Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Communications Democrats Republicans The Internet

Mitch McConnell: Democrats' Net Neutrality Bill is 'Dead on Arrival' in Senate (cnet.com) 209

Posted by msmash from the tussle-continues dept.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters on Tuesday that the net neutrality bill Democrats are pushing through the House is "dead on arrival" in the Senate. From a report: The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote later today on the Save the Internet Act, which is the Democrats' proposal to restore Obama-era net neutrality protections that were repealed in 2017. It's expected to pass the Democrat-controlled House. McConnell was asked by reporters about whether the Senate would consider the bill once it passes. He indicated it would not, according to several tweets from reporters. McConnell's office confirmed the comment.

The Save the Internet Act restores rules adopted by the Federal Communications Commission in 2015. These rules would ban internet service providers from blocking or throttling access to the internet. And they would prevent ISPs from charging companies extra to deliver their online faster to consumers. The Democrats' bill restores these rules and also restores the FCC's authority to regulate and oversee broadband networks.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mitch McConnell: Democrats' Net Neutrality Bill is 'Dead on Arrival' in Senate More

Mitch McConnell: Democrats' Net Neutrality Bill is 'Dead on Arrival' in Senate

Comments Filter:

  • One more time, people... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Lucas123 ( 935744 ) on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @02:38PM (#58411246) Homepage

    Big business pays for political campaigns.

    Get it right, already.

    • Re: One more time, people... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by chispito ( 1870390 ) on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @02:44PM (#58411292)
      The bill was designed neither to pass nor to fix the problem. It was designed to draw distinction between the President and the opposing party.

      • Re: One more time, people... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @03:05PM (#58411476)

        The bill was designed neither to pass nor to fix the problem. It was designed to draw distinction between the President and the opposing party.

        Too bad that Trump's voter base just does not hear the incessant "fuck you, plebes" messages from the Republican party and their president. Still doesn't hurt to let them show off their colors some more.

        • It wasn't Trump who called us deplorable. It was the Democrats who hate the working class and hate white people.

          • Re: One more time, people... (Score:4, Insightful)

            by meglon ( 1001833 ) on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @08:06PM (#58412978)
            You're the epitome of the Trump-loving dipshits who either can't be bothered to understand anything that's more than 3 words long, or are a pathological liar.

            "I know there are only 60 days left to make our case -- and don't get complacent, don't see the latest outrageous, offensive, inappropriate comment and think, well, he's done this time. We are living in a volatile political environment. You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people -- now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks -- they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America."

            She defined exactly who she was calling deplorable: "The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic" which are some of the worst traits humans have in society. So don't be a fucking asshole and suggest that democrats hate the working class and white people, because what she said had nothing to do with either. Two years into his term, it's pretty obvious that "half" is shortchanging the amount of his supporters in those groups.

            So, i'll leave it to you... are you a fucking idiot, or a fucking liar?

            • Re: (Score:3)

              by The Rizz ( 1319 )

              So, i'll leave it to you... are you a fucking idiot, or a fucking liar?

              Why pick only one?

      • The bill was designed neither to pass nor to fix the problem. It was designed to draw distinction between the President and the opposing party.

        Exactly this. This was nothing more than for show, much like the "Green New Deal" vote in the Senate. But then again politics is mostly theater to start with so most of what is said and done is for show anyway.

        Queue the punditry! Time to bloviate endlessly about how this "show vote" means something. IMHO, it's meaningless.

        • Re: One more time, people... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by fropenn ( 1116699 ) on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @03:41PM (#58411728)
          So they should only vote on things when it is guaranteed to pass? It honestly doesn't take that much time for a vote, and it is important to know where your representative and senators stand on issues that are important to you, even if the bill ultimately fails.

          Furthermore, how many bills of actual substance are likely to make it through Congress this term? Maybe 5-10? I hate to think that my representative and senators are going to spend the next 1.7 years doing nothing but raising money and pontificating after saying "aye" or "nay" 5-10 times.

          • So they should only vote on things when it is guaranteed to pass? It honestly doesn't take that much time for a vote, and it is important to know where your representative and senators stand on issues that are important to you, even if the bill ultimately fails. Furthermore, how many bills of actual substance are likely to make it through Congress this term? Maybe 5-10? I hate to think that my representative and senators are going to spend the next 1.7 years doing nothing but raising money and pontificating after saying "aye" or "nay" 5-10 times.

            They should write bills designed to accomplish things instead of writing bills designed to rally their faithful. All politicians do this crap.

      • Did McConnell even read the bill?

