October 2009

While the Federal Communications Commission considers the first steps toward ensuring net neutrality -- ­making certain that broadband providers do not discriminate against high traffic sites -- ­the telecom firms that would be affected by the rules and their trade groups have been swamping Congress with a one-two punch of campaign contributions from the companies and their registered lobbyists. Some 244 members of Congress were the beneficiaries of these contribution clusters­totaling more than $9.4 million­from January 2007 to June 2009, an investigative collaboration of the Sunlight Foundation and the Center for Responsive Politics has found. Telecom interests and their lobbyists engaged in more clustered giving than any industry save pharmaceuticals. Overall, the top recipient of the largess was Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who took in $894,379 (many of those contributions were directed to his 2008 presidential campaign). The telecom interests also targeted House and Senate leaders: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) was next with $341,089, followed by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) ($275,275), Senate Finance Committee chair Max Baucus (D-MT) ($248,999) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) ($198,972).

Hilary Shelton, Director, Washington Bureau & Vice President for Advocacy, of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and Sylvia Aguilera, Executive Director of the Hispanic Technology and Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), delivered a letter to Gigi Sohn, President and Co-founder of Public Knowledge. The minority advocacy organizations issued the joint letter to express their indignation at offensive statements made in a recent blog by Art Brodsky, PK's Director of Communications, regarding minority organizations that have weighed in opposition to Public Knowledge in the current debate regarding network neutrality. Brodsky wrote: "Perhaps the saddest part of the whole affair to date is the role of groups representing minority populations. For whatever reason ­ whether they believe what the Big Telecom companies tell them or not ­ many organizations seem to land on policies that hurt their constituencies and fall into ludicrous traps one suspects are not of their making." The NAACP and HTTP countered saying, "To make the blanket assertion that minority groups "fall into ludicrous traps" when taking positions on policy is to claim that minorities, and the groups they form to advocate on their behalf, are incapable of intelligently participating in sophisticated debates. Such statements are irresponsible, prejudiced and lack qualification. To further suggest that the concerns of minority civil rights organizations are being directed to influence the only minority sitting on the FCC is indeed ludicrous. It is categorically unacceptable to claim that minority advocacy groups are colluding with certain interests to exploit the ethnic self-identification of government officials who happen to be minorities in leadership positions at the FCC." Public Knowledge President Gigi Sohn acknowledges the rhetoric got overheated in the run-up to the FCC vote Thursday to launch a network neutrality rulemaking, and wants a more "civil dialogue" on both sides.

In Washington for the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology meeting, Google chief executive Eric Schmidt said favors Network Neutrality, but only to a point: While the tech player wants to make sure that telecommunications giants don't steer Internet traffic in a way that would favor some devices or services over others, he also believes that it would be a terrible idea for the government to involve itself as a regulator of the broader Internet. "It is possible for the government to screw the Internet up, big-time," he said. Google is strong enough as a company to weather any possible outcome on the issue, he said. But what he worries about "is the next start-up." Schmidt doesn't come across as Capitol Hill's biggest fan. Google is a tech company that loves facts, metrics and algorithms, after all. Schmidt might prefer a political system that dealt in such quantities.

In a letter to National Telecommunications and Information Administration head Larry Strickling and Rural Utilities Service Administrator Jonathan Adelstein, the trade associations claim it is difficult, and in some cases impossible, for their members to examine and respond fully and completely to broadband stimulus applications within the 30-day deadline set by the agencies. Ultimately, they are concerned that the data before the agencies may inadvertently provide an inaccurate or incomplete picture and potentially compromise the integrity of the process. They ask that action be taken quickly to address their issues, and that service providers be given a reasonable period of time to review the new information once the changes have been made.