Posted on 03/01/2007 11:44:24 AM PST by JZelle
A tech legislative priority of congressional Democrats, "net neutrality," threatens America's unique Internet success, because it would reverse America's 11-year, bipartisan policy to promote competition and not regulate the Internet. Democratic presidential candidates Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, are co-sponsors of Dorgan-Snowe (S.215), a net neutrality bill that for the first time would mandate broadband provide equal treatment to all Internet content. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also supports net neutrality as does House Telecom Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey, who plans a series of hearings soon to promote net neutrality legislation. To justify massive new government intervention in the Internet marketplace, Democrats are busily manufacturing a "broadband crisis" and an "Internet blocking problem" that simply does not exist. Policymaking by false premise is always dangerous. It's downright irresponsible when it threatens to undermine the unregulated Internet, one of the key engines of our nation's economic and productivity growth.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Markey the one -- years ago -- who was so concerned about the high cost of cable TV that he did something about it? I don't know about you, but my cable bill doubled.
Does Bush have a position on this? VETO, I hope.
You said -- "Does Bush have a position on this? VETO, I hope."
Well, my position is to write to Bush and tell him to not veto it. I'm for net neutrality...
Regards,
Star Traveler
why would they want to screw with the greatest single weapon given to mankind?
knowledge
what is China concerned about in todays internet addicts? new ideas in free minds. Same weapon being suppressed in Iran.
Let it grow untinterrupted
Please get technical.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
That's how it has always been and that's how it always should be. "Net Neutrality" is just a legislative way to keep the internet the way it is. Barring any poison pills, I strongly agree with this legislation.
Why are you in favor of net neutrality?
Telecoms are evil, so if they want this legislation, it is almost certainly bad.
And yes, I am in the Internet business and believe me, most folks feel the same way about telecoms.
The internet's success is largely owed, IMHO, to the fact that it's wide open and completely accessible. Furthermore, your access is limited by the amount of money you want to spend - within reason, and excepting isolated areas of the country.
Net neutrality would regulate not only the amount of bandwidth available to companies (and thus, individual subscribers) but also the content. Think in terms of this - Whenever FreeRepublic reached a certain amount of hits, or page loads, it would shut down for the day. Most people think about major downloaders - streaming content, movies, etc, but once that can of worms is open, anything can happen.
Further, can't you see (for instance) ATT lobbying Congress to get limits on *its* users raised, while leaving other companies out in the cold? Once the government steps in, anything can happen. How about FR being blocked as "Hate Speech"?
What I forsee the gov't taxing, eventually, is bandwidth. For instance - KoRn downloaded 50mb of content today, ergo, their tax is 50 times (x cents). Payable via Credit Card or PayPal. Or just to your internet provider.
Lets hope it remains that way. I've been under the impression that the big providers have plans to implement a tiered internet. In such a system sites will have to pay for more than just bandwidth, they will be forced to pay for quality of service. It's my understanding that Net Neutrality would prevent such a thing. I would be totally against regulating users bandwidth with taxes, and the other scenarios you mentioned.
The bottom line: Keep the internet the way it is!! The government and large providers need to just leave it the hell alone! If it ain't broke don't fix it!
You said -- "why would they want to screw with the greatest single weapon given to mankind?
knowledge"
And that would be one of the reasons why I would want net neutrality maintained as it is now, instead of putting the net into tiers of service with only those with more money to pay, getting the higher tiers of service.
Regards,
Star Traveler
"Should Jim have to pay more to run FR with its current responsiveness because my ISP got greedy?" He already pays bandwidth, I already pay for my connection, end of story.
Another thing that makes me go in that direction is the fact that we, the taxpayers, already paid billions to the telcos on a promise of 40 MB/sec fiber to every house. They have yet to deliver on that promise. They lobbied for this money, so they shouldn't complain when the government wants to put a few strings on how the infrastructure it built is used.
The issue boils down to two simple questions:
1. Should JimRob be presented with bills from any ISP that feels like sending him one (not just the ISP that actually provides FR with its Net connectivity)?
2. If JimRob tells any of said ISPs to file their bill where the sun don't shine, should customers of those ISPs find that FR suddenly loads at dialup speed, or not at all?
If you answer both questions "no", you are in favor of net neutrality. If you answer either question "yes", you are opposed to net neutrality.
You said -- "Would you care to explain why you would be in favor of such a patently bad piece of legislation?
Please get technical."
Better yet..., don't duplicate what is already "out there" -- "on the net".
And here it is -- for your reading and everyone else's...
You asked -- "Why are you in favor of net neutrality?"
You can see post #18 and then just start reading and reading on the subject. That should take you to an understanding of that question...
Regards,
Star Traveler
The Dems will never give up their goal of censoring the internet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.