Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Government Politics

FCC Internet Grant Decision Riles Congress 214

Posted by samzenpus from the you'll-get-a-computer-in-college dept.
museumpeace writes "The FCC, with no advance notice to congress, effectively made substantial cuts in the funding for the program that subsidizes provision of internet connection to libraries and poorer school systems. This was not small potatoes: 2.5 billion buys a lot of connection. [confess your real identity to them and the ] NYTimes will tell you all about the uproar. The ostensible cause according to FCC officials, who annoyed congressfolk by dodging the inquiry, was an attemp to control possible fraudulent spending in the program but FCC actions then went far beyond fiscal oversight. FCC deference to phone companies by way of reducing the amount they were required to contribute to the program has compounded its financial woes according to Technology Review which also covered the story. [and which will also require a "free" registration]"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FCC Internet Grant Decision Riles Congress More

FCC Internet Grant Decision Riles Congress

Comments Filter:

  • E-Rate was a mess (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:01AM (#10458292)
    The E-Rate Program [theregister.co.uk] was incredibly corrupt [theregister.co.uk] with lots of companies getting illegal kickbacks [theregister.co.uk]. They had to restrict it so they could at the very least clean it up. I don't see how allowing things to continue as they were was a good idea.

    • Re:E-Rate was a mess (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sgant ( 178166 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:22AM (#10458378) Homepage Journal
      It's not that...it's that the FCC didn't tell anyone they were going to do this...like Congress.

      The FCC is again just acting like they have no one overseeing what they're doing...and they had to be reminded that they do indeed have people watching what they're doing.

      Funding for the FCC needs to be cut WAY back itself...they are tending to stick their noses where it just doesn't belong...at all. But that's another matter.

      • Re:E-Rate was a mess (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Ho-Lee-Cow! ( 173978 ) * on Thursday October 07, 2004 @08:32AM (#10458752)
        And the single best way I the FCC is to investigate the hell out of Michael Powell and his cronies to find out who is in their pockets.

        I think that the shady dealings of the FCC merit a special prosecutor, and have for some years.

        • Re:E-Rate was a mess (Score:2, Insightful)

          by caseydk ( 203763 )

          Better yet, let's close down everything that is not explicitly covered by the Constitution.

          We'd probably cut the budget by 50% in 1 year's time.
          • I think that's a great idea for the most part.

            I especially like the bit where we get rid of income taxes. They're not covered in the constitution either...
            • Amendment XVI

              The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
              • I work for the first 3.5 months of each year essentially without pay due to withholdings...

                Now the fun thing to point out is that the payment of such taxes MUST be voluntary otherwise Amendment XIII applies.

                And if it's voluntary...
                • Unfortunately thats faulty logic. You may end up losing an amount of money equivilent to whatyou would have made in the first 3.5 onths of the year, but you are paid for that time.

                  I've seen a lot of anti-income tax arguements, but few of them actually hold up to scrutiny. Not that I think th income tax is a good thing per say, but it is in fact legal.
                • You are perfectly free stop working at anytime. Thus this is not even slightly comparable to slavery.

          • Re:E-Rate was a mess (Score:3, Interesting)

            by jmorris42 ( 1458 ) *
            > Better yet, let's close down everything that is not explicitly covered
            > by the Constitution.

            Preach it brother! Can we get an Amen on that?

            And I'll add in a great big Hell Yea for good measure.

            Especially in the case of the SLC. The FCC had no business ever getting into that business in the first place and it has only caused problems since its inception. We wouldn't be fighting off the CIPA & COPA censors if it were not for those "federal monies" (read cash ripped screaming from end users by
      • Funding for the FCC needs to be cut WAY back itself...they are tending to stick their noses where it just doesn't belong...at all.

        If this ship is not heading where you want it to go, you won't correct that problem by dropping the sail. You have to adjust the rudder.

        Trying to correct an out-of-control FCC by just cutting it's funding is likely to get you an FCC which is still heading the wrong way, but perhaps in a less-effective fashion.

        • If this ship is not heading where you want it to go, you won't correct that problem by dropping the sail. You have to adjust the rudder.

          But a torpedo might work nicely...

      • I agree.. why should the FCC have such powers? They're not elected or representative of the people. Isn't that how democracy is supposed to work?

    • Re:E-Rate was a mess (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 07, 2004 @08:22AM (#10458678)
      I don't see how allowing things to continue as they were was a good idea.

