Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

by Matt Stoller, Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 07:51:06 PM EDT

Harry Reid just told me that he strongly supports net neutrality and that he will not support anything going through the Senate that does not include protections for it.

UPDATE: Reid is giving his keynote, and he's talking about the failures of the 1996 Telecommunications Act and the problem with consolidation. He's saying that what has saved us is the blogs. To be heard, you don't need money, you need ideas.

Tags: Harry Reid, net neutrality (all tags)

Comments

27 Comments

Sort by

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

I like him more and more. Give 'Em Hell Harry! Sorry I had to miss your speech.

Vegas was just too much... ;-)

by dayspring 2006-06-10 08:06PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

No reason to miss his speech. I recorded the entire thing using evoca.com. Check out the link:
http://www.evoca.com/everyone_recording. jsp?rid=9283

andrew.

by andrewodom 2006-06-10 09:30PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

there's too much of an echo i cant hear what he's saying :(

thanks though!

by dayspring 2006-06-11 09:01AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re:

may be you are right..
21 22 23 24 25 5 12 17

by chjort 2006-12-01 02:44PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

thanx.

by chjort 2006-12-06 03:14PM | 0 recs

by chjort 2006-12-07 01:17PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

by chjort 2006-12-18 01:58AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

Too bad he's not presidential material...yet...

by Bobby McGee 2006-06-10 08:09PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

Harry showed why he is an effective leader in the Senate. He understood who he was speaking to in Las Vegas, and gave the audience credit for the growing power in the blogosphere.

I think Harry is happy doing what he is doing, and if he had Presidential ambitions, he would not be as effective as he is. If he were hoping to move up the ladder, every thing he did would be suspect. I prefer him being an effective leader of the Democrats in the Senate. And I trust HIM to look after the interests of the American Public.

by Tuba Les 2006-06-10 09:11PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

Harry Reid is not a particularly electrifying speaker, but he's articulate and exudes a grandfatherly integrity. I thought his speech was terrific.

And yes, he gets it on net neutrality. (As do Mark Warner and Howard Dean. Both of them touched upon the issue in their respective speeches.)

Maybe we'll see a filibuster if the telco-senators try to ramrod through a crappy bill. THIS issue is where you use the powder...

by Master Jack 2006-06-10 09:19PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

It was my pleasure tonight to attend the YearlyKos meeting in Las Vegas and hear a keynote address by Senate Minority Leader "Give 'em Hell" Harry Reid (D-NV) as well as capture it on audio available at http://www.evoca.com/everyone_recording. jsp?rid=9283 Known for his past platforms such as 'Training Teachers in Technology', the'Democratic High Tech Working Group', the 'Defense Appropriations' bill, and the more recent 'Iran Intelligence Oversight Act', Senator Reid has long been known for his aggressiveness in the technology and defense fields. As we well know, the yearly Kos convention is billed as the first-ever national meeting of the online progressive community. One of the reasons I was so anxious to be a part of this address tonight is the candor and respect given to the blogging community by Senator Reid himself. "I do believe that each day, they have more impact...one of the reasons I so admire them is they have the ability to spread the truth like no entities I've dealt with in recent years." Please feel free to use this recording (either by link or by embedding the HTML from Evoca.com) in your own posting or blog. It was a great night and I would love to share it with as many bloggers as possible. Our voices are being heard! andrew. www.drewandbritt.org

by andrewodom 2006-06-10 09:33PM | 0 recs

permalink

Obama and Net Neutrality

He's got a new podcast on net neutrality..

by Sue Reen 2006-06-10 10:14PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

Kinda ironic that Conrad Burns pushed the 1996 Telecommunications Act and now the blogs are all over his re-election campaign...

by Bob Brigham 2006-06-10 10:19PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

That's a very good point.

It's funny, because not too many people are hitting him because of the Telecom Act. He's just obviously a crook.

