On Sunday, the Washington Post reported that the Federal Communications Commission is expected to abandon its pledges to protect Net Neutrality and to ensure universal, affordable broadband. The story cites anonymous insiders confirming that FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is "leaning toward" siding with the most powerful phone and cable lobbyists on a crucial decision: whether the FCC will have any authority to protect an open Internet and make it available to all.
It is a testament to the phone and cable industry's overwhelming influence that they seem to have convinced the nation's communications agency to swear off authority to protect Americans' right to open communications. But it is stunning that Genachowski would even contemplate allowing it to stand, given President Obama's repeated pledge to ensure fast, affordable, universal Internet broadband for every American.
So what's going on here?
In early April, a a federal appeals court ruled that, based on decisions by the Bush-era FCC, the agency lacks the authority to regulate broadband providers. In so doing, the court effectively handed control of the Internet to companies like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon -- allowing them to slow down or block any website, any blog post, any tweet, any outreach by a congressional campaign. The FCC no longer has the power to stop them.
Fortunately, the FCC does have the power to easily fix the problem by "reclassifying" broadband under the law. All it would take is a vote by its five commissioners -- and Genachowski already has the votes. But so far, he has done nothing, while proponents of Net Neutrality (the principle that prevents providers from indiscriminately blocking or slowing Internet content) have been watching and waiting with bated breath.
If Genachowski gives up on restoring FCC authority, you can be sure he will claim that Internet deployment remains the signature issue of his FCC and that he can still accomplish the goals outlined in the FCC's recently released National Broadband Plan.
But unless the FCC puts broadband under what's called "Title II" of the Telecommunications Act, nearly every broadband-related decision the agency makes from here forward will be aggressively challenged in court, and the FCC will likely lose. The phone and cable companies know this, which is why they're going all out to keep the FCC from fixing the problem.
The goals of the much-feted National Broadband Plan are to ensure all Americans can get high-speed access to the open Internet -- not a closed version of the Internet that looks more like cable TV, where phone and cable companies decide what moves fast or not at all.
Chairman Genachowski could stand up for the American people, and against one of the biggest lobbying juggernauts in Washington, but it will take courage. If he fails to stand with the public, it could mean the end of the Internet as we know it.
Before it's too late, we need to make sure the FCC knows the American people are watching, and we will not sit quietly as the largest companies destroy the open, democratic Internet.
Follow Josh Silver on Twitter: www.twitter.com/freepress
Assuming that the FCC Chairman's proposal is reasonable, it's a clear signal that the FCC is backing away from the cliff, and charting a path toward a sensible broadband policy framework that will protect consumers and promote universal access.
Art Brodsky: Prince Hamlet of the FCC
Julius Genachowski is leaning toward trying to find a way to salvage his Open Internet policies through the existing legal structure that was largely, but not completely, shot down recently.
Julius Genachowski - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Biography of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski
FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski
FCC Chair Leaning Against Net Neutrality
What to watch: key events this week: May 3-7
FCC chief Julius Genachowski faces broadband dilemma
Obama FCC Expected to Abandon Net Neutrality; Universal Internet
That this government does not uphold it pledge to the people is not a surprise either, just look at who and what the government does uphold. The actions of this government speak loudly on its own behalf.
We'll be lucky if we get out of this alive! The oil spill in the gulf is the worst the world has ever seen and its just beginning, meanwhile the "Blame Game" is just getting started. The FCC is abandoning its pledge to the people in favor of what? The Communication companies! Like everything else about this government it too is for sale. An insane government engaging in insane actions... why does any of this surprise you?
Try to remember the net as it now is, because it won't be this way for much longer.
Reading the reactions to this story is kind of like that. The rational (hopefully) start getting the feeling that MAYBE they've gone too far in blaming Obama for his stance on oil drilling off the coast, et. al. when they see exactly WHO they've crawled into bed with.
Kind of frightening, actually.
So far, in the first page of comments, I see only 2 comments (yours and someone else's) offering some concrete action (calling Genachowski or Obama), and 24 bemoaning the situation. Yup, 8% action, 92% grumbling - sadly, there's a lot of that on progressive sites. I hope others will call and leave comments to that effect here.
Indeed, another reason why nobody should be pinning educational systems' problems solely on the teachers' performance is that teachers will fake grades or give students a free ride. A teacher should NOT be held responsible after a certain point if the student has no desire to learn. In college myself, seeing people half my age (they're 20) be indolent and mean-spirited toward the instructor, making the instructor pay for those brats is just uncoordinated and sinister on somebody's behalf. Bush wanted to put it all in the hands of the teachers, but he couldn't analyze a bucket of minnows... never mind anything important.
Sorry for the half-tangent, but it's more than regulations. The application of the regulations is as important.
In this case, net neutrality is a good regulation, because it frees users and their data from corporate micromanagement.
You talk about a rock and a hard place!
It's sad too.
What could have been a hands-off affair will become the ugly mob in the end.
So sad you couldn't just leave well enough alone big bizz.......
"Don't screw the internet" would be more accurate, but it's not particularly professional.
We used to laugh at people voting against their own interest. Now the shoe-is-on-the-other-foot.