Net Neutrality Update: 2006-10-04

MoveOn.org sent out an email today, celebrating the fact that the Senate has adjourned without voting on the telecommunications bill that would have killed Net Neutrality. They also warned that the biggest challenge will be to keep up the pressure when Congress returns after the election, characterizing the lame duck session as the time when Congress is least accountable. There's a nice summary of the issue, and a handful of links, on their site.

Two days ago, Daniel W. Reilly posted "The telecom slayers" (S$) on Salon. This is a very good read.

You still think Net Neutrality is a minor issue? The telcos sure don't. Consider this, from Reilly's article:

In 2005, the big phone and cable companies began putting their money where their mouths were. That year, they spent $71 million in lobbying, reports Bloomberg News, to make sure Net neutrality died a quiet death. This spring, according to a study conducted by Gary Arlen, president of Arlen Communications, a Maryland telecommunications research firm, the telecom companies spent more than $1 million per week in targeted TV advertising in the D.C. area. Arlen puts that level of advertising "on par with a car dealership," although in this case, he says, the ads are aimed only at "the 535 members of Congress and their staff."

In addition to the TV ads and the lobbying efforts, the telecoms have been conducting a number of Astroturf campaigns. Chief among the talking points: they need the money to expand the broadband infrastructure. Believe it? Reilly again:

To hear McCurry [head of one of the lobbying groups] tell it, the telecoms are struggling. Without tiered pricing, he says, the companies will not have the funds to build out broadband networks. However, Verizon generated nearly $80 billion in revenue last year, more than all other cable companies combined. AT&T's revenues clocked in at a paltry $44 billion. Over the past five years, the four Bell phone companies have received more than $15 billion in federal subsidies to help wire rural and low-income households through the "universal service fund." All to say nothing of the monthly charges they receive from the average Internet user.

Contrast that with this article, from last week's NY Times, about a town in rural Vermont that still can barely do dial-up. I don't know where that $15 billion in subsidies went, but it sure didn't make it up to Canaan.

There are times when it's appropriate to let the private sector and market forces run the show. This isn't one of them. The U.S. is already way behind most of the developed world in broadband access, and the letting the big telcos set up tollbooths on the Internet is not going to change that. It's just going to make matters worse.

I'd like to close with some words from that most eloquent of senators, Barack Obama, whom SaveTheInternet.com quotes from one of his podcasts:

It is because the Internet is a neutral platform that I can put out this podcast and transmit it over the Internet without having to go through any corporate media middleman. I can say what I want without censorship or without having to pay a special charge. But the big telephone and cable companies want to change the Internet as we know it. They say that they want to create high speed lanes on the Internet and strike exclusive contractual agreements with Internet content providers for access to those high speed lanes. Everyone who cannot pony up the cash will be relegated to the slow lanes.

---

Gory political details:

SaveTheInternet.com maintains a tally of senators and their respective positions on this issue. They also have a nice interactive map. Click on your state to see your senators' positions.

Here's what they know as of today.

On the plus side, 28 senators are counted as supporting Net Neutrality: Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI), Evan Bayh (D-IN), Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D-DE), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), Mark Dayton (D-MN), Christopher J. Dodd (D-CT), Byron L. Dorgan (D-ND), Russell D. Feingold (D-WI), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI), James M. Jeffords (I-VT), Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA), John F. Kerry (D-MA), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Barack Obama (D-IL), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Harry Reid (D-NV), John D. Rockefeller IV (D-WV), Charles Schumer (D-NY), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).

Kudos to Olympia Snowe, the lone Republican on the side of the people.

On the dark side, 14 senators are counted as opposing Net Neutrality: George Allen (R-VA), Sam Brownback (R-KS), Conrad R. Burns (R-MT), Larry E. Craig (R-ID), Jim DeMint (R-SC), John Ensign (R-NV), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Trent Lott (R-MS), John McCain (R-AZ), Gordon Smith (R-OR), Ted Stevens (R-AK), John Sununu (R-NH), Craig Thomas (R-WY), and David Vitter (R-LA).

No surprises here. All Republicans, all on any list of the usual suspects. Note, in particular, that Saint Sen. McCain continues to prove that he really isn't an "okay guy for a Republican."

Here are the declared wafflers, the "known unknowns," as it were: Joesph I. Lieberman (D-CT), Mel Martinez (R-FL), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Barbara A. Mikulski (D-MD), and Arlen Specter (R-PA).

My, my. Lieberman and Specter. Who woulda thunk?