      You know the expression "throwing the baby out with the bathwater"? Arbitrarily shutting the program down without notification, under the intent of stopping abuse (at the expense of a majority of programs that are not part of the abuse) is a great way to get new FCC commissioners.

      I have E-Rate customers (mostly school districts). Last year, several had their paperwork rejected (clerical errors by the district staff rejected by E-Rate and the E-Rate administrators would not permit a "re-application" to correct the minor errors). We carried them at a loss of over $20K per district. We made sure to update our paperwork to prevent against having to carry the loss in the future - whether or not your mom and dad give you $10 to help buy lunch is not McDonald's responsibility.

      Guess what? Several districts are now faced with being shut off. No Internet. They don't have the budget to make up the E-Rate difference - heck, they already had to reduce several teaching positions in several districts. They looked at us to absorb it again, but after $80K missing from last year on a customer who at their current rate is 60% of what I make on the same business broadband (and they use every bit of bandwidth I give them). Per the corruption issues, a subsidy for broadband provided at less than my cost is far from an issue (though I am aware of some incumbant LECs that have abused it). Want to shut down a corrupt broadband program? RUS grants and low interest loans - mostly used as ILEC political reward money. Many of the grants in our region are given to totally inept, unqualified but politically influencial incumbant phone monopolies. Oh well, it's just your tax money being given back to keep your phone company in position to monopolize the network for another 50 years.

      So I would imagine the FCC's effect will be causing an Internet blackout for schools and libraries. Senators are already getting called by administrators, and Senators should have no problem removing a rather corrupt FCC (mind you, I'm of the same political party as the President, a licensed amateur radio operator, own commercial licenses and am highly disgusted with this cash & carry FCC).

      • Another Way That Bush Screws American Children (Score:4, Insightful)

        by ortcutt ( 711694 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @08:57AM (#10458937)
        So, there's no reason to believe that these changes will prevent fraud in the program, but it is certain that these changes will prevent schools from getting money for legitimate and vitally necessary uses. Then, they make the change and fail to tell anybody about it, including umm, Congress. Yeah, remember them ... in that big building on that hill. Yep. This has all of the hallmarks of the present administration.

        Doesn't fix the problem. Check.

        Arrogant and secretive. Check.

        Hurts American children. Check.

        • ...try to use it once in awhile.

          Bush may be an intellectual lightweight as far as US presidents go, but Bush can't be blamed for everything wrong with anything to do with the USA.

          The whole point of the article is that an unelected regulatory body mande an unaccountable, arbitrary descision regarding a major budgetary issue (how to spend billions of dollars). The FCC overstepped its bounds considerably and is under BI-PARTISAN scrutiny. The program in question was spearheaded by Republicans and supporte

    • Re:E-Rate was a mess (Score:4, Informative)

      by ortcutt ( 711694 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @08:37AM (#10458796)
      True. That wasn't in dispute, and no one was suggesting that things should continue as they are. The question is whether the steps the FCC have taken are necessary and effective to deal with the fraud. The NY Times article made this quite clear.
      At Tuesday's hearing, lawmakers and an executive of Universal Service said that many of the most significant changes would not make it easier to perform audits or root out fraud and waste. That acknowledgment prompted concern from the lawmakers.

      "It's really difficult to understand why these changes were made,'' said Senator Olympia J. Snowe, a Maine Republican who helped draft the legislation that created the E-Rate program in 1996.

      Senator Conrad Burns, Republican of Montana, also criticized the tighter regulations, which have led to a cash squeeze at the program, and the recent quick sale of the program's investments.

      "I fail to see how these series of events have led to a more efficient management of the funds,'' he said.

  • *cough* (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:06AM (#10458313)
    Internet Grants Cut, and F.C.C. Scolded
    By STEPHEN LABATON

    Published: October 6, 2004

    ASHINGTON, Oct. 5 - The Federal Communications Commission came under sharp criticism in Congress on Tuesday over a series of decisions that have led to the suspension of a $2.25 billion program that pays for telephone and Internet services at public schools and libraries.

    Advertisement

    The suspension, which began without notice two months ago, has caused hardships in many school districts and communities, which have had to postpone paying bills or take money from other projects. By one estimate, as much as $1 billion in expected grants could be suspended by the end of the year.

    The company that administers the program issued a suspension on new grants as it wrestled with new accounting standards and tighter spending limits imposed on it by the F.C.C.

    A hearing Tuesday before the Senate Commerce Committee had originally been called to examine waste at the so-called E-Rate program, which administers telephone and Internet services for schools and libraries. But three of the four senators present focused instead on the F.C.C.'s decision to impose tighter spending restrictions.

