The FCC releases Barack Obama’s ‘plan to regulate the internet’
The FCC recently released its net neutrality recommendations, and I use the term “released” loosely for it has been given to the FCC Commissioners but reportedly it will not be made available to the public.
The Democratic FCC Commissioners have one take on these regulations while the lone Republican FCC Commissioner has another.
Here is some of what FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler had to say about the new regulations:
“Using this authority, I am submitting to my colleagues the strongest open internet protections ever proposed by the FCC,” Wheeler wrote on Wednesday. “These enforceable, bright-line rules will ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services.”
That sounds benign enough, who does not want an open and fair internet where the providers cannot throttle the internet or charge additional fees to provide high speed lanes?
But is there more behind the veil that we do not know about? Republican FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai thinks so. Here is more:
Ajit Pai’s description of “President Obama’s 332-page plan to regulate the Internet” sounds Orwellian. He tweeted a picture of himself holding the 332-page plan just below a picture of a smiling Barack Obama with a comment, “I wish the public could see what’s inside.” The implication depicted Obama as George Orwell’s “Big Brother.”
Pai also released a statement: “President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works,” he said. “The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband… These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay.”
“The plan saddles small, independent businesses and entrepreneurs with heavy-handed regulations that will push them out of the market,” Pai said. “As a result, Americans will have fewer broadband choices. This is no accident. Title II was designed to regulate a monopoly. If we impose that model on a vibrant broadband marketplace, a highly regulated monopoly is what we’ll get.”
So who is telling the truth and who is not? Or does the truth lie somewhere in the middle? Simply put; we do not have enough information to make an intelligent decision and the reason we do not is because the FCC has decided not to give the American people that information. But we can speculate.
The fact that the FCC is not releasing this information to the public is troubling and leads one to believe there is more to this than we are being led to believe. The idea of net neutrality in and of itself might be benign but what is behind the veil?
Regular readers of America’s Watchtower understand that I do not trust the Federal Government in the least. Is it possible that the FCC is promoting this net neutrality issue in order to get its greedy little hands into the internet under the guise of protecting consumers only to extend its reach in the future?
This is my biggest concern and it is amplified by the veil of secrecy surrounding the release of this plan. We have seen time and time again that once the Government gets its hand on a power, no matter how benevolent the initial intent is, that it will continue to take more and more power and I fear we will see the same here.
America's Watchtower 
Vibrant broadband marketplace? What planet is this fellow living on? European and Asian people who visit the US and see the state of our Internet access and service consider us backward. And now the GOP wants to let the oligarchs who control the Internet to decide who gets to see what, and for how much.
Sorry, it’s a paradox, to be sure, but to ensure its freedom, the Internet needs watchdogs. I agree that I’d like to see these regs before they’re promulgated, but I don’t trust the existing providers to do right by us.
Take good care and may God bless us all!
TGY
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is a double-edged sword to be sure! On the surface net neutrality does not seem like a bad idea but without knowing what else is in this proposal it is hard to support it. I do not trust anyone to do right by us but the secrecy surrounding this leads me to believe there is more to this than is being let on.
LikeLike
I’ve been gone a long time, Steve. What is not neutral about internet service in America that needs to be fixed?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Internet providers can slow down some websites which creates a “fast lane” for others and that is what the argument is. However it certainly does not seem like it should take 322 pages of regulations on this one issue alone.
LikeLike
He should start it out, “By abusing the authority that I’ve usurped …”
Of course that’s one of the ‘world leaders goals’ for their Agenda System.
It’s against their religion to draft up something in one or two pages, it always has to be long winded and repressive – just like they are!
Protect = Regulate and control.
Lawful content = anything that ‘agrees’ with them.
Unlawful content = anything that shines the light of truth on their devious plans and lies.
Blocking sites that don’t ‘conform’ and restricting content. How ‘easy’ it is to do what they’re doing, even a kid can knock down stacked blocks.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/02/07/exposed-president-obamas-322-page-secret-plan-to-regulate-the-internet-the-white-house-will-not-allow-public-to-see/comment-page-1/#comment-1287468
“Astroturf and manipulation of media messages | Sharyl Attkisson | TEDxUniversityofNevada”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, lawful content, and we know who decides what is lawful and what is not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
For some reason this reminds me of the movie title “Enemy At the Gate” … but now it’s “Enemy Inside the Gate”. We’re living in the Nazi Hitler daze.
LikeLike
Nazi Hitler “daze?” What abominable claptrap! How many of your relatives were hauled off to concentration camps this week? How many people of unpopular religions were forced to follow repressive rules and wear special symbols to identify themselves? How many of our citizens were murdered for not being pure Aryan? Have you seen the photographs of the emaciated people who survived the camps? Have you seen photographs of the mass graves?
Not only are the accusations that our nation is like Hitler’s Germany an insult to all Americans, they also diminish the horror of what Hitler and his minions stood for and did.
There is NOTHING about this country or its politics today that even remotely resembles what Hitler and his henchmen did to Germany and the world. You — and anyone else who so carelessly bandy about such stupid thoughtless sentiments — should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.
May God bless us all.
TGY
LikeLike
Reblogged this on .
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you.
LikeLike
Don’t forget the increase in the bills that will surely follow! We have to be able to pay for those that cannot afford internet, right? Guess where that money will be coming from? Oh, come on, GUESS! My bill now is $152 for high speed internet, basic/expanded cable (no extra movie channels) and phone line. It has been up close to $200 and I told them I could NOT afford that, so they gave me the price of having been a long time customer. The problem is, it is now slipping up and up, like it usually does. I want to drop the phone, but then the price is even higher for a “double play” compared to the “triple play”. Any way you look at it, they have control, I doubt that will be dealt with, will it? Any way you look at it, they will get control of what they want, let’s just pass it and see what we get out of it and I guarantee it will NOT be for the better!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, in the end I fear this will not be good for us. There may be legitimate concerns and a need for net neutrality but why all the secrecy behind the regulations. It make one think there is more to this than we are being told.
LikeLike
Here is a good article to read about the internet:
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/69715
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for sharing that!
LikeLiked by 1 person