    • Not untrue, but you could have also said:

      Partisan legislation gets blocked by partisan action.

      Anything short of declaring all line and wireless operators as common carriers isn't going to be enough. It's all just degrees of who's in who's pocket.

    • It could be stopped (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Big business pays for political campaigns.

      Get it right, already.

      Mitch McConnell could be fired.

      But that would require the Republican base to vote for a *gasp* Democrat!
      That won't happen.

      Identity politics: lifelong Reps just vote Reps.
      Believing lies: Democrats are socialists - it doesn't help that most Americans don't even know what socialist is: Sanders calling himself a Democratic Socialist to people who think a failed petro-state led by populist leaders with populist policies (like Trump) is socialist (Venezuela).
      And then there are the abortion fanatics that fall for

    • So what? That has nothing to do with the price of rice. Turn your back, and vote for somebody else.

  • DOA? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Freischutz ( 4776131 ) on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @02:45PM (#58411298)

    Mitch McConnell: Democrats' Net Neutrality Bill is 'Dead on Arrival' in Senate

    This is what the Democrats need to do, go down the list of popular bills congress should pass, send them to the senate so the electorate can watch them go down in flames thanks to Mitch McConnell. Lather, rinse repeat until the 2020 election and shine the spotlight on Mitch McConnell every time he shoots one of these popular bills down. Make him the poster boy for the demise of every reform, every popular bill imaginable. It's the best way to make his 'no to everything, it's my way or the highway' policy work against him. There are tons of people on both the right and left wing who want to seen net-neutrality anchored in law and for either Rep. or Dem. politicians to be against net neutrality is not likely to be a vote winner on either side.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Sarten-X ( 1102295 )

      That can backfire easily enough.

      If they send enough bills, then the GOP will accuse the Democrats of wasting Congress's time by bullying the Senate and refusing to produce workable legislation, while propping up McConnell as a stalwart defender strong enough to resist the onslaught. Whether the bills are popular or not doesn't really matter... the bigger the number, the more it can be spun to look like political pressure.

      • Republican ability to spin is diminished every day (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        If they send enough bills, then the GOP will accuse the Democrats of wasting Congress's time by bullying the Senate and refusing to produce workable legislation, while propping up McConnell as a stalwart defender strong enough to resist the onslaught. Whether the bills are popular or not doesn't really matter... the bigger the number, the more it can be spun to look like political pressure.

        That's really not a concern any more. No one is buying the Republicans' spin any more -- their support of Trump's extr

      • Re:DOA? (Score:5, Informative)

        by DRJlaw ( 946416 ) on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @03:03PM (#58411458)

        If they send enough bills, then the GOP will accuse the Democrats of wasting Congress's time by bullying the Senate and refusing to produce workable legislation...

        Name one piece of workable legislation that the Senate has proposed or passed in the new Congressional term.

        I'll save you the trouble [congress.gov]. They graciously decided to back-pay furloughed government workers at the end of the shutdown, and they've done f-all else in 3 months.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gtall ( 79522 )

          In every 4 weeks, the Senate is only around for 3 of them. During a work week, they arrive on Monday afternoon and leave on Thurs afternoon...well, most do anyhow. Watch a committee hearing. The first 5 minutes are the chair blowing words out of his ass for 5 minutes, then the Ranking Member imitates him/her. Next, we have the panel. Say there's 4 people on the panel, each gets 5 minutes to blow their precious thoughts out on CSPAN.

          So the first half hour is toast. The rest of the time most committee members

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Good. Been 230 years, our legislature should mostly be doing nothing at this point.

        • they haven't passed one piece of workable legislation since the ACA. I mean, I wouldn't call that mess of a tax bill that _raised_ my taxes $50 bucks and resulted in more offshoring and job cuts (look it up, good 'ole unintended consequences) "workable".

          • Funny, I got a tax break which I put into my 401k. Worked out nicely. You must make more then me. That's with me owning property too.

            I was under the impression liberals like paying taxes. Is this not correct?

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by meglon ( 1001833 )

              I was under the impression liberals like paying taxes. Is this not correct?

              I think a lot of liberals are just getting really tired of the conservatives continuing to steal their money to pay for their states low taxes, and then act like ungrateful little bitches all the time. Lets get that amendment passed where no state can get more than 1.05 of the value they put in back (in money/grants or in investment). Conservative states don't pay taxes because they'd rather steal from blue states.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by The Rizz ( 1319 )

                Lets get that amendment passed where no state can get more than 1.05 of the value they put in back (in money/grants or in investment).

                Yeaaah... except that doesn't work with certain types of national-level projects (not that we've done any in a while). Or do you think the Interstate Highways shouldn't actually connect the coasts to each other?

