Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

by Matt Stoller, Tue Jul 11, 2006 at 03:24:43 PM EDT

I haven't written an update on the net neutrality fight for a week or so. Mostly this is because politicking in DC sort of dies down the week of July 4. Over the past few days, there's been some activity on the part of the telcos. They are continuing to run ads, and they are planting Op-Eds in local areas all over the country. There's not a lot of floor time left in this Senate session, and so the telcos are breaking arms to try to rustle up enough support to jam the bill through the full Senate.

For instance, Verizon lobbyist Tom Tauke, the hottie pictured to the left, is urging immediate action to pass the Stevens bill. Tauke's a former Republican Congressman from Iowa who's now a lobbyist for a massive telecom company. He's also a recent recipient of the least surprising career path in Washington award. Not to pick on Tauke or anything, but lobbyists really shouldn't be writing our telecom laws. Thankfully, we've got Senator Ted Stevens, who moonlights as a network engineer, to ensure that they don't have to. Senator Stevens is excellent at taking dictation.

Anyway, here's what this most attractive Tauke had to say:

Verizon's lobbyist Tom Tauke today called on Congress to act quickly on cable franchising legislation, warning that Congress is at a "critical pivot point" in policy and shouldn't delay action because of net neutrality questions drawn out of fear, not substance.

We're at a 'critical pivot point'. Oh dear! We better give the telcos everything they want!

In a speech to the Media Institute, Mr. Tauke, Verizon's executive VP of public affairs, policy and communications, also suggested that allowing phone companies to for the first time charge content providers as well as users for faster service could offer new alternatives for innovation.
Consumer groups and some senators urging net neutrality have questioned whether phone companies would use the charges to discriminate between content, essentially creating a two-lane Internet: a fast one for favored partners and a slow one for others.
Mr. Tauke offered a more favorable view, saying video gaming sites might find paying Verizon to get faster service enhances their user experience and might do so to help users to get a megabit burst in speed for their site, benefiting all. He said to his knowledge Verizon is not in talks with anyone now about providing that boost.

Here's a question. If Tauke is saying that Verizon could offer some sites better service than other sites, why is Verizon's group Hands off the Internet running this ad that claims that their supported legislation protects against discrimination on the internet? Isn't discriminating against some sites in favor of other sites, um, discrimination?

Here's another question. National video franchising was what the teclos really wanted. Why are they letting net neutrality hold this up? And who's going to get fired for their massive PR mistakes?

And here's the final question. Why is Tauke threatening and whining to Congress about needing the legislation right this minute, if he knew earlier this year that net neutrality could kill this whole bill? Why didn't the telcos just cut a deal, net neutrality for us, and video franchising for them?

So many questions. Something tells me that the wahmbulance is out in full force in telco land.

In the meantime, listen to the Ted Stevens techno remix, or the Stevens-Askaninja mash-up.

I'll have a more comprehensive post up soon.

Update: I made an error. Apparently Verizon doesn't sponsor Hands off the Internet. Sometimes I can't keep all the telco front groups straight, alas.

Tags: net neutrality, Tom Tauke (all tags)

Comments

14 Comments

Sort by

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

Thanks for staying on top of this.

by Matt in VA 2006-07-11 05:57PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

Ditto -thx for staying on top of this.

1. Too few people understand that NN has already been destroyed by both the FCC and the courts. Unless Congress INSERTS specific, strong NN language, the Internet as we know it is gone. That's because -- in response to requests by telcos -- the FCC and the courts 'redesignated' the legal definition of phone service so that it no longer falls under Title II FCC Common Carrier protections.

2. Therefore, UNLESS some strong NN language is INSERTED INTO THE SENATE BILL, there won't be any NN. Period.

3. The telcos have bamboozled Congress into believing that inserting strong NN language will mysteriously conjure forth vast bureaucracies. In fact, because of NN protections, we've had a phenomenal period of innovation on a scale seen maybe three times in human history (e.g., the invention of writing around 800 BC; the invention of the printing press in 1400s; the invention of telegraph and related technologies in the 20th c).

4. The fact that under NN there is no regulation is precisely what allowed new products and services to be created -- and NONE OF THEM were invented by the telcos.

How many insurance agents, realtors, teachers, nurses, cops, ministers, and grandmas are going to be happy with Congress once they figure out their phone bills have shot up b/c Congress didn't protect their Internet access?

The telcos are probably starting to panic as more and more 'normal citizens' -- and small businesses -- are learning about the hoax currently being foisted on Congress by the telcos.

I assume that if the Senate doesn't schedule this bill until September, a lot more Senators are going to get an earful from local ministers, bankers, and small businesses over the August recess. I have to think that the push is on Big Time by the telcos to get the Senate to buckle under and pass the telco version before the end of July.

I work with small businesses and small eComm sites, as well as one large company's educational materials, so I watch how often, how inventively, and how much 'normal people' use the Internet to buy, sell, learn, and socialize.

I am convinced that the public blowback on this issue will be unprecedented. Because you do not mess with the Garden Club ladies, and you do not screw with the WWII vets passing dirty jokes to their buddies, and you do not mess with grandmas who want to get pics of the grandkids via email.

