Washington state will act under their own laws, authority and jurisdiction to protect Net Neutrality - Polidicks

[quote]Gov. Jay Inslee, Attorney General Bob Ferguson, and other officials announced a plan today to maintain standards in Washington that require internet providers to offer the same speed of service for all online content. The news comes on the eve of a vote by the Federal Communications Commission. It is expected to roll back regulations that prevent companies like Comcast and Verizon from throttling service to some content or creating a “fast lane” that customers can pay for.[/quote] [url]https://www.geekwire.com/2017/washington-state-leaders-announce-first-kind-plan-defend-net-neutrality-constituents/[/url] [video]https://twitter.com/GovInslee/status/941075518924865536[/video]

Every time Washington comes up in the news I get a little prouder to live here.

isnt this specifically against the FCC's new regulations? courts may shoot it down

[QUOTE=Judas;52974660]isnt this specifically against the FCC's new regulations? courts may shoot it down[/QUOTE] Probably but the FCC is abducating any authority over enforcing net neutrality and saying nobody else can enforce it either.

[QUOTE=Judas;52974660]isnt this specifically against the FCC's new regulations? courts may shoot it down[/QUOTE] But, wait, isn't the GOP supposed to think that "big government overreach" is bad as opposed to encouraging state rights?!? :thinking:

Let's see a USNNA after Ajit Pieceofshit repeals Net Neutrality despite all the opposition. [QUOTE=BlindSniper17;52974687]But, wait, isn't the GOP supposed to think that "big government overreach" is bad as opposed to encouraging state rights?!? :thinking:[/QUOTE] Because state rights only matter when it plays to their desires. Despite the common view of them being all for small government, they're actually not. In many cases they're far far worse than the Democrats. (And that's even if you ignore the part where they're discriminatory asshats.)

Just to make it clear to people because some people usually miss it, we're talking about the STATE of Washington here, not Washington D.C.

[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;52974687]But, wait, isn't the GOP supposed to think that "big government overreach" is bad as opposed to encouraging state rights?!? :thinking:[/QUOTE] This is a strawman fallacy if i've ever seen one. The question is if they have the authority to do this for interstate telecom providers. This is a power that is solely held by the federal government (enumerated in the commerce clause). That being said in the article they did mention a work around for this which seems legally plausible, but what do I know INAL.

Can we have a nullification crisis please

[QUOTE=Hilton;52974781]Can we have a nullification crisis please[/QUOTE] I second this 100%. The FCC Chairman has been acting against the interests of the public for semi-personal gain. When the public comment period went through with how overwhelmingly high support FOR net neutrality is, the vote should've died right there. But they're ignoring public opinion, and they're ignoring the possible fraud in the comments system. Maybe even willfully withholding evidence and cooperation by investigators into the fraud to further their own gains. It's an obvious case of regulatory capture as A Shit Pie is a former Verizon lawyer, and has been seen meeting Verizon executives. That's conflict of interest out the fucking ass. I think they're gonna succeed in killing it tomorrow, but I have no doubt that the ACLU and the EFF will fight the decision tooth and goddamn nail to reinstate net neutrality. I think even the Supreme Court will favor net neutrality, because most of them have watched the internet grow, and now see how important it is to society.

I'd just like a Democratic Congress pass net neutrality legislation under a Democratic president in 2020. Polls indicate that the vast majority of Americans prefer the existing FCC rules.

It'll get worse before it gets better, but no doubt it'll get better So many people support NN that there is no way it will be dead forever [editline]13th December 2017[/editline] thats assuming it gets the can anyways

