• House votes to gut FCC's authority over broadband, but Obama will veto
    28 replies, posted
[url]http://www.engadget.com/2016/04/15/house-votes-to-block-fcc-from-regulating-broadband-prices/[/url] [quote]In its guidelines for an open internet, the FCC gave itself the ability to regulate what internet customers in the US will pay for service by classifying broadband as a utility. The US House of Representatives is looking to take that power way, and today voted to pass H.R 2666, or "No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act." The bill has drawn criticism from both politicians and open-internet supporters for being vaguely worded and that it could allow service providers to sue the FCC for unrelated enforcement actions (like fines). President Obama already said he'll veto the legislation if it arrives on his desk.[/quote] [url]http://www.engadget.com/2016/04/15/house-votes-to-block-fcc-from-regulating-broadband-prices/[/url] [quote]As Republicans in Congress push legislation that would gut the Federal Communications Commission's authority to enforce net neutrality rules, the White House today issued a policy statement threatening a veto. "If the president were presented with H.R. 2666 [the bill number] his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill," the statement said. The bill is titled the No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act and was approved by the Energy and Commerce Committee over objections from Democrats last month. The bill would strip the FCC of authority to set broadband rates or review whether a rate is reasonable, and it's controversial mainly because it defines "rate regulation" so broadly that it could prevent the FCC from enforcing net neutrality rules against blocking and throttling. It could also limit the FCC's authority to prevent ISPs from applying data caps in discriminatory ways.[/quote]
what happens when we get a president who won't veto this type of shit
[QUOTE=TheHydra;50138292]what happens when we get a president who won't veto this type of shit[/QUOTE] You get fucked [I]HARD[/I] unless you're the one owning a big company who wants this kind of shit.
Fuck off Republicans. I hope a Republican doesn't win the next presidential election since this just confirms that they would kill off net neutrality. Then again Clinton probably would too since she's taking money from Verizon. If the US kills off net neutrality the rest of the world will surely follow.
The one and only time I'm glad to hear the word "veto" from Obama. Kill this shit fast. The FCC has FINALLY been doing their job and REALLY WELL to boot. Please do not undermine them.
[QUOTE=TheHydra;50138292]what happens when we get a president who won't veto this type of shit[/QUOTE] In terms of the 2016 candidates it's still a straight partisan issue - Clinton and Sanders have both come out in support of neutrality and the FCC, while Trump and Cruz hate it [url]http://gizmodo.com/the-2016-presidential-candidates-views-on-net-neutralit-1760829072[/url]
wait hillary is in favor of it ? was this before or after sanders starting getting ground
Obama will veto it and then Republicans will scream "executive overreach" like a bunch of babies when this is precisely the kind of bullshit nonsense bill that the veto was built to take care of. [QUOTE=TheHydra;50138292]what happens when we get a president who won't veto this type of shit[/QUOTE] The corporate lobbyists win until the revolution begins.
[QUOTE=smurfy;50138346]In terms of the 2016 candidates it's still a straight partisan issue - Clinton and Sanders have both come out in support of neutrality and the FCC, while Trump and Cruz hate it [url]http://gizmodo.com/the-2016-presidential-candidates-views-on-net-neutralit-1760829072[/url][/QUOTE] Clinton is being funded heavily by Verizon. Not only that she's a career liar. I wouldn't put an ounce of faith in her actually being in favor of net neutrality
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;50138352]wait hillary is in favor of it ? was this before or after sanders starting getting ground[/QUOTE] Over a year ago she [url=http://time.com/3721452/hillary-clinton-net-neutrality/]backed Title II reclassification of broadband[/url] while the FCC was considering it
[QUOTE=TheHydra;50138292]what happens when we get a president who won't veto this type of shit[/QUOTE] Ask the [URL="https://facepunch.com/poll.php?pollid=8456&do=showresults"]217[/URL] (some jokingly) Facepunchers who would rather vote for Trump over Clinton while moaning about how their ISP is fucking them in the ass hard enough that they can't afford more hot Cheetos.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;50138367]Ask the [URL="https://facepunch.com/poll.php?pollid=8456&do=showresults"]217[/URL] (some jokingly) Facepunchers who would rather vote for Trump over Clinton while moaning about how their ISP is fucking them in the ass hard enough that they can't afford more hot Cheetos.[/QUOTE] That poll isn't very accurate. Some of the people that voted for "Vote Trump" aren't from the US or supported Trump anyway.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;50138367]Ask the [URL="https://facepunch.com/poll.php?pollid=8456&do=showresults"]217[/URL] (some jokingly) Facepunchers who would rather vote for Trump over Clinton while moaning about how their ISP is fucking them in the ass hard enough that they can't afford more hot Cheetos.[/QUOTE] Which is ironic given that many typical Republican voters would rather vote for Clinton if the choice was Clinton or Trump.
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;50138358]The corporate lobbyists win until the revolution begins.[/QUOTE] So basically the corporate lobbyists win.
I already brought it up with him in Mod chat.
[QUOTE=smurfy;50138364]Over a year ago she [url=http://time.com/3721452/hillary-clinton-net-neutrality/]backed Title II reclassification of broadband[/url] while the FCC was considering it[/QUOTE] maybe she'll be useful for something then
[QUOTE=Starpluck;50138384]I already brought it up with him in Mod chat.[/QUOTE] but [I]we[/I] want to see it too!
Why won't Starpluck release the transcripts of the speeches he made in mod chat? What does he have to hide?
[QUOTE=Starpluck;50138367]Ask the [URL="https://facepunch.com/poll.php?pollid=8456&do=showresults"]217[/URL] (some jokingly) Facepunchers who would rather vote for Trump over Clinton while moaning about how their ISP is fucking them in the ass hard enough that they can't afford more hot Cheetos.[/QUOTE] id estimate theres a lot more than 217
What is their reasoning for this? Because regulations are bad and free markets are good? What a load of shit.
[QUOTE=The Pretender;50139052]What is their reasoning for this? Because regulations are bad and free markets are good? What a load of shit.[/QUOTE] Because money.
[QUOTE=The Pretender;50139052]What is their reasoning for this? Because regulations are bad and free markets are good? What a load of shit.[/QUOTE] They don't seem to understand or even want to understand that net neutrality is regulating the internet to maintain an open platform, they just scream that the FCC will shut down the internet, which is exactly what ISPs were trying to do with tiered distribution packages which were far from hypothetical, they were planning to introduce them
Now if FCC can stop being an arbitrary asshole over censorship we'll be good.
[QUOTE=Megadave;50139851]Now if FCC can stop being an arbitrary asshole over censorship we'll be good.[/QUOTE] Didn't they relax some of the rules? or did the Moral Guardians force that back in?
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;50138358]Obama will veto it and then Republicans will scream "executive overreach" like a bunch of babies when this is precisely the kind of bullshit nonsense bill that the veto was built to take care of. The corporate lobbyists win until the revolution begins.[/QUOTE] Don't forget overriding the veto.
[QUOTE=TestECull;50139873]Don't forget overriding the veto.[/QUOTE] That's much, MUCH harder to do. That requires a huge 2/3rds majority in both HoR and the Senate. Unless this vote was already near that, we're not gonna get fucked over by it any time soon.
[url=https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/114-2016/h152]The vote[/url] was along party lines except for 5 Democrats who voted Aye. No chance of a veto override in this Congress.
[QUOTE=Megadave;50139851]Now if FCC can stop being an arbitrary asshole over censorship we'll be good.[/QUOTE] Pretty sure it's the networks being the arbitrary assholes these days, they all have images to keep up, like Colbert frequently comments on what be can and can't say on cbs
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.