Two of the eComm sites that I work with are for very, very small local businesses who could not possibly afford to build their customer base any other way. One of them is owned by an extremely conservative, devoutly religious small biz owner -- so to assume that this NN issue is simply a lefty plot is totally misreading things.

If I wanted to pick one issue that could prove to be the Congressional Katrina, this would be it.

by readerOfTeaLeaves 2006-07-11 08:20PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

"If I wanted to pick one issue that could prove to be the Congressional Katrina, this would be it."

Well said, rOTL.

by mitchipd 2006-07-11 09:05PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

RoTL - I agree with you on most points, except I don't see why you think we're winning the propoganda battle. Online businesses have yet to buy airtime, whereas telcos can and have swamped the market. People - even Dem volunteers - that I've talked to are underinformed, and to a frightening extent misinformed, about the issue. Without the proper publicity, I think the telcos can ram this one through under the public's nose.

by Matt in VA 2006-07-12 04:58AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

Good point, Matt -- only general ignorance and passive acceptance will allow the telcos to prevail. But they're killing their credibility. And no amount of advertising or glossy brochures will ever get it back. This will be Enron II: The Telecom Sequel.

Ted Stevens' remark about 'the Internets' and 'pipes' will pop up on everything from The Daily Show to the Gilmore Girls to country music. Failing to protect NN will hugely diminish Congressional stature, once people figure out what happened -- which could take up to 18 - 24 months. (Look how long it took to for the public to figure out Enron. Note that people are far more *emotionally engaged * with their email than they ever were about their electricity bills. And many, many small businesses rely on it.

Multiply the contempt for Enron by about 100, and then redirect it at the phone and cable purveyors. The NN issue has no historical prededent in terms of public wrath; tv never send anyone a photo of their grandkid's soccer goal. People are deeply and profoundly connected to their email; for the telcos and Congress to mess with that is so collassally stupid it takes my breath away. This is not a partisan issue -- if Congress were to intentionally script the culmination to the K Street Culture of Corruption Show, they couldn't do a more brilliant job of exposing their lack of decency and ethics. That's stupifying. (BTW: Expect Inslee and Lofgren to gain HUGE political capital over the same period as people figure out who at least tried to save their access to cheap email.)

The telcos are racing to get their legislation passed, but over time it will turn into a Political Katrina.

We're now in a post-Enron, post-Iraq debacle, post-Plame era... the public doesn't believe big corporations are going to save anyone $$$. TV ads are smoke and mirrors. People won't figure this out by watching tv; they'll figure it out at donuts after church, and at the local Garden Club when they find out that one of their retirees can't afford her email anymore.

Let the telcos advertise on tv and radio all they want. Hundreds of millions of dollars of ads have less meaning than a single photo of someone's grandchild.

A huge, basic industry is slitting its throat in a money grab. As the Greeks used to say, "To bring my enemies to dark despair, may the gods grant their every prayer."

The fact that the telcos are even asking for this legislation reveals the depth of their stupidity, which I find breathtaking.

BTW: a poster below wrote a superb synopsis about why the phone companies are giving NN as a 'carrot' to the cables for video franchising. That comment is excellent, and consistent with everything that I understand about this mess.

by readerOfTeaLeaves 2006-07-12 08:05AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

JJCPA and RoTL - I think you both are overestimating the public's powers of comprehension on this one. Frauds worse than Net Neutrality (or equally bad, see any deregulation scheme) have been perpetrated upon the public with little to no corporat accountability.

The ads, which we all see through, are incomprehensible at best to the average voter. At worst, they're truth.

I agree with the potential for a 'Political Katrina', but I fear that a non-neutral internet could potentially be workable without enraging the public. The key is to raise the specter of the worst case scenario and get these people enraged prior to the passage of the bill, not afterwards. Not only will it be harder to reinstall (pun not intended) Net Neutrality after this bill passes, but it will also be harder to get voters ramped up about the issue. To my mind, the common response will be "What do we need Net Neutrality for? It's only charging extra on VOIP and Google, anyway.."

We may know all of these things, but unless someone gets the word out to the general public, the telcos will continue to control the debate and eventually shape the public perception of reality to their own liking.

sorry if that was rambling, no editing.

by Matt in VA 2006-07-12 05:19PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

Hi Matt, didn't seem like rambling to me.

#1 The ads, which we all see through, are incomprehensible at best The telcos don't want opposition crystalized. Their real audience is Capital Hill; but (from a cognitive point of view) most tv ads are a waste.

#2 People know who is on their Garden Club email, they know how easy it is to order and bank online, and they know how easy it is to get Bobbie's soccer photo. Those are all very simple, real life concepts that are now deeply embeded in daily life.

#3 If NN were only about VOIP, the political backlash would be neglible, because grandmas and WWII vets and realtors don't care much about VOIP. But YouTube, email, and online business leads -- are part of daily life. These tasks are deeply embedded in business and social life.

