Senate forces a vote looking to reinstate Net Neutrality

[Master Disaster]

33 US Senators have submitted a discharge petition to undo the FTCs vote on repealing net neutrality which happened in February. Submitted under the Congressional Review Act the petition forces a vote in the House of Senate.

Quote

Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) and 32 other Democrats have submitted a new discharge petition under the Congressional Review Act, setting the stage for a full congressional vote to restore net neutrality. Because of the unique CRA process, the petition has the power to force a Senate vote on the resolution, which leaders say is expected next week.

 The Congressional Review Act gives the senate 60 days to undo regulations after their introduction but the fight isn't over yet, to pass this bill will require a majority vote in both houses as well as the president's signiture.

Quote

The Congressional Review Act allows Congress to roll back regulations within 60 legislative days of introduction, a process that today’s resolution would apply to the internet rules introduced by FCC chairman Ajit Pai in December. Pai’s rules reversed the 2015 Open Internet Order, which had explicitly banned blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization by internet providers. To successfully undo the Pai order and restore the 2015 rules, today’s resolution would need a bare majority in both the Senate and the House, as well as the president’s signature.

So far 50 senators have come out in support of the bill, it will require 51 to pass and it's hoped this vote will gain it the required extra senator

Quote

So far, 50 senators have come out in support of the bill: 48 Democrats together with Sen. Angus King (I-ME) and Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME). Activists have targeted moderate Republicans like Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA), and Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) as a possible 51st vote. The 2015 net neutrality rules are still broadly popular, which activists hope will make members of Congress wary of voting against them.

 

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) told The Verge he’s “hopeful” that the resolution will find a 51st vote in the Senate and proceed through the House. “We don’t know how this is going to end, but this is part of an effort to get every member of Congress on the record either supporting or opposing Net Neutrality,” Schatz said. “With this piece of legislation there is nowhere to hide and there are no excuses.”

This vote it likely to happen very quickly and obviously the internet is rallying behind it

Quote

The resolution has gained significant support from the internet community. Reddit, Tumblr, Etsy and other sites have put up Red Alert banners as part of a day of action to drive petitions in support of the resolution.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/9/17333108/net-neutrality-congressional-review-act-cra-resolution-vote-senate

 

It's good to see the senate seems to (mostly) want this thing killed of as much as everyone else, my worry is once the bill passes houses it will be killed off.

[DemiGod]

Damn someone is finally taking action. I hope the voting will go well net neutrality must prevail.

[Bcat00]

Don't matter much to us in Canada, we get throttled and butchered to death by our 3 main ISPs regardless.

[mr moose]

Politicians arguing over regulations that, at their very core, simply force a company not to be cunts,  is very telling of the state of the world we are currently in. 

 

It's time to stop thinking like 20th century coal merchants and start thinking like 21 century digital revolutionists. 

[Master Disaster]

22 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Politicians arguing over regulations that, at their very core, simply force a company not to be cunts,  is very telling of the state of the world we are currently in. 

 

It's time to stop thinking like 20th century coal merchants and start thinking like 21 century digital revolutionists. 

Yeah, because if you had your way large corporations would be free to do and say as they please, they have the money, they have the power so screw the little guy, right?

 

Guess what? You're one of the little guys and when your cable company start throttling your internet then charging you more to do things you should be able to do anyway I guarantee you'll be right here complaining about it along with everyone else.

 

Also politicians arguing over a political topic is par for the course, that's literally their job.

 

Before we can start acting like 21st century digital revolutionists we first need to remove the 20th century coal merchants from power, as long as the Trump's and Pais of the world are in power the little guy is always going to get screwed over because just like you, they're on the side of corporations and money, not consumers and the general population.

[NMS]

Now correct me if I'm wrong (my knowledge on US politics is lacking), but couldn't the president just veto if this all passes? After all, he was the one who put Ajit in place and thus shares his views.

[IronSoldier]

Im sorry. As a british person reading these articles... All I see is Senate and think our lord and savior Sheev Palpatine. 

 

On topic.... would trump sign whatever they vote in favour of the consumer for? Nope. 

[Pixel5]

1 hour ago, Bcat00 said:

Don't matter much to us in Canada, we get throttled and butchered to death by our 3 main ISPs regardless.

but that doesnt matter in terms of net neutrality thats just retard companies.

 

as long as they throttle everything the same way its fine at least nobody gets a paid advantage .

[Master Disaster]

3 minutes ago, NMS said:

Now correct me if I'm wrong (my knowledge on US politics is lacking), but couldn't the president just veto if this all passes? After all, he was the one who put Ajit in place and thus shares his views.

I don't think so, I'm not exactly an expert but I believe if the bill has more than a 2 thirds majority vote in both houses he cannot veto it. Of course it has to get that first.

 

4 minutes ago, IronSoldier said:

Im sorry. As a british person reading these articles... All I see is Senate and think our lord and savior Sheev Palpatine. 

 

On topic.... would trump sign whatever they vote in favour of the consumer for? Nope. 

Again I don't think he has a choice, if it passes both houses with more than 2 thirds support I think he has to sign it.

 

I'd love someone American to chime in and correct me if that's wrong.

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Yeah, because if you had your way large corporations would be free to do and say as they please, they have the money, they have the power so screw the little guy, right?

