Sen. Barack Obama is taking heat from liberal supporters for changing his position on granting phone companies involved in President Bush's domestic spying program retroactive immunity for breaking federal laws.
According to a New York Times article published Wednesday, more than 7,000 Obama supporters have organized on Obama's own campaign Web site to protest his recent move to support legislation that will grant legal immunity to phone companies involved in the National Security Agency's domestic wiretapping program after the September 11 attacks.
Sen. Barack Obama
(Credit: Declan McCullagh/CNET News.com)Previously, Obama opposed any immunity for the telecom companies. In February, Obama voted on a Senate bill against retroactive immunity. And when asked for CNET News.com's 2008 Technology Voters' Guide whether he supported "giving (phone companies) retroactive immunity for any illicit cooperation with intelligence agencies or law enforcement, " he answered "No."
During the primary, Obama vowed to fight such legislation to update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, the Times story said. But now he has switched his position to support a compromise bill that was worked out between the White House and Democratic Congressional leaders.
The bill is expected to be voted on by the Senate on Tuesday after the Fourth of July holiday, the article said.
Disappointed Obama supporters told the Times that they see the shift in the telecom immunity issue as a test of Obama's principles in opposing Bush's surveillance program. The article quotes Markos Moulitsas, a blogger and founder of DailyKos.com, as saying that he has decided to cut back the amount of money he gives to the Obama campaign.
While supporters may be frustrated and angry by Obama's apparent flip-flop on this issue, they won't find any more consistency in Sen. John McCain, Obama's presidential opponent on the Republican side.
My colleague Declan McCullagh pointed out in his blog last month that when news about the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program became public years ago, McCain was critical of it. Initially, he said that the courts should decide whether or not AT&T and others accused of violating laws should be held accountable for their participation in the domestic spying program. He also said publicly that it should be made clear to the phone companies that any immunity granted should explicitly state that this was not a "blessing" of their practices and that there should be oversight hearings on the issue.
But over the course of the campaign, McCain's position has changed. In February, he voted for retroactive immunity--even though there were no explicit statements telling AT&T and other telecommunications companies that this is not a "blessing." And there was no deal providing for "oversight hearings," nor were there "provisions" to ensure this won't happen again.
Net Neutrality could soon get top billing in the upcoming 2008 U.S. presidential race.
Or at least, that's what the folks at MoveOn.org are hoping. A question about the issue will be asked of Senator Barack Obama on Monday during an MTV dialogue in Iowa. The event will be streamed live on the Internet at 1:30 p.m. EST and air on MTV at 7:00 p.m. EST.
MTV agreed to ask Obama the top-rated question submitted by a voter in the online video contest 10Questions.com. And the top-rated question is from a MoveOn member, former AT&T engineer Joe Niederberger.
Niederberger's question is this, "Would you make it a priority in your first year of office to reinstate Net neutrality as the law of the land? And would you pledge to only appoint FCC commissioners that support open Internet principles like Net neutrality?"
Net neutrality refers to a principle or a set of principles that would prevent Internet service providers from blocking or degrading certain kinds of traffic on their networks. The idea is that a large company like AT&T or Verizon could block or slow down IP packets carrying information that is being sent or received from a particular Web site or service. Recently cable operator Comcast has been accused of blocking BitTorrent traffic, but the company denies this.
Currently, there are no laws that specifically mandate that network operators keep their networks open. But supporters of Net neutrality claim that changes in the classification of broadband services by the Federal Communications Commission have put the openness of the Internet at risk.
The Federal Communications Commission under Republican chairman Kevin Martin claims that this is not the case. And he points to a set of principles adopted by the commission that encourage network operators to keep their networks open. But these are not regulations and there is no penalty for not complying.
Obviously, Net neutrality supporters don't think this is enough. Last year, hundreds of organizations mobilized people online to form the SavetheInternet.com Coalition. This group and others lobbied Congress for specific legislation to bar operators from blocking or degrading traffic on their networks. Even though the issue stirred up a lot of debate, no law protecting Net neutrality was passed. Now Congress has seemingly moved on to more pressing issues, such as the war in Iraq. For the most part, Net neutrality has fallen by the wayside and out of the news.
Niederberger and MoveOn hope to change that by bringing the issue to the forefront of the presidential race.
"The Internet is a place where people can read any newspaper they want to stay informed," Niederberger said in a phone interview. "They can express their opinions about topics like the war. And without Net neutrality that freedom of information is in danger. In general, shutting down freedom happens in small steps. That's why it is important to watch these things now."
All of the major Democratic candidates, Barak Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich, and Bill Richardson have all expressed support for Net neutrality. And so has Republican candidate Mike Huckabee .
But Niederberger's question will pinpoint specific action.
"In 2008, voters are looking for real leadership," said Adam Green, who leads MoveOn's Internet freedom campaign. "Any presidential candidate who boldly promises to reinstate Net neutrality during his or her first year in office, and to only appoint pro-neutrality FCC commissioners, will get tons of positive buzz online."
Still, the phone companies say there is no need for a specific law on Net neutrality. Speaking at conference in Santa Clara, California last week, James Cicconi, Senior Executive Vice President of External and Legislative Affairs for AT&T said that new legislation would only hurt innovation on the Internet. He said that the phone companies need to have the flexibility to manage traffic on their network. And new Net neutrality laws could prevent that from happening. He said that AT&T's network traffic doubled in 2006 from the previous year, largely from the use of more video from sites like YouTube. He added that AT&T spent $19 billion to upgrade and keep the network working so it could handle the traffic.
"There is this notion out there that all bits are created equal," he said. "But not all bits are created equal. Some bits carry porn while others carry critical information like interactive video for heart surgery. Treating all bits the same is a costly and inefficient use of bandwidth."
He went on to say that current antitrust laws protect consumers from phone companies and cable companies abusing their power to control the network for their own gain.
"If we degrade anybody's Internet traffic intentionally, we could be held accountable under antitrust laws," he said. "And also why would we want to do that? Selling service to customers is our business. The more traffic we have on our networks the more money we make. We just need to manage it effectively."
Cicconi warned politicians and lawmakers not to introduce new regulations or laws to protect Net neutrality.
"There is ample protection out there already," he said. "And I think the cure could be worse than the disease. From my experience, whenever you invite government in to regulate, they never get out. And it rarely works out the way you thought it would."
Text messaging as means of political outreach is hardly a new idea, but 2008 Democratic presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich claims a new drive launched by his campaign on Monday stands out from all the rest.
The vegan congressman from Ohio is asking Americans opposed to the Iraq war to text the word "peace" to the number 73223. From there, he plans to forward on the responses to President Bush and the Pentagon.
It all amounts to what his campaign staff calls "the first time text messaging has been used to try and change American policy." (Wait, selecting the next American Idol doesn't count?)
"You can vote now to end the war in Iraq," Kucinich tells viewers in a video message posted on YouTube Monday. "Text peace now to send a message to the White House and to the Democratic Congress that now's the time to end the war."
Kucinich's video message is also scheduled to air on Monday evening during CNN's first-ever YouTube-inspired Democratic presidential debates in South Carolina, a campaign spokesman told CNET News.com.
Other White House contenders seeking endearment among the gadget-dependent set, including Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, are already offering their followers text message updates about their campaigns. Edwards, for his part, also recently used the tool to hit about 13,000 supporters with the plea, "Will u donate $ to my campaign?"
- prev
- 1
- next