    The fourth senator, John McCain of Arizona, the Republican chairman of the committee, pressed the witnesses about what steps were being undertaken to monitor the program in light of a series of fraud cases involving telephone companies and equipment makers over the last few years. He expressed irritation that Congress had not been notified about the suspension of the program.

    Frank Gumper, the chairman of the Universal Service Administrative Company, the nonprofit organization that oversees the E-Rate program, told lawmakers that the F.C.C.'s decision last week to order a quick sale of more than $3 billion of the program's investments had resulted in a loss of almost $5 million.

    Guidelines for making those investments had been approved in July by top officials in the office of Michael K. Powell, chairman of the F.C.C. But the investments had to be liquidated after the commission later concluded that they impinged on the company's ability to make payouts to schools and libraries.

    Commission officials, who declined a request by the senators to appear at the hearing, have said that spending changes were necessary to audit and monitor the program more effectively. The officials have said they imposed the new restrictions in consultation with the White House budget office. But late last week, administration officials began distancing themselves from the changes, noting that the budget office has never issued a formal opinion on the matter.

    At Tuesday's hearing, lawmakers and an executive of Universal Service said that many of the most significant changes would not make it easier to perform audits or root out fraud and waste.

    That acknowledgment prompted concern from the lawmakers.

    "It's really difficult to understand why these changes were made,'' said Senator Olympia J. Snowe, a Maine Republican who helped draft the legislation that created the E-Rate program in 1996.

    Senator Conrad Burns, Republican of Montana, also criticized the tighter regulations, which have led to a cash squeeze at the program, and the recent quick sale of the program's investments.

    "I fail to see how these series of events have led to a more efficient management of the funds,'' he said.

    Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, a West Virginia Democrat, criticized the F.C.C.'s decision to reduce the contribution level by telephone companies and their customers by $550 million this year, only to find that the E-Rate program, under the new rules, is likely to suffer from a cash squeeze and may need to increase tariffs later to pay schools and libraries.

    He and Ms. Snowe also criticized the commission's decision not to send any officials to the committee who could explain the decision to tighten the spending rules.

    "I'm very disappointed that the F.C.C. declined to

    • Re:*cough* (Score:3, Informative)

      by ortcutt ( 711694 )
      Respect fair use by being fair to the copyright holder. Reprinting the whole article isn't.

  • Tit for Tat (Score:5, Funny)

    by grunt107 ( 739510 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:07AM (#10458315)
    Since the FCC is worried about government overspending, they should be rewarded with an equal amount of reduction in funding for them.

    The reduction can be used to then pay for the libraries (and underprivileged) to get internet access.

    • Re:Tit for Tat (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Sqwubbsy ( 723014 )
      Of course, we could find another corrupt organization to control distribution or, even more radical, let the localities KEEP their money and spend it on the things they need instead of keep bureaucrats employed. Oh wait, this is /. and not the WSJ discussion forum.

    • Re:Tit for Tat (Score:5, Insightful)

      by patches ( 141288 ) <patrick...pattison@@@gmail...com> on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:53AM (#10458512) Homepage
      Although I think that Internet access in schools, and libraries are a good thing, why is it that it has to be the Federal Government's job to give them internet access.

      If you as a constituant think that your local schools and libraries need internet access then you lobby your State or Local governments and let them fund it. I don't see anywhere in the Constitution where the Federal Governement is required to fund Internet connections, and I do see where anything not specifically listed in the Constitution is reserved for the States. So I see this as really a non-issue. I don't feel that the FCC should be funding this anyway. Let the States or even Local governments handle this.

      I will also give you my reasoning for why the Federal Government should stick to only doing what the Constitution says it should do and let the States do all the other things. The government, like anyone else, cannot do things for free. Everything that a government does requires money. The problem is that the Federal Government has accountability to EVERY American. So your voice of how you think your tax money should be spent is of less significance because you are in a sea of many millions of Americans. Now in the States level, the field of constituants is dramatically cut down, as only residents of that Stateare included. Going one step further to the Local level and the number is a lot less. So you can have more control over how your elected representatives handle your tax money, the further down the chain you go. That is why I feel that the Federal Government should stick to only A) Settling Inter-State disputes, B) Providing for the National Defense of the United States, and C) Handling diplomatic responsibilities for the States. I think the Federal Government should stop doing all the other things they have their sticky little fingers in like Health Care, Education, Social Security, Welfare, etc... The list is rather long...

