www. O S N E W S .com
News Features Interviews
BlogContact Editorials
.
Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality
By Thom Holwerda on 2018-05-17 12:08:24

The Senate has voted to save net neutrality, but don’t get your hopes up: there’s still a long, likely impossible journey ahead if the policy is to be saved in the immediate future.

In a 52-47 vote today, senators voted to overturn the Federal Communication Commission’s Restoring Internet Freedom Order, which took net neutrality rules off the books. They were able to do so using the Congressional Review Act, or CRA, which allows Congress to reverse recent decisions by government agencies. Republican control of Congress means that such a measure wouldn’t normally even make it up for a vote; but the CRA allows senators to force a vote by obtaining 30 signatures.

All 49 Democrats voted in favor, as well as Republican Senators Susan Collins, of Maine; John Kennedy, of Louisiana; and Lisa Murkowski, of Alaska.

This is a step in the right direction for the US, but corruption runs deep, so this fight is far, far from over. Still, a victory is a victory.

 Email a friend - Printer friendly - Related stories
.
Post a new comment
Read Comments: 1-10 -- 11-14
.
RE: Comment by coherence
By Alfman on 2018-05-17 17:52:08
coherence,

> I think the market should sort it out ideally, but there simply isn't the infrastructure available in the US. In the UK and they took net neutrality away, it would be an ISP selling point.


Almost all of us think the market should sort it out ideally. However the free market becomes an utter failure under monopolies and oligopolies. Decades ago blind faith in the free market might have been forgiven, but these days one industry after another we've witnessed the harms of consolidation and the downfall of competition, all under the "free market". The big fish are not succeeding through better products and services, which was the intention, but rather because they are able to strongarm the rest of the market (and even government itself). This hurts consumers, employees, startups, etc...it helps wallstreet, but unless we are in favor of aristocracy, then we desperately need an economy with more emphasis on merit.

I get why people hate government intervention, but we need to recognize that it's the corporations that have hijacked the free market to benefit insanely wealthy CEOs at the expense of society. The healthiest thing to do would be to break up all these massive corporations and then let them compete on merit. Alas, I'm under no delusions that this will happen, government is bought by corporate interests, and given current events I'm not optimistic that things are about to get better.

I significantly broadened the scope of discussion, but only because I feel what is happening with carriers is a consequence of much larger economic trends.
Permalink - Score: 6
.
Comment by fmaxwell
By fmaxwell on 2018-05-17 18:08:37
> > All 49 Democrats voted in favor, as well as Republican Senators Susan Collins, of Maine; John Kennedy, of Louisiana; and Lisa Murkowski, of Alaska.
This is a step in the right direction for the US, but corruption runs deep, so this fight is far, far from over.


100% of Democrats voted to restore net neutrality.
6% of Republicans voted to restore it.

It's pretty obvious on which side the corruption runs deep.
Permalink - Score: 4
.
RE[2]: Comment by coherence
By CaptainN- on 2018-05-17 19:52:17
"free market," "laissez faire," neoliberalism, whatever you call it, it's just purity - it has to be either all free, or all planned. This black and white false dichotomy is just so childish and tired. I'm so tired of simplistic good and evil thinking applied to economics. People need to grow up already.
Permalink - Score: 4
.
RE: Comment by fmaxwell
By CaptainN- on 2018-05-17 19:53:52
It's true. Republicans have always been closer to money interests. Corruption is a problem in both of our two parties - but suggesting they are equally corrupt is not backed up by the facts.
Permalink - Score: 4
.
Corruption?! How dramatic...
By HangLoose on 2018-05-17 19:58:13
When it is in USofA it is called "lobbying" Tom, only people from less enlightened countries (everyone else) suffer from corruption.

Get your facts straight pal.

/s
Permalink - Score: 4
.
RE: Comment by fmaxwell
By ssokolow on 2018-05-17 20:25:42
> 100% of Democrats voted to restore net neutrality.
6% of Republicans voted to restore it.

It's pretty obvious on which side the corruption runs deep.


...but, when a vote comes up that the donors want, like confirming Gina Haspel, and not enough Republicans are on board, you see Democrats switch to make up the difference.

Both parties are corrupt and the corrupt Democrats are paid to give the illusion of not being as bad.

For example, the Republicans weren't consistently dominant in U.S. politics between 1981 and 2002, but this study reveals a consistent problem with policy decisions:

https://www.cambridge.org/core/jo...

(TL;DR: There was essentially no correlation between the average citizen's preference and what got passed and a near perfect correlation between what economic elites wanted and what got passed.)

Edited 2018-05-17 20:30 UTC
Permalink - Score: 0
.
We already had the victory...
By cjbreisch on 2018-05-17 20:38:15
...this is a loss. A giant one.

Anyone that thinks that more government involvement in the Internet is a good idea has lost their ever-loving mind.

I can't believe in 2018 I still have to point this out.


So-called "net neutrality" is inherently evil. The Democrats tried and failed to take us down this very short road to Hell. Thank God people with sense stopped it.
Permalink - Score: -1
.
RE: We already had the victory...
By fmaxwell on 2018-05-17 21:26:12
> ...this is a loss. A giant one.

Anyone that thinks that more government involvement in the Internet is a good idea has lost their ever-loving mind.

I mean this in the most respectful way: You're an idiot if you think that leaving this up to massive, for-profit corporations will benefit the consumer.

Broadband will use their monopolies and oligopolies throughout the country to screw their customers and the competing content competitors.

You want to give Comcast the ability to interfere with the ability of Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Video, CBS All Access, and HBO Now to deliver content. If too many subscribers drop premium channels from their Comcast TV service, then Comcast starts crippling the competition. If Netflix et al. won't pay for faster speed, the consumers are left with "buffering" messages, pauses, fall-back to lower resolution and/or more compression, and so on.

You want to allow broadband providers to charge twice for the same bandwidth. I pay for given amount of bandwidth, but if I use it to watch Hulu, Netflix, YouTube, and so on, you want my ISP to be able to charge the content providing company for the bandwidth I already bought!
Permalink - Score: 5
.
RE[2]: Comment by fmaxwell
By fmaxwell on 2018-05-17 21:49:55
> Both parties are corrupt and the corrupt Democrats are paid to give the illusion of not being as bad.
You're implying a moral equivalence where there isn't one. It's like saying that Bashar al-Assad and Justin Trudeau are both corrupt and, therefore, equivalent to one another.

Name the Democrats and who are "paid ... to give the illusion of not being as bad" and who is paying them.
Permalink - Score: 4
.
RE[2]: We already had the victory...
By fmaxwell on 2018-05-17 21:51:18
"Competing content competitors" should have been "competing content providers." Caught it after editing time expired. Sorry.
Permalink - Score: 2

Read Comments 1-10 -- 11-14

There are 1 comment(s) below your current score threshold.

Post a new comment
Username

Password

Title

Your comment

If you do not have an account, please use a desktop browser to create one.
LEAVE SPACES around URLs to autoparse. No more than 8,000 characters are allowed. The only HTML/UBB tags allowed are bold & italics.
Submission of a comment on OSNews implies that you have acknowledged and fully agreed with THESE TERMS.
.
News Features Interviews
BlogContact Editorials
.
WAP site - RSS feed
© OSNews LLC 1997-2007. All Rights Reserved.
The readers' comments are owned and a responsibility of whoever posted them.
Prefer the desktop version of OSNews?