How Tech Policies May Evolve Under Republicans and Trump


Author: Cecilia Kang
Coverage Type: press release
Location:
Senate Commerce Committee, Constitution Avenue and 1st Street, NE Russell Senate Office Building - 253, Washington, DC, 20002, United States

A Q&A with Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (R-SD).

With Republicans now in power across the government, Congress has moved aggressively toward undoing Obama-era tech policies. Network neutrality, the rule that ensures equal access to all websites, and broadband privacy rules are the first targets. Lawmakers also hope to play a bigger role than in the last administration on policies of particular concern to Silicon Valley and internet users, including driverless cars and the scaling back of Federal Communications Commission powers concerning broadband providers. Asked, "How do you want to change net neutrality rules?" Chairman Thune responded, "We’re open for business. We think a legislative solution is the best alternative and that the FCC under Chairman Tom Wheeler went too far with regulations that were overreaching and basically classified the internet as a public utility under a 1934 statute. Congress needs to be heard from, or you will have a constant back-and-forth on this issue depending on which party is in the White House."

Comments

No reliable communication by radio travels 300 miles and must be combined with wire communication except for perhaps military microwave troposcatter but this would require violating a "Top Secret" security clearance to verify.

Most readers of this comment are further than radio waves may communicate alone in the "airwaves medium" from Newark, Arkansas. Reading this comment is ONLY possible due to the seamless combination of "airwaves" and wires.

Chairman Thune; Yes, Congress accounted for the combination of wire and radio in 1934.
This was after wire "cable" reports of WWI casualties were a regular radio news feature and required modifying the Federal Radio Commission into the Federal Communications Commission. I am typing very slow with only one hand Chairman Thune.

Yes, Chairman Thune; The "legislative solution" defining the definition of a common carrier was done in 1934 and included what is called "broadband" or "open nternet" regularly today when written. Apparently legislators have forgotten how to read laws already on the books. Reading laws is not dependent on political party.

(59) wire communication
The term “wire communication” or “communication by wire” means the transmission of writing, signs, signals, pictures, and sounds of all kinds by aid of wire, cable, or other like connection between the points of origin and reception of such transmission, including all instrumentalities, facilities, apparatus, and services (among other things, the receipt, forwarding, and delivery of communications) incidental to such transmission.

Neeley Jr v 5 Communications Commissioners, et. al. DEMANDED "online" be called a Title II common carrier.

. . . . Transmitting an indecent or obscene digital image “online” is a felony today as well as hazardous abuse of a public Title II Common Carrier for communications. Every JPG image today could and should be rated to protect children and pornography addicted Title III judicial personnel. GOOG is VERY aware of this fact and maliciously refused to only index rated image files in 2015 and only allow vulgar searches for authenticated viewers.

I will legally aid any church group or other allegedly moral organization bringing a 42 USC §1983 action for the FCC treating online as ANYTHING besides the illegal hazardous use of a common carrier this has ALWAYS been.

Gosh, ALL this would require is logging in like at FB, G+, Disqus, or Benton. Authenticated processes should be required to allow searches that might return images not allowed broadcast into homes by wi-fi radio. This is already required by laws written by Congress Chairman Thune.

This is not a threat but is a promise Chairman Thune and Chairman Pai. Chairman Thune is protected for this action but Commissioners Pai et. al. are not.

CurtisNeeley on February 21, 2017 - 11:10pm.

Ratings

Recommendation:
3
Informative:
0
Accuracy:
0

Login to rate this headline.