Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Bill to Save Net Neutrality is 46 Votes Short in US House

posted by janrinok on Thursday June 28 2018, @10:42AM   Printer-friendly
from the so-close-yet-so-far dept.

DeathMonkey writes:

Congressional Democrats seeking to reinstate net neutrality rules are still 46 votes short of getting the measure through the House of Representatives.

The US Senate voted last month to reverse the Federal Communications Commission's repeal of net neutrality rules, with all members of the Democratic caucus and three Republicans voting in favor of net neutrality.

A discharge petition needs 218 signatures to force a House vote on the same net neutrality bill, and 218 votes would also be enough to pass the measure. So far, the petition has signatures from 172 representatives, all Democrats. That number hasn't changed in two weeks.

"We're 46 [signatures] away from being able to force a vote on the resolution to restore the Open Internet Order," Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) tweeted yesterday.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/06/bill-to-save-net-neutrality-is-46-votes-short-in-us-house/

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Bill to Save Net Neutrality is 46 Votes Short in US House | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 42 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Aegis on Thursday June 28 2018, @04:04PM (1 child)

    by Aegis (6714) on Thursday June 28 2018, @04:04PM (#699860)

    Yeah, both parties are sellouts.

    Not on this issue they aren't. Dems successfully implemented Net Neutrality once. Republicans killed it. And now they're trying to implement it again.

    Claiming Dems/Reps are the same on this issue is blatantly false.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=1, Informative=3, Total=4
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   5  

  • (Score: 1) by anubi on Saturday June 30 2018, @07:26AM

    by anubi (2828) on Saturday June 30 2018, @07:26AM (#700582) Journal

    I guess I am still fuming over that DMCA vote, whereas they granted the "rightsholders" all sorts of protections about people reversing their product, but did not grant the responsibilities of having those rights go along with it.

    That is if they were going to make the construction of the software opaque to the end user, they were going to be responsible for bad things their software had in it.

    This to me was the same as making contracts they write legally enforceable, but telling me I have no rights to read the thing. I have just one option... usually a little button marked "I Agree".

    Now, I live surrounded by wares I have no idea what they are going to do when I run them. It's all become "hopeware", and the onus is on me to keep my disks imaged ( which probably violates copyright just to do that! ).

    Whether its corporate spyware ( aka "marketing tools" ) or botnets, or cryptolockers.... all protected from scrutiny by our Congress, backed up with people who have authority to shoot other people over it if it comes to that.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]