Connect with us

Congress

Schumer Says Senate To Vote On Overturning FCC Net Neutrality Repeal Wednesday

Published

on

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.) speaks outside the White House in June 2015

WASHINGTON, May 14, 2018 — The strong network neutrality rules put in place during the Obama administration’s final months will get an up-or-down vote in the United States Senate on Wednesday when a bill to overturn the FCC’s repeal of those rules reaches the Senate floor, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Monday.

“The internet should be kept free and open like our highways, accessible and affordable to every American, regardless of ability to pay,” Schumer said in a joint statement with Sens. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Bill Nelson, D-Fla., and Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii. “The repeal of net neutrality is not only a blow to the average consumer, but it is a blow to public schools, rural Americans, communities of color and small businesses. A vote against this resolution will be a vote to protect large corporations and special interests, leaving the American public to pay the price.”

The bill in question is S.J. Res. 52, a so-called resolution of disapproval, which makes use of procedures laid out under the Congressional Review Act in order to roll back rules the FCC approved in December which repealed the Obama-era regulations put in place under then-chairman Tom Wheeler (D).

The regulations, formally known as net neutrality rules, prohibit broadband providers like Comcast and Verizon from interfering with users’ internet traffic or prioritizing some traffic over others. Under Wheeler, the FCC did this by classifying broadband internet access services as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act. Their repeal was a priority for the current Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who has long opposed strong net neutrality protections.

Under the CRA, which was passed by the Republican-led Congress in 1996 and signed by then-President Bill Clinton, Congress can use a joint resolution of disapproval to repeal rules put in place by regulatory agencies like the FCC. Unlike most bills, however, CRA resolutions cannot be filibustered in the Senate, meaning only 51 votes are required to pass them.

Markey urges GOP senators to side with families against ‘broadband barons’

 Markey, the bill’s lead sponsor, said passing it would send a “clear message” that senators support American families, not “not the special interest agenda of President Trump and his broadband baron allies.”

“May 16 will be the most important vote for the internet in the history of the Senate, and I call on my Republicans colleagues to join this movement and stand on the right side of digital history,” he said.

Markey’s bill already has the support of the Senate’s 49 Democrats and one Republican, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine.

With Senate Democrats in the minority, Collins’ support has been crucial in allowing Schumer to file a discharge petition signed by 50 senators to invoke a rarely-used parliamentary procedure which forces a bill to be brought to the floor for a vote. The maneuver is necessary because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., had not indicated any interest in allowing an up-or-down vote on the resolution.

Wednesday’s vote is necessary because the clock is running out on a 60-day period during which the Senate can vote on a resolution of disapproval that began when the FCC published the repeal in the Federal Register. Whether it is successful or not depends on if a 2nd Republican can be persuaded to defy a White House that has made rolling back Obama-era regulations a priority.

During a July 2017 press briefing, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders gave Chairman Pai’s efforts the administration’s imprimatur.

“We support the FCC chair’s efforts to review and consider rolling back these rules, and believe that the best way to get fair rules for everyone is for Congress to take action and create regulatory and economic certainty,” she said.

Even in a best-case scenario, Dems effort could be all for naught without Trump 

Even if Democrats’ effort is successful in finding a 51st vote in the GOP-controlled Senate, House Democrats must still garner enough Republican signatures for a discharge petition of their own, though they have until the end of the 115th Congress’ second session to do so.

Still, even if both chambers pass the bill, the joint resolution would still require the president’s assent — with or without his signature — for it to become law.

While President Donald Trump has signed 15 CRA resolutions since taking office, those have repealed regulations promulgated in the waning days of the previous administration. It is unclear whether Trump would allow a 16th to become law if doing so restored a regulation enacted under his predecessor.

When asked last week if President Trump would be amenable to such a resolution, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was noncommittal as to whether Trump would sign, veto, or allow the bill to become law without his signature.

“We’ll keep you posted when we have a specific policy announcement on that front,” she said.

print

Andrew Feinberg is the Managing Editor and lead Washington Correspondent for Breakfast Media, and covers the White House, Capitol Hill, courts and regulatory agencies for BeltwayBreakfast and BroadbandBreakfast.com. He has written about policy and politics in the nation's capital since 2007.

