What the heck is your guy, Charlie Gonzalez, up to?

K.C. Jones | TechWeb | April 26

Congress continued to debate network neutrality Wednesday as a group opposing companies' push for tiered access gained momentum.

A day after the House Committee on the Judiciary debated the issue, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce took up the issue Wednesday with plans to vote on the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Efficiency (COPE) Act of 2006. A portion of the bill would authorize the Federal Communications Commission to enforce network neutrality.

At the same time, the SavetheInternet.com Coalition announced that more than 250,000 people signed their petition calling for protection of net neutrality. The coalition, which joins libertarians and gun owners with liberal and business groups, gathered the signatures supporting Massachusetts Democrat Rep. Ed Markey's amendment in less than a week.

"Both sides of the political blogosphere have galvanized behind this political issue – with nearly 500 blogs linking to www.SavetheInternet.com within days," SavetheInternet.com announced.

Telecommunications companies want the FCC to regulate Internet traffic and have argued for the ability to charge companies more for premium services. They argue that they need to increase revenue to upgrade networks. Opponents say that if some companies get premium services, others will get inferior service. They say that will annihilate the equality that has allowed small Web site operators and bloggers the same reach as large companies.

"Net neutrality ensures that the public can view the smallest blog just as easily as the largest corporate Web site by preventing companies like AT&T from rigging the playing field for only the highest-paying sites and services," Timothy Karr, campaign director of Free Press, said in a prepared statement.

The AARP, Consumers Union, Consumer Federation of America, Free Press, the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, MoveOn.org, Gun Owners of America, MySpace.com and Vint Cerf are among those claiming that the Internet's level playing field is threatened.

"Network neutrality is the First Amendment of the Internet, the principle that guarantees that all speakers on the Internet are treated equally," they wrote in a joint letter, also signed by petitioners and sent to members of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

They claim that, without Markey's amendment, COPE would prevent the FCC from being able to protect consumers and businesses First Amendment freedoms, as exercised through equal Internet access.

"The Markey amendment will effectively thwart attempts by broadband behemoths to block, impair, or degrade a consumer's ability to access any lawful Internet content, application or service," amendment supporters wrote in their letter to the committee.

They claim the amendment will prevent broadband providers from favoring themselves or affiliated groups and "warping the Web in a multi-tiered network of bandwidth haves and have-nots."

Markey said in a prepared statement that the exponentially growing coalition – which also includes eBay, Amazon, Yahoo and religious broadcasters – shows how important the issue is to millions of Americans who depend on the open structure of the Internet.

Tuesday, Walter McCormick, president and CEO of the U.S. Telecom Association, testified before the Committee on the Judiciary during a hearing on the topic. He said he thinks that the country's anti-trust laws are sufficient to protect consumers.

McCormick, representing more than 1,200 companies, added that the companies do not want to block, degrade or control access. They simply want to give larger pipes to businesses than residents need. McCormick said that under the current system, consumers are shouldering part of the burden for increased capacity, while providers would like to charge the heaviest users.

"What's in debate here is who pays for that enhanced portion of the network," he said.

As of Wednesday afternoon, the Commerce and Energy Committee recessed without taking up the Markey amendment and planned to reconvene later in the day.

Meanwhile, opposition continued to grow this week as dontmesswiththenet.com launched, while Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, Google CEO Eric Schmidt, Intel President and CEO Paul Otellini and IAC/InternActiveCorp. Chairman and CEO joined the fight. They sent a letter to several representatives stating that net neutrality has supported innovation and empowered people and must be protected.

more commentary, from FT:

a victory is a victory- a defeat is a defeat- if I hear the "good spin" on near misses one more time I'll have to up the Prozac:-)

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

This sucks, do we have a full list on who voted for\against ?
The big question is how do we get our 'elected' officials to work for us, not the special intrest groups.

I'm just whining because I'm tired of losing.

_{"at some point I'm hopeful I'll figure out something to put here"}

A widely diverse coalition of large content providers, including Google, Amazon.com, eBay and Microsoft, and nonprofit organizations, free speech groups and consumer advocates—the SaveTheInternet.com Coalition—vowed to continue fighting for stronger protections.

"The [committee vote] ignores a groundswell of popular support for Internet freedom," said Ben Scott, policy director of Free Press, one of the coalition members. "We hope that the full House will resist the big telecom companies and reject the bill."

PCMag.com
[snip]
The House is expected to take up the bill in early May, but the net neutrality provision's momentum may be slowed by several variables, including a turf battle in the House. Both Republican and Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee April 25 made it clear that they consider net neutrality to be within their jurisdiction. In addition, the Senate is moving cautiously. Several telecom reform bills are under consideration in the Senate, but none contains detailed neutrality provisions.