BREAKING! - Net Neutrality Bill Passes House Judiciary: 20-13.
I'd be interested to know if this split along party lines or if one party was more in favor or the consumer over the big broadband carriers and Internet backbone providers.
Or it could simply be that the 13 who voted against it, also have $90,000 worth of bribes sitting in their freezers. (See: corrupt Democrat William Jefferson for context.)
I'd be interested to know if this split along party lines or if one party was more in favor or the consumer over the big broadband carriers and Internet backbone providers.
Or it could simply be that the 13 who voted against it, also have $90,000 worth of bribes sitting in their freezers. (See: corrupt Democrat William Jefferson for context.)
Technorati
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Digg
twitter
I work with the Hands Off the Internet Coalition, an organization opposing net neutrality legsialtion. This wasn't a party-line vote or an ideological victory for net neutrality. It was a a turf war to protect jusridicition.
"many members of the committee said they were voting for the legislation not because of strong concerns over Net neutrality--but instead because of a turf battle. They said they were worried that a competing proposal already approved by a different committee last month would diminish their own influence in the future."
http://news.com.com/House+panel+votes+for+Net+neutrality/2100-1028_3-6077007.html?tag=nefd.lede
As for the 13 votes against, it is possible for a Congressman to oppose net neutrality and not be in the pay roll of the telecos. Remember who is on the other side with rather deep pockets and extensive lobbying shops; Google, Microsoft, Amazon.
>>As for the 13 votes against, it is possible for a Congressman to oppose net neutrality and not be in the pay roll of the telecos.
True, but then I wouldn't be able to make my $90,000 freezer wise-crack.
But you are correct that the deep pockets of Google, Amazon, etc. could just as easily line the pockets of those in favor of net neutrality.
Net neutrality is a complex issue that certainly goes way beyond my short wise-cracking blog post. I for one am anti-government intervention in most cases. However, I also don't want to see the "big boys" that control the Internet pipes unduly hurt those that don't. Certainly there must be some sort of compromise that protects the investment made by the "big boys" while also protecting others that ride on their pipes.