Congress

Flake, Raskin Push Back On Trump’s Attacks Against Immigrants as Un-American

Published

on

US. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md (mdfriendofhillary/Flickr) and U.S. Senator Jeff Flake, R-Ariz (Gage Skidmore/Flickr)

WASHINGTON, June 24, 2018 — Members of Congress on Sunday hit back at President Trump’s most recent anti-immigrant rhetoric. Trump’s suggestions that immigrants and asylum seekers should not be entitled to due process as inconsistent with American values and a repudiation of the idea of the United States as a nation under the rule of law, said a Republican and a Democratic critic.

Trump’s latest outburst against the idea that immigrants deserve the protections of due process came in a Sunday morning tweet, in which the president declared: “We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country.”

“When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came,” Trump continued, adding that the current system is “a mockery to good immigration policy and Law and Order.”

Trump has railed against the idea that immigrants and asylum seekers should be entitled to have their case heard before an impartial immigration judge on several occasions since a Tuesday speech to members of the National Federation of Independent Businesses, during which he said he wanted “border security, not judges.”

Sen. Jeff Flake rebukes Trump; says it’s not ‘reflective of who we are’

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., characterized Trump’s recent talk of an “invasion” and his and his surrogates’ talk of immigrants as an “infestation” as consistent with his rhetoric on immigrants dating back to 2015, when the then-candidate kicked off his campaign for the presidency by calling Mexican immigrants “rapists” and accusing them of bringing crime and drugs.

“It’s all been rhetoric that’s not welcoming and reflective of who we are as a country,” said Flake, who announced that he’d retire from the Senate after this year.

Flake has become one of only a select few Republicans in Congress to regularly criticize the president and his regular attacks on the press and the ideas of democracy and the rule of law.

Flake, who spoke to BeltwayBreakfast by phone Sunday afternoon, was even more emphatic in his denunciation of Trump’s suggestion that immigrants are not entitled to due process.

“The hallmark of our country is the rule of law, and to say to those asylum seekers — ‘the huddled masses yearning to breathe free’ — that we’re not going to consider an asylum application, that’s not who we are,” Flake said.

Is there a constitutional law professor in the House? Yes, Rep. Jamie Raskin.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, a first-term Maryland Democrat who teaches constitutional law at American University, was even more critical of the president’s recent attacks on immigrant communities and the rule of law in a separate phone interview with BeltwayBreakfast, in which he declared that Trump “is trashing the American dream.”

“The president has declared war on due process within the immigration system,” said Raskin, who noted that the United States’ obligations to treat asylum seekers with respect and allow them their day in court come not only from American law, but from the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees, to which the United States is a signatory.

“How are we going to live up to our obligations under international law and the constitution if we don’t have judges to sort it out?” he asked.

“[Trump] just wants to build a wall and a moat and put up barbed wire, and that’s a complete betrayal of what America is as a nation founded as a haven for refuge for people fleeing violence and oppression,” he added, concluding that the president “essentially wants to turn us into a tyrannical state ourselves.”

Raskin noted that immigration judges are not just bureaucratic functionaries or cogs in a deportation machine, but “real judges” who are supposed to follow the law and fairly adjudicate claims of asylum under U.S. immigration and asylum law.

Robbing Central and South American immigrants of their due process rights

He hit back at the Trump’s increasingly vicious anti-immigrant rhetoric and apparent desire to rob Central and South American immigrants of the due process rights guaranteed them under the constitution as hypocritical considering the president’s own family history.

“Despite the fact that the president’s family, like all of our families, came here from somewhere else, and despite the fact that he has married people who are not U.S. citizens, he seems to want to treat all immigrants to this country like criminals.”

As for Trump’s description of immigrants as “invaders,” Raskin said it was more of the same from a president who has consistently refused to repudiate the white nationalists and other racists who’ve openly embraced his presidency as if one of their own had ascended to the White House.

“This administration began with a sinister relationship to the alt-right and racist movements around the world, and the president has never shed these associations,” Raskin said.

“America is not defined today by a principle of race or ethnicity or blood or religion. America is defined by our constitutional values and the dream of a society where everybody can make it who works hard and believes in the country.”

Continue Reading

Cabinet Departments

Democrats Mourn Loss of Net Neutrality, But Industry Supporters Call it a New Day

Published

on

WASHINGTON, June 12, 2018 – As the Federal Communications Commission’s repeal of Obama-era network neutrality rules took effect Monday, Democrats and net neutrality advocates vowed to continue the effort to use a Congressional Review Act resolution to roll back the new FCC rules.

“There will be no eulogy today for net neutrality,” said Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., a longtime network neutrality advocate and a member of the Senate Commerce Committee.

“The FCC will not have the last word when it comes to net neutrality, the American people will,” he said. “The fight to restore net neutrality rules has new urgency today and moving forward as we continue to work in the House of Representatives to repeal the FCC’s terrible decision.”

Markey urged House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to call for a floor vote on a companion bill to the CRA resolution passed by the Senate last month. The CRA measure, if it passed both chambers and were signed by the president, would void the laissez-faire “regulations” promulgated by the FCC in December 2017, under agency Chairman Ajit Pai.

‘An overwhelming majority of Americans’ support net neutrality, say Democratic legislators

The sponsor of that companion CRA bill, Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Pa., noted that “an overwhelming majority of Americans” support network neutrality despite the FCC’s refusal to follow public sentiment, but that it was “still possible” to save the policy by passing his resolution.

“The Senate has voted to overturn the FCC order that killed off net neutrality,” Doyle said. “Now the House must do the same.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., slammed Ryan’s refusal to bring the Markey-Doyle resolution to the House floor.

“By refusing to bring up the Senate-passed resolution to restore net neutrality, which passed the Senate by a powerful bipartisan vote, House Republican leaders gave a green light to the big ISPs to charge middle-class Americans, small business owners, schools, rural Americans, and communities of color more to use the internet,” Schumer said, adding that the entire Senate Democratic Caucus had sent Ryan a letter urging him to move Doyle’s bill forward.

Schumer said that Republicans, except of the three GOP Senators who sided with the Democrats, were choosing large corporations and special interests over American families.

“Every Republican who opposed this vote will own any and all of the damaging consequences of the FCC’s horribly misguided decision,” he warned.

Pai publishes an op-ed arguing that the ‘Restoring Internet Freedom Order’ will restore internet freedom

Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai defended his agency’s repeal of Obama-era network neutrality rules in an op-ed for C-Net. He said the “Restoring Internet Freedom Order” will only improve the internet for users.

“Under the Federal Communications Commission’s Restoring Internet Freedom Order, which takes effect Monday, the internet will be just such an open platform. Our framework will protect consumers and promote better, faster internet access and more competition,” Pai wrote.

Pai attempted to bolster the FCC’s decision through claims that the new regulations introduces stronger transparency laws and hence more protection for the consumer.

He also lauded his agency passing power to the Federal Trade Commission for enforcement actions.

“Our approach includes strong consumer protections,” Paid said. “For example, we empower the Federal Trade Commission to police internet service providers for anticompetitive acts and unfair or deceptive practices. In 2015, the FCC stripped the FTC – the nation’s premier consumer protection agency – of its authority over internet service providers.

“This was a loss for consumers and a mistake we have reversed. Starting Monday, the FTC will once again be able to protect Americans consistently across the internet economy, and the FCC will work hand-in-hand with our partners at the FTC to do just that.”

Internet Innovation Alliance on defending the need for new laws on neutrality and privacy

The Internet Innovation Alliance, a coalition of business and non-profit organizations under leadership of Former Congressman Rick Boucher, D-Va., also defended the new laws.

The IIA issued a statement of support for today’s decision, calling it “the right decision” for consumers, investors, and “for the internet itself, as the internet will once again be subject to the rules under which it grew and flourished for nearly 20 years.”

Despite expressing support for the FCC’s rollback of Title II regulations, the IIA’s statement also addressed fears that the repeal of net neutrality —will empower internet service providers to discriminate against certain websites or services.

“But as grateful as we are for the Commission’s action and today’s implementation, we cannot rest here. The broadband internet is too important to our national life,” read the statement.

