Saving the Internet

In California, Governor Jerry Brown just singed a bill rendering the repeal of Net neutrality . . . neutered in his state.  Internet service providers in California now have to respect Internet neutrality by not slowing down some traffic and speeding up some other traffic and charging more for the faster speeds.  And no blocking of content politically objectionable to the service providers!

The U.S. Justice Department has sued to stop the re-instatement of Net neutrality in California, citing the supremacy of federal deregulation over state regulation.  It figures that Jeff Sessions would suddenly forget the beauty of states' rights now.

But then, Congress does have the power to oversee interstate commerce, and the last time I checked, the Internet providers who are in California are in other states.  So the Tenth Amendment may not be applicable here. But the First Amendment is, since the repeal of Net neutrality involves free speech.  

Let the court battles begin.  Ajit Pai may have thought the battle was over when he scuttled Net neutrality earlier this year, but I predict that it's only just begun.          

Isolated

Trump just cut the United States off from every other major industrialized country at the Group of Seven summit by inciting tariff threats that could undermine the global economy - and it could also undermine the U.S. economy, but not until after the midterm elections.  He won't endorse their communique on free trade or anything else.  Now even Canada is an enemy.   

Trump showed his true colors when he disregarded a G-7 meeting on gender equality by arriving late at a meeting on that topic.  He's made it clear that the United States - still without a gender equality amendment in its Constitution - can't be bothered with the issue.  And he's right; the people who constantly elect people like Trump to office can't be bothered either.  Again, we're on the outs with everyone else.

So what do I think will happen at the Trump-Kim summit in Singapore this Tuesday?  I don't give a twit.  Nothing will be resolved or even started, but if Trump gets through the summit without chewing with his mouth open, the media, with such low expectations for the summit, will rate it a success and his approval rating will go up twenty points.  All for negotiating with a fellow global pariah.

Oh yeah, Net neutrality ends tomorrow, the House doing nothing to join the Senate in solidarity to preserve it.  I am not posting anything on either of my blogs tomorrow in protest.  I'll be back in this space soon after, with another Beatles White Album song commentary on Thursday, but I don't know how many of you will get to read it, because with Net neutrality gone, with my White Album commentary following the running order of the tracks, and my last commentary before this week focusing on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" . . . well, you can figure out the rest.

Theoretically, I might be cut off from my own blogs - not just my regular blog but my beautiful-women picture blog (I discussed that here) - and maybe even my Family page, because Internet service providers don't want to facilitate access to content on a band most Americans have never heard due to the fact that no one cares about it.

Now that's isolation.

Net Neutrality Is Circling The Drain

Federal Communications Chairman Ajit Pai has announced that Internet neutrality will go out of existence on Monday, June 11.  So if you try to access an environmentalist or anti-poverty activist Web site, you can expect to be out of luck.

But maybe not.  This Wednesday, May 16, the Senate is expected to vote on preserving Net neutrality via a resolution, and if the pro-Net-neutrality forces can get one more vote for a simple majority, that would be half the battle won.  There would then be a push to get at least 218 House members to support the Senate's resolution.  To say that it would be an uphill battle is an understatement.  That's why there are going to be massive demonstrations at congressional district offices tomorrow to get the resolution through.

But, even after all that, come Tuesday, June 12, when you click onto a site that your Internet service provider can't tolerate, or doesn't want to have compete with its own site (for streaming movies or whatever), the image below will be all you get.

After waiting thirty minutes for it to load. 

I thought Net neutrality was supposed to officially end in April.  I was wrong, obviously, but not as wrong as Net-neutrality activists will be if they think they can stop its repeal this late in the game.

Pai Creamed

Although a virtual lack of media attention on the Internet neutrality issue these days would have you believe that the Internet deregulation sought and won by Federal Commutations Commission  (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai is a done deal, pushback against Pai is gaining steam . . . even within the FCC itself.   And not just for the FCC's repeal of the neutrality regulation.

