June 28, 2006
Senate committee vote on Net Neutrality today

From Reuters, via Daily Kos:


U.S. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens said on Tuesday he does not yet have the necessary votes to get legislation to overhaul communications laws through the full Senate. . . .

Stevens told reporters he had not yet secured the 60 votes needed to end debate on the Senate floor, known as cloture, and set the measure for a final vote by the lawmakers.

"We have to get 60 votes, we don't have them right now," the Alaska Republican said after a daylong committee session for amending his proposed legislation. He has predicted the panel would pass the bill.

Stevens said he would not likely get a commitment from Senate leaders to bring the measure to the floor until there was greater support and that the toughest issue facing senators was Internet service, known as Net neutrality.

"They're not going to take a month on the floor on this bill," Stevens said. "Unless we can define a period of time that we get it done, we'll not get it up (on the Senate floor) and that's defined by 60 votes."


It would be nice to put this one to bed in committee. According to Save the Internet, one of the Commerce Committee members that has not yet stated a position on Net Neutrality is our own Kay Bailey Hutchison. I'd not given any thought to the idea of calling her on this before because frankly I expect so little from her. But maybe this one time I can be pleasantly surprised. Give her office a ring this morning at 202-224-5922 and urge her to support the bipartisan Snowe-Dorgan Internet Freedom amendment in the Commerce Committee. If you do, please leave a comment here with the response that you get.

Oh, and I don't need to tell you that Barbara Radnofsky supports net neutrality, right? As we expect to be disappointed in KBH, we expect the best from BAR.

UPDATE: I spoke to a gentleman in KBH's office this morning and expressed my support for the Snowe-Dorgan amendment. When I asked if KBH had announced a position on Net Neutrality, he said that she had not yet done so, and was waiting on feedback from constituents. I asked if her office had taken many calls on this and he laughed and said "more than you can count". He would not say which way they had been going, however, as it was a "private poll".

So. Why not give KBH a few more data points for her "private poll"? Call now - 202-224-5922 - and urge her to support the bipartisan Snowe-Dorgan Internet Freedom amendment in the Commerce Committee.

Posted by Charles Kuffner on June 28, 2006 to National news | TrackBack
Comments

Called a few days ago, spoke to a young female staffer, she responded with the usual "I'll pass that along".

Posted by: PDiddie on June 28, 2006 9:08 AM

I think expecting little from Kay Bailey Hutchison is always a good policy. That way, she will never disappoint you. Let's see if I get this straight - a public official, elected by us, gets input from her constituents and it's considered a "private poll". I'm sure glad she is a Republican because I'd hate to have to defend a Democrat using that kind of faulty logic.

Posted by: Dennis on June 28, 2006 9:30 AM