Regulatory classification

Democratic leaders of the House and Senate unveiled the Save the Internet Act that will keep the internet open and free.

Ultimately, the ping-pong match of network neutrality will not be resolved by political struggles over control of the Federal Communications Commission. A lasting solution can only come from bipartisan legislation, which will involve compromise. Identifying the points of compromise, places where each side is willing to give ground, is impossible if the two sides see each other as enemies worthy of contempt rather than basically good people who can reasonably disagree, even about important issues.

For the uninitiated, net neutrality is the principle that the companies that provide access to the Internet – Comcast, AT&T, Charter and Verizon, among others – should not be able to block, slow down, or otherwise discriminate against any particular content, application, or service. In other words, the companies providing the on-ramp to the Internet should not be able to pick winners and losers on the Internet.

Telecommunications companies would be barred from receiving state grants if they don't follow network neutrality standards that have been abandoned by the Federal Communications Commission under a bill working its way through the Colorado Legislature.

A Q&A with former Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler. 

House Commerce Committee Ranking Member Greg Walden (R-OR), Communications Subcommittee Ranking Member Bob Latta (R-OH), and Consumer Protection Subcommittee Ranking Member Cath McMorris Rogers (R-WA) wrote to Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle (D-PA) to engage on three network neutrality bills the Republican Reps have offered up, describing them as a "menu of options to get started" on a "bipartisan solution." 

Sen Bernie Sanders (I-VT) wasted no time taking aim at e-commerce giant Amazon over its economic practices after announcing his 2020 presidential bid — marking an early campaign appearance for the senator's long-standing critiques of tech titans. Sen. Sanders criticized the company over how it conducted its second headquarters search and for not paying any federal income taxes for 2018.

A battle over network neutrality is heating up in Vermont -- one of at least eight states that recently moved to restore the Obama-era rules. VT's net neutrality law, passed last May, prohibits broadband access providers that contract with state agencies from violating the former rules -- including ones prohibiting blocking or throttling and charging higher fees for prioritized delivery. In 2018, industry associations sued in federal court to block VT's law.

At a House hearing on net neutrality, the claims of Joseph Franell — the general manager and CEO of Eastern Oregon Telecom (“EOT”) — stood out like a sore thumb. He said, “The application of Title II as part of Net Neutrality had a dramatic chilling effect on rural telecom in the Pacific Northwest and I suspect the same could be said about the rest of the country.” He also said that since the repeal of the 2015 Federal Communications Commission order, “investors have been much more willing . . .

People actually need Title II and all of the protections it provides for internet users. Here’s why.