      • If you as a constituant think that your local schools and libraries need internet access then you lobby your State or Local governments and let them fund it.

        The reason the Federal government is involved here is because the Federal Government benefits when the population of the entire country is better educated.

        If we poshed this responsibility down to the local level, we'd wind up with (even more of) a two-tiered system where anyone living in big cities, where broadband is readily available, would pay n

        • The reason the Federal government is involved here is because the Federal Government benefits when the population of the entire country is better educated.

          Another reason for government involvment is when the return is long-term as opposed to short-term. If the water and sewage systems had to have a five-year payout, we'd all be much worse off.
          It is also to the long-term interests of the cities to do a bit to improve conditions in the hinterlands.

          FCC policy we have today is leading us to an Information S

        • The reason the Federal government is involved here is because the Federal Government benefits when the population of the entire country is better educated.

          You realize that this is the worst possible justification, don't you?

          If the Federal government is allowed to do anything that benefits it, then it's time for me to move to another country, because I don't want to live in this one.

        • If we didn't do it on the federal level, doing it on a city-by-city level is not the only other alternative: states could do it.
      • They shouldn't, but we all pay for it in the Universal Service Fee. The USF shouldn't be "federal", it should be 100% "State." This fix is trivial. Congress should take away the money from the FCC and give it directly to the states to administer. IMHO, the fee is way to high. Should be half at best. Frankly, there are better ways for most school districts to get connectivity and communications - wireless for example. Instead of each school getting a T1, the whole district gets a few (or fractional T3) and h
      • It falls under "interstate commerce". (US Constitution: Article I, sec. 8)

        For example, I am currently writing this post in one state, which will appear on a server in another state, & in response to a post written in a third state, & this post will be read be people in other states or outside the U.S.

        To make all of this possible, it has to be carried over fiber or copper cables that are maintained as the result of people making money -- which is clearly the meaning of the word ``commerce".

        The fac

    • Re:Tit for Tat (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ortcutt ( 711694 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @09:03AM (#10458992)
      Michael Powell was on NPR yesterday and he was asked about the fact that FCC only censors broadcast media and not cable and satellite radio. He basically said that this was outdated and suggested that cable and broadcast should be treated similarly. If Bush wins in November, say goodbye to the Sopranos. The thought police have decided that we need protected from the bad words.

  • Kicking kickbacks (Score:5, Interesting)

    by goneutt ( 694223 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:11AM (#10458329) Journal
    I remember hearing about how this program was providing funds to school districts that really didn't know what things cost. I think it was the El Paso school district that wound up being sold a few $million worth of Cisco gear that was never installed because it wasn't part of the IS architecture plans, drawn by the same people that sold the gear.

    All in all, this is a program that should have started really big to make initial investments in hardware, but cut back a little to just maintain.
    • You're missing the point though. The question that was raised by Congress was whether the changes made would prevent cases such as these.

    • Re:Kicking kickbacks (Score:2, Interesting)

      by scott9676 ( 808984 )
      It's not just El Paso. In Atlanta they had some school classrooms with enough networking equipment to run a small company, and it was just sitting in closets because nobody had a clue how to install it. I don't think these funds pay for network administrators. And even if they did, how much connectivity does a grade school or middle school need? If they wanted to do it cheaply, they could just set up WIFI stations for every couple of classrooms, and have those wired through the ceiling to a decent switc

  • repeat after me... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by night_flyer ( 453866 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:13AM (#10458343) Homepage
    schools do not NEED interent connections or computers, with a large % of people coming out of school illiterate, I would think that schools need to concentrate on the basics first!

    • Re:repeat after me... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by jmays ( 450770 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:44AM (#10458460)
      What about the schools that are doing their jobs? Are you going to deny them technology too?

      Besides, internet connections and computers aren't rewards ... they are aids. And when used in complement with a working 'basics' system they will provide a superior learning environment. I can't believe you got modded insightful for that generalized shit comment.
      • It's an example of conventional wisdom in effect. Say something bad about public schools, call for a "back to the basics" approach to education, and everyone will nod wisely and stroke their chins and say, "Well, of course public education is badly broken ..." blah blah blah. What's pathetically amusing about this is that the vast majority of people who do this are themselves public school graduates; they're effectively calling themselves uneducated morons.

        The fact is that hard-working teachers in this c

        • Re:repeat after me... (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Ho-Lee-Cow! ( 173978 ) * on Thursday October 07, 2004 @08:51AM (#10458897)
          What's pathetically amusing about this is that the vast majority of people who do this are themselves public school graduates; they're effectively calling themselves uneducated morons.

          What is sad about this comment is that it ignores the fact that the quality of education has fallen off so badly in the US in the last 25 years that we have to now require post-secondary education in order to be assured to get the basic language and math skills needed to do jobs that pay even a living wage. Of course, I'd actually be in agreement with you if the supposed college prep program I was forced into in high school had actually prepared me for college...it didn't and was a waste of two years that I could have spent learning something useful in the real world.

          The fact is that hard-working teachers in this country do their best to educate tens of millions of kids, day in and day out, and by and large they succeed. Is the system perfect? Hell no; it's a long way from perfect, and we should do everything we can to improve it.

          This is simply a strawman. An attack on the failings of the school system is not the same thing as blaming the teachers who are just as much screwed over by it as the kids are. When teachers are free to teach and students are free to learn, we get the best results and bang for the buck. When we have to spend tons of money on unfunded federal mandates and bean counting BS to maintain them--and force qualified and hardworking teachers to go to great expense to become certified in all the subjects they teach--it's easy to see why I think schools should stop taking federal largesse and get back to the business of teaching kids. No Child Left Behind means that all children get left behind--while all those concerned adults can pat themselves on the back because they slapped the fsck out of the 'bad guys'.

          But I know of no other educational system in history that has -- with a mandate to take every kid, regardless of intelligence or willingness to work -- successfully educated the number of people that the American public school system has.

          One of the accomplishments of the Soviets was mostly eradicating illiteracy in less than 30 years. Not that I think that the Soviet system is all that fabulous, but I note that their basic literacy rates were historically higher than ours. Breadth of literacy, though, we always had them hands down.

          • Re:repeat after me... (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward
            Just an observation:

            Kid's don't like going to school.

            There are alot of reasons. The two most common are probably:

            Boredom.

            Fear.

            Society has changed alot in the last 25 years. As it changed our school systems have not fully adapted. The styles/methods used do not fit the current breed of children.

            Kid's walking through medal detectors, School shootings/beatings/stabbings etc have become common place. I personally would not like to attend the majority of Highschools in america now adays.

            The worst thin
      • Agreed, you can't teach someone who doesn't want to learn but people who do should have access to ALL information.

        Amazingly computer's are cheaper than libraries.
    • Considering that everyone NEEDS to be able to use a computer in later life, you are going to be holding back the students with less money if you don't teach them to use computers/internet at school.

      And BTW, what percentage of student come out of school illiterate? I don't know anyone at my school who can't read. Well, one who doesn't know what an adjective/verb/noun is, and can't read an analogue clock, but, that's it.
    • Hi Grampa! Still walking uphill to and from school?

    • Yes you're right it's a lot more efficient for teachers to create instructional materials by hand or on an old school typewriter and not be able to communicate with parents via email. Any teacher can just pick up the telephone here on our desk and talk to parents that way or maybe just go over to kids' houses.

      We don't need photocopiers either.

      Ravi

  • phone companies contribute? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by way2trivial ( 601132 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:15AM (#10458352) Homepage Journal
    I'm sorry, don't they collect every penny of the "Universal connectivity charge" back from their customers (us) thereby making it a backhanded tax?

    So, the FCC has stopped paying out- Yet it's still on my cell bill, where are the funds piling up? the FCC coffers? or the telco?

    fwiw, I have no problem subsidizing a telephone to a city of 200 in W VA that can't run at a profit.

  • Bad but not so... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mirko ( 198274 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:17AM (#10458365) Journal
    IIIRC, a few months ago, Microsoft got to pay their fine in computer and software equipment for the above mentioned educational structures, now, if these get their technological fundings cut, then it means that Microsoft might have to pay in cash.
    • Not to be a cynic, but part of the reason the E-Rate program was being "restructured" was because there were a lot of kickbacks and incidents of schools/libraries being sold gear they didn't need and couldn't use. I highly doubt MS would just say: "here, have some cash instead". IIRC, one of the original MS settlement proposals was purely for MS software, and the courts rejected that because when you have an illegal monopoly on something, giving away free versions to impressionable schoolkids isn't exactl

  • uproar? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by stinky wizzleteats ( 552063 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:22AM (#10458381) Homepage Journal
    So it's okay for the FCC to create a new tax without congressional oversight, but if they ever decide to get rid of that same tax, there's an uproar?

