Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes House Judiciary Committee, 20-13

Here's the roll call vote for the House Judiciary Committee.  This is an amazing turnaround, from a bipartisan stance against net neutrality, to a bipartisan stance for net neutrality.  The battle isn't over, but enjoy this victory.

Conyers - yes
Berman - yes
Boucher - yes
Nadler - yes
Scott - yes
Watt - not voting
Lofgren - yes
Jackson-Lee - yes
Waters - yes
Meehan - not voting
Delahunt - present
Wexler - yes
Weiner - yes
Schiff - yes
Sanchez, Linda - yes
Van Hollen - yes
Wasserman Schultz - yes

Sensenbrenner - yes
Hyde - didn't vote
Coble - no
Smith - no
Gallegly - no
Goodlate - yes
Chabot - no
Lungren - yes
Jenkins - yes
Cannon - yes
Bachus - no
Inglis - yes
Hostetler - no
Green - no
Keller - no
Flake - not voting
Pence - not voting
Forbes - no
King - no
Feeney - no
Frank - no
Gohmert - not voting

Tags: conyers, House Judiciary Committee, HR 5417, Internet Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act, net neutrality, Sensenbrenner (all tags)



Huge Deal

Getting something to pass is much harder than preventing something from passage.  A bill must jump every hurdle to survive, but only trip on one to fail.  And when we're talking about something that initially was opposed by a majority, it's many times harder.

If this survives the whole house and senate, it will be a much bigger achievement than anything else the netroots have done thus far.

by fwiffo 2006-05-25 09:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Huge Deal

"If this survives the whole house and senate, it will be a much bigger achievement than anything else the netroots have done thus far."

I think that says something about the power and appeal of the NN principle as it relates to broader issues and political strategies, particularly for the netroots community, which is building influence and membership by leveraging the open Internet and manifesting the values embodied in its fundamentally "democratic" and "progressive" architecture.

It also speaks to the "values" space where "personal freedom" meets "fairness" and where folks who wear labels like "libertarians," "progressives" and "conservatives," can find common ground against the excesses of corporate power and their influence over the media and the political process.  

In key respects, the NN issue highlights the fundamental conflicts and policy choices our country faces on multiple but related fronts.  Hopefully there are ways to expand this heightened awareness of the corrosive influence of excess market/political/media power by large corporations to include other issues and industries(e.g., drug, insurance, energy, agribusiness companies).  One common link is the deceptiveness and pervasiveness of their corporate propaganda...the recent ant-Gore ads by an energy-backed group being one recent example.

The beauty of the Internet as a media model is that people get to choose what they "consume" and to navigate through and compare their choices.  They also get to contribute their point of view and to dialog with others with similar or very different views and experience.  

Large corporations are struggling to deal with this growing reality (e.g., Rupert Murdoch's purchase of MySpace and the trend toward corporate "blogs"), but its not what they're good at.  Which is one reason why the pipe-owners want to carve out most of their network for a "controlled" media and service economy. For them its all about "control."  For us, its all about......[anyone want to fill in the blanks?]

I'm rambling....Congratulations Netroots!

by mitchipd 2006-05-25 10:44AM | 0 recs
Not as big a victory as it seems

Many of the people voting for the bill vote sense simply because of a turf war, not because they support net neutrality.

"In an unusual twist, many members of the committee said they were voting for the legislation not because of strong concerns over Net neutrality--but instead because of a turf battle. They said they were worried that a competing proposal already approved by a different committee last month would diminish their own influence in the future." r+Net+neutrality/2100-1028_3-6077007.htm l?tag=nefd.lede

by 4 a better internet 2006-05-25 11:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Not as big a victory as it seems

Good job planting that Declan McCullagh hack job.

And nice username.

by Matt Stoller 2006-05-25 02:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Not as big a victory as it seems

Jesus! Talk about spin! Turf war?! If people are voting for this net neutrality legislation because they don't want the FCC to have ultimate jurisdiction on the matter (as the Barton bill would establish -- with no guidelines from Congress), then that's probably because they're concerned about net neutrality, and about elected officials (rather than a 5-member appointed board) being able to have some say in the matter. To call that a "turf war" is preposterous. Barton's committee has no more control over what the FCC does than the judiciary committee!

I won't even begin to deconstruct all of the other blatantly misleading arguments in this article. This is an incredible example of how the truth can be twisted and obscured, though. Aspiring disinformers take note -- this is one to study.

by grg 2006-05-26 10:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes Hous

I never thought I'd agree with Lungren on anything.

by janinsanfran 2006-05-25 09:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes Hous

And Ken Lay and Jeffrey Skilling were both convicted in the Enron case today.   I don't know it my heart can handle this much good news at once....

by global yokel 2006-05-25 09:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes Hous

Some Republicans are surprisingly good on this type of issue, even if they take the dominionist position on every other issue.  IIRC, one of the best senators on IP issues is Sam Brownback.  Go figure.

by jsw 2006-05-25 10:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes Hous

The Christian Coalition is part of the SavetheInternet campaign, so Brownback is a natural ally, I'd say.

