Bigger U.S. Role in Broadband Is Likely

[jypagan]

By AMY SCHATZ

WASHINGTON -- The Federal Communications Commission began to lay the groundwork for a bigger federal role in the broadband business Wednesday, outlining the hurdles the U.S. needs to overcome to improve the availability of high-speed Internet access.

The FCC identified a number of issues the government should address, including the high cost of laying new broadband lines in rural areas, a lack of airwaves for wireless Web access and ill-informed consumers.

Journal Community

Vote: Should you pay higher phone fees to help support high-speed Internet access for all Americans? Related

Feds Mull Rules, Fees to Spur Net Access "This focus on broadband is a reflection of a recognition that the U.S. is lagging behind," FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said Wednesday at the agency's monthly meeting.

The FCC is drafting a National Broadband Plan, which will lay out ways the government can improve broadband service in the U.S. The plan is scheduled to come out in February, and it's uncertain how many of its suggestions will ultimately be adopted. Already, some big cable and telecommunications companies are concerned the agency wants to impose rules that could undermine their business strategies and profitability.

FCC officials noted Wednesday that because more Americans are relying on smart phones to access the Internet, more airwaves need to be devoted to wireless broadband service. Agency officials have previously floated a plan to take some airwaves from television broadcasters and use them for wireless devices instead. Broadcasters are unhappy about that plan.

The agency took a step toward expanding wireless Web access by passing a new rule Wednesday to help wireless companies speed up local officials' decisions on new cellphone towers. Wireless companies asked the FCC for help, because they have had problems in the past getting state and local land-use regulators to make decisions on siting new cellphone towers.

Getty Images

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski testifies on Capitol Hill in October.

Of the 3,300 applications for new towers or to put a new antenna up on an existing tower, more than 700 have been pending for more than a year, FCC officials said. The FCC said local communities should have 90 days to consider applications from carriers who want to put an antenna up on an existing tower, and 150 days for new tower applications. The decision means that if local officials don't make a decision in that time, the wireless carriers can appeal to a court.

The FCC's latest broadband moves are part of a multi-stage process mapped out by Mr. Genachowski for examining whether American consumers have suffered from the largely hands-off approach the U.S. has taken on Internet infrastructure.

FCC officials said they are concerned consumers don't know enough about the actual speeds of broadband connections before they sign up with a provider. Often, the speed advertised by an Internet provider is much faster than the actual speed a consumer gets at home, which makes it harder for consumers to compare competing services. FCC officials Wednesday didn't say exactly what they would propose to address this.

The agency is also looking at how to increase the use of broadband among lower-income people and minorities, who subscribe at lower rates than the general population.

Write to Amy Schatz at [email protected]

Source http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125858121746254383.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_tech

[mudmanc4]

FCC officials said they are concerned consumers don't know enough about the actual speeds of broadband connections before they sign up with a provider. Often, the speed advertised by an Internet provider is much faster than the actual speed a consumer gets at home, which makes it harder for consumers to compare competing services. FCC officials Wednesday didn't say exactly what they would propose to address this.

Once again, you have government making a statement that we know nothing, that we can't think,and make decisions for ourselves, that we need another tax funded organization to tell us what is good for us.

They don't know what they would propose my ass, they will propose more regulations on private corporations forcing them to do what a small handful of bureaucrats say is best , but what is best is rarely best for the consumers, or private companies.

The FCC is drafting a National Broadband Plan, which will lay out ways the government can improve broadband service in the U.S. The plan is scheduled to come out in February, and it's uncertain how many of its suggestions will ultimately be adopted. Already, some big cable and telecommunications companies are concerned the agency wants to impose rules that could undermine their business strategies and profitability.

And I don't blame them for being concerned either, they should be, government is creeping it's way into private business like a thief in the night !

[localpeon]

Read the following:Taken fromhttp://www.internetfreedomcoalition.org/[table][tr][td][table][tr][td][table][tr][td]Don't let the government slow Internet progress

The Internet has become a powerful communications and economic force because it has been free from government interference. To make sure the power and promise of the Internet continues, we need to keep it free of government interference.[list type=decimal]

• We oppose three basic threats to Internet Freedom:

• Taxes

• Regulations

• and any attempt by the United Nations to manage the Internet

The FCC voted Thursday, October 22, 2009 on what it calls a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" (NPRM) on Net Neutrality.  It is a complex 107-page proposal to regulate the Internet that you can read here.