“We once again call on Congress to pass, this year, a law protecting the core principles of an open internet – no blocking, no throttling, no censorship, no unfair discrimination based on online content – and including robust consumer privacy protections that apply to all entities in the internet ecosystem and no matter how consumers access the internet.

“Only that action can settle the issue permanently and ensure that the principles of a truly open internet will have the force of statutory law,” IIA said.

(Photo collage of Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., upper left; Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Pa., upper right; former Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., lower right; and FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, lower left.)

Continue Reading

Network Neutrality

Senate Votes 52-47 To Advance Bill Restoring Obama-era Net Neutrality Rules

Published

on

Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., speaks during a press conference last week as Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., looks on

WASHINGTON, May 16, 2018 — Senate Democrats on Wednesday joined forces with Republicans Susan Collins, John Kennedy, R-La. and Lisa Murkowski, R-Ak. to approve a bill which rolls back the Federal Communications Commission’s repeal of network neutrality rules enacted under former President Obama, 52-47

The bill, S.J. Res. 52, is a so-called resolution of disapproval which uses procedures laid out under the Congressional Review Act to prevent the FCC’s repeal of regulations, commonly known as net neutrality rules, which prohibit broadband providers like Comcast and Verizon from interfering with users’ internet traffic or prioritizing some traffic over others. 

“Today the Senate took the most important vote on the internet in its history, and the American people won,” said the bill’s lead sponsor, Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass. “It is a victory…for every family in America, it is a victory for our economy, and for our democracy.”

Markey thanked Collins, Kennedy and Murkowski for their votes, noting that the result “could not have happened without them.” He then added that the Senate vote “puts the House on notice,” giving House Republicans a choice between “standing with the American people, or with President Donald Trump and his “cronies”

Repeal of net neutrality rules, a priority of President Trump, still looms

The FCC’s repeal of the Obama-era net neutrality rules will take effect June 11 unless the House passes a companion bill and President Donald Trump signs the bill.
The repeal process began at the commission’s December open meeting and has been a priority for Chairman Ajit Pai, a Republican and longtime opponent of strong net neutrality protections.

Pai’s push to roll back the Title II protections made him a key player in implementing Trump’s efforts to roll back Obama-era regulations, and put the FCC — traditionally the province of technology and telecommunications geeks and wonks — firmly in the public spotlight.

The Senate’s vote to roll back Pai’s is also a rare rebuke to Trump, who has made what his former strategist Steve Bannon called “deconstruction of the administrative state” a major priority.

Democrats had the 51 votes needed to pass Markey’s bill earlier today

Although most legislation requires 60 Senators to vote to end debate on a bill before it can receive an up-or-down majority vote, resolutions under the Congressional Review Act, which was passed by the Republican-led Congress in 1996 and signed by then-President Bill Clinton, cannot be filibustered, meaning only 51 votes were required for passage in the Senate.

While Republicans have a 51-49 advantage in the Senate, Collins’ support made today’s result all-but-assured because Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., remains at home undergoing treatment for brain cancer.

Kennedy and Murkowski were the only two Republicans to vote for the bill other than Collins, whose support was also crucial in allowing Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to force his Republican counterpart, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to bring the Democrat-sponsored bill to the floor using a rarely-used parliamentary maneuver called a discharge petition.

Democrats still have work to do but the final outcome is still uncertain

Even with today’s result, House Democrats must still garner enough Republican signatures for a discharge petition of their own, though they have until the end of the 115th Congress’ second session to do so. If both chambers pass the bill, the joint resolution would still require the president’s assent — with or without his signature — for it to become law.

While President Donald Trump has signed 15 CRA resolutions since taking office, those have repealed regulations promulgated in the waning days of the previous administration. It is unclear whether Trump would allow a 16th to become law if doing so restored a regulation enacted under his predecessor.

When asked last week if President Trump would be amenable to such a resolution, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was noncommittal.

“We’ll keep you posted when we have a specific policy announcement on that front,” she said.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2018 Breakfast Media LLC Send tips, advertiser/sponsor inquiries, and press releases to press(at)beltwaybreakfast.com.