 

Guess what? You're one of the little guys and when your cable company start throttling your internet then charging you more to do things you should be able to do anyway I guarantee you'll be right here complaining about it along with everyone else.

 

Also politicians arguing over a political topic is par for the course, that's literally their job.

If I had my way? one of the little guys?  are you assuming I have some agenda that counters your opinion?  I assure you my post was merely commentary about how bad the world is that such activities need even be debated.  It's not exactly a complicated market, Companies should only charge for services they can provide. 

 

6 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Before we can start acting like 21st century digital revolutionists we first need to remove the 20th century coal merchants from power, as long as the Trump's and Pais of the world are in power the little guy is always going to get screwed over because just like you, they're on the side of corporations and money, not consumers and the general population.

I agree with this 100%, We also need to change our own mindsets and understanding of what is necessary.

[Carclis]

I hope this passes but I'm sure it's only a matter of time before we see what else Ajit Pai and his cronies have planned to place the power back in the hands of telcos.

[Kamjam21xx]

Sweet (: i think its a great thing

 

[Master Disaster]

25 minutes ago, mr moose said:

If I had my way? one of the little guys?  are you assuming I have some agenda that counters your opinion?  I assure you my post was merely commentary about how bad the world is that such activities need even be debated.  It's not exactly a complicated market, Companies should only charge for services they can provide. 

 

I agree with this 100%, We also need to change our own mindsets and understanding of what is necessary.

Ok well in that case I feel I owe you an apology, I read something into your post that didn't exist so I'm sorry

[asus killer]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

Politicians arguing over regulations that, at their very core, simply force a company not to be cunts,  is very telling of the state of the world we are currently in. 

 

It's time to stop thinking like 20th century coal merchants and start thinking like 21 century digital revolutionists. 

more than that it's elected career politicians, that aren't actually required to know anything about anything let alone internet regulation, deciding on things like NN. Most of these more complex subjects should never be decided by these people. It would be actually funny to seat each one of this 100 senators and ask them to detail the subject, what's at stake.

It's not even US related, it happens all over.

[Wolther]

2 hours ago, NMS said:

Now correct me if I'm wrong (my knowledge on US politics is lacking), but couldn't the president just veto if this all passes? After all, he was the one who put Ajit in place and thus shares his views.

You’re not wrong, the presidents power to veto is very strong. Once the president veto’s the chance of congress getting the required 2/3rds vote is pretty slim, put into perspective there are 2,500 veto’s in u.s history, 100 of which have been overridden 

 

trump hasn’t veto’d any bills so far, so we’ll see what happens 

[Tech_Dreamer]

not much so about hanging onto NN when nothing significant has yet happened from the companies when the repeal move was instantiated nothing changed except companies had to stay neutral to face competition without having to loose customers. this is like just trying water plants during rain . so... i dunno , go crazy beating up the dead horse to an even mushier pulp.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Ajit should be spelled Eejit.

[Kamjam21xx]

23 minutes ago, Wolther said:

You’re not wrong, the presidents power to veto is very strong. Once the president veto’s the chance of congress getting the required 2/3rds vote is pretty slim, put into perspective there are 2,500 veto’s in u.s history, 100 of which have been overridden 

 

trump hasn’t veto’d any bills so far, so we’ll see what happens 

Yeah i doubt trump would veto it. 

[DocSwag]

This is great, and while I could see the bill passing the senate, I don't think we could see it going through the house, let alone the president.

4 hours ago, NMS said:

Now correct me if I'm wrong (my knowledge on US politics is lacking), but couldn't the president just veto if this all passes? After all, he was the one who put Ajit in place and thus shares his views.

 

4 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

I don't think so, I'm not exactly an expert but I believe if the bill has more than a 2 thirds majority vote in both houses he cannot veto it. Of course it has to get that first.

 

Again I don't think he has a choice, if it passes both houses with more than 2 thirds support I think he has to sign it.

 

I'd love someone American to chime in and correct me if that's wrong.

All correct. If both houses have over 2/3 support they override the president's veto. However, seeing as it doesn't seem the senate vote is going to pass 2/3 and I'm not even sure if the house will get a majority vote in favor of it.... I don't think it'll happen  

[Sauron]

The president's signature? Good luck with that, that guy is the only reason the repeal was allowed to happen in the first place... hopefully the threat of a popularity drop will force his hand.

[Eduard the weeb]

Really want to get political but I'll keep that to myself rn

 

but I doubt it will go through, the Senate is 50/50 split last time I checked because 1 republican leaned left on this one, but they will need 60 of the 100 to pass if I'm correct.

[ravenshrike]

Item 1 - There is no House of Senate.

Item 2 - The CRA motions may not be subject to vetoes or filibusters. You'd have to read the damn thing to be sure and I'm too lazy. However the presidential veto only applies on bills to be signed into law, which doesn't make sense to have it apply to a law allowing Congress to stop regulations enacted by the Executive branch that they dislike.

[DrDerp]

I'm sure with the bipartisan agreement on this that it will pass.

[JoeCoke]

[Beskamir]

17 hours ago, Bcat00 said:

Don't matter much to us in Canada, we get throttled and butchered to death by our 3 main ISPs regardless.

get a better ISP. Lightspeed/comwave's pretty decent. It's what I've got since Shaw's data caps were infuriating.