H.R. 1542
Fred Goodwin, CMA
news:slrna7o3b2.dtr.JoneS&Sm...@dhcp-414-209.austin.rr.com:
> Tuesday, February 26, 2002 U.S. House vote tomorrow could kill
> high-speed Internet competition
It will do nothing of the sort. Have you actually read it?
> Just two weeks ago, the Federal Communications Commission proposed
> reclassifying high-speed Internet access as an "information" rather
> than "telecommunications" service, which would effectively exempt it
> from many regulations designed to protect consumers.
Are you in favor of the FCC regulating the Internet?
> How does a bad bill like H.R. 1542 have a chance to become law? Quite
> simply, the giant telephone and cable corporations have huge staffs of
> well-paid lawyers and lobbyists who convince individual legislators -
> most with limited understandings of complex technical issues - that its
> passage will "stimulate investment" and "accelerate deployment" of
> residential high-speed Internet access. Translation: It will raise
> prices and remove choices for consumers in a classic monopolistic power
> grab.
I doubt if the cable companies are lobbying on behalf of HR1542. If you
have any evidence to the contrary, by all means please share.
--
Hanlon's Razor:
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."
Skeptic's Creed:
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
Bruce Tomlin
JoneS&Sm...@dhcp-414-209.austin.rr.com (JoneS&SmitH) wrote:
> Well, a bad situation could get worse tomorrow, as the U.S. House of
> Representatives takes a full vote on H.R. 1542, euphemistically named
> "The Internet Freedom and Broadband Deployment Act" by its sponsors,
> Billy Tauzin, a Louisiana Republican and John Dingell, a Michigan
> Democrat. If passed into law, this bill would effectively undo critical
> portions of the Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996 so that four phone
> giants - Verizon, Qwest, Bellsouth and SBC, the parent corporation of
> Southwestern Bell - could completely monopolize high-speed Internet
> access over the telephone wires running into almost every home in
> America.
Did you know that SBC's requirement to treat DSL as an ILEC/CLEC
situation (not that they're doing a good job of that) is not due to the
Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996, but was in fact a condition
imposed by the FCC as part of their Ameritech merger, so that they would
be allowed to offer long distance service there? (I may be incorrect on
the details, but this is what I found out during the three months I was
a contractor at SBC TRI.)
James Ascher
news:bruceNS+usenet9-3E...@news.jump.net...
was a long distance operator for a small carrier so I know!
James