"Stroke of the Pen, Law of the Land, Kinda Cool" NOT

It’s Official – The FCC Will Vote to Take Over the Internet in December

Just this past Friday, we warned you that a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) December Internet power grab was probably coming.

Well, we now know that it is – and it may be even worse than we thought. Details have been sketchy, and successive reports often contradictory, but what follows is what seems to be looming over us in December. (We will know for sure on Wednesday, November 24 – if the FCCmaintains its current December 15 meeting date.)

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski appears to be preparing to dramatically increase the FCC’s regulatory role over the Internet (in TWO ways; more on that later).

He is doing so without the necessary Congressional authority – which he himself acknowledges he doesn’t have. And he is doing so by torturing and twisting the regulatory language he is drafting – so as to keep this extraordinary dictatorial seizure within the current Title I confines.

The latter is for The Chairman merely an optical effort. If he can feign the appearance of remaining within Title I, he avoids Reclassification to Title II – against which many of us have long been rightly fighting. He will then portray his fealty to Title I as testament to the alleged “moderation” of his (un)modest proposal. This will be a totally bogus assertion, but he will make it – and the media will in parrot-esque fashion repeat it. The Chairman should bring crackers to the press conference.

Free Press and the Media Marxists – who have long cried for Title II Reclassification – will on cue rail against The Chairman’s “sell-out.” This will further “bolster” his claim that he has found the magical, mystical Third Way – winding a path between the leftist Open Internet absolutists and the evil telecom companies. The Chairman should also bring nuts to the press conference – in case Free Press & Co. show up.

(An aside: How are the telecom companies “evil” – when they have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in building the Internet infrastructure? Which has resulted in the free speech, free market Web Xanadu we consumers all currently enjoy. Free Press and the Media Marxists haven’t invested a dime – yet they somehow successfully lay claim to the mantle of “consumer advocates.”)

Of course, this attempted sleight of regulatory hand does not get The Chairman past one glaring problem – the D.C. Circuit Court has already unanimously ruled that the FCC doesn’t have the authority to regulate the Internet under Title I – at least as far as enforcing Network Neutrality is concerned. (Which is why Free Press & Co. have been clamoring for Title II Reclassification.) And Net Neutrality is why The Chairman has engaged in – and forced us all to endure- this one year-plus kabuki dance.

Testimonium – The Chairman now looks poised to have the FCC again attempt to enforce Net Neutrality – under his now stretched-beyond-all-recognition Title I.

What a short, selective memory he has. And most economically destructive of all – it appears The Chairman will try to impose Net Neutrality not just on wired broadband Internet service – but on wireless “smart phones” as well. This would be a titanic overreach by The Chairman – and an immense blow to the economy.

The uncertainty caused just by The Chairman’s prolonged flirtation with the Media Marxists and their ridiculous Internet notions has already cost us billions of dollars in private sector Web investment. The cost in investment dollars and jobs lost when Net Neutrality is actually imposed will be cataclysmic. These aren’t the fake “saved or created” jobs of the alleged “stimulus” – these are very real jobs denied or destroyed by the ridiculous and ridiculously damaging Net Neutrality. Imposed by an FCC and its Chairman who know in advance that they do not have the authorityto do so.

What will follow will be years of litigation forced upon us by The Chairman – to undo what he knew beforehand he didn’t have the authority to do.

What will follow will be years of diminished and diminishing Web capacity, caused by an absurd policy wrongfully jammed down our throats by a dictatorial, rogue Executive Branch Commission.

What will follow will be years of stagnant or declining job growth, as investment capital rightly flees a regulation-constricted Internet which is no longer amenable to free market success.

What will follow this essay may very well determine the free market, free speech future of the Internet – are you ready to place some calls and send some emails and faxes to protest this preposterous policy proposal and demand that it never be enacted?

Stay tuned – we will soon tell you how you can be a part of the preventative solution.

FCC and Net Neutrality

FCC may regulate Internet lines days before Christmas
By Sara Jerome - 11/19/10 04:50 PM ET

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has a Christmas gift in store for the phone and cable industry: it may move ahead on its controversial net-neutrality regulations three days before Christmas.

An FCC source confirmed on Friday that the commission plans to push its December meeting back by a week, meaning it will fall on the 22nd of the month. That's the same meeting in which analysts say the agency may move forward on its controversial net-neutrality proposal.

Though the FCC has not confirmed that it will vote on net neutrality this year, rumors are swirling that it will.

The timing of the meeting is already raising eyebrows. Some see it as a way to move the matter along before the GOP assumes the majority and while Congress is not in session to criticize the effort.

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), ranking member of the telecom subcommittee, questioned the schedule on Friday.

He said "it appears that Chairman [Julius] Genachowski is trying to slip it under the radar and hope no one notices."

Industry sources also suggested that political calculus is involved with the change of date for the meeting.

"While many Americans will be enjoying their eggnog on that day, I'm sure the broadband providers won't be pleased to find this piece of coal in their stockings," an industry source jibed.

I Wonder If This Includes Blogs

Web censorship bill sails through Senate committee

On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously approved a bill that would give the Attorney General the right to shut down websites with a court order if copyright infringement is deemed “central to the activity” of the site — regardless if the website has actually committed a crime. The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) is among the most draconian laws ever considered to combat digital piracy, and contains what some have called the “nuclear option,” which would essentially allow the Attorney General to turn suspected websites “off.”

Read more:

Net Nannies from 1984

EDITORIAL: Obama's Internet nanny
FCC regulations not needed to 'protect' the Web

The FCC, a New Deal relic, derives its current authority from the Telecommunications Act of 1996. At the time the law was enacted, Congress wisely decided to take a hands-off approach to the Internet by creating a new "information service" category explicitly designed to remain free from the tangle of red tape that the agency layers on top of telephone service, cable, broadcast television and radio.

[FCC Chairman] Mr. Genachowski, however, is upset that this plain reading of the statute deprives him of the authority to "safeguard privacy," "empower consumers" and "lower the costs of investment." He seeks to remedy this by imposing new rules on the Internet's network infrastructure. In a rather Orwellian fashion, he claims these regulations would not involve regulating the Internet itself. Mr. Genachowski insists that he has no intention of meddling with online content.

Even if that's true, his proposal remains deeply troubling. If a federal agency is allowed to ignore court rulings and erase laws with which it disagrees, there would be no restraint on what a future chairman might do. Surely, if the federal government can provide a "good reason" to reclassify broadband services as telecommunications, it can come up with a "good reason" to prevent such bad language on the Internet or even extend its reclassifications to cover cable television programs on HBO and Showtime.

Absent legal constraints, the agency could even resurrect the Fairness Doctrine and apply it to the Internet. This rule, created during the 1940s, required that broadcast stations give equal time to both sides of controversial issues, but it had the unintended consequence of discouraging stations from discussing anything controversial. The scheme was ultimately canceled by President Reagan's FCC in 1987, a move that ushered in a revival of talk radio.

Neither President Obama nor his appointees have the authority to unilaterally rewrite the law when it suits their convenience. If Mr. Obama wants to impose controls on the Internet, he must go to Congress and ask for the new power - a request not likely to be granted. Members of Congress and the general public appreciate that the Internet's greatness lies in its unregulated, Wild West nature. As the FCC opens its proposals to public comment, we hope that readers deliver the clear message that federal "help" is neither needed nor desired online.