    I actually worked on an E-rate project in a large urban area. Graft and corruption do not begin to describe the money sucking machine that was E-rate. So I speak with some authority on the subject when I say that we are all better off without it.

    • Re:uproar? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:25AM (#10458396)
      FCC didn't create it. Senator Olympia J. Snowe, who is mentioned in the New York Times article, was among the drafters of the legislation that created the E-Rate program.
    • Actually, they didn't get rid of the tax. I'm still paying it on my phone bills. What they decided to do was to keep that money rather than paying it out to the organizations it was intended for. Whether you agree with the USF or not, for the FCC to keep taking in revenue but suspend payments smells more like corruption than the program did before.

  • Taxpayer subsidized Internet is a boondogle (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Gothmolly ( 148874 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:26AM (#10458400)
    I've read of massive hardware installations and billing done at small schools, all by unscrupulous companies and oblivious administrators, at the public expense. Any time you have this kind of blank check, and any time its 'for the children', you're going to get this kind of graft. The only solution is to stop taxing long distance bills (read your phone bill some time), and make local communities fork over the cash - they will buy what they can afford or what they need, no more, no less. It will spark creative ways of managing networks, combining services with adjacent communities, community involvement, and basically return the $$ spent back to the local vendors (with the exception of the hardware cost). Inject Gubmint monopoly money, and of course the costs will explode - look at the medical industry in the US for an example.

    • Re:Taxpayer subsidized Internet is a boondogle (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The problem with the blank cheque approach is that the value of what you get is pretty much defined as what you spent on it. "A ten million dollar computer system" sounds just as impressive whatever it actually is.

      What you need is someone on the receiving end who actually knows what they're paying for and what it's worth, and is able to negotiate with the provider. That way you stand a fighting chance of getting the $10m to be the value, not just the cost.
    • I remember when you could map a drive from Windows to \\ftp.microsoft.com\data

      You still could if you weren't using Micros~1:

      mount -t lufs none /mnt/micros~1 -o nosuid,fs=ftpfs,host=ftp.microsoft.com,username=an onymous,passwd=loser@ms.com,ftpactive

    • The only solution is to stop taxing long distance bills (read your phone bill some time), and make local communities fork over the cash - they will buy what they can afford or what they need, no more, no less.

      I bet you didn't go to a public inner city school. By going this way, you make sure poor communities keep a substandard education because they won't be able to afford it.

      While it is generally true that federal intervention brings unaccountability and graft, federal funding also reduces funding inequa

      • The inner city schools are not substandard because of LACK OF MONEY. Most of these schools receive higher dollar amounts per students than surrounding schools and still do poorly.

        Why? Simple. Bureaucratic abuse. The inner city schools are run by politics and croynism. Atlanta city schools are a perfect example. They have long been a place for corrupt mayors and city officials to put family members into jobs they had no business having. Just like they abuse the airport here.

        How are they able to get
      • Washington, D.C. spends a huge amount of money per student (among the largest in the nation), and their schools still suck. Throwing money at the problem doesn't fix it.

  • Slush fund (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Now 3.5 billion is a nice slush fund.

    For 3.5 billion you could give 29 million students dialup for a year and they don't have to share.

    Or 1.1 million schools could have a dedicated high speed cable connection with static IPs and no bandwidth cap year round.

    If either of the above was actually done with the money it was well spent. But I don't think it was.

  • Ummm this is a legitimate executive branch power (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ShatteredDream ( 636520 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:46AM (#10458469) Homepage
    The executive agencies have a responsibility to cut off public funds when they have a very good reason to believe they are being subject to fraud, waste and abuse. GSA, the General Services Administration, does this sort of thing all the time when it does internal criminal audits of how Congressionally-allocated funds are being used. One of their jobs is to bust up slush funds and take down those who were using them. Do you honestly think they let someone just spend all of those tax dollars all the way through the investigation?

    The Congress desparately needs to have its spending and law-making powers curtailed by a few good constitutional amendments. The President needs the power of line-item veto, the Congress needs to have every bill address only one subject with all riders to the contrary automatically ruled unenforceable and deficit spending when the Congress has not issued a formal declaration of war should be unconstitutional.

    I applaud the FCC, it's about damn time that an executive agency told Congress to take responsibility for where it spends tax dollars. The Congress spends our money, which it confiscates by threat of prison time, like a bunch of rich old white businessmen at a Vegas strip club. As long as the FCC just keeps the funds tied up, it shouldn't have any legal trouble. Since it is saying that it is merely tying up the funds to prevent them from going to what evidence shows is most likely an illegal use, it doesn't have to ask the Congress for permission. The Constitution doesn't say that the executive agencies have to actually spend money for purposes known to be illegal under federal law....

