Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
Thanks Tree7Thanks

Thread: Senate votes to save net neutrality rules

  1. #1
    Above the FRAY Friday13's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    12,921
    Thanks
    16171

    From
    SoCal

    Senate votes to save net neutrality rules

    Gods forbid the GOP congress do anything to benefit anyone other than their donors.

    Senate votes to save net neutrality rules
    The Senate on Wednesday voted to reinstate the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) net neutrality rules, passing a bill that has little chance of advancing in the House but offers net neutrality supporters and Democrats a political rallying point for the midterm elections.

    Democrats were able to force Wednesday's vote using an obscure legislative tool known as the Congressional Review Act (CRA). CRA bills allow Congress, with a majority vote in each chamber and the president's signature, to overturn recent agency moves.

    Three Republicans - Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and John Kennedy (La.) - joined the 49 Senate Democrats to pass the bill 52-47.

    They argue that without the net neutrality regulations, which require internet service providers to treat all web traffic equally, companies such as Verizon and Comcast will be free to discriminate against certain content or boost their partner websites.

    The bill will have a much harder time in the House, where Democrats would need 25 Republicans to cross the aisle in order to bring it up for a vote.

    For their part, most Republicans argue that the net neutrality rules are unnecessary and onerous for broadband providers. The GOP has been urging Democrats to come to the negotiating table to work out a legislative replacement to the FCC rules, a move that is also backed by the broadband industry.
    Thanks from DemoWhip

  2. #2
    Civis americanus borealis Singularity's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    27,799
    Thanks
    19166

    From
    Kansas
    The GOP's claim that it seeks a legislative replacement, which is indeed the right move here, is dishonest. They can put a bill on the floor if they want to and it will get Democratic amendments and votes.

    But it's good to get it out of the Senate, giving each member of the House no excuse when challenged on this issue. Some form of net neutrality law needs to be in place.
    Thanks from Arkady and labrea

  3. #3
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    40,003
    Thanks
    38416

    From
    United States
    Senate Republicans know that they can count on the House to make this show vote irrelevant.

  4. #4
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    32,253
    Thanks
    425

    From
    Tennessee
    Meaningless vote.

    Obama had the FCC do his political bidding on his version of net neutrality because it could have never passed in Congress.

  5. #5
    Member Arkady's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    2,334
    Thanks
    3279

    From
    Massachusetts
    Quote Originally Posted by Friday13 View Post
    Gods forbid the GOP congress do anything to benefit anyone other than their donors.

    Senate votes to save net neutrality rules
    Net neutrality seems like something that should be a no-brainer, bipartisan item. The simple facts on the ground are that most people live in markets where there isn't enough competition among broadband providers for market forces to prevent the providers from engaging in anti-competitive policies. Often, the local broadband market will be a monopoly or duopoly, and it's very seldom the kind of market where you have free-wheeling competition among a large number of providers. As such, it's more like a traditional utility, like your power company.

    Imagine what your electric company could do to you if it didn't have to treat energy demands on its system equally. For example, it could provide dirtier electricity to homes that don't use utility-branded appliances. Or it could throttle power supply to a house that uses too much power on non-utility-branded appliances. It could also discriminate against such homes in brown-out situations, as well as put them at the back of the queue when it comes to storm restoration work -- if a storm has taken out the drop line going to your house and also the one going to your neighbor's, he could get power restored days before you do, if he bought his dryer from the electric company and you got yours from a third-party. The power company could even charge you different rates for power you use in their appliances versus power you use in third-party appliances. We sensibly do not allow power companies to do such things, because we understand that they are effectively monopolies within their footprints, and allowing them to use that power that way would be anti-competitive. Broadband providers aren't quite as extreme that way, but they generally lack enough competition to keep them in check, so they should be subject to similar neutrality rules.

  6. #6
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    29,008
    Thanks
    20789

    From
    Florida
    But it won't make it through the HOUSE.

  7. #7
    Civis americanus borealis Singularity's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    27,799
    Thanks
    19166

    From
    Kansas
    Quote Originally Posted by roberthughey View Post
    Meaningless vote.

    Obama had the FCC do his political bidding on his version of net neutrality because it could have never passed in Congress.
    Nope. It puts the onus on the House to act. When it doesn't, its members will have to answer for it. That's the entire point. The GOP hoped to kill this in the Senate.

  8. #8
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    32,253
    Thanks
    425

    From
    Tennessee
    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    Nope. It puts the onus on the House to act. When it doesn't, its members will have to answer for it. That's the entire point. The GOP hoped to kill this in the Senate.
    We already know, the house votes NO!

    This has been known for a long timr their vote would be a NO.

    The onus is on no one.

  9. #9
    Civis americanus borealis Singularity's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    27,799
    Thanks
    19166

    From
    Kansas
    Quote Originally Posted by roberthughey View Post
    We already know, the house votes NO!

    This has been known for a long timr their vote would be a NO.

    The onus is on no one.
    Don't be ridiculous. If the House isn't forced to consider the matter, its individual members can safely ignore it.

    Now, they have to vote, or at least get behind their leaders in killing it.

    This opens up a campaign issue that didn't previously have a foundation.

  10. #10
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    40,003
    Thanks
    38416

    From
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by roberthughey View Post
    Meaningless vote.

    Obama had the FCC do his political bidding on his version of net neutrality because it could have never passed in Congress.

    You don't even know what net neutrality is. You only know that Republicans generally oppose it.
    Thanks from OldGaffer and Arkady

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. FCC announces 'net neutrality' rules will expire in June
    By DemoWhip in forum Current Events
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 14th May 2018, 08:27 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 27th February 2018, 04:58 PM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 8th January 2018, 04:32 PM
  4. Replies: 209
    Last Post: 20th December 2017, 08:27 AM
  5. FCC Votes to Kill Obama-Era Net Neutrality Rules
    By DemoWhip in forum Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 14th December 2017, 02:34 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed