FCC takes first step towards making the Internet a “public utility”
posted at 3:53 pm on June 18, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
Certain monopoly services get classified as “public utilities” and regulated as such on the federal, state, or local level as a consequence of the concession granted by government to supply the monopolized service or product. Electricity, water, natural gas, and until recently local telephone and cable services were usually classified as public utilities and regulated by government. Now, however, the Federal Communications Commission wants to classify the decentralized Internet as a public utility, as FCC chair Julius Genachowski tries to get around a Supreme Court ruling blocking his Net Neutrality ambitions:
The Federal Communications Commission voted Thursday to take another step toward reclassifying the way it regulates Internet service providers, releasing a plan for public comment that would give the federal agency vast new powers over companies that distribute Web access.
“The FCC has an obligation to move forward with an open, constructive public comment process to ask hard questions, build a record, find a solution and resolve the uncertainty that has been created,” said FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski.
The 3-2 vote comes on the heels of a unanimous April ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that said the FCC had overstepped its authority when the federal agency sanctioned Comcast for slowing some Internet traffic within its networks. The FCC has since made efforts to find new ways to regulate the industry that fall within the confines of the law.
The FCC currently classifies Internet service providers — namely AT&T, Comcast and Verizon — as information services, leaving them largely exempt from regulation. The vote today is the first step toward re-classifying the companies to a new and more restrictive category within the FCC code.
Americans for Prosperity have begun sounding the alarm with a new effort at NoInternetTakeover.com, with this press release and a video warning Internet users of the danger of a government takeover:
“Today marks a troubling and dangerous step forward in the Federal Communications Commission’s ongoing effort to take over the internet. The FCC’s Notice of Inquiry is an aggressive step in their reckless effort to force decades-old Title II public utility regulations on Internet providers.
“Such a radical change undoes a remarkable decade of success with a free-market, hands-off Internet. No wonder we have seen mounting bipartisan opposition to reclassification from consumers worried about the impact Title II would have on innovation and competition, small businesses worried about a sudden drop in investment, and free-market allies worried about the increased role of the federal government in internet policy.
“Despite the outcry from nearly 300 Democrats and Republicans, President Obama’s FCC is determined to regulate. We therefore urge Congress to step in immediately to stop the Commission’s dangerous efforts to get regulatory control of the Internet.”
Over 300 members of Congress may object, but Genachowski is only following the example of Democratic leadership there. They had attempted an end run around the Citizens United case by pushing the DISCLOSE Act, which got pulled late last night. Why shouldn’t Genachowski take a page from Nancy Pelosi’s playbook and try the same thing? The other two Democratic appointees to the FCC’s board fell in line quickly.
Bottom line: the ploy to make the Internet a “public utility” is ludicrous, for the same reason that Net Neutrality is unnecessary. Internet services compete for business in a marketplace. Most homes have at least two potential hardline connections to the Internet: the local telephone company and their cable provider. Wireless services are also available through a number of providers. Some cost more than others, which is the same as saying that a BMW will cost consumers more than a Hyundai. No one is entitled to either, and no entitlement exists for Internet service. It’s not a monopoly in the same way that commercial radio is handled within the FCC’s regulatory authority, and it doesn’t need to be regulated like local telephone or electricity monopolies.
What can be done? First, stay involved, either through AFP’s efforts or by keeping in close contact with your own Senators and Representative. Second, get involved in the comment process at the FCC. Third, keep writing and talking about this, because silence in this case will mean government control and more silence in the future.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
One power grab after another…it makes me weep for my country.
PattyJ on June 18, 2010 at 3:56 PM
Government does one thing and only one thing well: Increase its power.
Holger on June 18, 2010 at 3:57 PM
This administration is becoming eerily close to wanting complete control of all messages. I can’t imagine ANYONE agreeing with this kind of power grab, no matter what party you belong or don’t belong to.
portlandon on June 18, 2010 at 3:58 PM
THE FEDS ARE SCUM…the first step after regulating it will be to tax it and then the buggers will scheme to censor it for political content…
JIMV on June 18, 2010 at 3:58 PM
This isn’t going to end well… Judges don’t like it when you do an end-around on a *unanimous* verdict.
teke184 on June 18, 2010 at 3:59 PM
If the goal is to make the internet more difficult/ expensive to access and less efficient with a steady decrease in the quality of content, by all means give the FCC control.
Corrupt bumblers.
NoDonkey on June 18, 2010 at 4:00 PM
Oh brother, big brother!
shick on June 18, 2010 at 4:01 PM
Making cable tv a public utility was an abomination, and this will be an even bigger abomination.
MadisonConservative on June 18, 2010 at 4:01 PM
People got suckered into net neutrality.
lorien1973 on June 18, 2010 at 4:02 PM
I’m so sick of these liberal fascists trying to take everything over.
CP on June 18, 2010 at 4:03 PM
Here’s the irony… the “internet” isn’t any one utility. It’s a network of interlinked computers. The basis of its design was modular to survive a nuclear attack. Sure, force AT&T et al to regulate it as a public utility… but then people can break off and re-link the internet in their own way.
But the socialists/leftist want this for Net Neutrality because they think AT&T will have the audacity to charge more for bandwidth.
In reality Obama and the leftists want this for political control. Gotta control that speech. (Note the sudden onslaught of “the net is 99% pornography” hyperbolic stories… gotta protect the children dontcha know… so we need to regulate it…)
Skywise on June 18, 2010 at 4:03 PM
Well, then, I suppose it is time for our neighbors to start stringing fiberoptic cables between our homes and creating our own “Internet”.
There is no such thing as “THE Internet”, it are only private networks that exchange data with each other.
What this amounts to is government takeover of private data networks.
This does not rate the regulation of a public utility because there is no monopoly involved. If I don’t like a company’s service, I can move to a different company. But if I don’t like the fact that transformers on poles in my neighborhood blew up 4 times in the past year disrupting my electricity, I can’t change “last mile” providers.
“Public utility” regulations should only come into play in monopoly situations where things are regulated because there is no competition. There is a LOT of competition between network vendors. Leave the market ALONE.
crosspatch on June 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM
“, it are” meant “there are”
crosspatch on June 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM
Disgusting. I think ISPs should turn off their spam filters in protest. After all, you can’t be discriminating against net traffic…
Sekhmet on June 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM
I’m sure the government will handle this almost as well as they are doing with health care and the oil spill…time to break out those old 56K modems from the attic.
AUINSC on June 18, 2010 at 4:05 PM
I really hate the US at this stage! 47yrs old and I keep apologizing to my grown children that we could’nt keep the dirty hippies from taking over.
Weep/Cry/Scream fight back in November. Keep calling your “elected” officials talk to your neighbors, your friends and let them know what direction we are heading. I believe the CIA is changing its acronym to KGB. Oh yeah don’t forget to blame it all on Bush.
igglesphan on June 18, 2010 at 4:06 PM
wow….just wow
cmsinaz on June 18, 2010 at 4:06 PM
fcc=internet czars?
cmsinaz on June 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM
How long before AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon fall in line with the FCC to avoid even more burdensome rules and regulations. It sure seems like the major corporations are more inclined to cave in than to fight.
fourdeucer on June 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM
Obama led a velvet Marxist coup against the people of the United States, go back to sleep this in unimportant because you already gave your country away.
Remember a couple of things before calling me a crazy conspiracy theorists.
Who voted for Obamacare?
Who voted for TARP?
Who voted to Nationalize the Housing industry?
Who voted to Nationalize the Banking industry?
Who voted to Nationalize the Insurance industry?
Who voted to Nationalize the Automobile industry?
When was the last time the will of the American people actually was taken into account by congress, the senate or the Whitehouse? Figure it out folks…
doriangrey on June 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM
It’s nothing to worry about. After all, they’re doing it for you.
darwin on June 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM
Of course, all authoritarian regimes must control the flow of information, otherwise the people would oppose them. Keep them stupid and uninformed (ironically, Communists do this more readily than true Capitalist societies) and they cannot toss you out.
How much can be attributed to the internet for Obummer’s slumping poll numbers and agenda failures?
Holger on June 18, 2010 at 4:08 PM
not good at all…dang it, don’t cave please!
cmsinaz on June 18, 2010 at 4:09 PM
I assume the NYT, LAT, and WP think this would be just swell.
a capella on June 18, 2010 at 4:09 PM
What uncertainty is this assclown talking about? Find a solution to WHAT?
Another Obama-esque ‘straw man’ argument if I ever heard one.
Truly disgusting
AZ_Mike on June 18, 2010 at 4:09 PM
I don’t think you’re a crazy conspiracy theorist. That’s exactly what’s going on.
Alana on June 18, 2010 at 4:09 PM
Tell Eddie Munster to keep his paws off my series of tubes.
DrAllecon on June 18, 2010 at 4:10 PM
These marxists are determined to extinquish Miss Liberty’s Torch.
kingsjester on June 18, 2010 at 4:10 PM
Really doesn’t the government own everything, really?
tim c on June 18, 2010 at 4:10 PM
They will fail.
John the Libertarian on June 18, 2010 at 4:11 PM
I’ve received notice from Verizon (my internet provider) that it’s being switched to Frontier (whom I’ve never heard of). There are no coincidences in stuff like this. What does that switch have to do with this internet deal?
Oink on June 18, 2010 at 4:12 PM
Can you imagine if the federal government required that every newspaper in the city have the exact same number, and size, of corner newspaper boxes, independent of their circulation? “We have to, to make it fair.”
RBMN on June 18, 2010 at 4:13 PM
And what makes the Federal Govt believe they control the internet? I can email with someone in Thailand. How do we know that Thailand, India, or BFE doesn’t control the internet.
This is not going to end well. Things are fixin’ to get ugly.
Oink on June 18, 2010 at 4:14 PM
Short wave radios, who knew they would be the communications of the future 100 years after being invented? Friedman wanted the U.S. to emulate China, well the goal is getting nearer by the day.
Bishop on June 18, 2010 at 4:14 PM
Buy ammo. Use it.
SirGawain on June 18, 2010 at 4:16 PM
How to stir up the masses on this -
point out the FCC will block their porn.
LincolntheHun on June 18, 2010 at 4:16 PM
Wait till the government requires you to purchase a certain number of copies of newspapers that they approve of or face fines and prison sentences.
doriangrey on June 18, 2010 at 4:16 PM
It seems like they’re trying to expand their power every single day hoping that they can get enough by without us noticing.
John Deaux on June 18, 2010 at 4:16 PM
It’s really rather funny: where I live, the telephone line is the LAST way to connect to the Internet. At best, I can probably get 56KB on a real dry day. We’re talking ancient phone lines. Half the time, you can barely make a decent, clear, static free phone call.
But there is wireless, cell phone, and satellite internet available, each from a different provider.
It’s such a monopoly…
karl9000 on June 18, 2010 at 4:17 PM
“Commerce Clause!”
Del Dolemonte on June 18, 2010 at 4:17 PM
You know, at this point, only the electrical power grid itself should be a regulated monopoly/utility. Consumers should buy the power itself directly from suppliers, or a selection of power supply companies.
Count to 10 on June 18, 2010 at 4:19 PM
Umm, ya, about that, Wake up… They dont give a rats a$$ if you notice, because you dont have any say in what they do any more.
doriangrey on June 18, 2010 at 4:19 PM
It’s getting hard to recognize this country.
These b@st@rds.
tru2tx on June 18, 2010 at 4:19 PM
Let’s hear it for Hugo Obama a.k.a. Barak Chavez
CynicalOptimist on June 18, 2010 at 4:21 PM
Not only no, but H3LLZ NO!!!11!
Mary in LA on June 18, 2010 at 4:21 PM
Next Obooba will demand $20B from intertube service providers.
Akzed on June 18, 2010 at 4:22 PM
Has anyone asked Algore if this is what he intended for his invention?
TugboatPhil on June 18, 2010 at 4:28 PM
Only in your own mind. The court said no so where is the obligation? Therefore you lie.
chemman on June 18, 2010 at 4:34 PM
Yet.
Certainly you have heard the heart-breaking pleas from the Lumbee Tribe member who says her son is entitled to high-speed internet because he :::gasp::: had to use dial-up.