    • Re:Ummm this is a legitimate executive branch powe (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      If the FCC were so principled:

      1) They would appear before congress to defend their actions.

      2) They would appear in *some* open forum to defend their actions.

      3) They would publish a public document to defend their actions.

      But they did not.

      Instead they acted in a manner consistent with Michael Powell's long history as a corporate puppet -- they slipped the knife in under cover of night.

      A vote for Kerry is a vote against Powell.

      Randy
    • "The executive agencies have a responsibility to cut off public funds when they have a very good reason to believe they are being subject to fraud, waste and abuse."

      Executive agencies have a responsibility to ensure tax monies are spent in a responsible manner, not arbitrarily cut off needed funds when they fail in their duties. Michael Powell's FCC real successes are in being whores to corporate interests, this is just another example of their religious mantra "let the free market decide". The FCC, where

  • Silver Lining (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Dachannien ( 617929 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:46AM (#10458470)
    The plus side to this mess is that the FCC is going to so thoroughly piss off Congress that it could mean good things in terms of the Broadcast Flag and the EFF's argument that the FCC is overstepping its Congressionally-granted bounds in that matter. This certainly isn't the first case where Michael Powell found himself at odds with Congress.

  • Fraud (Score:2)

    by N8F8 ( 4562 )
    Where was Slashdot when all the fraud was being reported? [wired.com]

  • E-Rate is GOOD (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Omeganon ( 104525 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:59AM (#10458546)
    When there is proper oversight. For the last 5 years I have been directly involved in wonderful education projects that would not be possible without E-Rate funding. Many, many schools in the state where I live would not even have Internet access were it not for E-Rate funds and most would be stuck at ISDN speeds for hundreds of students per school. I have seen first hand the power of distance learning in cooperation with Universities, use of web resources for students such as Atomic Learning and NetTrekker, online teacher recertification training to be compliant with NCLB, and the ability for districts and states to modernize a significant portion of their daily administrative tasks such as attendance reporting, Free and Reduced Lunch tracking and centralized student information systems by bringing them all online. The savings in administration overhead are significant by themselves. All of this is possible because of E-Rate.

    What people don't seem to realize is that most school districts are poor. They have very restricted budgets with little lee-way. E-Rate allows them to bring modern technology into the hands of students who most likely don't get to utilize it at home and educational resources that they most certainly wouldn't be able to use or even access at home.

    A properly managed E-Rate fund with proper accounting and oversight is essential to the education of our future. The sensationalist examples of waste given in response to this article are exceptions and not the general rule. NASA had the same types of problems years ago. NASA wasn't abolished or suspended. Instead, they were forced to get their act together and perform proper accounting and oversight. That's the right way and what needs to happen here.

    • Great so once there is a properly managed e-rate program the FCC can start doling out money again.
    • The idea that most public schools are poor is FUD. They only *seem* poor because so much money is wasted. For example, the NY state school system employs more administrators than teachers.

      There are numerous examples of private schools that spend *FAR LESS* per child than your average failing inner city school, yet they achieve vastly better results, even with children who were referred to them as "problem cases" who couldn't succeed in public school.

      Read the facts in The Underground History of Educati [johntaylorgatto.com]

    • My high school had internet access, and guess what? We never used it. Just about everything you're supposed to learn in high school can easily be done with books and offline computers.

      Giving kids who can't afford home internet access a way to access it is fine, but I'd do it through public libraries. It's not necessary at school.

  • Another unbiased /. story! [nt] (Score:3, Funny)

    by Dwonis ( 52652 ) * on Thursday October 07, 2004 @07:59AM (#10458550)
    ;-)

    Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment ... like the body or the subject!)

  • Personally, I do not see much reason for the local library to have Internet connectivity for visitors. I always went to the library to get books and media, not sit there and type on some nasty public keyboard.

    While I understand there are some unfortunate souls out there who can not afford a computer and 'net connect, I do not see why I am in charge of providing them both.

    I might be missing something major here; Feel free to jump in and tell me if I did. The way I see it, I'd rather that money be spent on

    • Re:Hmm. I might be unpopular on this one. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Migraineman ( 632203 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @09:29AM (#10459240)
      You went to the library seeking information. That's what a library is all about. It's irrelevant as to how the information is packaged - magazine, newspaper, hardcover book ... that's just the transport mechanism. You went seeking information. Internet access is a logical extension of the library's charter, so it makes a ton of sense. If you don't want to read some grungy old book that's been thumbed through by countless "unfortunate souls," that's your prerogative; you can purchase a shiny new one at a bookstore. Same goes for your internet access.