It seems that Uncle Charlie's own inspector general is looking into Pai's dealings with Sinclair Broadcasting Group, a conservative media company that owns several local TV stations across the country - many of which are network affiliates, meaning that Sinclair stations in numerous markets can pre-empt any national network program they do not like in favor of, say, a locally produced cooking show.  Or a documentary against single-payer health insurance. According to the New York Times, Pai may have had improper contacts with Sinclair before he became FCC chairman and may have committed improper acts to facilitate Sinclair's takeover of Chicago-based Tribune Media, which owns the Chicago Tribune and several television stations across the country.

FreePress.net reports that Sinclair, already the largest owner of TV stations in the United States, had a close relationship with Donald Trump throughout the 2016 campaign and that that Trump even brokered a deal for favorable news coverage from the company's various newscasts. "Since his appointment as FCC chairman," FreePress.net says, "Pai has worked overtime to clear the decks for Sinclair’s purchase of Tribune: He’s reduced the agency’s longstanding media-ownership limits and overturned rules that required broadcasters to maintain physical studios wherever they broadcast."

Tribune Media, by the way, owns WPIX-TV, broadcasting on Channel 11, in New York.  If Sinclair gets its hands on this station, Yankees home baseball games may be the only New  York-based programming you see on it.  

Meanwhile, thanks to the efforts of Senator Susan Collins of Maine - a Republican - fifty senators have endorsing a resolution that would reverse the FCC's repeal of Net neutrality; if one more senator signs on, and it will pass in that chamber.  Momentum to reverse the repeal is gaining in the House, and even though Trump could easily ignore or block the repeal, the growing hostility against Pai cannot be denied.

And as if that weren't enough, New Jersey's new governor, Phil Murphy, just signed an executive order that requires Internet service providers doing business in New Jersey to recognize Net neutrality principles in order to do business with the state government, making New Jersey the third state that requires Internet service providers "adhere to the principles of net neutrality" if they want a contract to do business with the state.  New Jersey also became the twenty-second state to join a lawsuit against the repeal. 

I'm pleased to report that I have had no Web site access issues with my Internet service provider.  Access to my e-mail, on the other hand, has been a different story - its e-mail server keeps going down.  Maybe I should make my Yahoo e-mail account my primary one . . . 

Okay, I guess I can go back to the Winter Olympics now . . .  

You Win Some, You Lose Some

Net neutrality? Done! Finished!  Even though five out of six Americans supported keeping it, Federal  Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai said no and nixed it.  Now Internet service providers will get to do with Uncle Charlie's blessing all of the nasty, evil things I kept talking about.

Fortunately, we don't have to worry about paying extra for content or getting our blogs blocked just yet.  Many pro-Net neutrality groups are immediately calling on Congress to stop Pai under the provisions of the Congressional Review Act, which allows the legislative branch to review bureaucratic regulatory actions, and New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is already suing the FCC to stop the rollback.

And how about Doug Jones's victory in the U.S. Senate special Alabama?  Roy Moore's personal issues obviously had a lot to do with it, but a growing distrust of Trump and of his poisonous populism turned off important demographic groups, like white women with college degrees and independents, and most Alabama voters said that pedophilia allegations against Moore were not an important factor in their decision - mainly, no doubt, because there were so many other factors that turned them against Moore. Like when he said slavery was a force for preserving black families?  Or that homosexuality should be criminalized?  Imagine being too reactionary even for Alabama . . . and you imagine Roy Moore.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell won't allow Jones to be seated before the vote on the tax bill, likely on the grounds that Jones was not involved in the debate and so should not vote on the legislation - even though he demanded - and got - the seating of Scott Brown of Massachusetts after a special election in 2010 to get the 41st vote for a filibuster against health care reform legislation (which the Democrats managed to get passed in the filibuster-proof reconciliation process) when Senate Republicans were in the minority.  But keeping Jones out until after the tax reform vote may not help; a few Republican senators have expressed doubts about the final bill.  That smooth path to passage may not be so smooth after all; Trump may end up being able to sign it by Christmas, provided he means Eastern Orthodox Christmas (January 7).   But then Trump loves people who celebrate Christmas thirteen days later, like the Greeks; he once proposed that more Greeks be able to emigrate here after Greece's economy tanked big time.  

You don't suppose that was because Greece is a so-called white country, do you?

Things are getting more interesting . . ..  

You win some, you lose some . . .. 

Another Day Of Decision

I'll get to Doug Jones later.  But right now . . .

The Federal Communications Commission will kill Net neutrality tomorrow.

We're about to get hit with a Pai in the face.

There's only one way to stop FCC Chairman Ajit Pai from imposing a rollback on Internet regulations keeping the network open and free. and that way is to urge Congress to enshrine Net neutrality into law.  Pai is one of three Republicans on a five-member commission, and that's a majority.  This is what Republicans have always wanted to do - get rid of Obama-era Internet rules.  Oh, sure, there will be lawsuits to stop Pai after the vote goes through, but congressional intervention is the best and only way to stop this once and for all.

I shudder to think what a neutrality-free Internet, governed by Internet service providers, might look like.  I know that this blog could be blocked due to all of the hard-hitting political commentary I've written here.  I'm even concerned that my beautiful-women picture blog could be affected.  Suppose a woman running an ISP has a problem with any blog or site celebrating women with feminine beauty as the main focus?  She might even have a problem with the preponderance of fashion models on my blog - "My God," she might say, "who is this jerk to celebrate women who are only famous because of their looks?"  Now, that's obviously an extreme case, but here's another problem; this blog is on a service owned by Google. What if my ISP has a problem with Google because it's competing with its own search engine? How about people who use Flickr, owned by Verizon subsidiary Yahoo, but don't have Verizon as their ISP?  Does that mean Flickr customers who use an ISP other than Verizon will have to pay more money than they already do to use it, if not every site is treated equally?  And what about social media?  Are Facebook and Twitter suddenly susceptible to user fees imposed by ISPs because you're using the ISPs' network to access those sites?

And of course, if I say anything bad on this blog about content provided by an ISP - say, a TV show on a channel owned by an ISP - that could be blocked as well.  I'm just glad I don't stream movies and TV shows online, because anyone who does will have to pay through the nose and the mouth to do it. 

It's easy to blame Trump for this, and it's an equally easy shot to say that this is part of his quest to have total control over everything, but the truth of the matter is that this rollback of Net neutrality would have happened even if another Republican presidential candidate from 2016 - Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, John Kasich - had been elected to the White House, because any one of them would have put Ajit Pai or someone like him in charge of the FCC.  Especially if Ted Cruz had been elected President.  The Texas senator declared Net neutrality to be "government control of the Internet," as assertion so laughable it would be funny if it weren't serious.     

I will not be posting tomorrow.  I want to show everyone tomorrow what my blog will be if my ISP moves to silence me with Uncle Charlie's blessing.

That is, nothing.

An Immodest Proposal for Preserving Net Neutrality

I wrote last week about the end of Net neutrality as if it were inevitable, and it probably is. But maybe I'm wrong.

The only thing Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chairman Ajit Pai understands is power.  That's why Pai laughs off comments on the FCC's message board pleading with him to preserve Net neutrality - "Look, I'm scared, I'm scared!"  Pai's allies in the telecommunications industry and their backers in Congress only understand power, also.  So don't waste your time writing to Uncle Charlie (i.e., the FCC) to demand that Net neutrality be preserved.   Here's a better idea.

Find a U.S. Senator - any U.S. Senator - on record for supporting Net neutrality.  If he or she happens to represents your state, so much the better.   Write to that senator and urge him or her to use the power every senator has to hold up legislation to block something important . . . like, say, the continuing resolution renewal. The U.S. government is operating on a continuing resolution in the absence of a real budget, and it is set to expire on December 9 if it is not renewed.  If it expires, the government will shut down.

