Obama wants to make the internet a utility
- Thread starter Displaced Bama Fan
- Start date
- Status
I keep seeing businesses like netflix being portrayed as if they are a necessity instead of a business of convenience. Why is it being made that it is the government's place to regulate convenience?
Last edited:
Cell networks were exempt until this ruling. Thanks to deregulation we've never had more choice.
The basics most people support are that no legal site will be blocked or artificially slowed in order to punish or stymie competition. When we pay for access to the internet we want access to all the internet and not just what comcast or uverse or aol (snicker) allow or promote. Where many people, including myself, get worried is when a) 80 year old laws are applied to present technology by a government that b) has questionable at best legal authority to regulate this industry. This is a fiat move and has little to no democratic or representative input, unless you count your 5th cousin thrice removed as kin. There were different ways to do this, the most obvious being congress passing a law covering th basics and nothing more.Oh well, par for the course.
Agreed - congress can't do anything right now.
I'm not an Obama supporter - never voted for him - but this is something that needs to be addressed. It's been talked about for YEARS now and congress has done what congress does - nothing.
Absolutely par for the course.
We have a system. Guess I don't have to abide by the rules either. Oh yeah...I'd go to jail and no one would excuse me. Really, I'm sick of that excuse. It's a fascist move.
I get it, trust me - I do. And if it's an illegal move, then the repubs (or the companies that oppose the decision) can sue and have it reversed. But just because you or I think it's illegal doesn't mean it is...
ValuJet. The details were disclosed in full by publication in the Federal Register as required by law.
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db0515/FCC-14-61A1.pdf
Here is some additional info on Notices of Proposed Rulemaking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notice_of_proposed_rulemaking
Nobody is trying to hide anything VJ. Blame the mainstream media, i.e. FoxNews for not telling you where to look.
there was also a fascist open comment period for several months in 2014.ValuJet. The details were disclosed in full by publication in the Federal Register as required by law.
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db0515/FCC-14-61A1.pdf
Here is some additional info on Notices of Proposed Rulemaking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notice_of_proposed_rulemaking
Nobody is trying to hide anything VJ. Blame the mainstream media, i.e. FoxNews for not telling you where to look.
No kidding...Blame the mainstream media, i.e. FoxNews for not telling you where to look.
Headlines after the announcement:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-theory-brewing-over-net-neutrality/?hpid=z14
A hit piece on the Conservative position, but a statement of the facts nonetheless.
Conservatives are demanding that the FCC release a full copy of the regulations that it's planning to impose on companies such as Comcast and Verizon — and taking the agency's silence as evidence of a cover-up.
Let's stop this nonsense right here. It's a stretch to think the FCC is withholding anything. While it was certainly within FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's power to release his draft proposal before it came to a vote, the regulations now must go through a formal process before they become official. And say what you will about bureaucratic inefficiency, but that's the chief reason the FCC won't be releasing the rules for some time.
There goes that whole "transparency" thing again.
A hit piece on the Conservative position, but a statement of the facts nonetheless.
Conservatives are demanding that the FCC release a full copy of the regulations that it's planning to impose on companies such as Comcast and Verizon — and taking the agency's silence as evidence of a cover-up.
Let's stop this nonsense right here. It's a stretch to think the FCC is withholding anything. While it was certainly within FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's power to release his draft proposal before it came to a vote, the regulations now must go through a formal process before they become official. And say what you will about bureaucratic inefficiency, but that's the chief reason the FCC won't be releasing the rules for some time.
There goes that whole "transparency" thing again.
Did you actually read the document that you linked? That is a 99 page document as to why the rules should be adopted along with statements by the five commissioners, be they for or against. It is a Notice for Proposed Rulemaking, the definition of which you provided us, but obviously did not read yourself. A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is just that, a notice that an agency would like to change procedures, rules, or regulations and then giving reasons why. It is not the actual legal language of what they intend to do. That is not the 300 plus pages of regulatory language that was voted on by the board.ValuJet. The details were disclosed in full by publication in the Federal Register as required by law.
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db0515/FCC-14-61A1.pdf
Here is some additional info on Notices of Proposed Rulemaking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notice_of_proposed_rulemaking
Nobody is trying to hide anything VJ. Blame the mainstream media, i.e. FoxNews for not telling you where to look.
From the Washington Post, posted yesterday (Not Fox): http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...onspiracy-theory-brewing-over-net-neutrality/
"As is typical for a final rule and order," said Kim Hart, an FCC spokeswoman, "the final document is not available until staff makes final edits, which must be cleared by each commissioner." "Final edits" don't mean a secret attempt by officials to scribble in new regulations at the last minute. Here's what that means instead: Under the FCC's procedures, dissenting arguments must be tallied up and responded to by the FCC's majority — in this case, the Democrats. When that's done — probably after a few weeks — the FCC will post the rules on the agency's Web site. At that point the public will be able to see the specific language. It'll be another few weeks before the document will be published in the Federal Register, the collection of all the rules and notices adopted by the government. "
So no, the details have not been posted yet and certainly not to the Federal Register. Nor will they be seen for a few weeks minimum.
Yeah I scanned and skipped through all 99 pages of that May 2014 repoert and at the end saw comments from the dissenting commissioners. That wasn't a summary of new regulations; it was a diatribe of why there should be regulations handed down by Big Brother.
Dude, what else do you need? You've been fully informed. It's what's best for us. Get with the program.
- Status
Latest threads
-
SIAP there was an article that Joe K interviewed for assistant coach
- Started by mlingerfelt31
- Replies: 7
-
Final Home Midweek for Alabama Brings Samford to The Joe- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