He has bad decision making skills all around.

phat

by phatass 2006-06-10 10:36PM | 0 recs

permalink

karmic payback for consolidation, MT leads

Stoller is right, it is the ideas. From George Ochenski column on what happened in Montana:

When Tester first announced his intention to enter the primary race the reaction was sadly predictable. The political pundits tossed Morrison's piles of money--as well as his political connections and ability to raise even more money--on the scales, weighed them against what Tester had, and pronounced their verdict: Morrison would win hands down.

As it turned out, the pundits weren't wrong about Morrison's money--he raised and spent about twice as much as Tester. What they were way wrong about, however, was thinking that money calls all the shots in Montana politics. As Tester proved, it doesn't.

Perhaps because politics has gotten so stale, so boring and so sleazy, the pundits figured whoever bought the most ads on the boob tube would influence the small percentage of primary voters and that would be that. What they didn't count on was the ability of Montanans to rally in a thousand small ways to a candidate who inspired and excited them. In the old days--the days before the latest batch of political strategists boiled everything down to money--such a groundswell of support from the populace at large was called a grassroots movement.

Content, not container...

by Bob Brigham 2006-06-10 10:47PM | 0 recs

permalink

Actual Conservatives position?

What has been the position of actual conservatives on this matter? In other words, what are the opinions of people who are actually principled conservatives, rather than all Republicans in Congress who are being told how to vote by the TelComs? I can't recall, say, George Will or Charles Krauthammer writing a column about it, or even Andrew Sullivan (who's Daily Dish search function totally stinks, BTW). Grover Norquist's ATR is totally against Net Neutrality; their website argues that Net Neutrality is government's attempt to regulate the internet... not really sure the logic in that.

Anyways, I just wonder if the silence (if it is in fact silence, rather than me just missing it) of people who don't answer to corporate donors is telling.

by alydar 2006-06-11 04:56AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Actual Conservatives position?

I wouldn't be surprised if it something akin to their opinion on the 'Fairness Doctrine'. You may recall that the Fairness Doctrine required radio stations to air equal time to poosing viewpoints. Once that was done away with, the right wing media completely took over the AM side of the dial, and claimed that was perfectly fair.

They claied that liberals couldn't succeed because there was no interest in hearing their ideas. The truth of the matter was that liberals broadcasters were run out of town by the station owners who were all supporters of the right wing media machine for business reasons (amongst others).

Net Neutrality is likely the same way. Driven off the radiowaves, liberals have made a home on the net, and have shown how they can use it in many different ways. It's our communications medium by and large, and we have pushed many issues onto the front page because of our presence. The GOP would love to shut us down here too.

I read an editorial in the Wall Street Journal who claims that the telecoms who are providing internet service would be hampered from pioneering new services (such as better video streaming capabilities) if they are not allowed to make money from the content that flows along their lines. I think that makes our point. The telecoms do not need to be deciding what we see on the internet. They do not need to be deciding how the internet is going to look in the future. The users of the internet will make that decision by the free market. If the playing field is not level, then we do not have a free market (in this case a free market of ideas).

Of course, the other upside of this is that without net neutrality, the telecoms would have the ability to make life difficult for content that does not pay the internet toll. It would cripple the blogs, and most certainly the liberal blogosphere which relies on the freedom of this media to communicate. The GOP would likely be effected too, but not nearly to the same degree. They would saw off one of their toes to chop off our legs.

So in that sense, it is the Fairness Doctrine all over again -- cripple the progressive voice so that the conservatives are the ones who can set the agenda.

by Matusleo 2006-06-11 05:46AM | 0 recs

permalink

To everything...

...there is a stated reason and a real reason.

The "innovation" argument the telecoms use is pure bunk -- has the internet been stagnant for a decade, even WITH net neutrality? Of course not.

They just know that liberals use the internet far more effectively than rightwingers -- or, more accurately, that the internet gives liberals a voice and a presence they don't have anywhere else. Their argument against liberal talk radio was always that "there's no market for it", as the blogs have proven, that's a lie.

