Wyden to Block Telecom Bill Without Net Neutrality
June 28th, 2006 by tkarr |
U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has placed a “hold” on major telecommunications legislation recently approved by the Senate Commerce Committee until clear language is included in the legislation that prevents discrimination in Internet access.
Immediately following the Commerce Committee’s vote against a Net Neutrality amendment, Senator Wyden marched onto the floor of the Senate to demand that the legislation include stronger safeguards against phone and cable company discrimination.
“The major telecommunications legislation reported today by the Senate Commerce Committee is badly flawed,” Wyden told the Senate, according to the transcript of his speech:
“The bill makes a number of major changes in the country’s telecommunications law but there is one provision that is nothing more than a license to discriminate. Without a clear policy preserving the neutrality of the Internet and without tough sanctions against those who would discriminate, the Internet will be forever changed for the worse.”
A hold signals his intent to filibuster until certain issues in the Stevens’ bill are cleared up. According to the Senate’s official site, a hold is:
“An informal practice by which a Senator informs his or her floor leader that he or she does not wish a particular bill or other measure to reach the floor for consideration. The Majority Leader need not follow the Senator’s wishes, but is on notice that the opposing Senator may filibuster any motion to proceed to consider the measure.”
Senator Stevens said that he lacks the 60 votes necessary to break a filibuster. If at least 41 Senators stand strong behind Net Neutrality, then Wyden’s hold could keep the Telecom bill from the floor.
The legislation that passed through committee today has toothless provisions on net neutrality, and instead opens the way for companies like AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth to charge consumers and small businesses new and discriminatory fees on top of those they already charge for Internet access.
“The Internet has thrived precisely because it is neutral,” Wyden said. “It has thrived because consumers, and not some giant cable or phone company, get to choose what they want to see and how quickly they get to see it. I am not going to allow a bill to go forward that is going to end surfing the web free of discrimination.”
Watch the video of Wyden’s speech at the Agonist. The full text of Wyden’s statement is available online at Salem-News.com
June 28th, 2006 at 11:32 pm
11-11 Tie…
I’ll have more on this shortly. But the Senate Commerce Committee voted 11-11 today on net neutrality.
Matt makes an important point here, as the momentum going into a floor fight is clearly on our side now:
They held under intense lobbying pressure…
June 29th, 2006 at 12:18 am
[…] The party-line vote at the Commerce Committee would seem to indicate that there’s strong support amongst Senate Democrats for internet freedom–more than in the House–but not necessarily enough across the aisle to pass amendment. Though, one Democrat, Sen. Ron Wyden of Orgeon, is willing to use his Senate privilege to put a hold on the telecomm bill if it fails to contain net neutrality provisions. […]
June 29th, 2006 at 8:54 am
After following this issue both here, in the media and other blogs, I have come to a simple conclusion: There will never be “net neutrality.” There will not be a telecom bill in this session of Congress due to the contentiousness of the net neutrality issue — it is no longer about policy, it’s all about politics. And even when the Democrats take control of either the House, the Senate or both, Republicans will not allow what they consider to be a “radical” net neutrality bill pass. Wyden puts a hold on the legislation this year, DeMint puts a hold on the legislation next year, and so on, and so on, and so on. And in the House, a large number of Democrats actually voted AGAINST strong net neutrality language, despite the efforts of Leader Pelosi and others.
And lets suppose that Congress DOES pass strong net neutrality legislation: You can bet that lawfirms representing the providers are salivating at the prospect because this will be tied up in the courts for years.
In the meantime, the telcos, cable and wireless providers continue to grow, cut deals with content providers and the prospect of an Internet unprotected by net neutrality legislation becomes a reality.
As is so often the case, a good policy issue has become a polarizing political issue. Fight the good fight, but at this point it appears we’re just shadow boxing.
June 29th, 2006 at 10:23 am
[…] UPDATE: Senator Wyden puts hold on Telecom Bill Without Net Neutrality. […]
June 29th, 2006 at 10:37 am
Three words: Oh, hell yeah!
June 29th, 2006 at 10:40 am
[…] Wyden to Block Telecom Bill Without Net Neutrality […]
June 29th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
[…] EDIT: Save the Internet.com: Wyden to Block Telecom Bill Without Net Neutrality - Some great comments there like this ones: Immediately following the Commerce Committee’s vote against a Net Neutrality amendment, Senator Wyden marched onto the floor of the Senate to demand that the legislation include stronger safeguards against phone and cable company discrimination. […]
June 29th, 2006 at 4:00 pm
I hate to be the pessimistic Chicken Little of this organization, but what do you guys think our chances are now?
June 30th, 2006 at 5:26 am
[…] Oregon Senator Ron Wyden has put a hold on the bill, intending to fillibuster it. But it’s uncertain whether or not the opposition has the votes to break it. Wyden says: The Internet has thrived precisely because it is neutral. It has thrived because consumers, and not some giant cable or phone company, get to choose what they want to see and how quickly they get to see it. I am not going to allow a bill to go forward that is going to end surfing the web free of discrimination. […]
July 2nd, 2006 at 11:15 pm
[…] Important to all mp3 blog. Wyden to Block Telecom Bill Without Net Neutrality. “The bill makes a number of major changes in the country’s telecommunications law but there is one provision that is nothing more than a license to discriminate. Without a clear policy preserving the neutrality of the Internet and without tough sanctions against those who would discriminate, the Internet will be forever changed for the worse.” […]
July 3rd, 2006 at 10:02 am
[…] I’m happy that there has been progress on the Network Neutrality issue since Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon has placed a Hold on the telecommunications legislation recently approved in committee. It’s also very encouraging that folks with prominence in the senate, like Senator Kerryare now speaking out on the issue. Having said all that, I’m much less happy about the way this thing is shaping up on the Senate Floor. Among the American People the fight is bipartisan, with right wing and left wing amazingly coming together to fight for internet neutrality, but in the Senate it appears now to be a fight divided right down the party line, with only a few exceptions. […]
July 13th, 2006 at 12:01 pm
This website needs to be updated, seriously. The Commerce Committee passed S 2686 on June 28th, 2006; this bill removes regulatory barriers that keep the private sector from investing in infrastructure and preserves consumer Internet experiences.
The bill includes an extensive section entitled the “Internet Consumer Bill of Rights.” Under this section, Internet service providers would be required, with limited exceptions, to allow consumers access to: 1) any lawful internet content 2) any web page of consumers’ choosing 3) any voice application, software, or service 4) any video application, software, or service 5) any email application, software, or service 6) any search engine of the consumers’ choosing; and 7) any other application, software, or service.
Moreover, consumers would be free to connect any legal device to the broadband network, as long as it does not cause harm to the network, and they would receive clear and conspicuous information about their broadband service. The FCC would be given extensive authority to adjudicate any complaints involving a violation of these provisions and take swift enforcement action.