#4 The $$ involved in ads ... The more relevant questions would be: is the CEO of Verizon getting on the Daily Show? On Leno? If they went on Rush or O'Reilly, they'd be preaching to the wrong audience ;-)

#5 Enron was really about electric rates, which was abstract, so it created sour attitudes, but that did not translate into action.

#6 People get very, very emotional about their email, photos, watching Baby's First Steps online -- these activities have become part of daily life. The telco legislation is going to impact the most emotional tasks of daily life-- and it's not just going to impact people in NOLA.

#7 Sabotaging NN comes on top of Katrina, on top of Enron, on top of rising gas prices, on top of a growing awareness of Global Warming, on top of Iraq, on top of an economy held up by a real estate bubble, on top of K Street. That's why I predict that this will hit home like nothing ever has.

#8 Screwing up NN will mess with people's garden groups, their dirty jokes to the old buddies, their online tracking of little Jimmy's birthday package arriving via UPS, their church websites, checking Bobby's homework assignments online for the Weekly Spelling List (and if you don't believe me, talk to any teacher who's been late putting those lists on line and had to listen to the voice mails and emails from worried parents!), ... messing with those social interactions and deeply emotional tasks exhibits a level of stupidity that suggests telco execs and lobbyists are in the throes of a very Sinister Case of Groupthink. (I assume that they are largely blind to the ways in which they are slitting their own throats; people never see these dangers clearly.)

I've spent plenty of time working around usability issues, so I know a lot about how people use these technologies -- and how important these experiences are to them. Never, ever, ever get between a WWII vet and his buddies, or a grandma and her grandkids. That is so stupid it takes my breath away -- and even though people will still BE ABLE TO DO IT (TECHNICALLY) asking them to pay more is suicidal. And I say this after years of working around usability issues, watching how people actually pay for software and services, and how they solve problems.

People won't figure out all the techie details of NN, but they're not going to accept the changes. They'll be looking for someone to blame to figure out 'who stole my Internet.'

There's no precedent for the emotional salience of this issue. The telcos are in so deep they've blinded themselves and Congress it too technically inept to figure it out. People will end up blaming telcos for greed, Congress for stupidity, and the FCC for criminal neglect. It'll take awhile, but they'll connect the dots.

Think about how emotional people get on the subject of abortion, and then quadruple it. Political Katrina.

How's that for rambling...?

by readerOfTeaLeaves 2006-07-12 07:09PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

I certainly hope it works out that way, but Operation Political Katrina seems a bit much like a Perfect Storm.

The change without NN doesn't have to be dramatic enough to get all those people angry in order to turn a profit.

However, it's really an unproductive point. If you're right, and I hope you are, then we can save NN easily and win Dems points in the process. If you aren't, I may not have a chance to say 'I told you so'.

ps. I enjoy talking to you. Just branched out from Kos about a week ago. (I'm the implosion Fox News is talking about)

by Matt in VA 2006-07-12 09:08PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

Well... I'm really viewing this through a lens that has a few cloudy spots, but I still stick with my predictions overall.

"Implosion" ...? Not sure what that means, although my hunch is 'disenchanted voter?'

Blogs are fascinating, aren't they? I'm sure you have a lot more good posts ahead of you ;-)

by readerOfTeaLeaves 2006-07-13 06:32PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke Calls the Wahmbulance

I'm not a fan of the way DK in general has been behaving since Yearly Kos. Instead of starting a flamewar about it, I branched out.

by Matt in VA 2006-07-14 05:56AM | 0 recs

permalink

Incidentally,

what is national video franchising, and do we have any reason to fear it?

by texas dem 2006-07-12 12:40AM | 0 recs

permalink

Tauke sucks

One of my favorite elections as an Iowan, was when our wonderful Senator Harkin thrashed him in '90.

by ficus 2006-07-12 06:14AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke

That's an easy question, they're letting net neutrality hold it up to placate the CableCo's. They cable companies are the big losers on the national franchise portion of the bill. In order to prevent Comcast for lobbying hard against the COPE, they had to give Comcast a carrot. That carrot is the end to net neutrality. It comes down to the fact that cable is faster than DSL. The CableCo's win that fight in the long run.

The problem with the national franchise, based on my limited understanding is three things: 1. It strips local governments of their power over who provides cable television service in the area. 2. It strips local governments of a valuable source of revenue. 3. Rich neighborhoods, communities, and areas are going to get the "choice" in service that AT&T keeps playing up. Poor neighborhoods, communities, and areas are still going to be without service or only have the cable company for service.

I do love the AT&T commercial advertising the 'wonderful' COPE act. I roughly quote, "For the first time, consumers will have a choice, which will lead to lower prices...and when we have a choice, we all win" (the voice actor sounds rather condescending). To that, I say "reeeehehehellly?" My prices are going to go down? Bullcrap. We've had a choice for years now. Its called satellite. Yet my cable rates keep jumping 10% a year. Where's the savings?

by JJCPA 2006-07-12 06:36AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Verizon's Tom Tauke

Excellent synopsis JJCPA. Thx. --rOTL

by readerOfTeaLeaves 2006-07-12 08:12AM | 0 recs