NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Will Congress Wreck the Internet?
Will Congress Wreck the Internet?
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000691.html
Greetings. The Federal Communications Commission has finally released
its long-awaited Broadband Plan, and many of the really meaty
recommendations have been handed over to Congress for their studied
analysis and actions. Other parts of the plan can in theory be
implemented directly by the FCC -- but we can rest assured that all
but the most trivial moves by either Congress or the Commission
associated with ISP regulations, broadband deployment, or related
topics, are almost certain to trigger complex litigation, in many
cases lasting for years.
I'm not a lawyer, so I'll leave the legal fun and games to those
parties whose fetishes run in that particular direction.
Nor will I for now dig into the technical aspects of the Plan, which
when all is said and done are likely to look far different if and when
implemented than what the Commission proposes, particularly after
Congress and the Courts have had their says.
For now though I'd like to pose a hypothetical question. Is it
reasonable to assume that Congress will handle these complex
broadband-related issues any better than they've managed to mangle
health care reform, another area where very powerful forces interplay
with Congress, often to the detriment of average consumers?
I don't want to be overly pessimistic. I'll admit I frequently tend
to see the darker side of possibilities, but I've found that
unfortunately to often be more realistic than not. Back in my more
hard-core software engineering days, I found a touch of the tincture
of pessimism to serve me well while coding -- trying to figure out the
many ways things could go wrong helped to avoid program execution
disasters ("Oops there goes another pointer ker-plop!"
Chorus: "Ker-Plop!")
But having watched Congress wading their way waist deep into the
"Big Muddy" of health care reform [ http://bit.ly/99LHMP - YouTube]
(my apologies, Pete Seeger) I'm increasingly concerned about what Congress
may do for -- and to -- the Internet.
The irony is that virtually everyone agrees that we need to improve
broadband in the U.S. -- just as there's general agreement that the
existing U.S. health care system is pathetic in the ways it affects
vast numbers of us.
I'd love to see real health care reform. I'm one of those
self-employed people hit very hard indeed by this economy, and who is
being priced totally out of the health insurance market -- very scary
for someone aged on the wrong side of 39. So I watch in something
akin to horror as Congress seems poised to pass health care reform
that apparently would allow insurance companies to continuing jacking
up premiums for years. In fact, they'd seem to have even more
incentive to screw individual policyholders, given the new mandates
included in the legislation.
Yet the health care status quo is also unthinkably awful. And process
counts at least as much as outcome, especially in the long run,
regardless of whether or not health care reform as currently written
actually passes Congress a few days from now.
So it's instructive to consider how one particular aspect of the
health care reform debate -- abortion funding -- has worked so
effectively to warp many aspects of health care reform legislation
(along with a great deal of help from the insurance industry itself
and Big Pharma, of course).
Could the same sort of thing happen when Congress gets their hands on
massive new broadband plans? After all, Congress has been called the
ultimate of "with strings attached" institutions.
The answer unfortunately seems to clearly be yes.
Let's look at just one aspect of this for the moment. It's time for
another hypothetical question.
Can we realistically expect that once large amounts of taxpayer
dollars are involved in broadband deployment, Congress will not wish
to "mold" the Internet in a politically expedient manner?
The shape that Congress might wish for the Net isn't very hard to
visualize.
Congress has passed legislation multiple times to impose all manner of
content controls on the Net. The Supreme Court has fought back these
laws to date, but terms-of-use precedents suggest that they might be
far more accepting of such restrictions when major taxpayer funding is
involved.
Add to that the many calls -- including from a key Microsoft
executive -- for "Internet Driver's Licenses" ( http://bit.ly/aAygfz
[Lauren's Blog] ) that would decimate the concept of user
anonymity -- and the prospects for serious undermining of Internet
civil liberties appear to be not at all far-fetched. The moves
by nominally democratic countries such as Australia and New Zealand
into Internet censorship regimes lends support to those in the U.S.
who simply salivate at the thought of clamping down on
the "Evil Internet."
One can almost hear the impassioned Congressional speeches. "My
constituents won't pay to support an Internet that allows porn and
hate speech, illegal downloading, and anonymous users who refuse to
stand behind their comments! If we're to fund these broadband
networks, we must insist that they not be allowed to become tools for
criminals, terrorists, and malcontents like the Internet has been up
to now!" (Loud applause from the gallery. FOX News commentators nod
appreciatively.)
Unless a politician represents San Francisco, West Hollywood, or
similar enclaves, they'd probably find this sort of "Net-Baiting"
harangue to be a sure-fire vote-getter in most parts of the country.
Because the sad truth is that many -- perhaps the majority -- of
people in the U.S. appear to fear the free-speech and anonymity
aspects of the Internet -- aspects that are in my opinion among the
Internet's most important and admirable attributes, even though both
of those aspects can be and are subject at times to abuse by less than
honorable individuals and organizations.
Enough questions. Now for a thought. It is my personal opinion that
as Congress proceeds to consider the FCC Broadband Plan and the many
involved implications, we must be exceedingly diligent to at least try
assure that Congress does not treat broadband -- the Internet -- with
the same sort of all too often short-sighted, skewed, and in some
critical ways cavalier attitudes that have shaped the health care
reform debate to date.
We must move forward with real "broadband reform" in this country,
just as not ultimately proceeding with true health care reform would
be calamitous.
But while Congress can indeed do immense good, it also has a history
of doing tremendous damage as well -- often with the best of
intentions in play throughout the process in either case.
Would Congress willingly "wreck" the civil liberties of Internet
users? For that matter, will Congress' current extended foray into
health care reform do more harm than good?
In Greek mythology, we might look to Atropos and her "shears of fate"
for some insight into such futures ( http://bit.ly/9NnXJQ [YouTube] ).
Absent her sage counsel, we can only really look inside ourselves.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren@vortex.com
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
- People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Co-Founder, NNSquad
- Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org
Founder, GCTIP - Global Coalition
for Transparent Internet Performance - http://www.gctip.org
Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/laurenweinstein