[QUOTE=zombini;52974806]I second this 100%. The FCC Chairman has been acting against the interests of the public for semi-personal gain. When the public comment period went through with how overwhelmingly high support FOR net neutrality is, the vote should've died right there. But they're ignoring public opinion, and they're ignoring the possible fraud in the comments system. Maybe even willfully withholding evidence and cooperation by investigators into the fraud to further their own gains. It's an obvious case of regulatory capture as A Shit Pie is a former Verizon lawyer, and has been seen meeting Verizon executives. That's conflict of interest out the fucking ass. I think they're gonna succeed in killing it tomorrow, but I have no doubt that the ACLU and the EFF will fight the decision tooth and goddamn nail to reinstate net neutrality. I think even the Supreme Court will favor net neutrality, because most of them have watched the internet grow, and now see how important it is to society.[/QUOTE] With the Trump plant in the SCOTUS alongside the 50/50 split between the other judges, I can't imagine SCOTUS voting in favor of keeping Net Neutrality, no matter how shady the process of FCC revoking Net Neutrality was. If you think Neil Gorsuch of all people is going to vote in favor of keeping the internet free and open, should it come to a split vote between the other judges, I want some of what you are having :v:

[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;52974836]With the Trump plant in the SCOTUS alongside the 50/50 split between the other judges, I can't imagine SCOTUS voting in favor of keeping Net Neutrality, no matter how shady the process of FCC revoking Net Neutrality was. If you think Neil Gorsuch of all people is going to vote in favor of keeping the internet free and open, should it come to a split vote between the other judges, I want some of what you are having :v:[/QUOTE] I can't see the FCC having any grounds to appeal all the way up to the scotus, like they would be defending their assertion that the ftc should be regulating communications for anti competitive abuses, its just so flimsy and contrived especially since the FTC AND their own council are saying that the ftc may not have the resources or congressional mandate to even do it. Also roberts and kennedy would probably side with the liberal half since they both seem to grasp the importance of the internet today

I've always been kind of tempted to choose Washington as a future home over Oregon. This is definitely a bonus. :thinking:

[QUOTE=StrawberryClock;52974740]Just to make it clear to people because some people usually miss it, we're talking about the STATE of Washington here, not Washington D.C.[/QUOTE] Isn't it common practice to call it Washington State to not confuse people? Nobody I've ever seen says "x happened in Washington" bc usually that follows with "where, D.C or state?"

[QUOTE=fruxodaily;52975589]Isn't it common practice to call it Washington State to not confuse people? Nobody I've ever seen says "x happened in Washington" bc usually that follows with "where, D.C or state?"[/QUOTE] Personally, I've only ever called or heard the state called Washington exclusively. We just call the other one D.C.

The Govener of Pennsylvania just tweeted this: [media]https://twitter.com/GovernorTomWolf/status/941308416601051136[/media]

Fuck yeah I'm so glad I live here. Jay Inslee doing the lord's work. :magic101:

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52975579]I've always been kind of tempted to choose Washington as a future home over Oregon. This is definitely a bonus. :thinking:[/QUOTE] What Washington does, Oregon tends to mirror. Give it a few months.

[QUOTE=iamgoofball;52976301]What Washington does, Oregon tends to mirror. Give it a few months.[/QUOTE] Yeah you're pretty much on the ball there

Im pretty sure that in every other western nation Roy Moore wouldve been a joke candidate with absolutely no chance of winning

[QUOTE=CunningHam;52975661]Washington is a gosh dang wonderful state, Oregon was a bit too Portland and granola for me. It's hip vs hippy[/QUOTE] Well, western Washington at any rate.

[QUOTE=Amber902;52977154]Im pretty sure that in every other western nation Roy Moore wouldve been a joke candidate with absolutely no chance of winning[/QUOTE] Yea but he didn't win in the 2nd least educated state in the nation, and arguably the one that would most agree with his rhetoric.

[QUOTE=Geikkamir;52977339]Well, western Washington at any rate.[/QUOTE] Same thing with Oregon. Eastern Oregon and eastern Washington are largely rural areas and thus trend towards conservatives. I don't know about Washington's districts and such but in Oregon's case we have one Republican in a federal position, the representative for the eastern district of the state. All four other districts, both our senators, and our governor are all Democrats.

[QUOTE=Geikkamir;52977339]Well, western Washington at any rate.[/QUOTE] not even that, you go away from the puget sound area and the salish sea, it becomes rural very quickly, even west of the mountains. south of the sound in particular is very rural. [editline]15th December 2017[/editline] i like it this way, keeps things at a political balance i think works well.

Honest to god I want to see Ajit's face when/if the whole repeal fuckin' explodes in his face and his vote is completely nullified. So much for your verizon-paid money mansion then eh?