      • " Whether the bills are popular or not doesn't really matter..."

        If the bills are popular (which I take to mean a significant majority of Americans support it across party lines), why would there then be enough support for McConnell "as a stalwart defender strong enough to resist the onslaught" to matter? Sure, people don't always act or vote logically but that's pretty far out there on the lack of logic scale.

      • That can backfire easily enough.

        If they send enough bills, then the GOP will accuse the Democrats of wasting Congress's time by bullying the Senate and refusing to produce workable legislation, while propping up McConnell as a stalwart defender strong enough to resist the onslaught. Whether the bills are popular or not doesn't really matter... the bigger the number, the more it can be spun to look like political pressure.

        That is easily countered, just make enough of a media hullabaloo about offering bipartisan cooperation to the Republicans you might even get a fair number of them on board with things like infrastructure reform since it will mean more jobs in their constituencies. America's infrastructure is more rotten than that of some 3rd world countries, there is hardly a congressional district anywhere in the US that would not benefit from an infrastructure improvement project. Same for all kinds of things like educati

      • Re:DOA? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @03:32PM (#58411670) Journal

        That can backfire easily enough.

        If they send enough bills, then the GOP will accuse the Democrats of wasting Congress's time by bullying the Senate and refusing to produce workable legislation, while propping up McConnell as a stalwart defender strong enough to resist the onslaught.

        I don't know if you've noticed, but the Republican spin machine isn't working as well as it used to any more.

        • That can backfire easily enough.

          If they send enough bills, then the GOP will accuse the Democrats of wasting Congress's time by bullying the Senate and refusing to produce workable legislation, while propping up McConnell as a stalwart defender strong enough to resist the onslaught.

          I don't know if you've noticed, but the Republican spin machine isn't working as well as it used to any more.

          Right, I just don't think people give a damn about this kind of spin anymore. People don't care whose fault it is that Congress is deadlocked they just want Congress to stop yapping and get things done again and they will vote for anybody who looks like they can make that happen. As soon as they electorate perceives anybody standing in the way of things getting done again that person will earn their anger and Mitch McConnell has built a career on being Mr. NO!!!.

      • ... then the GOP will accuse the Democrats of wasting Congress's time ...

        Ya, but that would be implying that Congress is, otherwise, actually doing anything else worthwhile.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by meglon ( 1001833 )
          I'm thinking a mandatory 8AM Monday morning to 5PM Friday night, 50 weeks a year is in order, with a permanent baring of being a lobbyist after they leave office.

          • Unfortunately, that would be the only bipartisan bill to be shot down by all of them.

            • Unfortunately, that would be the only bipartisan bill to be shot down by all of them.

              Kinda like how Congress was all over term limits for the President, but not so much for themselves...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by flippy ( 62353 )
      Here's the problem with that: until people are actually affected by it (we haven't seen any REAL effects yet), it's not an issue that anyone cares about enough to change their vote.

    • If Democrats do political posturing to gain what they think would be points instead of being productive that will be difficult to hide. People aren't stupid.

      If Dems really truly believe Net Neutrality is extremely important for our society and have data to back it up and McConell still shoots them down out of spite then he'll be the villain. But that doesn't seem to be what's happening.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by thomst ( 1640045 )

      Freischutz quoted TFS's headline:

      Mitch McConnell: Democrats' Net Neutrality Bill is 'Dead on Arrival' in Senate

      Then went on to observe:

      This is what the Democrats need to do, go down the list of popular bills congress should pass, send them to the senate so the electorate can watch them go down in flames thanks to Mitch McConnell. Lather, rinse repeat until the 2020 election and shine the spotlight on Mitch McConnell every time he shoots one of these popular bills down. Make him the poster boy for the demise of every reform, every popular bill imaginable. It's the best way to make his 'no to everything, it's my way or the highway' policy work against him. There are tons of people on both the right and left wing who want to seen net-neutrality anchored in law and for either Rep. or Dem. politicians to be against net neutrality is not likely to be a vote winner on either side.

      The problem is that there really aren't "tons of people" who want to see net neutrality anchored in law (as opposed to mere regulation) - although you're right about it being a bi-partisan issue.

      In fact, the problem all along has been getting ordinary, non-technical people to understand the issues net neutrality was originally adopted by the FCC to address. They don't understand computer internetworking. Nor do they want to understand it. Technology scares them - and, despit

    • This is what the Democrats need to do, go down the list of popular bills congress should pass, send them to the senate so the electorate can watch them go down in flames thanks to Mitch McConnell.

