MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Senate Votes to Halt Net Neutrality Repeal

Today's vote is a mostly symbolic victory for supporters of the Obama-era internet regulations.

Cookiecutter/Dreamstime.comCookiecutter/Dreamstime.comToday the Senate voted 52–47 to block the Federal Communications Commission's repeal of "net neutrality" regulations.

The FCC's net neutrality rollback—known as the Restoring Internet Freedom Order and approved in December of last year—overturned Obama-era rules that placed tight restrictions on internet service providers' ability to slow or speed up content, and to charge users for faster speeds. The repeal is supposed to go into effect on June 11.

Three Republicans—Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Joe Kennedy of Louisiana—crossed the aisle to vote with all 49 Senate Democrats. The resolution now goes to the House of Representatives for approval.

Net neutrality proponents are hailing the vote as a major win. "This is a key step toward preserving a fair & open Internet," tweets Sen. Jack Reed (D–R.I). Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) calls it "an historic victory."

But the vote is largely symbolic. The GOP's 42-seat majority in the House all but ensures that the Senate's resolution is dead on arrival. A similar resolution to reinstate net neutrality rules was introduced in the House in February but has languished in committee ever since.

In addition to these congressional efforts, 23 state attorneys general have sued the FCC in an attempt to reimpose net neutrality regulations. A number of states have also passed their own legally dubious net neutrality laws.

Reason's Nick Gillespie has been a vocal proponent of doing away with the Obama-era regulations, writing in April that the problems the regs were meant to prevent "only rarely and sporadically happened before the imposition of such rules and were easily remedied without giving the government enormous power to dictate business practices." Should net neutrality go the way of the dinosaur, Gillespie predicted, "the internet will continue to improve, both in terms of the speed of connection and the range of content, applications, and experiences we'll be accessing."

Photo Credit: Cookiecutter/Dreamstime.com

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • damikesc||

    Seriously, fuck Murkowski and Collins. Their wet-clits for government daddies are tiresome. And who is this Kennedy dipshit?

    These assholes actually think government will make the internet BETTER?

    Seriously, Woodrow Wilson is not as brain dead as these fucks.

  • Benitacanova||

    Kennedy cain't help being Kennedy. It's what they do.

  • tuhad||

    I just got paid $6784 working off my laptop this month. And if you think that¿s cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers and made over $9k her first month. It feels so good making so much money when other people have to work for so much less.
    This is what I do...>>>> www.profit70.com

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Should net neutrality go the way of the dinosaur, Gillespie predicted, "the internet will continue to improve, both in terms of the speed of connection and the range of content, applications, and experiences we'll be accessing."

    And it will all be hosted in a network of smart fridges.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Spoiler alert.

  • Mickey Rat||

    The notion that a "free" internet is possible by commandeering other people's unused storage memory without their consent makes me think Pied Piper are not the good guys.

  • Scotticus Finch||

    I enjoy the show, but I don't pretend to understand what he's claiming to have created. Care to dumb it down for me? (And yes, I suspect it has already been tremendously dumbed-down for the HBO audience. And I realize what that says about me.)

  • Don't look at me.||

    Anyone making a profit is evil, government dictates are good.

  • Ska||

    Wasn't the show pretty clear that the people involved knew what they were doing was unethical and illegal?

  • ||

    Wasn't the show pretty clear that the people involved knew what they were doing was unethical and illegal?

    Yes - which is why Jared finally snapped and yelled at Richard that he was compromising his ethics, behaving like an irresponsible child, and turning into Gavin Belson.

  • Nardz||

    This season, up until the finale, was great.
    Then they took all that momentum and... meh

  • Nardz||

    Gavin is the best character on the show, with Jared firmly in 2nd. The underused VC who was most recently seen searching a landfill for his billion dollar genes is 3rd, only because he's never on the show anymore.

  • ||

    I don't have HBO, so I haven't seen the latest season, yet - just the one that ends with Gavin leaving Bachman in the opium den with five years worth of rent, which was a great goodbye.

    Gavin is a great character, but my favorite may have been the Peter Thiel stand-in from Season 1. I still think of him every time I see sesame seeds.

  • Nardz||

    It's crazy, but I really don't remember him.
    RIP

  • Paulpemb||

    Was just about to post the exact same thing. Peter Gregory is still my favorite character on the show. The entire ensemble is pretty good, though.

  • Mickey Rat||

    But the show acted that their being successful in a way they did not intend, but was still questionably ethical was a good thing.

  • ||

    The tone when they succeeded was a little bit over-cheery given the fact that they were stealing other people's property to make it happen. I admit that while I liked the Richard-goes-to-the-dark-side angle on the season, I concede that it wasn't that clear that the writers understood which parts were dark and which weren't.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Going by the ACA repeal coverage as a guide, this means Republicans want to reimpose Net Neutrality.

  • Rhywun||

    Not to be a downer but once the Dems get a power-grabbing idea into their heads, they never, EVER let go of it.

    There will be "net neutrality" within 5 to 10 years. Count on it.

  • MarkLastname||

    Along with single payer health care and a guaranteed job for everyone digging and filling in ditches. In 10 years Tony will be on here defending president Gillibrand's plan to nationalize all clothing retailers.

  • creech||

    "What, you want people to go naked?" Depends on the "people."

  • Nardz||

    "You hate brown people so much, you want to deny them clothes! That way... their... skin... brown... exposed... does... not... not compute... Tony... hard... crash... drive... brown... racist!"

  • Cynical Asshole||

    In 10 years Tony will be on here defending president Gillibrand's plan to nationalize all clothing retailers.

    "We don't need 23 (or however many) clothing retailers when children are starving in the streets!"

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    That's what they said about smoking regulations!

    Oh wait...

  • ||

    Not to be a downer but once the Dems get a power-grabbing idea into their heads, they never, EVER let go of it.

    Right and 50 yrs. after the GOP dies a little retreating to every subsequent hill, we'll continue to act like the parties are interchangeable on this and every other issue and have been all along.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The GOP's 42-seat majority in the House all but ensures that the Senate's resolution is dead on arrival.

    If only there were more Collinses and Murkowskis in the House. Maybe next year there will be.

  • esteve7||

    So I need to start a list of things my prog roommate says. I was talking about how I had to work on my vacation and I asked my company to reimburse me for my Disneyland ticket (I had a work emergency and didn't actually get to ride on anything, and had to leave).

    "That's such a white thing to do?"

    "What, to have confidence and assert myself?"

    "When black people have confidence and assert themselves, they get shot"

    Jesus fucking Christ

  • Don't look at me.||

    Confusing assertion with assault.

  • MarkLastname||

    I'm sure that's why many black people get shot, because they asked their employer for a refund for tickets.

    When you're black, you get beaten with a truncheon for trying to ask if there are free refills at a restaurant. It is known. They live in constant fear.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Is this roommate actually black? If not, you should ask him what the fuck his dumb ass knows about it. If he is, ask him when was the last time a black person got shot asking for a ticket reimbursement.

  • ||

    "When black people have confidence and assert themselves, they get shot"

    As per your peoples' general policies or are you trying to tell me you murdered someone?

  • damikesc||

    Your response: Well, by cops in Leftist cities.

  • MichaeI Hihn||

    My thoughts and prayers are with you. Is moving a possibility?

  • Tony||

    "Today's vote is largely symbolic" because Republicans long ago stopped pretending to give a flying shit about anything other lining the pockets of their plutocrat buddies and setting themselves up for a big private-sector paycheck in a couple years provided they don't touch any little children in the process. FTFY.

  • esteve7||

    Lol, love seeing leftists froth at the mouth over NN. Do you even know how computers work?

  • Tony||

    I mash buttons on them and they show me things I want to see. Or, in the near future, what Verizon wants me to see.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Because that was what was happening before 2015.

  • MarkLastname||

    The internet as we know it was invented by Obama's in 2015.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Based on All Gore's original design, of course

  • esteve7||

    Tony you need to stop projecting. The only people trying to prevent you from seeing things are the far left and government types, not businesses. Please give me one example of Verizon preventing you from seeing anything online. I'll wait.

  • Tony||

    It's hypothetical at this point, but tell me why it was necessary to repeal NN?

  • Don't look at me.||

    The fewer regulations, the better.

  • Tony||

    Well that can't always be true.

  • Don't look at me.||

    It is in this case.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Because it was a regulatory capture scheme that was an open.door for corruption supported by gullible people angry about something Net Neutrality does not even address?

  • Tony||

    How so?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    The 2015 OIO did not prohibit the "throttling" that NN supporters claimed it did. Reason even had an article about this.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    In fact, when the FTC took AT&T to court for unfair businesses practices for doing this very thing, the switch to Title II common carrier ended up exempting AT&T from the throttling penalty.

    Expecting the FCC to allow an open, uninhibited content flow over the internet via Title II when it's been restricting content on over-the-air mediums for decades, is probably the biggest case of cognitive dissonance NN supporters have displayed so far.

  • ||

    Expecting the FCC to allow an open, uninhibited content flow over the internet via Title II when it's been restricting content on over-the-air mediums for decades, is probably the biggest case of cognitive dissonance NN supporters have displayed so far.

    Especially when you recognize that the two largest survivors/benefactors of those restrictions are AT&T and Comcast.

  • Bubba Jones||

    You have that backwards.