President Kick-Ass to the rescue!
VibrioCocci on June 18, 2010 at 4:34 PM
I think he’s going to find out very quickly that an easy way to piss off the youth vote is to make their expensive iPhones near-worthless by killing their internet capability.
teke184 on June 18, 2010 at 4:34 PM
For what problem? There is no problem. Once again, government needs to concoct a problem to impose its “solution.”
Control of the internet isn’t an option for this government. It’s a necessity. There is simply too much uncontrollable freedom out there. Way too dangerous.
I’ve reached the point now where I know that every scary thought I’ve been having for two years since I saw this sly Chicago thug and second-rate academic Marxist emerging as a candidate is true. It has already come true or is in the process of coming true. This is it, America — this is your true crisis.
rrpjr on June 18, 2010 at 4:36 PM
Related: Members of Congress Move to Reverse Their Listing as an Invasive Species
Mervis Winter on June 18, 2010 at 4:38 PM
At one time Ameren UE was working on broadband over the powerlines in order to provide ubiquitous internet service without the need for phone lines or cable lines. That would put the internet directly under the utilities and the governments purview.
fourdeucer on June 18, 2010 at 4:38 PM
Worthless? Nah. As they’ll understand it, Obama’s making the internet free!
Rational Thought on June 18, 2010 at 4:38 PM
WHAT CAN WE DO? YOU KNOW THE ONLY D@MN REASON THE O IS DOING THIS IS BECAUSE HE DOESN’T LIKE HOTAIR, DRUDGE, CNSNEWS and A HOST OF MIRAD OTHER SITES WHO DON’T LIKE HIS POLICIES….
I JUST CAN’T SIT HERE…. AND READ THIS MALARKY… IT’S LIKE
HE’S GOING TO DO WHATEVER HE WANTS….
LET’S VOTE’EM OUT!
CynicalOptimist on June 18, 2010 at 4:39 PM
“Never let a crisis go to waste!” And if we don’t have a sufficient amount of ‘em, create ‘em!
cartooner on June 18, 2010 at 4:42 PM
Joesph Goebbels cometh.
Tav on June 18, 2010 at 4:43 PM
Is this what the far-leftists wanted when they put Obama in office? If not, where the hell are they on this?
OxyCon on June 18, 2010 at 4:44 PM
“Something Wicked this Way Comes”
chemman on June 18, 2010 at 4:44 PM
With the help of our trusty SIDE KICK… MSM
CynicalOptimist on June 18, 2010 at 4:45 PM
If I get online one day, and find no HotAir, no Drudge, no FoxNews, no Ace, no AmericanThinker, even no Townhall…..
…It won’t be pretty, or nice, or anything resembling civil.
Sekhmet on June 18, 2010 at 4:50 PM
“I hate Illinois Nazis.”
teke184 on June 18, 2010 at 4:50 PM
teke184 on June 18, 2010 at 4:50 PM
That was supposed to go in the Blues Brothers thread, not in here to Godwin the argument.
teke184 on June 18, 2010 at 4:50 PM
The China model. Welcome to the 21st century.
Limerick on June 18, 2010 at 4:54 PM
copy that….
cmsinaz on June 18, 2010 at 4:56 PM
This is only to control the content of the internet. There won’t be DrudgeReport, HotAir, RCP, Fox Nation, etc.
Mirimichi on June 18, 2010 at 4:56 PM
Related – Rural Dane County residents whine for $40/month DSL, claiming that dial-up and $70/month wireless/satellite (or $175/month T-1) is in violation of Wisconsin law because cheap broadband is a “right”.
steveegg on June 18, 2010 at 5:00 PM
“How long before AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon fall in line with the FCC to avoid even more burdensome rules and regulations. It sure seems like the major corporations are more inclined to cave in than to fight.”
I suspect that you will at some point see networks refusing to share data with each other. For example, if you are on AT&T, you might be able to get to Facebook, MSN, Google, etc. IF AT&T has a direct connection to them but you will not be able to reach anything that must cross another provider’s network to reach its destination. It will be the end of “transit” traffic because the cost of it will skyrocket under these proposed regulations.
What you are going to end up with is two classes of traffic at two different rates. You will have “on net” (local) and “off net” (long distance) traffic and your off net traffic will cost you more. Some providers already do that with content providers now.
Off net traffic will be subject to the regulations as things are only “internet” when they cross between networks. Up to that point what you essentially have is an “intranet”, not an “internet”.
crosspatch on June 18, 2010 at 5:10 PM
There is a really fundamental point being painted over by rhetoric. A Federal bureaucracy is going to decide to authorize itself to regulate something. This is not congress passing legislation, this is not the president issuing an executive order, this is not the courts. It is a bureaucrat deciding he has the authority to regulate broadband in a manner he believes.
They are not going to just choose to regulate broadband they are also going to decide what regulations should apply.
Skandia Recluse on June 18, 2010 at 5:15 PM
midlander on June 18, 2010 at 5:16 PM
FCC= Fascistic Communications Controllers
LegendHasIt on June 18, 2010 at 5:18 PM
But you’re exactly right. He’s from Illinois (as far as we know) and he’s…well…
splink on June 18, 2010 at 5:19 PM
You know how you usually don’t have to pay sales tax for online purchases? That’s the “problem.”
Leftists see internet transactions and salivate at the enormous amount of taxes that could be levied in the (near) future.
visions on June 18, 2010 at 5:22 PM
If a law is stopping me from doing what I want, I’ll just find a way around that law. That’s what it means to be a good citizen, right?
Daggett on June 18, 2010 at 5:24 PM
Yay, the fascists are in charge!
/getaclue
rbj on June 18, 2010 at 5:24 PM
That is most likely the case and part of their intent. They aren’t approaching the “problem” from that direction. New taxes will just be the result of another power grab. If they were being honest about their intentions, they would get nowhere. They have this big bag of super special solutions they want to implement on nonexistent problems. There is the problem.
midlander on June 18, 2010 at 5:33 PM
And if you don’t like, just talk over your power line, if it’s still connected.
tarpon on June 18, 2010 at 5:33 PM
Anyone actually know the reason why Comcast (and most other providers do this?
I’ll tell you right now: ’cause too many idiot people (both children and adults) are overloading the bandwith pipes with ILLEGAL FILE SHARING
So basically people are saying “I have a right to steal (copyright infringement) stuff and suck up all the bandwith in my neighborhood in the process (thereby slowing everyone else’s internet on the block to a crawl) and not have any consequences”
Entitlement mentality much?
SgtSVJones on June 18, 2010 at 5:39 PM
Que the cyber security ‘crisis’ justifying insane power grab in 3… 2… 1…
bitsy on June 18, 2010 at 5:46 PM
*Cue PIMF
bitsy on June 18, 2010 at 5:54 PM
Pithy and very Ayn Rand. I loved it :o)
IowaWoman on June 18, 2010 at 5:57 PM
Does this mean the internet will be like PBS?
I don’t entirely think that would be a good thing at all.
Dhuka on June 18, 2010 at 6:00 PM
Copyright laws, patent laws, and anti-terrorism laws all represent a threat to freedom of speech in my opinion.
Those three things are what is driving all of this.
Spathi on June 18, 2010 at 6:16 PM
If they ever dare to make a move to regulate content, the gloves are off.
This is their intent; we cannot cede this ground.
If we give an inch on free speech, they will take a mile, then another, then another….
hillbillyjim on June 18, 2010 at 6:56 PM
Remember when the media warned us after the Republican Revolution in 94 that they’d go off the deep end because they had majorities in both houses. Don’t you think they should have warned us how it might be with both houses and the WH being run by the same party?
November may be too late to undo some of the damage.
hawkdriver on June 18, 2010 at 7:00 PM
Of course by the time they do this the next mode of wireless will be creating a completely mobile, distributed, on-the-go, always on network that you can be on for the cost of electricity and a few bucks worth of equipment. A total peer, mesh network that has no centralized distribution points and no ISPs…
After that the FCC will try to regulate sunshine.
ajacksonian on June 18, 2010 at 8:01 PM
Nobody — including most of you — realizes that we have a very frightened elite. Here is their public position:
We have a free press in this country. The powers that be just want to make sure that the internet meets the higher standards we see in places like the networks and the major publications.
Here is their private fear:
The stupid rednecks will never go quietly to build our paradise so long as they have information to feed their hate and ignorance. We don’t want to fetter the internet completely or permanently, we only want to regulate it until it resembles the MSM and eventually remove controls when it suits us.
IlikedAUH2O on June 18, 2010 at 8:51 PM
Give a shout if any of you are low enough to corrupt the news the way the MSM does every day. Think about what scum they are!
IlikedAUH2O on June 18, 2010 at 8:54 PM
I don’t think you have been paying attention. The left has been acting like they will never lose power, makes you wonder doesn’t? They might do well to remember that payback can be a real mother.
whbates on June 18, 2010 at 9:28 PM
I think this solidifies the notion, that the government is being taken over from within…..and unless we all ban together to stop it….we’ll become Iran, or Venezuela, or North Korea, or China.
Even if you’re a liberal…is this truly what you really want???
capejasmine on June 18, 2010 at 9:36 PM
Not true for multi-family dwellings, especially those built within the last 15 years (condos, co-ops, apartments).
Verizon, Comcast, AT&T, Time Warner, et al, enter into exclusive contracts with the management of those buildings, giving kickbacks to the building management for the exclusive right to provide service. These contracts exclude all competitors. The residents of these buildings are forced to pay bloated rates, and to purchase services that they don’t want as part of a “package plan” (i.e.; If you want internet service you have to have landline voice service, too.)
A couple of years ago a friend of mine filed a complaint with the FCC regarding these exclusive contracts between carriers and building managers. The FCC issued a rule intended to invalidate these types of contracts, but the carriers objected on the grounds that the government can’t interfere in a contractual relationship between two parties engaged in legal business activities (a good point).
So here we sit with unregulated, bloated internet invoices that the consumer can do nothing about except sell their home and move to a single family dwelling.
The internet needs some regulation in this area. Also, as long as consumers are forced to pay monopoly rates for internet service, the carriers should not be allowed to discriminate between certain types of traffic flowing over their networks.
However, once the carriers allow competition into the market of multi-family dwellings, they should be allowed to carry the traffic on their networks any way they please, and let the consumer sort it out. In other words, when they behave like a monopoly they should be regulated as a monopoly, and when they behave as a competitor they should be unregulated.
jaime on June 18, 2010 at 9:36 PM
Pretty sick of hearing about all this “dead” stuff.
Cap and Trade…dead, will never happen.
Fairness Doctrine…dead, will never happen.
ObamaCare…dead, will never happen.
They have their agenda, they have their window of opportunity and they’re not going to screw it up. The oil spill? Inconsequential-has nothing to do with advancing Socialism other than maybe providing a convenient excuse to make Cap and Trade more palatable.
Dr. ZhivBlago on June 18, 2010 at 10:28 PM
As part of the emergency, Restore America Bill, we need a Clause removing the ability to for any Regulating Agencies to make up rules, and removing all such rules.
That is the job of the legislators, not the bureaucracy.
Slowburn on June 19, 2010 at 2:02 AM
How much difference at the moment is there between what Obama and the Democrats have been doing and what Hugo Chavez and his cronies did down in Venezuela? I’m just asking.
Theophile on June 19, 2010 at 3:51 AM
Translation: We could ram through our communist agenda a lot quicker if some people weren’t so darned informed.
labrat on June 19, 2010 at 8:59 AM
Absolutely right. The merits or demerits of Net Neutrality are the least important of the issues involved here. The single most important issue is that when the FCC finds it doesn’t have the authority to regulate internet broadband, they make this power grab to do it anyway.
Who gave the FCC the authority that they have now? Congress. Has Congress expanded their authority to let them regulate broadband? No.
So they think they can just have a period of public comment, then unilaterally claim more authority? If they’re able to get away with this, then they don’t have any checks or balances preventing them from, say, regulating the political content of news broadcasts, or fining bloggers who are overly critical of the president.
This attempt by the FCC brings into question the very concept of a limited government.
There Goes The Neighborhood on June 19, 2010 at 6:21 PM