It's an interesting team, the Democratic netroots and the Christian Coalition. I think both feel like big telco and media corporations are on the other side when it comes to communications issues.

by BriVT 2006-05-25 10:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes Hous

They're both correct in that too.  Big telco and media corporations are about power and money and money and power.  It's one of many cases where the corpratist agenda comes into conflict with the theocratic agenda, but it's one of the few that's so blatantly obvious that they can't ignore it.  And of course consolidated power and money are the obvious enemies of progressivism.

by libdevil 2006-05-25 10:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes Hous

It is a day to be proud!! Dems and Repubs acctually agree on something, where has this been the last six years!! Where is the post on Enron though, really would like to discuss that.

by Forward with Feingold 2006-05-25 10:09AM | 0 recs
I just called Cong. Sensenbrenner

to thank him for his "pioneering, visionary" work.I stated I was a Democrat but I appalauded his leadership.  If we want it to succeed in the House the leadership burden will be on his head.
I think he should get as much positive reenforcement from as many places as possible.

He really did the right thing.

His phone number is 202 225 5101.

by debcoop 2006-05-25 10:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes Hous

Delahunt voted present, huh?

Must have gotten a lot of phone calls....

by Davis X Machina 2006-05-25 10:19AM | 0 recs
Let's hear it for the internets

by msnook 2006-05-25 10:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes Hous

Yay!  And van Hollen voted for it so I can feel good again for having voted for him.  (I couldn't get through on the phone but I did send him an email.)

by RickD 2006-05-25 10:33AM | 0 recs
Ok, Back to work....

What's the next step comming up....

Can't quite celebrate yet.  Now the Telcos will start pushing their influence on the floor, they'll be the ones trying to kill the bill.  

by NvDem 2006-05-25 10:36AM | 0 recs
Almost forgot

Nice work everyone....

by NvDem 2006-05-25 10:38AM | 0 recs

Matt, mcjoan, davej, and everyone that worked to deliver this wonderful deserve much accolade and credit. You guys make me proud.

by NuevoLiberal 2006-05-25 10:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Cheers!

Lots of people worked on this.  I'd like to thank Mike McCurry in particular, for helping me understand just how dishonest the telcos are.

by Matt Stoller 2006-05-25 11:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Cheers!

I agree. I should have mentioned Jane and Christy and other FDL folks among those I mentioned, since I read their work firsthand too. A full list of credits would be great to see, if possible.

by NuevoLiberal 2006-05-25 12:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes Hous

A month ago, this didn't look very good.  It says a lot about how the netroots can be brought together, and the power that it is becoming.  I am happy that we have gotten this far, and further motivated to put more into the next step.

by AlphaHydroxy 2006-05-25 10:55AM | 0 recs
Credit Where Due

The Netroots certainly has been a big part of this fight, but this issue has been all over the "geekroots," i.e. Slashdot, Digg, etc. I think they had something to do with this as well.

by bkharmony 2006-05-25 11:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Credit Where Due

bkharmony...I agree. And your comment raises the question of what other issues can the netroots and geekroots align on.  

How about renewable and distributed energy production and conservation?  This issue has a significant tech element and is closely tied to the issue of growth and competitiveness of the U.S. economy as driven by tech innovation.  

And maybe also election reform, including those God-awful Diebold machines, where tech-expertise is needed to dig below the surface to reveal the huge flaws in these systems.

I bet there are more as well.

by mitchipd 2006-05-25 12:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Credit Where Due

I somehow doubt we'd be celebrating if the online effort hadn't had the benefit of moneybags like MS and Google on our side and of the extreme anti-leadership ire of Jimmy Sensenbrenner.

But - a result is a result.

However, the GOP leadership will have the last laugh, so far as I understand, because they will determine whether the bill gets floor time or not.

My bet would be that the Sensenbrenner bill gets substantially left on the cutting-room floor. Unless lobbying steps up a gear or several.

by skeptic06 2006-05-25 12:52PM | 0 recs

Anybody have any insight into Delahunt's position (not that it matters much at this point)? Is there a behind-the-scenes quid pro quo going on? He doesn't seem particularly indebted to big telco (he gets his money mostly from labor and lawyers), and big telco isn't a presence in his district (MA-10... Plymouth County and Cape Cod). People at Kos were speculating that he's old, a bit of a Luddite, and just plain out of touch on Net issues.

by Crazy Vaclav 2006-05-25 11:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Delahunt...

...I know him mostly from his time as DA/prossie.

Can't figure out a crime-control angle.
Can't see a big telco angle either.
The high-tech money is all up in the districts of Meehan and  McGovern and Markey.

Back in the day, New England Telephone pulled some weight, but that was three mergers (NYNEX, Verizon) ago...

Is a puzzlement. Did the CWA give him much last cycle?

by Davis X Machina 2006-05-25 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Delahunt...

Good call. The CWA tied for 1st as his largest contributor in the 05-06 cycle ($10,000).

However... as best as I can tell from the CWA's website, they've adopted a basically pro-net neutrality position. So I'd think that if they were going to exert any pressure on him, it would have been for a 'yes' vote.

by Crazy Vaclav 2006-05-25 12:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes

Woo hoo for net neutrality, but is this the same Sensenbrenner bill that requires ISP's to record and maintain all your internet usage for 'law enforcement' purposes?  Democracy Now was discussing a bill introduced by Sensenbrenner a few days ago that will require ISP's to maintain logs of what sites you visit, what emails you send, etc.  The stated objective was to fight child porn, but with the illegal spying going on already, this worries me.  Has anyone read the text of the bill?  

Sensenbrenner is such scum that I have a hard time believing that this bill is just a blanket net neutrality bill...

by JJCPA 2006-05-26 05:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Bipartisan Bill for Net Neutrality Passes

alright, so I'm just a bit paranoid today.  I just read the full text.  This is straight up net neutrality, no shady riders.

But Sensenbrenner is still scum.  

by JJCPA 2006-05-26 05:48AM | 0 recs
by posco 2006-12-02 09:33AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads