content at the same price, they will set up sweetheart arrangements to play favorites. Without net neutrality protections, this bill is bad news for consumers and anyone who today enjoys unlimited access to all of the Net's applications, service and content.
This hold is basically a signal of intent to filibuster. Holds generally are requests that any Senator can make that a bill or measure not be considered by the full Senate until certain issues in it are cleared up. It's not officially in the Senate rules, and the majority leader can refuse it. If Stevens's statement that he doesn't have 60 votes is to be believed, then Wyden's hold could keep this bill from the floor. We'll just have to wait to see what negotiations that might be in the offing mean for the future of the telecommunications bill and net neutrality.
Here I need to provide full disclosure: my first job out of college was with Ron when he was still in the House. Though there's been plenty I've disagreed with him about, I'm still a fan. His leadership on this issue, however, has been unquestionably admirable. He introduced the first stand-alone legislation on net neutrality, S. 2360, the Internet Non-Discrimination Act, in March, and is a co-sponsor of Snowe/Dorgan. He was among the first to recognize it as a critical issue for consumers, for the technology industry, for business small and large, and for the non-profit sector.
His willingness to stand up on this issue should be applauded and supported. It should be supported by all Senate Democrats, including the leadership. Don't let up on your pressure on your Senators on this issue. Make them stand with Wyden to protect the Internet.
::
ABOUT TIME!
Sweet Lord above!
A Dem. in the Senate actually offering to STAND UP AND FIGHT.. against the Telecom giants?
BRAVO!
This is also the first time that C-dems.blgspt.com has ever linked to a dailyKos article.
But we certainly welcome the good news that Senator RON WYDEN is set to OPPOSE Big Telecom legislation trying to RIG the internet as a TIERED system, with one set or rates for big-biz customers (i.e. TAX CUTS, er, Big-Biz REBATES to friends and cronies), while setting higher rates (ENRON EXTORTION RATES) for everyone else.
We here at C-dems.blgspt.com do not believe that "free enterprise" is the Alpha and Omega for the telecom industry. They have set their priority as PROFITS, which means that lots of companies scramble around trying to CONTROL market share, often with competing and overlapping services. By contrast, in Europe the GOVERNMENT decides on which is the best, most efficient system available, and COORDINATES the construction of that system. You know, the way the US GOVERNMENT created the INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM, handing out plenty of "private enterprise contracts" to allow local contractors to become rich, but using the government's powers of taxation, planning, supervision, and oversight to develop an efficient, standardized system.
Or, to make it brief, we believe that EVERYONE in America should be ENTITLED to ACCESS to the information highway - AT FULL SPEED. This should be a CIVIL RIGHT for everyone in America in the 21st century, even if we have to knock a few telecom dodos over to attain that GOAL. (And Repugs say Democrats "HAVE NO BIG GOALS"!) (It is ironic that net telecom execs can become DODOS merely 10 years after 56k dialup was the "hot thing"! But Lyndon Johnson had to fight the same status-quo when he took on POWER EXECUTIVES in rural Texas and throughout America. Running power transmission lines is an expensive process in labor and materials, and private energy companies DID NOT want to run costly power lines long distances to small numbers of rural end users. But Johnson, a product of hardscrabble West Texas, INSISTED that the monopoly of private power execs be broken, doing much to take rural Texas out of the 19th century into the 20th.
Senator Wyden stands SQUARELY in that Democratic/Progressive/LEADERSHIP tradition, and for once it would be nice to see Democrats band together and GET THE UPPER HAND of POPULAR APPROVAL vs the telecom giant bullies.
Wyden Blocks Telecom Legislation over Net Neutrality
by mcjoan
Wed Jun 28, 2006 at 05:03:37 PM PDT
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/6/28/20337/0262
Ron Wyden announced this afternoon that he has placed a "hold" on the telecommunciations legislation just passed by the Commerce Committee until clear language is included in the legislation that prevents discrimination in Internet access.
From his floor statement (in an e-mail to me):
Mr. President, the major telecommunications legislation reported today by the Senate Commerce Committee is badly flawed. The bill makes a number of major changes in the country's telecommunications law but there is one provision that is nothing more than a license to discriminate. Without a clear policy preserving the neutrality of the Internet and without tough sanctions against those who would discriminate, the Internet will be forever changed for the worse.
This one provision threatens to divide the Internet into technology "haves" and "have nots." This one provision concentrates even more power in the hands of the special interests that own the pipelines to the Internet. This one provision codifies discrimination on the Internet by a handful of large telecommunications and cable providers. This one provision will allow large, special interests to saddle consumers and small businesses alike with new and discriminatory fees over and above what they already pay for Internet access. This one small provision is akin to hurling a giant wrecking ball at the Internet.
The inclusion of this provision compels me to state that I would object to a unanimous consent request to the Senate proceeding with this legislation until a provision that provides true Internet neutrality is included. . . .
The large interests have made it clear that if this bill moves forward, they will begin to discriminate. A Verizon Communications executive has called for an "end to Google's `free lunch.'" A Bell South executive has said that he wants the Internet to be turned into a "pay-for-performance marketplace." What they and other cable and phone company executives are proposing is that instead of providing equal access for everyone to the same content at the same price, they will set up sweetheart arrangements to play favorites. Without net neutrality protections, this bill is bad news for consumers and anyone who today enjoys unlimited access to all of the Net's applications, service and content.
This hold is basically a signal of intent to filibuster. Holds generally are requests that any Senator can make that a bill or measure not be considered by the full Senate until certain issues in it are cleared up. It's not officially in the Senate rules, and the majority leader can refuse it. If Stevens's statement that he doesn't have 60 votes is to be believed, then Wyden's hold could keep this bill from the floor. We'll just have to wait to see what negotiations that might be in the offing mean for the future of the telecommunications bill and net neutrality.
Here I need to provide full disclosure: my first job out of college was with Ron when he was still in the House. Though there's been plenty I've disagreed with him about, I'm still a fan. His leadership on this issue, however, has been unquestionably admirable. He introduced the first stand-alone legislation on net neutrality, S. 2360, the Internet Non-Discrimination Act, in March, and is a co-sponsor of Snowe/Dorgan. He was among the first to recognize it as a critical issue for consumers, for the technology industry, for business small and large, and for the non-profit sector.
His willingness to stand up on this issue should be applauded and supported. It should be supported by all Senate Democrats, including the leadership. Don't let up on your pressure on your Senators on this issue. Make them stand with Wyden to protect the Internet.
::
posted by verifi at 9:03 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home