January 2, 2008 4:00 AM PST

Technology Voters' Guide: Hillary Clinton

Iraq, immigration, taxes, and health care probably have been the four most pressing topics of the 2008 presidential campaign. Technology has made nary an appearance.

Sure, there have been the YouTube-ified debates, MySpace.com polls, record-setting fund-raising efforts, and the now-obligatory Google office visits.

But knowing where the candidates stand on high-tech topics like digital copyright, surveillance, and Internet taxes can be revealing, which is why we've put together this 2008 Technology Voters' Guide.

In late November, we sent questionnaires to the top candidates--measured by funds raised and poll standings--from each major party. We asked each the same 10 questions.

Not all candidates chose to respond: Republicans Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, and Fred Thompson rebuffed our requests, as did Democrats Joe Biden and Bill Richardson. In all such cases, we made repeated efforts to try to convince them to change their minds.

Read on for responses from Sen. Hillary Clinton, or check out CNET News.com's election coverage roundup, featuring other Technology Voters' Guide candidate reports.

Q: Politicians have been talking for years about the need for high-speed Internet access. Should this be accomplished primarily through deregulation and market forces, or should the federal government give out grants or subsidies, or enact new laws?
Hillary Clinton: Broadband is the infrastructure of the 21st century. It will play an important role in everything from commerce to education to the delivery of medicine. Our relatively low broadband penetration rate is unacceptable. I believe that there is a role for private industry and for the federal government to play in expanding access to broadband.

As president, I will strengthen tax incentives for extending broadband to underserved areas. I will support state and local broadband initiatives, from new wireless technologies to high-speed fiber optics. And I will change the FCC rules so that we finally have an accurate, detailed picture of broadband deployment and penetration rates.

At present, the FCC data is unreliable because it is based on loose estimates and outdated standards. I will also create a public-private partnership to effectively map broadband availability and broadband demand, and to extend broadband to every corner of every state in the country.

Congress has considered Net neutrality legislation, but it never became law. Do you still support the legislation that was re-introduced in 2007 (S 215), which gives the FCC the power to punish "discriminatory" conduct by broadband providers?
Clinton: Yes. I am an original co-sponsor of the Internet Freedom Preservation Act, and I supported its reintroduction. No other communications medium in recent history has had such a profound impact as the Internet on free expression, education, the proliferation of commerce, and the exchange of political ideas. And it is the basic principles of neutrality and nondiscrimination that have allowed the Internet to flourish.

Thanks to these principles, a small business has been able to market to the same customers as the biggest corporation. The average citizen has been able to voice grievances in the same forum as the editors of the largest newspaper. And students, entrepreneurs, and consumers have been empowered by the wealth of information and opportunities afforded by an open Internet.

As we continue to build on the innovations brought forth by the Internet, we must ensure that there continues to be open, unimpaired, and unencumbered Internet access for both its users and content providers. We need to ensure that the Internet of the 21st century opens the same doors, creates the same opportunities, and fosters the same innovation that we have seen so far.

Telecommunications companies such as AT&T have been accused in court of opening their networks to the government in violation of federal privacy law. Do you support giving them retroactive immunity for any illicit cooperation with intelligence agencies or law enforcement, which was proposed by the Senate Intelligence Committee this fall (S 2248)?
Clinton: I have said that I oppose retroactive immunity for telecommunications providers, and I oppose the retroactive immunity provisions in the Senate Intelligence Committee bill.

The 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act's section restricting the "circumvention" of copy protection measures is supported by many copyright holders but has been criticized by some technologists as hindering innovation. Would you support changing the DMCA to permit Americans to make a single backup copy of a DVD, Blu-ray Disc DVD, HD DVD, or video game disc they have legally purchased?
Clinton: Strong copyright protections and efforts to stem piracy are critical to ensuring that our technology industries remain competitive in the global market. As we go forward, I would support a review of a range of issues related to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act insofar as it did not concern degrading copyright protections or encourage copyright infringements.

CONTINUED: What about Real ID?…
Page 1 | 2

See more CNET content tagged:
Hillary Clinton, tax incentive, broadband, candidate, tax

48 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
So where is the Edwards Tech Voters Guide?
What no support for a Populist? Is he too anti corporate for this site? Shame on c/Net!
Posted by sellitman (26 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Edwards guide coming Friday
John Edwards' responses are scheduled to be published on Friday, Jan. 4. You can check back on this main page of the voters' guide for all the responses as they're published, along with other coverage of the presidential race:

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.news.com/Following-the-digital-campaign-trail/2009-1028_3-6221134.html?tag=nefd.lede" target="_newWindow">http://www.news.com/Following-the-digital-campaign-trail/2009-1028_3-6221134.html?tag=nefd.lede</a>
Posted by Jon Skillings (249 comments )
Link Flag
So where is the Edwards Tech Voters Guide?
What no support for a Populist? Is he too anti corporate for this site? Shame on c/Net!
Posted by sellitman (26 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Edwards guide coming Friday
John Edwards' responses are scheduled to be published on Friday, Jan. 4. You can check back on this main page of the voters' guide for all the responses as they're published, along with other coverage of the presidential race:

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.news.com/Following-the-digital-campaign-trail/2009-1028_3-6221134.html?tag=nefd.lede" target="_newWindow">http://www.news.com/Following-the-digital-campaign-trail/2009-1028_3-6221134.html?tag=nefd.lede</a>
Posted by Jon Skillings (249 comments )
Link Flag
Writer should be ashamed
*** is this junk? Publishing political propaganda should be considered writer suicide.

Horrible article!
Posted by loki_racer (63 comments )
Reply Link Flag
disagree with you
if you don't like it, don't read it.
Posted by TBolt (70 comments )
Link Flag
Why?
I suspect the same questions are being put to other candidates,
where they get an equal chance of bloviating (or having a staff
member bloviate on their behalf).

To be honest, pretty much all of the current candidates are
barely tech-oriented enough to use their Crackberries. After
that, I sure as Hell wouldn't trust them to write code or admin a
network... similarly, I'm not so sure I'd trust them to do anything
legislative (or executive) with the tech realm except on a very
broad scale.

Until we see former programmers and former sysadmins get
elected, don't expect things to change too much for the better
vis-a-vis tech and politics.

/P
Posted by Penguinisto (5042 comments )
Link Flag
Writer should be ashamed
*** is this junk? Publishing political propaganda should be considered writer suicide.

Horrible article!
Posted by loki_racer (63 comments )
Reply Link Flag
disagree with you
if you don't like it, don't read it.
Posted by TBolt (70 comments )
Link Flag
Why?
I suspect the same questions are being put to other candidates,
where they get an equal chance of bloviating (or having a staff
member bloviate on their behalf).

To be honest, pretty much all of the current candidates are
barely tech-oriented enough to use their Crackberries. After
that, I sure as Hell wouldn't trust them to write code or admin a
network... similarly, I'm not so sure I'd trust them to do anything
legislative (or executive) with the tech realm except on a very
broad scale.

Until we see former programmers and former sysadmins get
elected, don't expect things to change too much for the better
vis-a-vis tech and politics.

/P
Posted by Penguinisto (5042 comments )
Link Flag
No question about spam
What would she and other candidates do to stop the attack on our
inboxes by spammers?
Posted by Lee in San Diego (608 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Gov't should do nothing...
The government should't do anything to stop spam from reaching your inbox.

You should do something about it. The government shouldn't have any power over what reaches anyone's inbox. Big Brother already reads everything in your inbox, why have them limit what you can read.

If you don't like spam, blacklist the sender.
Posted by loki_racer (63 comments )
Link Flag
Death Penalty!
But to be honest, there's frig-all that they can do, and using law
to solve a purely technical problem is not something I'd really
want to see...

/P
Posted by Penguinisto (5042 comments )
Link Flag
Nothing
Spam filters work. You want a communication system to be open to
allow people to talk and communicate without restriction. Internet
revolutionises communication and increases the power of free
speech.
SPAM is a consequence of that, but it's easy to deal with with
filtering software.
Posted by Nicholas Buenk (220 comments )
Link Flag
No question about spam
What would she and other candidates do to stop the attack on our
inboxes by spammers?
Posted by Lee in San Diego (608 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Gov't should do nothing...
The government should't do anything to stop spam from reaching your inbox.

You should do something about it. The government shouldn't have any power over what reaches anyone's inbox. Big Brother already reads everything in your inbox, why have them limit what you can read.

If you don't like spam, blacklist the sender.
Posted by loki_racer (63 comments )
Link Flag
Death Penalty!
But to be honest, there's frig-all that they can do, and using law
to solve a purely technical problem is not something I'd really
want to see...

/P
Posted by Penguinisto (5042 comments )
Link Flag
Nothing
Spam filters work. You want a communication system to be open to
allow people to talk and communicate without restriction. Internet
revolutionises communication and increases the power of free
speech.
SPAM is a consequence of that, but it's easy to deal with with
filtering software.
Posted by Nicholas Buenk (220 comments )
Link Flag
Tech questions
Why no question about electronic voting?
Posted by erniecall (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Tech questions
Why no question about electronic voting?
Posted by erniecall (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Dear Hillary...
Dear Mrs. Clinton,

We, the American people, do not want "a review of a range of issues related to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act." We want it REPEALED.
Posted by cjb8465 (16 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Now with that I agree.
It went way overboard and this comes from someone who creates
graphics and videos.
Posted by Lee in San Diego (608 comments )
Link Flag
Dear Hillary...
Dear Mrs. Clinton,

We, the American people, do not want "a review of a range of issues related to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act." We want it REPEALED.
Posted by cjb8465 (16 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Now with that I agree.
It went way overboard and this comes from someone who creates
graphics and videos.
Posted by Lee in San Diego (608 comments )
Link Flag
Anybody but Bush and we win....
It really doesn't matter folks, Bush is THAT bad a president. If cross dressing Guliani wins, we win. If the Cult Mormonist Romney wins, we win. If CFR Hillary, Thompson, Obama, etc win, we win. If nut cases Tancredo, Gilmore, or any of the socialist candidates win, we win.
If Ron Paul or Kucinich win, we really win.

The only people that think Bush is doing a good job is Bush, and maybe William Kristol.
Posted by savagesteve13 (104 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Yes but...
I think huckabee and romney seem just like bush.....
Posted by Nicholas Buenk (220 comments )
Link Flag
Anybody but Bush and we win....
It really doesn't matter folks, Bush is THAT bad a president. If cross dressing Guliani wins, we win. If the Cult Mormonist Romney wins, we win. If CFR Hillary, Thompson, Obama, etc win, we win. If nut cases Tancredo, Gilmore, or any of the socialist candidates win, we win.
If Ron Paul or Kucinich win, we really win.

The only people that think Bush is doing a good job is Bush, and maybe William Kristol.
Posted by savagesteve13 (104 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Yes but...
I think huckabee and romney seem just like bush.....
Posted by Nicholas Buenk (220 comments )
Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.