Comments on: Stevens from Alaska tells Senate we won’t get Net Neutrality

By: Net Neutrality already breached by ComCast

Net Neutrality already breached by ComCast — Sun, 06 Aug 2006 21:00:06 +0000

[...] Meanwhile, in the Senate, Senator Stevens has used his position as the head of the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation in a most inappropriate way. Anyone reading this brochure, which was handed out to Senate Members by Stevens in an effort to secure enough votes for Cloture, can tell it was written by Telecommunications PR flacks. (pdf download of brochure.) I guess it’s not surprising, since the Telecomm and CableCos have bought and paid for Senator Stevens, but what is amazing is that this very obviously biased piece of literature was also featured on the Senate Commerce Committee’s Website until recently, when pressure was brought to bear and it was removed. According to IPDemocracy’s article about this– I wonder what the Democrats on the committee, or those who oppose the bill anyway, think about this? It’s such a blatant display of pro-industry blather — on a Senate web site no less — and an utterly craven example of what many people already believe to be true, namely that politicians are in the pockets of industry. [...]

By: Senate Committee Vote on Net Neutrality delayed

Senate Committee Vote on Net Neutrality delayed — Sat, 24 Jun 2006 02:35:15 +0000

[...] We, as a country, need to look at putting the internet back into public hands with community wifi, and with public peering once more being the rule rather than the exception. Letting the huge and monopoly minded telecoms control this is going to hurt everyone over the long haul. Seeing how the telecomms manipulate our government with lobbying and campaign contributions should be a wake up call to us all. Senator Stevens from Alaska, who drafted the Senate Legislation on Telecommunications Reform, took campaign contributions from those same telecomms, and has been arguing vociferously in their favor, which comes as no surprise to me. We all, as a country, need to wake up to how these large corporations are trying to control our life, our government, what we see on television, what we read in the paper, what we hear on the radio, and next, what we can access on the internet. We need to tell our politicians clearly that this is unacceptable and that those politicians who vote against the best interests of the people they represent will be voted out. [...]

By: John

John — Sat, 17 Jun 2006 09:16:39 +0000

As the bridge has been constructed for the convience of the people therefore it has nothing to do with the number.
Using federal funds for something so localized is never in the interest of the rest of the country.

By: BJ

BJ — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 02:28:07 +0000

I stand corrected on the Bridge issue, at least as far as the amount of people it’s servicing. I will say this though– building another hospital in Nowhere would most likely have been a lot cheaper, and using federal funds for something so localized is never in the interest of the rest of the country.

Having said that, it doesn’t change the fact that the Senator who is heading up this Telecomm Reform legislation for the majority gets a large amount of his campaign contributions from the Corporations who stand to gain the most from the end of Network Neutrality. This is a serious conflict of interest.

By: Amber

Amber — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 07:26:54 +0000

I’d just like to let you know that this bridge to nowhere is actually a bridge to the fastest growing region in the state of Alaska. That it has nothing to do with 50 people, it has to do with a minimum of 30,000 currently living on only one side and another 250,000 living on the other side.

I am from the less populated area .(nowhere as you out of state uninformed like to call it)and now live in the city of Anchorage and have for over a decade. Live here for six months and then give your your educated opinion.

Public transportaiton is difficult in Anchorage due to it’s large land area and extreme weather. Land values in Anchorage and the outlying areas have skyrocketed, creating more commuters and forcing people into “nowhere”. They are moving there faster than they can build, creating traffic congestion, strains on the only hospital in the area, and furthering the environmental damage from vehicles.

Building this bridge would allow the area to expand comfortably and safely. I find it compeltely hilarious that people read the headlines titling “nowhere” and actually think it means “nowhere”.

With that said - I understand there are other things that our money should be spent on. And I until this post was not aware of the current FCC legislation. I will be reading up more on this. Thank you for passing it on.