From my rep in Congress re: FCC & net neutrality

Approx 2 weeks ago, I went through the House of Rep's official "Contacting Your Rep." system and asked my Congresswoman -- Susan Brooks, 5th District, Indiana -- to urge the FCC to rethink it's position. I used Wendell's letter posted here on the forums as a guide, making sure to include Title II, "fast lane" = bad idea, etc. This was before the other FCC board members had come out publicly stating that they thought Mr. Wheeler's plan was not-so-good, so I obviously couldn't mention that, unfortunately.

This is the response e-mail I just got from my representative in Congress, posted here verbatim [other than a redacted name] for further discussion:

---START---

Dear Mr. [redacted],

Thank you for contacting me regarding net neutrality and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). I appreciate the time you have taken to inform me of your thoughts on this issue.

As you may know, net neutrality is the concept that all data on the internet should be treated equally and internet providers should not be able to charge more money to access certain data. For example, an internet service provider should not be allowed to speed up certain websites and slow access to others. There is an ongoing debate about whether net neutrality should be required by law and whether congressional action is needed to ensure unfettered access to the internet.

In December of 2010, the FCC adopted its "Open Internet" order that required broadband providers to disclose their network management practices and barred them from blocking legal traffic on their network. The rules also prohibited fixed broadband providers from unreasonably discriminating against internet traffic. On January 14, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia decided in Verizon v. FCC that the FCC had authority to encourage deployment of broadband infrastructure and that this empowered the agency to regulate how broadband providers treat internet traffic. At the same time, the court struck down the agency's 2010 rules that barred broadband providers from blocking content or unreasonably discriminating in the flow of traffic on their networks. On February 19, 2014, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler announced that the agency would not appeal the federal court's decision but instead would pursue new rulemaking on the no-blocking and anti-discrimination rules that the federal court struck down. Then on April 23, 2014, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler announced proposed rules that would allow Internet service providers to charge companies different rates for faster connection speeds.

This is an issue that is evolving and changing very quickly. Internet regulation and the FCC's authority to implement such regulations is, and will continue to be, a topic of much debate. I will continue to study and monitor this situation closely and should any legislation regarding net neutrality come before the U.S. House of Representatives for a vote, please know I will certainly keep your thoughts in mind.

Thank you again for contacting me. Your thoughts and opinions are of critical importance to me as I work to represent Indiana's 5th District in Congress. I sincerely appreciate your comments and look forward to hearing from you in the future.

Sincerely,

Susan W. Brooks
Member of Congress

---END---

Just figured I would ask for thoughts and input from the users here. IMO, there's not a whole lot of meat on the bone here, but at least she (or the staffer who wrote this) seems to have a good idea on where the issue stands, albeit while not offering much of an opinion on the matter.

It seems the House Republicans (the leadership anyway) just came out with their position on Net Neutrality, and surprise, they are against it:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2458063,00.asp

If she concurs with her party's leadership it seems she would disagree with Net Neutrality now.

I should get off my lazy ass and do the same thing. The only way to make grassroots efforts like this work is to keep reminding them that their voter base considers the issue important.

boilerplate politi-speak... just a ton of hot air...

Ya, didnt say much of anything did it. Bunch of lip service with no substance. At least you got that, mine wont even give me that.

She can't do much to influence anyone. Even if the FCC wrote better legislation the second it were to pass the isp's would immediately fight it in court. They would claim blah blah is grounds for this to be illegal. Then it would be the same shit again. It's extremely draining that they do this but they aren't gonna go down without a fight. Net neutrality is just more BS that really wouldn't solve the issues anyway.

Most of the mistake the FCC made was allowing these companies to grow to the point they are at now. Agreeing to write legislation to allow more buyouts then allowing them because within the rules they wrote they can't deny them. If the FCC just opened the last mile to any competitor then the large isp couldn't use bully tactics against the consumer anymore. They'd have to actually offer good customer service, increase speeds while at the same time reducing cost for their customers. That is the position that needs to be created to break up the monopolies and make them serve us. Right now it's everyone serves the ISP. You most likely have no choice for other service. That's the problem and thanks FCC. Dumbasses.