I'm reviewing the NPRM and will post a set of talking points next week, along with a form that will make it easy for you to submit formal comments.

In the meantime, if you want to make your voice heard please sign our petition to oppose any Washington attempt to take over the Internet.

                  - Phil Kerpen, Chairman, Internet Freedom Coalition[/td][/tr][/table]

The Free Press and Obama Information Control Hierarchy

SUNDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2009

[img height=201 width=320]http://internetfreedomcoalition.org/uploaded_images/infocontrol-revcap-796581.jpg

The list of major funders (OSI/Soros, Tides, Streisand, Nathan Cummings, Ford, Rockefeller Bros) on the chart comes directly from the Free Press 2007 Annual Report.

Robert McChesney (University of Illinois professor) and John Nichols (The Nation magazine) are Free Press founders and hard-left Marxists. McChesney recently told the Socialist magazine The Bullet:

"Instead of waiting for the revolution to happen, we learned that unless you make significant changes in the media, it will be vastly more difficult to have a revolution."

This is a man who, two weeks after 9/11, said:

"Likewise, Americans have no idea of the United States' own history in the world as a supporter of terrorism. The United States is, I think, by any honest account, the leading terrorist institution in the world today."

In a February 2009 article titled "A New New Deal under Obama?" for the socialist Monthly Review

McChesney and co-author John Bellamy Foster wrote:

"These gains will only be made through an enormous class struggle from below. If won, they will not, we underscore, eliminate the evils of capitalism, or the dangers it poses for the world and its people. In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles. This is something that the great majority of the population will undoubtedly learn in the course of their struggles for a more equal, more humane, more collective, and more sustainable world. In the meantime, it is time to begin to organize a revolt against the ruling class–imposed ceiling on civilian government spending and social welfare in U.S. society."

Free Press, far from condemning disgraced radical green jobs czar Van Jones, a former Free Press board member, rallied to his defense following his resignation, posting a statement attacking Glenn Beck and FOX News titled (http://www.freepress.net/node/72459): "Free Press Calls on Obama Administration to Resist Extremism in the Media. Defends Former Free Press Board Member Van Jones"

Free Press is directly tied to White House Internet Czar Susan Crawford, described Wired Magazine as, "the most powerful geek close to the president."

Free Press and ACORN are both participating organizations of Crawford's "OneWebDay" project. (http://onewebday.org/participating-organizations/) Crawford self-consciously modeled OneWebDay on Earth Day and the radical environmental agenda that it propelled forward. (http://onewebday.org/ourstory/) She explains on the OneWebDay site:

"Earth Day was the model when I founded OneWebDay in 2006. In 1969, one man asked the people to do what their elected representatives would not: take the future of the environment into their own hands." Today, a worldwide citizens' movement has put the environment front and center politically. According to Crawford, "peoples' lives now are as dependent on the Internet as they are on the basics like roads, energy supplies and running water. We can no longer take that for granted, and we must advocate for the Internet politically and support its vitality personally."

As Crawford explained her mission in the White House to The Wall Street Journal in April: "We should do a better job as a nation of making sure fast, affordable broadband is as ubiquitous as electricity, water, snail mail, or any other public utility."

Crawford was in charge of the FCC for the Obama transition team, working under transition team co-chair John Podesta of the Center for American Progress (former employer of Mark Lloyd and Van Jones). In that capacity, she counseled Obama to appoint Julius Genachowski to the FCC, along with former Free Press staffer Jen Howard and former author of a paper for Free Press, Mark Lloyd.

Free Press is now, not surprisingly, extremely influential with the Obama administration and its supposedly independent agency, the FCC. According to National Journal(http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdaily/cda_20091005_1509.php):

"Free Press, Google and Public Knowledge worked with then-candidate Obama to help develop his tech policies. Public Knowledge President Gigi Sohn is a longtime friend of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, who tapped Free Press spokeswoman Jen Howard to be his press secretary.  Free Press and the Media Access Project, a public interest law firm, regularly draw marquee names such as Susan Crawford, special assistant to the president for science, technology and innovation policy, as keynoters. She previously was a member of Public Knowledge's advisory board."

