Net Neutrality Might Not Be Dead: Senate Democrats Have Enough Support to Force a Vote on the Senate Floor

[Max_Settings]

Senate Democrats have gained enough support to force a vote on the Senate floor to save Net Neutrality. Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer plan is to force the GOP to have to vote for the extremely unpopular decision to end Net Neutrality 

 

Quote

Shortly after the party-line vote to repeal the regulations, which prevent internet service providers from blocking or slowing content, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer promised to force a Senate vote on blocking the decision, using a favorite Republican legislative tool to do it.

The Congressional Review Act of 1996 (CRA) gives Congress 60 working days to review new agency regulations, and to overturn them with a simple majority. At a press conference in New York, Schumer told reporters that he could use the CRA to force a vote to block the repeal with a simple 51-vote majority, using the same law that Republicans relied on towipe out many Obama-era regulations:

Source: https://shareblue.com/senate-dems-will-force-gop-to-cast-deeply-unpopular-vote-against-internet-freedom/

 

(Please don’t turn this into a Republicans vs Democrats debate)

[PCGuy_5960]

Yeah boii! I hope that they manage to save Net Neutrality, so that Ajit Pai can wipe that smirk off his face.

[Max_Settings]

Just now, AresKrieger said:

Well in order to care you have to understand, and I can't name a single member of the senate who has knowledge on how the internet actually works, there may be one hidden among them but I haven't seen any

 

Anyway I'm not a huge fan of net neutrality due to some consequences of it from a server load side however since we seemingly can't bust the monopolies limiting their power and generally screwing with them is a decent temporary action.

I agree. I am not a fan either. It does have some crippling actions. I feel it needs to be repealed but new regulations need to be put in place. But anyone who believed any of that stuff people were saying like, “OMG NO NOW WE HAVE TO PAY $20 A MONTH FOR TWITTER!!” Is just an idiot. That will never happen regardless.

[LordWaffleGoblin]

5 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Yeah boii! I hope that they manage to save Net Neutrality, so that Ajit Pai can wipe that smirk off his face.

For some reason he just looks insanely smug with his mug in most of the photos I see of him.

[AresKrieger]

1 minute ago, Max_Settings said:

I feel it needs to be repealed but new regulations need to be put in place.

Yep hence the issue I have with fidget spinning, harlem shaking, santa impersonating Pai, he thinks the current situation with ISPs is somehow not only acceptable but needing even less scrutiny, plus he has the likability of those damn prank youtubers personality wise

[Bananasplit_00]

yah, we kinda knew this was comming, but never the less awesome and hope you can hold on to net neutrality  

[AresKrieger]

1 minute ago, MikeSK said:

could the providers be held liable for content using their services?

Do you mean like copyright liable, no that was sued for prior to net neutrality and loss if something else idk

[MikeSK]

For subversive, unpopular speech and or theft or damage as a result of using the service provider.  I thought with Net Neutrality, they could say the government said I couldn't block or inhibit it.  Now, they have more control and one would think more responsibility. 

[Misanthrope]

Well maybe democrats will do what they always do: Compromise and still not re-establish net neutrality but put limitations on the throttling that can be done in theory while still not classifying ISPs as utilities.

 

[WkdPaul]

Thread cleaned.

 

Political discussion aren't allowed, some replies were removed because of that and because they were quoting replies containing political content.

 

This is a concerning topic for everyone so let's try not to antagonize anyone.

 

Backseat moderation and troll accusations are also not allowed, if you think a reply is breaking the CS, then report it and don't reply.

[Max_Settings]

1 minute ago, wkdpaul said:

Thread cleaned.

 

Political discussion aren't allowed, some replies were removed because of that and because they were quoting replies containing political content.

 

This is a concerning topic for everyone so let's try not to antagonize anyone.

 

Backseat moderation and troll accusations are also not allowed, if you think a reply is breaking the CS, then report it and don't reply.

Yes I didn't intend this as a political thread. Just notifying everyone that Net Neutrality might still have a chance. It is just a political reason why. Just an FYI for the mods.

[WkdPaul]

3 minutes ago, Max_Settings said:

Yes I didn't intend this as a political thread.

Totally get it.

 

When the whole thing started we used to close threads that turned political but since this is an important issue, Linus has directed us to try to keep NN threads open and clean up as much as possible so that a discussion about NN could be had despite our "no politics" rule

[Max_Settings]

6 minutes ago, wkdpaul said:

Totally get it.

 

When the whole thing started we used to close threads that turned political but since this is an important issue, Linus has directed us to try to keep NN threads open and clean up as much as possible so that a discussion about NN could be had despite our "no politics" rule

Yes I agree 100%. This entire topic is 100% a political discussion, which is what I told the guy who said I was trolling. 

