The "Other" Big Event Tomorrow

Now, I understand you all are pretty interested in a vote happening in Pennsylvania tomorrow. Not surprisingly, I'm focused on that, too -- I spent Saturday in Pennsylvania for Barack -- but there's a very important event happening tomorrow which we can't afford to have lost in the shuffle.

The Senate Commerce Committee is holding a hearing on the future of the Internet, and a big part of that equation is net neutrality. I know net neutrality is important to a lot of you here, but Senators haven't heard from you in a while on the issue, and I want to make sure we keep this front and center -- it's that important.

Last Friday, I did a liveblog at Firedoglake, and I talked about how some of the big network providers have run into some problems trying to manage traffic using their own rules. The one you've probably heard the most about is the dispute over Comcast and BitTorrent, but this is hardly the only incident to occur since we last took a look at this issue in the Senate.

These actions by the big providers are a cautionary tale. We can't allow companies to pick and choose what companies they allow to access their networks, and we certainly can't depend on overwhelming political pressure on every decision to keep the networks open. This is not good for the future of the Internet and, frankly, it's not good for anyone who uses it either.

We need to have clarity on these rules. The value of innovation on the Internet is just too high to have it affected by these kinds of messes. From the economic value of the Internet activity to the social value of the new models of organization (like this blog), the free flow of information on the Internet is a vital part of this nation's future.

Look, I understand that there are issues with the amount of information flowing over our broadband infrastructure. But the key is to expand that infrastructure, not arbitrarily restrict traffic based on content. I don't even really blame the corporations on this; this is a classic case where the government needs to step in and create sensible regulations to set the rules of the road. This doesn't mean a prescriptive, heavy-handed approach to telling providers who to serve subscribers. But we need to insist on basic fairness and an open, content-neutral approach to how users can access the backbone of our telecommunications system. There have been a lot of excuses about why it's difficult to do that, and frankly, most of those have turned out not to be accurate. There's no reason why we can't do this, and no reason why we shouldn't.

But -- I said this on FDL, and I say this all the time on so many issues -- it's not going to happen unless we all make it happen. Because of the importance of the PA primary, there's a danger that this hearing can come and go without the people's voice being heard. You need to make sure it is heard. Call, write or email your Senator and let them know you are watching this debate, and that an open internet is important to you.

Comments

[fn0rd]

I'm going to take one small issue here:

>>But the key is to expand that infrastructure, not arbitrarily restrict traffic based on content.

What comcast apparently did, falls clearly into the former. They don't know or care what content is in a torrent. It might be the Declaration of Independence, or (sadly, more likely) a rerun of "Three's Company".

Bandwidth, exactly like freeway lanes, is expensive. It costs to build it, and it costs to maintain it. We have rules to keep freeways navigable (18-wheelers can only use certain routes, multi-rider cars get priority) and we even charge a premium for faster routes - without any interest in who you are or what your business is. We need to be very careful and realize that for the government to monitor some of the proposals that people have requested, they *must* monitor the type and content of our traffic.

Some traffic, like the aforementioned 18-wheeler, can take a different route, since the only thing that matters is that it arrives - the warehouse organizes the deliveries and reassembles the finished product without me ever thinking about what order it arrived.

Voice traffic, like our car full of workers, loses a lot of it's value if it doesn't show up in a very narrow time window, and affects a number of people quite immediately. It disrupts commerce and speech.

(I don't work for comcast, though I used to work for a similar company. Happily in a different industry now!)

[dugan45]

I've already contacted my Senators on this issue. One of them is Arlen Spector, who can blow like the wind. Senator Kerry, I wish you well tomorrow.

What we need is to hold off legislation until more Democrats fill the Senate. I wish this problem would have been addressed after the elections.

[thedirtman]

Unlike bitter and resentful conservatives I thank Al Gore for inventing the internet.

[Snowball]

Thank you Sen. Kerry for addressing the critical issue of net neutrality. If those who control the means of communication in our country are allowed to filter content, it is inevitable that they will do so in their own political and economic interests. Given the paltry state of our Corporate Media system and its overt bias towards the Republican party and its ideology of deregulation, to allow the same people to control the internet would shut down all legitimate and grassroots communication and organizational capabilities that are conducted via this medium. That, more than immediate profit, is the goal of the advocates of abolishing net neutrality.

