U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
November 22, 2017 12:54 PM UTC
5 Comments
America's favorite redneck breaks it down…
Thanks, Michael. Somehow I missed this in my youtube subscriptions and I love me some Trae Crowder.
Pushback against net neutrality needs to be seen as not just a medium of social control – it is also a means for the cable and telecom industries to maintain their huge profits. More consumers are refusing to sit and watch TV. Instead, Americans are getting their news and entertainment on the internet, usually on a portable device. (Pew Research, Key trends in social and digital news media)
As more and more people are "cutting the cord", Big Cable is trying to preserve its high (41%) profit margins. There are only about 5 companies providing most of the internet service in the continental United States, and more of them are merging under the lax Clinton-era FCC rules. These companies were this profitable even with Obama-era net neutrality rules in place.
Many of those cable internet providers that have merged, such as Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon, also provide wireless phone and data services, so they are following their unwired consumers. But access to this wirelessly provided news is still controlled by about 10 companies.
So when consumers cut the cord, where will profits come from? Data caps and "variable pricing" for faster speeds. There isn't any logistical need for data caps – it's pure profit-seeking. There are laws of physics that limit how much data can be pushed wirelessly on a device – but that could be and is changing with new technologies.
The United States of America does not regulate internet service providers effectively. Compared to industrialized, and even less-developed countries worldwide, we pay 3X as much for crappier service. Per Statista (see chart). Russia and Russian satellite countries, especially, get cheap broadband. No wonder their hackers and bots can each generate a million fake facebook posts. Russia has apparently invested in telecommunications infrastructure – and they're kicking our ass with it.
Rural customers are gouged in the US, because there are only 2-3 companies that provide rural internet service, and they can charge what they want. They can even kick their rural customers off their networks, for "using too much data", as Verizon did. Centurylink was sucking up the taxpayer funds for "improving rural broadband", but it never passed along those lower rates to consumers. Alas, the FCC cares not whether rural rubes can access the internet.
However, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai certainly does care about industry profits. And his boss, Donald Trump, certainly does care about social control and about suppressing the "fake" (i.e. unflattering to Trump) news media. Hence, Pai's push to get rid of net neutrality, and to push enforcement for unfair practices onto the FTC.
So, yes, to keep net neutrality, do call the FCC , and call your Congressperson, too, like Pols says. But keep the big picture in mind – we need to see internet access as a right, like health care and clean air and water, and to regulate the industry accordingly. Prohibit giant mergers and monopolies. Put consumer access to information as a higher priority than industry profits.
Maybe Congress will legislate neutrality into law.
Hahahahahahahahahahha. suckers.
Congress doesn't have to legislate neutrality. Only a Democratic Congress would do anything so reasonable.
This unreasonable Congress merely has to continue its run of being unable to roll back an Obama accomplishment- in this case, the 2015 net neutrality rules. Some of the reps from red states will also be feeling the pressure to keep these rules; I’ve seen the same plea that Pols posted on conservative sites. They also want to keep their little niche markets.
Otherwise, how could they sell MAGA hats, or conspiracy theories, or solicit thousands of dollars for nonexistent orphanages (like Gordon Klingenschmitt did), or sell cures for baldness or erectile dysfunction? How could they buy guns and gun parts or a duck call from Phil Robertson?
So there will be mass confusion and shifting loyalties – par for this Congressional course. But bipartisan legislation preserving net neutrality could be more than a pipe dream – if Republicans get scared enough by the Alabama election of Doug Jones to the Senate, for example. They might start thinking that they need to at least appear moderate for now.
Unfortunately, Pai’s FCC doesn’t need Congressional approval for these rules to take effect. He has 3/5 of the votes he needs on the Commission itself. Some of its rule provisions could be blocked in the courts; the ACLU, for example, is already preparing a legal challenge. But we could see sites being closed off on our ISPs as soon as January 2018, unless we are able to pressure Congress to intervene.