      *sigh* such a waste. First, the democrats don't want to upset their big money donors either [gq.com]. They know how to kill a popular bill as well as anybody. Let's not fall for the *good cop - bad cop* routine. If there was opposition we would see it. Second, the voters will always believe campaign promises made by their t

  • Shouldn't they craft something simple and contemporary that actually address the internet we know? Why are they reinstating rules from before the internet ever existed and trying to apply it to the internet? Sure some of the 2015 rules should probably be in place but it's dumb to lump it together with the old rules.

    • Everything you just said is false. Even the things you implied are false.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Big Boss ( 7354 )

      Do you really trust they will do something LESS stupid than the old rules?

      The FCC had no choice about the old rules either. They tried that, the courts shut them down and said they needed Title II if they wanted to do that.

  • Ladies and Gentlemen (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cmdr_klarg ( 629569 ) on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @03:02PM (#58411444)

    I present for you the single largest obstacle to Democracy: Mitch McConnell!

    This is an issue that a large majority of Americans want, and ol' Turtle-Neck can single-handedly block it, with no recourse. Not even Trump can do that, even with a veto, as Congress has the ability to override if desired.

    No one man should have that power.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      The electorate is stuck in the clutches of big business interests.. Congress doesn't work for the electorate either.

      The system is just so thoroughly corrupt and undemocratic that there is no simple solution.

      In an ideal world the Senate would be forced to debate / vote on an issue within a certain time frame. A single person should not be able to block other representatives from doing their jobs. All these dirty shenanigans are just further proof of just how thoroughly corrupted the system is. Voting can be

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      But that's what happens when you do not live in a democracy.

      All they need to do is raise the spectre of "communism" or "Take away your guns" to distract you from all the other things they are taking away.

      Americans are stupid.

      • You act like Democrats don't want to take the guns. To present it as such just makes you look dishonest. Be honest. Democrats would love to ban gun ownership. They don't waffle on this unless they are in a contested district.

        Look at the strictest gun laws we have in the states and realize they push through more and more each election season.

        New York City has a law that's likely to end in the supreme court, which shows just how over the top New York City went.

    • the real problem is we accepted oligarchy in exchange for some minor bigotry and a general fear of change. The bigots are actually a minor problem. Sure, getting rid of their bigotry would fix things (since they tip the scales) but the real problem is folks who see things like minimum wage hike not as paying a living wage but as too risky since it might raise the price of a pizza 75 cents... Nevermind that it's just restaurants [seattletimes.com] that saw a hike or that the hikes are small enough that it's just as likely to b

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Eldaar ( 5056619 )
      Mitch McConnell may or may not lie more than Trump, but he's definitely more stragetic about how and when he lies. He's arguably the biggest lackey to corporate America, constantly working in their favor. He's quite possibly the biggest enemy of the middle class in modern America.

      The sad thing is that Democrats aren't good at messaging, so instead of getting together as a group and blasting him for the anti-middle class elitist that he is, they let such opportunities pass. McConnell single-handedly did a

  • So, I keep asking this on these threads (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Tuesday April 09, 2019 @03:02PM (#58411456)
    but is this gonna change how anyone votes?

    If not then McConnell has the right idea. This is a high value issue for his donors and a low value issue for his voters. He'll collect his paycheck from AT&T, Cox, etc and ignore the will of the people because it's not strong enough to change what happens at the ballot box.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by flippy ( 62353 )
      ^^^This. It won't change anyone's vote.

    • Even more important than his paycheck is the party donations. Running political campaigns in the US is very, very expensive. The combined party spending in 2016 for all US election campaigns was $6.5 *BILLION*, according to a Washington Post estimate. The only hope a party has of securing enough funding to participate in that game is to seek out and appease the big donors - show that the party is on their side, and that donating to them would be a beneficial relationship. It's not *quite* bribery, but the e

    • I'm not sure very many things change anyone's vote these days. I'd expect this one to be rather low on the list.

  • That would be because Mitch isn't working for the common good, he's working for the corporate good.
  • When anti-trust was enforced the way it's supposed to be? When it was actually about consumers?

    Now we have a bunch of rich old fucks who care more about money than the people. A government full of people profiting off their own decisions. A government that mis-represents it's citizens and calls itself the best country in the world.

    Most of the world knows the citizens don't want this. An overwhemling majority don't want it.

    But...here we are...the majority is representing the minority opinion simply becaus

Slashdot Top Deals

The 11 is for people with the pride of a 10 and the pocketbook of an 8. -- R.B. Greenberg [referring to PDPs?]

Close