And for you Clinton supporters who care about the internet, check out the record of Mike McCurry currently spokesman for the Clinton campaign. Given Bill Clinton's disastrous Telecommunications Act of 1996 which allowed further consolidation of big media conglomerates, the Clinton's continued association with Mike McCurry poses a serious threat to our 1st Amendment rights.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-green/mike-mccurry-hurting-t_b_20216.html

[dugan45]

Clinton supporters are like bush supporters. They cannot process information objectively, and what information they acknowledge they tweak so it does not upset their politically correct take on their Clintons. Denial works well for them, too.

Conservatives, clintons. Same same.

My hope is my fellow Pennsylvanians are not as dumb as far too many of them were in '00 and '04 when they voted for bush. It took them years to understand what an evil succubus santorum was and still is. Let's pray they understand this is more about voting for a woman or voting for some other equally ridiculous reason when our democracy is at stake..

[Sum1]

The technical community that built today’s digital infrastructure did so around a certain set of cultural values, among them openness, sharing, personal expression, and innovation. It spawned an exponentially growing social community around it that has embraced these same values. The power of knowledge shared in this manner is a threat to current economic and political systems. In the same manner Industrialization freed the serf from the aristocracy we now have the tools by which wage slaves can be liberated from the intermediaries who manage them. As has always occurred in history the existing power structures will resist. Net neutrality is only the beginning. It may be marked as one of the first revolutionary battles of the knowledge age. Will the Gates be open to all or closed to those without a net passport?

[Stevelagain]

I would suggested that you might also want to take action on other more PRESSING issues.

Issues like Medicare that is flirting with absolute disaster. Ending ear marks. Fixing social security. National Health care. Balancing the budget. Responsible spending.

Why do congress spend so much time bragging about taking action on little things and refusing to do the big jobs that are begging to be done? Why did the senate pass a bill pushing for more food to fuel when it's destroying the environment and starving people the world over?

Democrats promised us they would deal with these issues. You are about 1.5 years into democratic party dominance of the house and the senate and these big issues go by with no real fixes. Is there a committee even meeting on fixing Medicare or balancing the budget? Why not?

I want more leadership than I've seen from any Senator running for president or not.

I'm no longer accepting diversionary tactics, I demand that Republicans and DEMOCRATS give me responsible government and start working on the major problems this country faces in it's social support system and it's spending problem., We've had enough of bad government.

The ratings of congress are down in the dirt because they are focusing on the internet and ignoring the big issues. The hard issues.

[23000Days]

Hey mongo, if you're getting ANY action out of these guys, you should thank your stars!

[mcthorogood]

The fact that you are able to express your opinion in this blog is evidence that net neutrality is important. The Net is the last bastion of freedom which can not be breached.

I am sure that you will agree that the MSM has its own agenda, playing sound bites which appeal our visceral feelings and occlude all semblance of logical reasoning. If the walls of Net come down, we would not be able to say which issue is PRESSING, we will be told.

[dugan45]

I'm hoping nothing is done until we replace Republicans with more Democrats in the House and Senate, except for this particular item whose expiration date requires we fight the right on it.

With Democrats in control, rescinding and fixing major issues like Medicare and spending will have a better likelihood of moving in directions beneficial to the many rather than the few.

If the US govt fails us after the elections, we are doomed, and so is the world around us. I want to bury Mitch McConnell John Boehner and that entire gang of congressional thugs, but I also want to bury Pubs on the FCC who undermine free, open communications.

[mcnote5150]

Go John! Support net neutrality! Keep the internet open and free! Let your voice be heard now and for time to come!

[Ratel]

Well that was dissappointing. From the headline I'd hoped Sen. Kerry would point out that tomorrow is also Earth Day (http://ww2.earthday.net/) which in this election where the environment is a major issue shouldn't be forgotten either. Its sort of surprising that the candidates aren't really using that in their campaigning for this big primary. Where's Al? He should call them out on this.

[DrPayne]

Earthday is everyday. I know that sounds trite, but it's true.

Tomorrow is an important day in this piece of legislation's progress.

That's why he brought this up. Seriously, stop being so self-righteous for a momnet and do something that matters. Call your Senator.

[burnt]

Thanks for the heads-up John... contacted Senator Cantwell with my opinion. best

[mamacat]

With the Democrats in control of the House, I think there is a good chance that the internet will remain available to the public for awhile. After seeing how the MSM has been whittled away to a mockery of what it used to be, I suspect the Right wing will be able to seize control of the internet. Those trying to keep the flow of info free have to win the battle everytime the Rightwing tries to take it away. The Right only has to win once.

