Breaking: House Judiciary Committee Tells FCC It's Going To Block Net Neutrality Rules

[Victorious Secret]

 

Oh boy, just when you think sanity might prevail in the US political system, one side stands up in the name of asshattery to remind us why every piece of political news should come with a bag of popcorn or two.

 

The House Judiciary Committee seems to be engaging in typical fear mongering tactics to pain the FCCs recent moves in the worst possible light, even going so far as to ignoring some service providers who have stated they are OKAY with the NN rules the FCC passed.

 

Come on. When you have ISPs saying "so what, we'll adapt" and "it won't be a detriment to us", you can't possibly expect that your fear mongering will hold water, will you?  

 

A letter from the House Judiciary Committee Members (pdf) to FCC boss Tom Wheeler complains that the FCC is pursuing the "most oppressive and backward regulatory option possible," which is odd since a growing list of companies that actually sell broadband -- like Cablevision, Frontier, Sprint and Sonic -- all say the rules won't impact their businesses in the slightest, since most of the heavier utility-components of Title II won't be applied. So why is the House Judiciary Committee fighting the rules? Because they're just super worried about the health of the Internet:

 

"We will not stand by idly as the White House, using the FCC, attempts to advance rules that imperil the future of the Internet. We plan to support and urge our colleagues to pass a Congressional Review Act resolution disapproving the “Open Internet” rules. Not only will such a resolution nullify the ‘Open Internet’ rules, the resolution will prevent the FCC from relying on Title II for any future net neutrality rules unless Congress explicitly instructs the FCC to take such action."

 

Of course any measure that makes its way to the President's desk will be vetoed -- and a Congressional Review Action still requires a presidential signature or enough votes to override a veto, both of which are extremely unlikely. The only real way to overturn the agency's new laws is either via lawsuit (which the FCC has gone to great length to avoid losing this time after the courts repeatedly told them they needed to classify ISPs as common carriers to be on solid footing) or through a party change (and therefore an FCC leadership shift) in 2016.

 

https://www.techdirt.com/blog/netneutrality/articles/20150302/08162630183/hysterical-facts-optional-assault-fccs-new-neutrality-rules-has-commenced.shtml

[XTankSlayerX]

Uhoh, is shit hitting the fan as they say?

[dadasmithywinkle]

"Oh boy, just when you think sanity might prevail in the US political system, "

 

Hhahahahaha sanity and US political system are not to be used in the same sentence.

[Guest Kloaked]

I feel like they're only doing this because of how many people are buying the "Net Neutrality is not your friend" narrative that's been going around on right-wing news outlets.

[bob345]

people are freaking idiots. Especially these near retarded us politicians

[Castdeath97]

WHAT?

[TheSLSAMG]

I feel like they're only doing this because of how many people are buying the "Net Neutrality is not your friend" narrative that's been going around on right-wing news outlets.

I don't strongly agree or disagree with the left or the right. I think that Title II reclassification could work, but it is something that also poses the potential to be manipulated.

[SImoHayha]

Jesus can they just fucking piss off already ? WE WANTED THIS, SO GODDAMN ISP'S DON'T CONSTANTLY FUCK US OVER, FOR EXPENSIVE ASS INTERNET. AND SPEEDS

[Guest Kloaked]

I don't strongly agree or disagree with the left or the right. I think that Title II reclassification could work, but it is something that also poses the potential to be manipulated.

 

What I don't understand is what could be manipulated. It's not like the FCC themselves are going to be sitting in the ISP's data centers and will shut off your connection if you don't politically agree with them.

[Victorious Secret]

What I don't understand is what could be manipulated. It's not like the FCC themselves are going to be sitting in the ISP's data centers and will shut off your connection if you don't politically agree with them.

 

I'm imagining Wheeler sitting in a data centre, shutting off the internet for whoever is a Seahawks fan... 

[beebskadoo]

This isn't about policy, this is all about money. This is what happens when a democracy is turned into an auction for votes.

