Net Neutrality: It Just Keeps Coming:

polifrog





Our non congressionally policed bureaucratic branch:

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) filed a final version of its net neutrality rules Thursday, one year after they voted to pass the framework defining the principles of an ‘open Internet.’ The vote on the framework was passed on partisan lines, 3-2.

The rules, published on the Federal Register’s website, will go into effect November 20th. Touted as a major victory for a free and open Internet by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, Republicans have begun building a last-ditch challenge to a principle they believe will kill markets.

From the comments (fourleafclover):

Water neutrality would be where everyone pays the same water bill no matter how much water you use. If you use very little but your neighbor uses a lot, you'll be subsidizing his water bill. Net neutrality is the same thing, it is the socialization of the internet. If you use the internet for e-mail and surfing the net you will pay the same as your neighbor who is downloading movies and music. The FCC is going to require each ISP guarantee each customer the full speed of his connection no matter that it will cost billions to upgrade ISPs all over the country. Internet costs are going to skyrocket with the implementation of net neutrality. Google and Netflix will be tickled with their billions of profit made on the backs of citizens who don't use their services.

Socialized bandwidth.

out

Net Neutrality: "There is no market failure here. This is a pure power grab."

polifrog



Earlier last year I argued against Net Neutrality:

...Gov. is not the source of vibrancy. The current vibrancy of the internet is directly related to the lack of government regulation.

Secondly, complaints of disparities in net service seem to be sourced on nothing. Who is complaining outside of those who want to regulate? I have no problems accessing the internet. Do you? If it is financially difficult for an individual to gain access, libraries across the country offer it for free.

We do not need to regulate problems that exist only in the minds of those who wish to regulate.

But where congress failed Rep. Brad Miller and the lovers of government brokered power through regulation the FCC did not. The FCC has staked out its claim over internet regulation by classifying it a public utility, despite court cases siding against such authority.


WSJ.com sums things up nicely:








out

Rep David Price (NC-4) -- Wrong on Net Neutrality...

polifrog


(h/t redstate)

Why regulate the internet? Why?
I have yet to hear a compelling reason from David Price or anyone else for regulating theinternet which has no apparent problems.

[Mr. Genachowski] wants to adopt "net neutrality" rules that require Internet providers like Comcast Corp. and AT&T Inc. to treat all traffic equally, and not to slow or block access to websites.

Have you had this issue? I haven't.


Now the push is again on after "a federal appeals court ruling last month cast doubt on the FCC'sauthority over broadband lines".

The court ruled the FCC had overstepped when it cited Comcast in 2008 for slowing some customers' Internet traffic.

Well, apparently, like Nancy Pelosi in her quest to control our health, no hurdle is too high for theFCC's quest for control.

In a move that will stoke a battle over the future of the Internet, the federal government plans to propose regulating broadband lines under decades-old rules designed for traditional phone networks.

The internet is works fine. It has been a wondrous source of vitality in the United States that reminds me of the United States of 100 years ago. It does not need to be smothered with needless regulation.

Until there is a compelling reason talk of regulation should be dropped. David Price should step back from his support for net neutrality and put his trust in the American people. That is, admittedly, difficult for David Price.

We do not need to regulate problems that exist only in the minds of those who wish only to control that which is free.

Fire David Price in November.



out

Rep. Bob Etheridge (NC-2) -- Wrong on Net Neutrality

polifrog

Why regulate the internet? Why?
I have yet to hear a compelling reason from Bob Etheridge or anyone else for regulating the internet which has no apparent problems.

[Mr. Genachowski] wants to adopt "net neutrality" rules that require Internet providers like Comcast Corp. and AT&T Inc. to treat all traffic equally, and not to slow or block access to websites.

Have you had this issue? I haven't.


Now the push is again on after "a federal appeals court ruling last month cast doubt on the FCC'sauthority over broadband lines".

The court ruled the FCC had overstepped when it cited Comcast in 2008 for slowing some customers' Internet traffic.

Well, apparently, like Nancy Pelosi in her quest to control our health, no hurdle is too high for theFCC's quest for control.

In a move that will stoke a battle over the future of the Internet, the federal government plans to propose regulating broadband lines under decades-old rules designed for traditional phone networks.

The internet is works fine. It has been a wondrous source of vitality in the United States that reminds me of the United States of 100 years ago. It does not need to be smothered with needless regulation.

Until there is a compelling reason talk of regulation should be dropped. Bob Etheridge should step back from his support for net neutrality and put his trust in the American people. That is, admittedly, difficult for Bob Etheridge.

We do not need to regulate problems that exist only in the minds of those who wish only to control that which is free.

Fire Bob Etheridge in November.



out

Rep. Bob Etheridge (NC-2) -- Wrong on Net Neutrality

polifrog

Why regulate the internet? Why?
I have yet to hear a compelling reason from Bob Etheridge or anyone else for regulating the internet which has no apparent problems.

[Mr. Genachowski] wants to adopt "net neutrality" rules that require Internet providers like Comcast Corp. and AT&T Inc. to treat all traffic equally, and not to slow or block access to websites.

Have you had this issue? I haven't.


Now the push is again on after "a federal appeals court ruling last month cast doubt on the FCC'sauthority over broadband lines".

The court ruled the FCC had overstepped when it cited Comcast in 2008 for slowing some customers' Internet traffic.

Well, apparently, like Nancy Pelosi in her quest to control our health, no hurdle is too high for theFCC's quest for control.

In a move that will stoke a battle over the future of the Internet, the federal government plans to propose regulating broadband lines under decades-old rules designed for traditional phone networks.

The internet is works fine. It has been a wondrous source of vitality in the United States that reminds me of the United States of 100 years ago. It does not need to be smothered with needless regulation.

Until there is a compelling reason talk of regulation should be dropped. Brad Miller should step back from his support for net neutrality and put his trust in the American people. That is, admittedly, difficult for Bob Etheridge.

We do not need to regulate problems that exist only in the minds of those who wish only to control that which is free.

Fire Bob Etheridge in November.



out

Rep. GK Butterfield (NC-1) -- Wrong on Net Neutrality...

polifrog


(h/t redstate)

Why regulate the internet? Why?
I have yet to hear a compelling reason from GK Butterfield or anyone else for regulating theinternet which has no apparent problems.

[Mr. Genachowski] wants to adopt "net neutrality" rules that require Internet providers like Comcast Corp. and AT&T Inc. to treat all traffic equally, and not to slow or block access to websites.

Have you had this issue? I haven't.


Now the push is again on after "a federal appeals court ruling last month cast doubt on the FCC'sauthority over broadband lines".

The court ruled the FCC had overstepped when it cited Comcast in 2008 for slowing some customers' Internet traffic.

Well, apparently, like Nancy Pelosi in her quest to control our health, no hurdle is too high for theFCC's quest for control.

In a move that will stoke a battle over the future of the Internet, the federal government plans to propose regulating broadband lines under decades-old rules designed for traditional phone networks.

The internet is works fine. It has been a wondrous source of vitality in the United States that reminds me of the United States of 100 years ago. It does not need to be smothered with needless regulation.

Until there is a compelling reason talk of regulation should be dropped. GK Butterfield should step back from his support for net neutrality and put his trust in the American people. That is, admittedly, difficult for GK Butterfield.

We do not need to regulate problems that exist only in the minds of those who wish only to control that which is free.

Fire GK Butterfield in November.



out

Rep. Brad Miller (NC-13) -- Wrong on Net Neutrality...

polifrog


(h/t redstate)

Why regulate the internet? Why?
I have yet to hear a compelling reason from Brad Miller or anyone else for regulating theinternet which has no apparent problems.

[Mr. Genachowski] wants to adopt "net neutrality" rules that require Internet providers like Comcast Corp. and AT&T Inc. to treat all traffic equally, and not to slow or block access to websites.

Have you had this issue? I haven't.


Now the push is again on after "a federal appeals court ruling last month cast doubt on the FCC'sauthority over broadband lines".

The court ruled the FCC had overstepped when it cited Comcast in 2008 for slowing some customers' Internet traffic.

Well, apparently, like Nancy Pelosi in her quest to control our health, no hurdle is too high for theFCC's quest for control.

In a move that will stoke a battle over the future of the Internet, the federal government plans to propose regulating broadband lines under decades-old rules designed for traditional phone networks.

The internet is works fine. It has been a wondrous source of vitality in the United States that reminds me of the United States of 100 years ago. It does not need to be smothered with needless regulation.

Until there is a compelling reason talk of regulation should be dropped. Brad Miller should step back from his support for net neutrality and put his trust in the American people. That is, admittedly, difficult for Brad Miller.

We do not need to regulate problems that exist only in the minds of those who wish only to control that which is free.

Fire Brad Miller in November.



out

Rep. Brad Miller NC-13 -- Wrong, Wrong, Wrong on Net Neutrality

polifrog

According to Brad Miller..

Recent changes in federal regulation and court decisions have altered the legal protections against discrimination in access to the internet. As a result, some internet service providers now see the potential to profit by providing favored treatment to some internet content providers, the same way retailers charge manufacturers for prominent product displays in their stores. Such discrimination among internet content providers would forever change the open, vibrant competition based now on the appeal of internet content and would deny consumers the right to choose internet content freely.

Sorry, Brad Miller, Gov. is not the source of vibrancy. The current vibrancy of the internet is directly related to the lack of government regulation.

Secondly, complaints of disparities in net service seem to be sourced on nothing. Who is complaining outside of those who want to regulate? I have no problems accessing the internet. Do you? If it is financially difficult for an individual to gain access, libraries across the country offer it for free.

We do not need to regulate problems that exist only in the minds of those who wish to regulate.

Fortunately, it has been found that the preferred regulatory agency for the implementation of Net Neutrality, the FCC, doesn't have the authority to do so.

A federal court threw the future of Internet regulations and U.S. broadband expansion plans into doubt Tuesday with a far-reaching decision that went against the Federal Communications Commission.

Currently engaged in a happy dance....




out

Brad Miller NC-13 -- Still Wrong on Net Neutrality

polifrog


(h/t redstate)

Why regulate the internet? Why?
I have yet to hear a compelling reason from Brad Miller or anyone else for regulating the internet which has no apparent problems.

[Mr. Genachowski] wants to adopt "net neutrality" rules that require Internet providers like Comcast Corp. and AT&T Inc. to treat all traffic equally, and not to slow or block access to websites.

Have you had this issue? I haven't.


Now the push is again on after "a federal appeals court ruling last month cast doubt on the FCC's authority over broadband lines".

The court ruled the FCC had overstepped when it cited Comcast in 2008 for slowing some customers' Internet traffic.

Well, apparently, like Nancy Pelosi in her quest to control our health, no hurdle is too high for the FCC's quest for control.

In a move that will stoke a battle over the future of the Internet, the federal government plans to propose regulating broadband lines under decades-old rules designed for traditional phone networks.

The internet is works fine. It has been a wondrous source of vitality in the United States that reminds me of the United States of 100 years ago. It does not need to be smothered with needless regulation.

Until there is a compelling reason talk of regulation should be dropped. Brad Miller should step back from his support for net neutrality and put his trust in the American people. That is, admittedly, difficult for Brad Miller.

We do not need to regulate problems that exist only in the minds of those who wish only to control that which is free.

Fire Brad Miller in November.



out