The push for Internet regulation ultimately goes all the way to the top. (Video on Free Press web site at: http://www.freepress.net/obama_net_neutrality)

Barack Obama: "I will take a back seat to no one in my commitment to Net Neutrality."

10/25/2009 10:09:00 AM

Read more! [/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table]

[zalternate]

First. Whats wrong with the rendering of this thread? Opera and FireFox.

Second. Make it so the damn cable companies can't block towns and cities from putting in their own Internet cables. 

It's total B.S. to block areas that can't get highspeed Internet from putting in their own service.

In Canada, many areas are forced to use wireless providers(last mile) and some of them don't care if you are anywhere near the speed that is advertised.

Cellular towers are taking up the slack, but quickly get overwhelmed by people who move away from crap last mile wireless.

And government back door deals are happening with our money(a tax, that was not a tax, that turned into a tax) that is being used to subsidize this crap.

Besides. It's the Copyright Mafia that is soon to control our Internet via ACTA.

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement

[localpeon]

                                            AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY

A couple of months ago I told you about the FCC's regulatorypower grab, boosted by the radical left, to gain control of the Internet andpotentially our whole communications system.  With Glenn Beck's help, we exposed the White House Czarcharged with technology policy, Susan Crawford, and she was forced toresign.  Unfortunately, the left'seffort to take over the Internet continues.  The Federal Communications Commission is moving ahead withproposed "Open Internet" rules, which would give federal regulatorsvast new powers, and ultimately lead to government control of the Internet.

The stakes are huge, and will help determine outcomes on allthe other issues we care about. That's because as long as the Internet is free, we can use it tocommunicate, educate, and organize. This is what's at stake as the FCC moves forward with its ridiculouslymisnamed "Open Internet" rulemaking..

"Open Internet" is the left's latest marketinglanguage for what they used to call "net neutrality."  It is an outgrowth of the largerso-called media reform project of radical left-wing activists like RobertMcChesney, the Free Press founder who explained his goal toSocialistProject.ca: "What we want to have in the U.S. and in everysociety is an Internet that is not private property, but a publicutility."

"Open Internet" or "net neutrality"sounds simple - force            phoneand cable companies to treat every bit of information the same way - until yourealize that modern networks are incredibly complex, with millions of lines ofcode in every router.  Making sureservices like VoIP, video conferencing, and telemedicine (not to mention thenext great thing that hasn't been invented yet) get priority may be necessaryto make the Internet work, but the government is considering regulations thatwill make it illegal to prioritize traffic.

These networks cost billions of dollars to build andmaintain, and if there is uncertainty about getting a good return on thatinvestment, private investment will dry up.  And then government will step in, spending billions of ourtax dollars on a government-owned and controlled Internet.

Although Susan Crawford is gone, the White House Internet            powergrab goes much higher, to President Obama himself.  He said on the campaign trail: "I will take a backseatto no one in my commitment to Net Neutrality."

Please click here to file official FCC comments opposing aWashington takeover of the Internet.http://capwiz.com/americansforprosperity/utr/1/ODGKLVCJRU/FTLOLVCJSL/4478089696

Thanks for all you do.

Phil Kerpen

Vice President and Director of Policy, Americans forProsperity

Chairman, Internet Freedom Coalition

P.S. After you click here to file comments with the FCCagainst its proposed "Open Internet" rule and in support of a trulyopen, competitive, privately owned and controlled network, please forward this            messageto anyone you know who can help us fight for real Internet freedom.  And please follow me on Twitter(http://twitter.com/kerpen) and Facebook (http://facebook.com/PhilKerpen) forthe latest news. Thanks!

Like what Americans for Prosperity is doing? Invest in ourwork by clicking here. We're supported by our more than 800,000citizen-activists nationwide. Your contribution in any amount will go a longway in promoting free-market policies at all levels of government - local,state and federal. Thanks!

Americans for Prosperity