  • DarrenM||

    We really do need Net Neutrality. I shouldn't have to pay extra just so my porn gets treated the same as a documentary on PBS.

  • MarkLastname||

    Why does something have to be necessary for it to be worth doing?

  • MarkLastname||

    What next, Newspapers deciding what I'm allowed to read in their papers? Stores telling me what I can buy in their stores? I mean, what do they think, they own the place or something?

  • Tony||

    Verizon owns the internet?

  • Don't look at me.||

    Switch carriers if you have a beef with Verizon.

  • Tony||

    Which one of those handful of carriers isn't interested in making more money? I want that one.

  • Don't look at me.||

    Why do you want your carrier to go bankrupt?

  • Tony||

    I just want the speed at which things are delivered on the internet to be content-neutral. So which ISP is promising that?

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I just want the speed at which things are delivered on the internet to be content-neutral.

    You clearly know less than nothing about network design.

  • Tony||

    Well I can't ever learn anything because any time a geeky computer subject comes up all anyone ever does is have a who-has-the-smallest-geek-dick contest. I am a humanities guy. That may make me higher on the intellectual totem pole, but I'm under no obligation to know stuff about this beyond what I read in journalism.

  • ||

    I am a humanities guy. That may make me higher on the intellectual totem pole

    It doesn't, actually.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I am a humanities guy. That may make me higher on the intellectual totem pole

    No, no it doesn't.

  • Nardz||

    I just took a screenshot of this comment and sent it to my friend, a humanities professor with a PhD in English Lit.
    I don't expect him to take Tony's side (though I can guarantee he's much, much, much, much, MUCH higher up on the totem pole than Tony).

  • DarrenM||

    You know what they say. "The higher the totem pole, the greater the fall."

  • MarkLastname||

    Humanities, higher on the totem pole? No no no, humanities puts you down there with the astrologers and homeopaths.

    I say this as a history major. Humanities is easy. It's just reading books and regurgitating then. It takes a full blown retard to get a B in a humanities class. Want an intellectual challenge, try linear algebra.

  • Necron 99||

    As a "humanities guy" surely you know that appropriating the Native American totem pole for your academic dick measuring contest makes you the top shit-lord.

  • Don't look at me.||

    What would that have to do with evil profits?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Which one of those handful of carriers isn't interested in making more money? I want that one.

    Yeah, I'm sure it's a total coincidence that the CEO of Netflix, which was pushing the 2015 OIO, is a major donor for Democrats.

  • ||

    So which ISP is promising that?

    mad.casual ISP, Inc. at your service! No fees, no contracts, no obligation to buy, and all your content is delivered at the exact same speed. Guaranteed!

  • DenverJ||

    So, streaming movies uses much more bandwidth than sending text, which is why email existed in the days of dialup but netflix did not. The entire basis of economics is scarcity. NN, like other socialist schemes, ignores this basic fact.

  • Bubba Jones||

    I want glitch free Netflix. I give no fucks about the other random crap channels on my Roku.

  • Greg F||

    I just want the speed at which things are delivered on the internet to be content-neutral.


    I guess you think an emergency room requiring the assistance of a radiologist at a remote location to read scans of a critically injured patient can go stuff it so people can watch cat videos and "Dumb and Dumber" on Netflix.

  • Greg F||

    I just want the speed at which things are delivered on the internet to be content-neutral.


    I guess you think an emergency room requiring the assistance of a radiologist at a remote location to read scans of a critically injured patient can go stuff it so people can watch cat videos and "Dumb and Dumber" on Netflix.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""I guess you think an emergency room requiring the assistance of a radiologist at a remote location to read scans of a critically injured patient can go stuff it so people can watch cat videos and "Dumb and Dumber" on Netflix.""

    The good old need argument. I have much more of a problem with setting up a situation where government gets to judge of need.

  • Freddy the Jerk||

    Because the nasty little commie believes the profit motive makes companies evil.

  • damikesc||

    Which one of those handful of carriers isn't interested in making more money? I want that one.

    They're figments of your imagination. Sorry.

  • MarkLastname||

    They own your connection to it.

    Let's give your insipid reasoning another try: "Southwest Airlines should be forced to take anywhere I want to go and charge the same rate per mile, because they don't own the sky!"

  • MarkLastname||

    Throw in a mention of the Koch Brothers, Christfags, and Kulaks and you'd be a better parody account than any of the deliberate ones.

    Really, take a break. Go watch Will and Grace or whatever. You're just embarrassing yourself here.

  • Tony||

    You're the one crying over a criticism of Republicans on a libertarian board, so who's embarrassed?

  • Cynical Asshole||

    who's embarrassed?

    Your mom for not going through with that abortion.