      All countries run "social programs." Roads are built with tax money or under charter from the gub'ment. Same goes for providing potable water, electricity, sewer ... In order to truely prosper, you (we) need to provide infrastructure to all areas, not just the ones that are economically feasible. And yes, you (we) get to foot the bill.
  • E-Rate is a scam and a government boondoggle from the collective liberal euphoria of the first Clinton administration. Millions are lost to corruption, and the paperwork is mind-boggling. It is corporate welfare at its worst. It should be instantly destroyed and replaced with a single-form block grant.

  • Uproar? (Score:2)

    by mi ( 197448 )
    Of course! All of a sudden, the government's money stops coming! What an outrage!

    I'm deeply hurt now, because my sense of entitlement promised me more, not less.

  • Yeah, how dare they... (Score:3, Funny)

    by mwood ( 25379 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @08:44AM (#10458839)
    ...decide not to spend money until they have it. This *is* government, after all.
  • that the kids and librarian's weren't using the internet access exclusively for browsing http://www.georgebush.com/

  • Looking out for who? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by xombo ( 628858 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @09:07AM (#10459020)
    What ever happened to the FCC and government in general looking out for us?
    FCC Chairman Michael Powell has said on several occasions that he doesn't know what the public wants and votes however his lobbyists want. The same thing happened with de-regulation (which allows bigger media monopolies than we have today).
    The FCC is archaic and corrupt and something needs to be done.

  • Problem Beyond Funding (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Qboid ( 144944 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @09:25AM (#10459181)
    As a former Director of Technology for a school district in Missouri, I had to deal very closely with the e-rate system. In concept, e-rate/universal service fund was supposed to level the playing field for poor districts whose tax base could not support the kind of technology enhancements that would allow students in those districts to compete with those in districts with a higher tax base that could afford the services if they wanted it.
    The problem as I see it is the Administrators don't know when they are being taken for a ride by the "consulting companies" that they bring in to do the work. I was one of the few administrators who was a technology professional to begin with. Most districts I had contact with just add the technology planning and administration to the duties of a Math, Science, or Business teacher. They don't traditionally have the information technology background to form a plan of attack for the district to follow, and instead just let the "consultants" tell them what to do. That gives the consultants the needed loophole to overcharge and under-deliver.
    • The problem as I see it is the Administrators don't know when they are being taken for a ride by the "consulting companies" that they bring in to do the work.

      Bingo.
      While the school probably requires something better than home or hacker-grade equipment, they certainly do not need nor should they pay the exhorbitant premium required for five nines reliability. There is a conflict of interest in the consulting company, as the margins are better and bigger on the high ticket items. "And of course you want the
  • No, this is all because Al Gore invented the Internet [snopes.com]. Bush needs to destroy it before he is fired, to be "fair and balanced".

  • And in Related News (Score:3, Funny)

    by AmericanInKiev ( 453362 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @09:54AM (#10459545) Homepage
    New York, NY
    The Grand Musicians Union (GMU) which represents live performers has sued 14,000 recording industry executives for "copying" their intellectual property and thereby undermining their right to work.

    "These microphone devices are simple theft of our labor, and by suing the recording industry, we aim to put the world on notice that borrowed copies of the sounds we make will not be tolerated" Said GMU president George Brush.

    "Microphones" he went on, "Are intended to reproduce copyrighted material, and are therefore misunllegal, along with kites, under the Digital Mullenelum Copyright Act."

    The Recording Industry could not be reached for comment, but a recording on their answering machine in what appeared to be the voice of Ronald Reagan seems to be saying.

    "We will develop this technology, and then we will share this technology with the Soviets"

    AP
  • One! ...
    Two! ...
    Three!

    FUCK THE FCC!!!

    I mean, seriously, have they done *anything* that this community, and society as a whole (if they were properly informed) like in the last two years?

    Maybe Congress will reform them next after they get done shaking up the intelligence community...
  • Apparently an educated electorate is too dangerous for the FCC and their conservative backers.
  • Why do we give a shit about a measly $2.5 billion when we're throwing $120 billion ($200 billion projected) down the bottomless pit of Iraq?

Slashdot Top Deals

You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all different.

Close