[TheSLSAMG]

What I don't understand is what could be manipulated. It's not like the FCC themselves are going to be sitting in the ISP's data centers and will shut off your connection if you don't politically agree with them.

I'm not so sure.

 

There were two dissenting individuals, unsurpisingly both Republicans (Michael O'Rielly and Ajut Pai, though I'm not really debating them). They argue that the measures fix a problem not present (completely untrue) and that the measure's 300+ pages weren't openly available for the public. That's the part I think about. What in there has the potential to be manipulated, and what will be? The government now has the control from what I understand as opposed to the telcoms and ISPs.

[Briggsy]

old people are scared of everything, and they constantly think that wolves are after them. who better to put into power, and then scare the #@#$ out and bribe to get your way?

[Guest Kloaked]

I'm not so sure.

 

There were two dissenting individuals, unsurpisingly both Republicans (Michael O'Rielly and Ajut Pai, though I'm not really debating them). They argue that the measures fix a problem not present (completely untrue) and that the measure's 300+ pages weren't openly available for the public. That's the part I think about. What in there has the potential to be manipulated, and what will be? The government now has the control from what I understand as opposed to the telcoms and ISPs.

 

Well from my understanding, the FCC was formed to keep things like Comcast/TWC mergers, data speed fixing and other stuff from happening; except the internet was never classified to be under their jurisdiction in such a way for them to prevent such things.

 

I'd rather take my chances with the FCC than have to pay a premium for an internet fast lane in the future, personally.

[terrytek]

First, net neutrality passes, then a freaking committee decides to come along and block those rules? What the fuck? I've totally lost all faith in my country. Things are really getting out of hand.

[ionbasa]

Wait. Given that the FCC is an independent government agency, and the FCC is meant to regulate wire and radio communications. Wouldn't it be outside the bounds of the house judiciary committee to even repeal the FCC's rulings.

 

The only way to enforce what the House wants is by nullifying the FCC's powers via a congressional act and in turn Congress would then be responsible for what the FCC is supposed to be doing anyway. 

 

If I understand this correctly, it most likely won't stand up in court as the FCC has enumerated powers written in legislature already. Congress would have to modify or nullify those enumerated powers. 

 

Thoughts?

[ivan134]

The simple reason is that Obama is for it. The best way for him to govern is to pretend he's against issues that he actually is for.

[iannai855]

Sounds bad, but barely a problem. As long as Obama doesn't sign it (spoiler: he won't), congress can't do anything. So, yeah. Divided government.

[Guest Kloaked]

Wait. Given that the FCC is an independent government agency, and the FCC is meant to regulate wire and radio communications. Wouldn't it be outside the bounds of the house judiciary committee to even repeal the FCC's rulings.

 

The only way to enforce what the House wants is by nullifying the FCC's powers via a congressional act and in turn Congress would then be responsible for what the FCC is supposed to be doing anyway. 

 

If I understand this correctly, it most likely won't stand up in court as the FCC has enumerated powers written in legislature already. Congress would have to modify or nullify those enumerated powers. 

 

Thoughts?

 

Agreed. They're basically wanting to deny the FCC the rights to do their job.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

my head hurts, why can't they accept change 

[miagisan]

I'm not so sure.

 

There were two dissenting individuals, unsurpisingly both Republicans (Michael O'Rielly and Ajut Pai, though I'm not really debating them). They argue that the measures fix a problem not present (completely untrue) and that the measure's 300+ pages weren't openly available for the public. That's the part I think about. What in there has the potential to be manipulated, and what will be? The government now has the control from what I understand as opposed to the telcoms and ISPs.

the bill itself is 8 pages, with 300+ being comments from the voting public. see the attached reddit post's links http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/2xh4a8/fcc_net_neutrality_plan_is_8_pages_not_300_and/

[Silent_Xaxal]

Uhoh, is shit hitting the fan as they say?

 

Yes. 

 

And that can of worms opened too. It's a big can.