So now that liberals are injecting themselves into the national political discourse, from which they had been shut out, the PTB's feel suitably threatened. Hence their attempt to do away with net neutrality.

I'm making as many of my peers aware of this as I can. Tell everybody you know that those Hands-Off-the-Internet commericals are pure lies and fabrications put together by telecom shills. I've gathered a lot of valuable net-neutrality info here at YearlyKos this weekend and I'll be dissemniating it to my local Democrats' group when I get back home. I'll do that and call my senators.

by Master Jack 2006-06-11 06:13AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Actual Conservatives position?

I think we should be wary of the fairness doctrine. I agree with what you're saying, but that's the way it is now. It all depends who is deciding what's "fair" don't you think?

He who has the gold makes the rules.

He who has control decides what's fair.

by snoopy 2006-06-11 12:15PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

Which version of "net neutrality" does Reid support? There are lots of different proposals being made under that name, some of which are reasonable (though still debatable) and some of which are downright crazy.

There's non-discrimination (no blocking or degrading of services except for reasons of security or stability of service), there's common carriage of last-mile broadband telcos, there's common carriage of last-mile broadband telcos and cable companies, there's common carriage for all ISPs (at this point and following it's absurd), there are proposals for new regulatory schemes that ban tiering, that ban QoS, that ban differential pricing for different classes of service, and so forth.

Up until now the only "net neutrality" that has been in place is common carriage of last-mile broadband telcos--everything else is proposed new regulation.

by Jim Lippard 2006-06-11 07:34AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

The technical side of this is way outside my expertise.

But I can't help feeling that, as you say, the devil is in the detail, and that some deliberately neutered form of net neutrality would be attractive to Dem senators looking to cosy up to the telcos without flipping off their bestest new buddies in the lefty sphere.

(When Matt adopts that gloopy tone over a pol, it's wise to count your ideological spoons!

What to do with this lot?:

Harry Reid just told me that he strongly supports net neutrality and that he will not support anything going through the Senate that does not include protections for it.

Even if you abstract for the sake of argument from the question of the definition of net neutrality, what the hell does that mean?

Is it just a personal pledge? And, if it is, is it a pledge

to vote against cloture and passage;
to vote against cloture only;
to vote against passage only;
to not vote in the cloture RCV;
to not vote in the passage RCV;
or what?

Or is it a pledge as Minority Leader to organize the Senate Dems, and, if so, organize them to do what?

If Matt really believes he's got a commitment there, I fear that there'll be tears before bedtime.

And as for

He's saying that what has saved us is the blogs. To be heard, you don't need money, you need ideas.

that sounds like common or garden pandering to me.

Of course, he has the advantage of being there...)

by skeptic06 2006-06-11 12:35PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

by yardman5508 2006-06-11 02:48PM | 0 recs

permalink

"the advantage of being there"

Talking out yer ass is a lot of fun, ain't it?

by Teaser 2006-06-11 03:42PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: "the advantage of being there"

Simply an acknowledgement of fact, designed to draw factual correction (if any could be made) from those who were actually in the same room as Reid to hear him talk.

That doesn't include you, by any chance?

by skeptic06 2006-06-12 05:30AM | 0 recs

permalink

Net neutrality discussion

Matt,

Is there some way to get your net neutrality explanation post that dissected McCurry and his lies permanently onto the front page? I want to send an LTE in response to the WaPo's inaccurate and misleading recitation of the telco talking points (even including the heart monitor business) and I'd like to include a link to that post. I know I can dig it out, but this will be the second time today I wanted it. (First time was for a comment in Dan Balz's live exchange, in response to a comment from Dan that he found the issue confusing.)

This fight is going to go on for some time, and that piece was the best one I saw.

by jayackroyd 2006-06-12 10:06AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

by kimi98 2006-08-21 12:58PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Harry Reid and Net Neutrality

by entiengol 2007-01-31 10:00PM | 0 recs