"Consider keeping our last means of free speech available to all of America. In my researched opinion; our powerhouse communications business will only merge on in the future as our government seeks its goals. It is up to you to protect any freedoms we have left even though someone is not going to get their extra spending money or power and control we might still atleast work together to help America rather than be slaves to money-hogging gatekeepers of the internet. WE MUST MAINTAIN NET NEUTRALITY - IT WOULD BE MORE THAN IMMORAL NOT TO DO SO!
Net Neutrality is essential to free speech, equal opportunity and economic innovation in America. Since the FCC removed this basic protection in 2005, the top executives of phone and cable companies have stated their intention to become the Internet's gatekeepers and to discriminate against Web sites that don't pay their added tolls.
This fundamental change would end the open Internet as we know it. It would damage my ability to connect with others, share information and participate in our 21st century democracy and economy. The FCC must ensure that broadband providers do not block, interfere with or discriminate against any lawful Internet traffic based on its ownership, source or destination."
Do your part!
View The Archive on savetheinternet.com
2006 - Net Nutrality
[Copied Using Microsoft DI2T]
Original letter was sent on official U.S. Letterhead
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
December 21, 2006
Mr. Andrew Eppley
1062 Superior Drive #A
Harrisburg, PA 17111
Dear Mr. Eppley:
Thank you for contacting me in regard to Internet network neutrality legislation. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
When the public Internet was created, its guiding principle was that everyone would be free to use it in a way that was privately beneficial without being publicly detrimental. That principle fostered the birth of thousands of companies, products, services and creative activities that together built the Internet to become the indispensable infrastructure that exists today - and the ultimate beneficiaries are consumers.
In recent years, this principle has been questioned which sparked a debate over ‘open access” or “net neutrality.” Proponents of net neutrality argue that network operators will begin to manipulate traffic with the goal of steering consumers to certain Web sites over others. They believe that large telecommunications companies will block, slow, or otherwise discriminate against information, services, and applications. Opponents however believe the net neutrality debate is based on hypothetical as to what might happen, not direct evidence of what any major company has done or is currently doing - a solution in search of a problem that doesn’t exist. They argue there is no better definition of bad business than to restrict customer access to the entire Internet when a competitor can provide an alternative with full services.
On June 8, 2006, Congressman Markey (MA-07) offered an amendment to H.R. 5252, the Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement (COPE) Act of 2006. Although, H.R. 5252 passed in the House of Representatives, the Markey amendment failed by a vote of 152 - 269. 1 voted in opposition to this amendment because I believe the Internet is currently, and has always been, free and flourishing without government interference. This has not resulted in website discrimination. The net neutrality proposal would introduce unnecessary government regulation to the Internet.
Passage of the Markey amendment would spare large profitable Internet companies like Google, eBay, and Microsoft from having to bear any of the costs of upgrading the nation s broadband infrastructure Current broadband pipes have limited capacity and new services and applications are eating up more and more of it. Expanding this bandwidth costs billions, and if network operators don’t raise capital by getting the largest users to chip in, individual consumers will be stuck with all the costs. Even large providers such as AT&T- Bell South will be forced to pass this cost along to the consumers in order to continue providing the latest technology upgrades in a timely manner.
Even worse, the upgrades might not happen at all, depriving Internet users of certain new services and innovation. The United States has already fallen to 16th in the world in broadband deployment. It is a bad decision to further hinder American progress based on a problem that does not currently exist.
The FCC already has the power to “ensure that providers of telecommunications for Internet access are operated in a neutral manner.” The only case of unfair internet was quickly resolved to benefit the consumer by the FCC. Additionally, the COPE Act contained an amendment (Smith amendment) which gives the FCC and U.S. district court jurisdiction to continue to resolve disputes relating to net neutrality and anti-trust laws on a case-by-case basis. I voted in favor of this amendment to maintain equal and open access to the Internet which passed by a vote of 353 - 68.
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts on this debate. If I can be of assistance in the future on any federal matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Tim Holden
Member of Congress
TH/jk
I am pleased to also note that Senator Arlen Specter has responded to our concerns on Net Nutrality and other concerns about Chemical Areosol Crimes. Here is a copy of his response below (YES IT IS APPARENT HIS SECRATARY DID NOT READ OUR LETTER!):
Dear Mr. Eppley :
Thank you for contacting my office regarding network neutrality.
I appreciate your taking the time to bring your views on this important matter to my attention. As a United States Senator, it is essential that I be kept fully informed o n the issues of concern to my constituents. Be assured that I will keep your thoughts on this issue in mind when the Senate considers this or related issues during the 109th Congress.
Again, thank you for writing. The concerns of my cons tituents are of great importance to me, and I rely on you and other Pennsylvanians to inform me of your views. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office or visit my website at http://specter.senate.gov . Thank you again for writing.
Sincerely,
Arlen Specter To contact your legislature on the issue of Net Nutrality visit:
Life without net neutrality - Witness AT&T's wireless network.