  • MarkLastname||

    You spewed some irrelevant drivel in response to Republicans (most of them at least) taking the libertarian position on net neutrality.

    I know, I know, whatever the bulk of republicans think at any given time is by definition evil in your mind. If they opposed a tax on farting you'd stroll by to mindlessly accuse them of being in Taco Bell's pocket and accuse anyone agreeing with them of being not a true libertarian. It's not exactly an original Shtick.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Throw in a mention of the Koch Brothers,...

    Those evil Koch Brothers. How dare one of them give millions to open a new ambulatory care center at New York Presbyterian Hospital.

  • BYODB||

    Y'know, the amusing thing with this is that you can insert either Republican or Democrat and this is still true.

    FACT: The richest members of the Senate and Congress are Democrats. Although, in fairness, the Trumpster is basically the king of the pile but he's not going to be a fixture in Washington for the next 20-50 years either.

  • Ron||

    NN actually gives corporations a back door legal basis to do what many think NN is supposed to prevent. But thats why the providers were for it. always read the fine print

  • damikesc||

    Yeah. Any regulation business isn't livid over is one that you really, really should not support. If AT&T and Comcast are OK with it, rest assured, it is not going to help you.

  • Nardz||

    ^correct

  • Pro Libertate||

    So much stupid. I have an idea. Let's bring back Ma Bell and let her have a monopoly on web service. Then we can pay through the nose, get the inferior service of a monopoly (party web access?), and watch technological advance slow.

  • Mithrandir||

    The internet largely being free from heavy-handed government intervention was, in my opinion, what helped make the internet so awesome originially. I see no good reason to mandate massive government intervention for something that could theoretically happen, but for the most part has not happened.

    It's simultaneously hilarious and infuriating to see proggies claim the sky is falling for going back to the pre-Obama era rules.

  • DarrenM||

    Because we can't develop anything more than what we have today. We are at the pinnacle of human achievement with regard to the internet. So, it should be OK now to let the politicians screw it up.

  • MarkLastname||

    Louisiana has a senator named John Kennedy, none named Joe.

  • Don't look at me.||

    OMG, HE'S BACK!

  • MarkLastname||

    Quick, someone get some metal helmets for those sons of his. Except the youngest, sedate him and keep him away from automobiles.

  • Jerryskids||

    This sucks. Now we'll have an enfeebled internet controlled by Comcast and AT+T instead of a free and open internet controlled by the government. Which is also controlled by Comcast and AT+T.

  • Don't look at me.||

    Mine is working ok.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    But not as fast as the 1%

  • Don't look at me.||

    I AM THE 1%!

  • MarkLastname||

    More evidence that Republicans don't actually have a majority in the senate - the Dems do. Murkowski and Collins are effectively Democrats.

  • creech||

    I guess Alaska will take care of that problem next time Lisa is up for re-election. But Maine is a goner.

  • damikesc||

    I doubt it. Murkowski lost her last Republican primary. She won as an independent.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I can't think of another group of people more capable of designing global networks than the likes of Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts.

  • Don't look at me.||

    Hey, Al Gore invented it. So...

  • hpearce||

    Freedom of Communication protects not only speech, press, and expression but also internet communication too

    Net Neutrality violates that freedom by regulation not only the commutation BUT ALSO the means by which that communication takes place. Once the means are regulated , then the communication necessarily becomes restrited if not forbidden.

    Similar logic is used to explain why regulating the sale of guns is a violation of the 2nd amendment

  • DenverJ||

    You know who else wanted the government to control information, communication, and entertainment?

  • SIV||

    Newton Minow?

  • Sevo||

    "This is a key step toward preserving a fair & open Internet,"

    Translation into English:
    "I want you to pay for my movies"

  • damikesc||

    Personally, I don't see why we aren't insisting Netflix and Google put money into the coffers here to improve access and speed. They want to make their money and demand OTHERS pay for the means for them to make their money.

  • Sevo||

    "This is a key step toward preserving a fair & open Internet,"

    Translation into English:
    "I want you to pay for my movies"

  • SIV||

    Hands off muh netflix

    /Millennial-tards

  • shortviking||

    Never go full millennial.

  • Sevo||

    "This is a key step toward preserving a fair & open Internet,"

    Translation into English:
    "I want you to pay for my movies"

  • DenverJ||

    Hat trick!

  • Sevo||

    Credit the site that no longer gets contributions, not me.

  • Sevo||

    501 now means 'it's posted, but try again anyhow'

  • Entelechy||

    Best disinivite K Street from Freedomfest before the payola starts to fester.

  • Sevo||

    Hey, Tony!
    A resolution is just like you BS regarding the hag:
    N
    W
    S
    Just so's ya know asshole.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online