Tell that senator to block a vote on the continuing resolution unless and until Congress agrees to enshrining Net neutrality into law. No free Internet, no continuing resolution.  Then find another senator and repeat the process.  Write to as many senators as you can.  Call their offices if you can.  Keep track of how many senators respond to you; follow up on the ones that don't.  

Do you remember that song that was a hit back during the 1979 oil crisis, the song suggesting that the U.S. withhold shipments of agricultural products to OPEC member states if they didn't lower the price of oil - "Cheaper Crude Or No More Food"?  Well, I'm proposing the same idea here.  We the people should have our senators hold the continuing resolution hostage to preserving Net neutrality.  If there's actually a completed budget to vote on (yeah, right), they should hold that hostage to ensure that Net neutrality is preserved.  Heck, they should block a vote on raising the debt ceiling, if that's possible, to get Congress and Trump to agree to preserve a free Internet.  Yeah - "Free the Net or no more debt!" :-D 

We ought to do something.  Anything.  Well, anything that's legal.  Because unless we do something, we're all going to get hit on December 14 with a Pai in the face.

Act now before the FCC board has its Net neutrality vote on December 14.

This Is the End of the Internet

Offer up your best defense, but it won't be good enough.

After a vote in May to begin the termination of Internet Neutrality, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is set to vote on a final set of standards in December to allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to do whatever they want with the World Wide Web - which means charging customers more for service, charging Web sites a premium for faster downloads, and blocking some Web sites - including blogs - altogether.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai says that companies will be free to innovate and to expand service without what he calls the government's "heavy-handed" regulation of the Internet.  The only thing the service providers have to, er, provide to customers in return for unlimited abilities to limit Internet access is an easily accessible Web site spelling out their content policy in an effort to provide "transparency."  Violations of this rule could allow Uncle Charlie (that would be the FCC) to fine the ISPs.

Any fines, of course, would probably be the equivalent of paying a 25-cent fine for dumping garbage on someone's property.  (Arlo Guthrie, remember, had to pay fifty dollars for that back in 1965, which would be about $390 today.)  

Regulation of the Internet would be transferred mostly to the Federal Trade Commission, an acknowledgement that Pai considers the Internet to be a commercial enterprise, not a public medium.  Just to make it clear - giving the Federal Trade Commission regulatory control of the Internet is like giving  an octogenarian security officer the authority to arrest a bank robber. 

This marks the end of the Internet as we know it - and I feel awful.  Money-making companies that provide Internet service - I ain't namin' names! - now have carte blanche to restrict and block Web sites and blogs that they don't like.  Do you have a Black Lives Matter advocacy site?  Sorry, your Internet service provider's CEO may have a problem with black people making trouble over the police.  Does your site advocate for high-speed rail?  Whoops, your ISP owns a television network with a lot of ad accounts from automakers.  Forget about it.  Do you oppose Trump?  You get the idea.

Oh, your ISP might let you access some sites they find questionable - for a price.  So if you see a 50 percent increase in your Internet connection fee, that will explain it.  Of course, you might be able to buy a premium package to get the same basic service you get now.  You just won't be able to afford the mortgage on your house.  And if you live in a state with a Democratic governor, don't expect him or her to try to regulate the Internet and preserve the old regulations within your state's borders; Pai has made it clear that state enforcement of Internet neutrality will not be allowed.

If I may use another analogy, ISP control of the Internet will be the equivalent of the anecdotal story I heard about newsstands in a hotel chain run by Mormons (again, I ain't namin' names!); it is said that the chain's bosses ensure that magazines such as the Atlantic, the New Republic, and Harper's don't appear in the newsstands in their hotels' lobbies.  (They apparently contract the Mormon Church's Word of Wisdom.)  A lot of people don't like Pai's rule change, but they are too powerless to stop it; the Republicans have a majority on the FCC's board and so hold all the cards.  I've heard about threats to file suits against the dismantling of Net neutrality, but whom can anyone sue?