[WkdPaul]

7 minutes ago, Max_Settings said:

*snip*

As long as the main topic is about NN, that's not a problem, but anything antagonizing will be removed, like political party bashing, let's make sure to keep that out of it.

 

After all party bashing is only going to devolve into accusations and insults, I'm sure we can have a discussion about NN without going there!

 

I personally am following the thread and other mods have been notified, just in case

 

[GDRRiley]

1 hour ago, Max_Settings said:

I agree. I am not a fan either. It does have some crippling actions. I feel it needs to be repealed but new regulations need to be put in place. But anyone who believed any of that stuff people were saying like, “OMG NO NOW WE HAVE TO PAY $20 A MONTH FOR TWITTER!!” Is just an idiot. That will never happen regardless.

it will but ISPs weren't going to do it when the hole country was watching. it would have happened slowly likely over a few years so that the changes aren't obvious to the consumer. 

[potoooooooo]

That's good

 

Net Neutrality as enacted in 2015 isn't perfect, but repeal is the worst way to make it better

[Max_Settings]

24 minutes ago, potoooooooo said:

That's good

 

Net Neutrality as enacted in 2015 isn't perfect, but repeal is the worst way to make it better

Not unless new regulations are put in place that fix the issues with it.

[TheCherryKing]

28 minutes ago, Max_Settings said:

Not unless new regulations are put in place that fix the issues with it.

Like more government regulations ever fixed anything...

[Taf the Ghost]

Let me rephrase the intent of this:

 

"Verizon, you better donate more to Democrats this coming cycle". 

 

And, let's be clear, outside of certain Internet circles, almost no one actually cares, but politicians can extract more money from this, so this should be interesting.

[DutchTexan]

1 minute ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Let me rephrase the intent of this:

 

"Verizon, you better donate more to Democrats this coming cycle". 

 

And, let's be clear, outside of certain Internet circles, almost no one actually cares, but politicians can extract more money from this, so this should be interesting.

Preciously. Got some regulations that may be coming up... Someone somewhere should help us sort out those extreme details no one can pay attention to or interpret 'correctly'...

[Taf the Ghost]

1 minute ago, DutchTexan said:

Preciously. Got some regulations that may be coming up... Someone somewhere should help us sort out those extreme details no one can pay attention to or interpret 'correctly'...

I'd actually view most of this situation as a shakedown of Google & Netflix more than the telecoms, simply because they never actually passed anything, when they could, around NN. Yet Google & Facebook practically ran both of Obama's campaigns, but nothing really got done for them. 

 

It also should be noted how bad fundraising is right now for the Democrats, so anything that can juice up payment will be big for them.

 

I do need to note that I hate this part of politics, but that's the current nature of Washington DC.

[Macimoar]

The thing I don’t like about net neutrality is how it’s being defended. Before the FCC vote, I had heard the phrase “net neutrality”, but was often confused as to which side was which (I’m the same way about “gun control”). So I looked more into it.

99% of the stuff I found was extremely for net neutrality, claiming things like “ISPs will be able to charge what they want for internet” and they’ll “throttle connection speeds whenever they want” and even “this will be the end of the internet as we know it” which seemed awful. 

“I’m all for net neutrality!” I said. I signed the petition, I posted on Facebook. But then I thought: “I have never seen a post arguing against net neutrality” and it got me thinking why that was. 

 

Why would anybody want to get rid of laws that protected against this? Those sound like terrible things! 

 

So I did what anyone who wants to be further educated on a matter should do. I researched both sides. Because, if you only know the strong points of your side, you’re not preparing yourself for a debate, your preparing yourself for a pissing match in which nobody wins but you think you do. 

 

So I found an article arguing against net neutrality , written by someone in the IT field. And you know what? It has a lot of good points. Maybe not enough to shake my pro net neutrality stance, but definitely enough to realize it’s not going to be “the end of the internet as we know it”. 

 

I like debating. I like the internet. I’m less decided on this issue than when it started and I think that’s a good thing. 

 

Tl:dr

I was for net neutrality, I researched the other side, the other side has good points too. 

Research the other side, people. 

[Max_Settings]

Guys you are going too off hand here. It's not meant to be a political discussion. 

[bcredeur97]

i still can't comment on this. i want to research it... yet I just don't. 


why do I never research things that are important and should be looked at? Especially with what's going on in the world. sheesh. Always end up in my own little world here thanks to my negligence

[AlwaysFSX]

They should let the repeal go through and see what happens for 1-2 years. Maybe then they could do something that actually works if it does indeed turn in to a dumpster fire.