April 26, 2006 1:54 PM PDT
Democrats lose House vote on Net neutrality
- Related Stories
Net neutrality showdownJanuary 2, 2007
Democrats pledge fight over Net neutralityApril 25, 2006
New group aims to 'save the Internet'April 24, 2006
Republicans defeat Net neutrality proposalApril 5, 2006
Democrats attack new bill over Net neutralityMarch 30, 2006
AT&T chief, FCC chair clarify on Net neutralityMarch 21, 2006
A better idea for Net neutralityMarch 15, 2006
Senator: Net neutrality may not happenMarch 14, 2006
Playing favorites on the Net?December 21, 2005
By a 34-22 vote, members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee rejected a Democratic-backed Net neutrality amendment that also enjoyed support from Internet and software companies including Microsoft, Amazon.com and Google.
"I'm concerned about e-mails being blocked from advocacy groups, of all sides," said Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois Democrat who supported the amendment. "I'm concerned about start-ups that may be shut down."
While efforts to rewrite telecommunications laws often languish in obscurity, advocacy groups and corporations have raised public alarms about the section of the 34-page bill pertaining to Net neutrality (also called network neutrality).
Opponents of the bill's Net neutrality portion say it doesn't go far enough to target possible errant behavior by AT&T, Verizon Communications and other broadband providers. A "Save the Internet" coalition has even been created and boasts members such as the left-leaning Moveon.org, the American Library Association and the libertarian-conservative group Gun Owners of America.
The groups say the Federal Communications Commission must be given power to prevent broadband providers from doing things like charging content providers extra for the privilege of faster delivery or other preferential treatment.
"Did the Bells create the Internet? Did the cable companies create the Internet?" asked Rep. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat and sponsor of the amendment. "The answer is no. The Internet was built on a different model, a public interest model, funded by American taxpayers."
For their part, major broadband providers have repeatedly pledged not to block traffic or censor Web sites. Instead, they say, it will only be economically feasible to invest in higher-speed links if some bandwidth can be reserved for paid content. In an interview with CNET News.com, for instance, Verizon Chief Technology Officer Mark Wegleitner said movie-quality video could be delivered to DSL subscribers if the copyright owner would pay.
Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican and committee chairman, pressured his fellow GOP members to vote against Markey's amendment--even going so far as to remind them that he opposed it and to call in wayward colleagues who had strayed out into the hallway.
Net neutrality is "still not clearly defined," Barton said. "It's kind of like pornography: You know it when you see it."
Barton argued that Net neutrality proponents were overstating their case and exaggerating the dangers of a more laissez-faire approach. "I don't think all the Draconian things they (predict) will happen if we don't adopt their amendment," he said.
Because the committee has a GOP majority, Markey's amendment never had a chance of passing unless some Republicans could be convinced to defect from the party line. Activist groups had tried to ratchet up the pressure, with a letter-writing campaign to politicians, and announcing early Wednesday that Intel had joined the Net neutrality coalition.
22 commentsJoin the conversation! Add your comment