I really don't know if my blog, given all of the controversial opinions I've expressed on it (like my hatred for rap), would be subjected to censorship, but my gut tells me that my ISP may not have a problem with it.  But yours might.  If it turns out that too many ISPs are blocking my blog, I suppose I could terminate it and start a new opinion blog under a pseudonym - say, "Kevin McClaine" - but as soon as Kevin McClaine started posting numerous blog entries supporting Martin O'Malley's presidential prospects in 2020, they'd know it was me.       

So I don't know what to tell you.  Except, welcome to the new era of Internet censorship.  When you go online after December 14, you may not get to access the Web sites you want.

But you'll get to look at a lot of this. :-(

(Note: To make it clear, www.action-now.com is not a real Web site.  But this is what you might start seeing from a lot of Web sites that are real. >:-(   )

Uncle Charlie Declares War On the Internet

The rule established two short years ago by the Federal Communications Commission - affectionately known as Uncle Charlie in CB radio slang - establishing a free and neutral Internet is dead.  This past Thursday, the FCC voted two to one to end Net neutrality and allow your Internet service provider (ISP) to have more leeway over the Internet, which means that the big company that lets you access the Internet could (will?) decide that certain sites - like streaming services from companies owned by rival ISPs or any sites that your own ISP may find politically offensive - will take more time to upload or won't load at all.  And if you want faster lanes for some Internet traffic, you'll have to pay more.  It's not going to happen right away, but the decision begins the process of dismantling yet another achievement of the Obama administration.

The FCC's chairman, Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer,  says that the rules keeping the ISPs' filthy hands off our Internet are too burdensome and too cumbersome to allow more services and more choices for consumers, and he says that they also hobble innovation.  He also believes that the Internet is a commercial, not a public, enterprise (proof once again that the only public entity in America anymore is Eliot Spitzer's sex life) and so should be regulated by the Federal Trade Commission.  Except that the FTC wouldn't have the ability to enforce rules of fair play even if there were any such rules to speak of.  Small wonder that Pai got praised by one communications company executive for "remaining focused on creating a light-touch regulatory environment that is pro-consumer, pro-investment, and pro-innovation."  And anti-freedom. 

Pai (above) is all but forcing Congress to decide how Internet access would be governed.  There's a possibility of creating new legislation to determine who writes the rules for the Net, which Pai seems to want to make Congress do, but the deadlock on Capitol Hill renders that possibility unlikely.  And, oh yes, in case you're thinking that a Democratic President will reverse Pai's reversal of Net neutrality in 2021, rest assured (rest assured, that is, if you work for AT&T or Verizon) that the Republican caucuses in Congress, having already established themselves as permanent majorities through gerrymandering and voter restriction laws, are now working to pass a law that would make it illegal for a presidentially appointed agency to change regulatory rules without congressional approval.      

But what about all of those pro-Net-neutrality e-mails and comments to the FCC that crashed Uncle Charlie's Web site?  Pai blamed it all on hackers.  End of discussion.

I guess it's time for me to finally start doing what I've been threatening to do here for awhile - stop talking about politics so much.  If I keep going after Trump, many of you might never get to read what I think about him, because any anti-Trump page will probably take so long to load (if it loads at all) that you won't even bother trying to read it.  My Family page and my beautiful-women picture blog likely won't be affected, but I'll have to take former George Walker Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer's advice and watch what I say in this space.  I might just stop discussing politics altogether.  Maybe I'll just talk about classic rock here. 

I know that anything I write about classic rock won't be blocked by ISPs.  Because classic rock is overwhelmingly white, mostly male, familiar, and out of step with the times - just like the folks who provide our Internet service.