[mooph]

Senate Commerce Committee -- contact your senator

Democrats

Ernest F. Hollings, South Carolina [phone]

Daniel K. Inouye, Hawaii [phone]

John D. Rockefeller IV, West Virginia [phone]

John F. Kerry, Massachusetts [phone]

John B. Breaux, Louisiana [phone]

Byron L. Dorgan, North Dakota [phone]

Ron Wyden, Oregon [phone]

Barbara Boxer, California [phone]

Bill Nelson, Florida [phone]

Maria Cantwell, Washington [phone]

Frank Lautenberg, New Jersey [phone]

Republicans

John McCain, Arizona, Chairman [phone]

Ted Stevens, Alaska [phone]

Conrad Burns, Montana [phone]

Trent Lott, Mississippi [phone]

Kay Bailey Hutchison,Texas [phone]

Olympia J. Snowe, Maine [phone]

Sam Brownback, Kansas [phone]

Gordon Smith, Oregon [phone]

Peter G. Fitzgerald, Illinois [phone]

John Ensign, Nevada [phone]

George Allen, Virginia [phone]

John Sununu, New Hampshire [phone]

[Kache]

THANKS MOOPH!

[ResidentChimp]

What? Kerry's getting a haircut?

[rvme]

Maybe John Kerry could have used the Internet in 2004 and read what the "people' expected and wanted. Instead he was Tone Deaf. The only reason I voted for Kerry in 2004 was A) BUSH SUCKS and B) I liked what Teresa had to say. She obviously wore the pants in the family.

[CC1]

Good reasons to have voted for Kerry, among many. Too bad other political wives don't tell nosy reporters to shove it :)

[jennifer Vizzo]

Was I asleep when John Kerry endorsed Obama? In his first paragraph, he said he was in Pennsylvania with Barack? Yippee, skippy, I'll go back to buying Heintz Ketchup again.

[nochickenhawk]

Oh yeah, Kerry promised that Obama will not be swift-boated quite a while ago.

[moxymama]

And as Obama's camp urged Superdelegates whose constituencies went for Obama to support Obama at the convention, shouldn't Kerry do the same?

[zizyphus]

How about citing the bill number when you discuss the bill.

[Stevelagain]

While you are at it.

Can you do anything about

1) Ending Pork?

2) balancing the budget?

3) Fixing our doomed medicare system?

4) fixing social security?

5) national health care?

I mean, I don't want to be petty or anything and wander off topic, the internet. But you guys have been in power now for about 1.5 years and we aren't really seeing any action on the big stuff. I thought you on the left were more "fiscally responsible" but now I'm not seeing it. And working across the isle? I don't see how Obama can make that happen when he doesn't seem to be able to make it happen in the Senate.

There's a reason you guys are rated LOWER than the president and it's not your stance on the internet....it's the inaction on the big issues.

[millions]

Net neutrality is a huge issue. Part of the reason it's so hard to make progress on so many political issues is that the average citizen doesn't have much of a voice in the mainstream media, and that lack of representation makes it easier to manipulate public opinion. Net neutrality is integral to ensuring that money isn't the driving force in determining what voices can be heard on the internet, and protecting a neutral flow of communication is a very good place to start if one hopes to affect social change on a larger scale.

[Clinton]

Can you explain how net neutrality will ensure that money isn't the driving force in determining what voices can be heard on the internet?

[K-Dog76]

millions, sorry to say but the mainstream media represents the opinion of the average masses. Its not some sort of 1984 spoonfeeding... thats commercials look to the banners on anyweb page and its there too... Smoking is bad wear a bicycle helmet, wear your seatbelt eat you vegetables, got milk. Say no to oil but yes to eletricity (!?!) common people shouldn't fly home for the holidays, thats reserved for movie stars and Al gore because they don't wreck they environment, average people do... Neutral communication? Good luck get back to the Pez Dis[enser, pavlov has another treat for you...

[K-Dog76]

Sevelagain:
"But you guys have been in power now for about 1.5 years and we aren't really seeing any action on the big stuff. I thought you on the left were more "fiscally responsible" but now I'm not seeing it. And working across the isle?"

Sorry to tell you but you were duped. The dems are politicians just like the repubs so you get what you vote for: empty promises. Could have told you there wasn't going to be any change... except that bipartisan legislation to raise their paychecks...