Monday, May 31, 2010

FCC broadband move draws bipartisan ire in Congress, probably driven by telecom lobbies

More than half of the House of Representatives has objected to the Obama administration's move to redefine broadband without the approval of Congress. "This week a total of 248 members on both sides of the aisle raised concerns about the Federal Communications Commission’s plan to reshape the regulatory framework for broadband services in order to adopt net neutrality rules," Kim Hart of Politico reports. Republicans claim the decision will reduce investment in broadband networks and kill jobs, while some Democrats feel FCC should wait for further direction from Congress.

"FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski does not need Congressional approval to adopt net neutrality, the controversial rules that would require Internet service providers to treat all Web traffic equally," Hart writes. "Genachowski, who has the support of President Barack Obama in pursuing net neutrality, has received political cover from senior Democrats, including Sen. Jay Rockefeller (W.Va.) and Rep. Henry Waxman (Calif.) to move forward." The largest Internet service providers, like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon, have been vocal in their opposition of net neutrality and said FCC action would be challenged in court.

The objections came in a flurry of letters from legislators to Genachowski. "Consumer advocates who support net neutrality say this week’s flood of letters is 'is nothing more than a demonstration of the unparalleled political and lobbying muscle of the telecommunications industry,' according to Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, a public interest group," Hart writes. Liz Rose of the public-interest group Free Press, added, "The members of Congress who signed the industry letters are attempting to drastically undercut the FCC’s ability to make a fast, affordable and open Internet available to everyone in America — and are actually taking a position against the interest of rural and low-income communities." (Read more)

No comments: