The House Public Utilities Committee recently approved legislation, H1587, that will effectively prohibit local governments from providing their constituents with internet service, even when private companies like Time Warner and AT&T refuse to serve those areas. Telecom companies want to restrict local government authority to provide communications services to citizens.
Last session, the telecommunications companies pushed for and won statewide franchising of video services, claiming that the local franchising process hampered competition. That state franchising legislation imposed very little regulation and did not require companies to serve an entire community.
Now, the telecom companies are pushing HB 1587 Local Government Fair Competition Act, which would place significant roadblocks and restrictions on any local government that wants to provide communications services including cable, telephone, electronic voice, data, audio or video transmission and Internet access to its citizens.
Read articles about HB 1587:
News Observer article
The Fiber Optic Files
Indyweek.com
Yesh.com
Muniwireless.com
To read more, google "NC HB 1587", and ask yourself this, "Why are there no articles written for the passage of this bill and why exactly would my legislators who are supposed to be FOR THE PEOPLE support a bill such as this unless they recently had lunch (or worse) with members of AT&T, Time Warner, etc?
How You Can Help
Email your representative and ask them to oppose any legislation, including H1587, which will limit access to the Internet.
Find your legislators: http://ncpirg.org/NC.asp?id=findlegislators
Email the following sponsors of the bill and ask them why they proposed such a bill and tell them you are watching them:
Mecklenburg County: Drew Saunders Drews@ncleg.net
Davidson County: Hugh Holliman Hughh@ncleg.net
Randolph County: Harold J Brubaker Brub@ncleg.net
Davie and Iredell County: Julia C. Howard Juliah@ncleg.net
Rockingham County: Nelson Cole Nelsonc@ncleg.net
Click Here to read about HB 1587
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2007&BillID=H%2B1587
Friday, July 27, 2007
North Carolina House Members Introduce Bill 1587 that will prevent many North Carolinians from having access to affordable, quality internet service
Monday, June 4, 2007
Save the Internet-Save the World
Net Neutrality. It just sounds right, doesn't it? So last night I am visiting the site "Save the Internet" (www.savetheinternet.com). As a non-techie person, I am a little intimidated when reading about computer issues, but now that my brother in-law has installed linux on my computer, I am getting my feet wet and venturing out more. I am just about to tackle the Ubuntu bible, but I digress. Reading the information on this website begins to infuriate me, so I decided to take action before the cable companies and phone companies decide they are going to take over the world.
I emailed my representative, Congressman Robin Hayes of North Carolina, voicing my support of net neutrality. Here is how he responded:
Thank you for contacting my office regarding Net Neutrality. As your Congressman, your views on this issue are extremely important to me.
Net neutrality is an issue that has been a concern of network engineers since the birth of the Internet. Net neutrality, in the eyes of network engineers, centers on the role of the transmission network acting as a “dumb” pipe that simply carries information offered by content and service providers to the end user. More recently, people have come to understand net neutrality as simply a consumer’s ability to access content and services. The accessibility of content providers or service providers to the network has widely been ignored as of late.
I believe the issue of net neutrality needs to be addressed from both angles, that of the providers as well as the consumer. The Internet was built on a framework that fostered innovation which required the network operator to provide non-discriminatory transmission upon reasonable request. Some innovations have led to what some consider unreasonable requests.
The demand for bandwidth from both consumers and content providers is doubling every year, and is expected to grow four-fold to six-fold each year through the next decade. Bandwidth allocation issues are nothing new; in 2003, Duke University found that 10% of the users on their residential student network were using 90% of the bandwidth. So, Duke University limited students’ use to five gigabytes-per-day in an effort to provide equal access to all students. People viewing streaming videos or downloading entire movies, for example, were compromising others users’ ability to simply check email or view a news website.
Many telephone and cable companies are currently proposing commercial arrangements with content providers to relay their content more effectively and quickly over the companies’ networks. The companies hold firm that service for content providers choosing not to engage in a commercial arrangement will not be degraded. It is their belief that the extra revenue from these commercial arrangements will help them upgrade their network to meet the demands of innovation. Included in the COPE Act, as currently written, is a $500,000 fine for broadband providers that block lawful content.
It is an honor to serve as your United States Representative, and I look forward to tackling the issues 8th District voters sent me here to address. Please know that I have assembled what I believe is the most responsive and courteous staff in Congress. Your suggestions are always welcomed, and if ever we may be of assistance, please don't hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Robin Hayes
Member of Congress
Doesn't this email sound like the phone and cable companies wrote it? I am no expert, so I am looking for those that are that would like to post a few sentences that I can use to respond to him. Furthermore, I intend to direct all of his constituents that I come into contact with to this blog so that they will know exactly who they are voting for and what he supports.
Sincerely,
A Newbie for Net Neutrality (n4nn@blogspot.com)
Tchrgrl@gmail.com
I emailed my representative, Congressman Robin Hayes of North Carolina, voicing my support of net neutrality. Here is how he responded:
Thank you for contacting my office regarding Net Neutrality. As your Congressman, your views on this issue are extremely important to me.
Net neutrality is an issue that has been a concern of network engineers since the birth of the Internet. Net neutrality, in the eyes of network engineers, centers on the role of the transmission network acting as a “dumb” pipe that simply carries information offered by content and service providers to the end user. More recently, people have come to understand net neutrality as simply a consumer’s ability to access content and services. The accessibility of content providers or service providers to the network has widely been ignored as of late.
I believe the issue of net neutrality needs to be addressed from both angles, that of the providers as well as the consumer. The Internet was built on a framework that fostered innovation which required the network operator to provide non-discriminatory transmission upon reasonable request. Some innovations have led to what some consider unreasonable requests.
The demand for bandwidth from both consumers and content providers is doubling every year, and is expected to grow four-fold to six-fold each year through the next decade. Bandwidth allocation issues are nothing new; in 2003, Duke University found that 10% of the users on their residential student network were using 90% of the bandwidth. So, Duke University limited students’ use to five gigabytes-per-day in an effort to provide equal access to all students. People viewing streaming videos or downloading entire movies, for example, were compromising others users’ ability to simply check email or view a news website.
Many telephone and cable companies are currently proposing commercial arrangements with content providers to relay their content more effectively and quickly over the companies’ networks. The companies hold firm that service for content providers choosing not to engage in a commercial arrangement will not be degraded. It is their belief that the extra revenue from these commercial arrangements will help them upgrade their network to meet the demands of innovation. Included in the COPE Act, as currently written, is a $500,000 fine for broadband providers that block lawful content.
It is an honor to serve as your United States Representative, and I look forward to tackling the issues 8th District voters sent me here to address. Please know that I have assembled what I believe is the most responsive and courteous staff in Congress. Your suggestions are always welcomed, and if ever we may be of assistance, please don't hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Robin Hayes
Member of Congress
Doesn't this email sound like the phone and cable companies wrote it? I am no expert, so I am looking for those that are that would like to post a few sentences that I can use to respond to him. Furthermore, I intend to direct all of his constituents that I come into contact with to this blog so that they will know exactly who they are voting for and what he supports.
Sincerely,
A Newbie for Net Neutrality (n4nn@blogspot.com)
Tchrgrl@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)